Delusional Democrats: The Warm Fuzzies of Infanticide

TownHall.com ^ | February 17, 2008 | Phil Harris

[Arthur McGowan]

Or they have discovered that it’s just easier to latch onto an evil, facile, brainless cliché and go with the flow.

[Kickass Conservative]

Can’t argue with you on that. Their defensive reaction to my question was quite a surprise to me.

[palmer]

You are right, I read your post quickly and added “moment” to what I read. But the reduction of conception to a singularity of some sort is a religious belief. Nothing wrong with that, but it should be recognized as such.

[GatorGirl]

When, in your obviously brilliant and oh-so enlightened head, does a person become a person, then?

[Arthur McGowan]

But the reduction of conception to a singularity of some sort is a religious belief. Nothing wrong with that, but it should be recognized as such.

I never said anything remotely religious. I described a physical event. It can be seen happening through a simple microscope. I have seen it happen in countless educational films.

There is a time when it has not yet happened. There is a time--NOT LONG AFTER--when it HAS happened.

I never said anything about a "moment" or a "singularity." One thing is certain: The time it DOES take, and the actual, physical events that occur, provide proof positive that every act of procured abortion is a homicide. In simpler words: If you LOOK, you can SEE that, by the time of EVERY procured abortion, a living human body exists, and is deliberately destroyed. That's called a murder.

The assertion that anything I wrote is "religious" is preposterous. I haven't discussed anything that can't be seen through a microscope and photographed with a camera. Let me say it again: The assertion that anything I've written is "religious" is preposterous.

The real issue is: What motivates people to make preposterous assertions? I suggest that by far the most common motives are base ones, such as the desire to enjoy the liberty to kill people.