June 22, 2013

An awful lot of people are calling Chelsea Clinton stupid for saying it's bad that her great-grandmother did not have access to family planning services.

At The Blaze: "Isn’t this basically like saying you’re sad to be alive today?"

Well, no, it is not. Otherwise, I'd have to be happy about Hitler, since my parents met in the Army in World War II.

We all owe our existence to countless murders and rapes that have occurred through the ages. When we say we are happy to be alive, we are inherently accepting the nonexistence of the completely different set of persons who would be alive today if the past did not contain its many horrors. We could never express sorrow over events in the past if we had to refrain from implicitly regretting everything that happened as a consequence of those events.

Talking about the past isn't like time travel fiction. Chelsea wasn't like Marty in "Back to the Future" (who needs to make sure that his parents, who aren't a loving couple in the present, really do get married, or he will never be born).

157 comments:

Ann Althouse said...

Spoiler alert.

edutcher said...

But still, she could have phrased it more artfully.

Or Dr Freud was right again.

somefeller said...

I'm glad you added the stupid tag for this one. Seems appropriate.

Pogo said...

The conclusion is not that she's sad to be alive, but that she didn't recognize the inevitable outcome of the lament over the lack of at-will abortions in that bygone era.

It looks pretty foolish, at a minimum.

rhhardin said...

Maybe she's resenting being ugly.

edutcher said...

FWIW, given that she was shown having to be poured out of half the pubs around Oxford in her college days, it lends some credence to the idea she wishes she'd never been born.

Who in their right mind would want those two as parents?

MayBee said...

But why does she have to have any feelings at all about abortion on behalf of her great grandparents?

It was a stupid thing to say in an over-effort to personalize PP services. IRS about her because its about her great grandparents, and that makes PP very very special to her. Apparently.

So criticize away, I say.

somefeller said...

Maybe she's resenting being ugly.

I suspect you know a lot more about that than she does, rhardin.

traditionalguy said...

Chelsea needs to become new commenter on Althouse.

She has that sneaky way of confronting other people's hot buttons without saying she is smarter than them, although she may be.

Perhaps being in the Bill and Hill's giant shadows and many crossfires for so many years tempered her style.

Bender said...

We all owe our existence to countless murders and rapes that have occurred through the ages. When we say we are happy to be alive, we are inherently accepting the nonexistence of the completely different set of persons who would be alive today if the past did not contain its many horrors.

Way to twist things around to a completely backward mindset that actually promotes death as a moral good.

Chelsea Clinton exists not because someone killed some possible ancestor of hers but because the ancestor she did have was NOT killed.

In fact, if abortion were legal in the 60s, 50s, 40s, etc., then a LOT of today's pro-abortionists and pro-choicers would not be here because their parents, grandparents, or great-grandparents would never have been born.

And if it was "wrong" to deny them that "choice," then it is wrong for today's pro-abortionists and pro-choicers to exist at all.

jimbino said...

Whenever I condemn rampant breeding, someone brainless person is sure to retort that if it hadn't been for breeding, where would I be?

Michael K said...

She obviously has a great future in politics. Maybe Nebraska or Missouri would be willing to elect her, given their past and present preferences.

edutcher said...

somefeller said...

Maybe she's resenting being ugly.

I suspect you know a lot more about that than she does, rhardin.


Thus spake the expert.

Sad to say, Miss Chelsea is not attractive and gets her looks from Mommy, who's had loads of work (feminist protestations to the contrary) done over the years.

Maybe she resents not looking more like Daddy, although Willie's ugliness is all internal.

Ann Althouse said...

"The conclusion is not that she's sad to be alive, but that she didn't recognize the inevitable outcome of the lament over the lack of at-will abortions in that bygone era."

What is "the inevitable outcome of the lament"? Could you be more clear?

I really don't know what you are trying to say?

What looks "foolish"?

If women had more control over their reproductive lives back then... what?

The Planned Parenthood slogan was "Every child a wanted child." We'd have different individuals born if that were the situation.

We have different preferences about what level of control we think women should have. We can debate about that. But I don't see what's stupid about what Chelsea said.

Nearly everyone rejects infanticide... some people reject birth control... some reject even free choice over whom to marry or whether a woman can refuse to have sex with her husband.

There are lots of policy positions, but the most specious argument is you would not exist if that had been the policy.

We all do exist. An infinite number of others do not exist. Would you prefer those others to be here instead? That's never the question.

It is the question who should come into being in the future. Chelsea is expressing the preference for planned, wanted children. Looking toward the future, that makes sense.

You might want to say, no, accidental conceptions are actually a great part of building the next generation of human beings.

Go ahead, make that argument then.

jacksonjay said...


Watching Chelsea on NBC convinced me she was stupid long ago!

El Pollo Raylan said...

Well, no, it is not. Otherwise, I'd have to be happy about Hitler, since my parents met in the Army in World War II.

No, that's generic and covers a lot of people. You'd be more specific and on point (not to mention stupid and nihilistic) if you said or implied that it was too bad your great grandmother didn't abort your grandparent. Anyone would be. Misanthropy appears to be very popular these days among the dendritic dead enders.

Achilles said...

It isn't like she has given any indications of being particularly smart. Her whole life has been lived in privilege. She hasn't had to deal with anything like the average American citizen has had to. Is it really surprising that she has no mooring in her paradigm?

This lack of attachment to a normal persons life will make her a great progressive. Most of them seem to start off with inherited wealth. And how many attractive progressive women are there really? If you look around a homely lady like Chelsea fits right in.

madAsHell said...

Hillary keeps pushing her as tomorrow's savior, but she seems rather reluctant.

I don't know why she insists on talking about her grandparents, because her lineage isn't very clear.

Unknown said...

Your analysis makes about as much sense as putting a rock on your head so you can tell everyone that you have a lot on your mind. She has been raised to believe that family planning is the answer to population control and abortion is merely a procedure, not the murder of an innocent human being. She believes that her grandmother would have never chosen to abort her precious mother.

Martha said...

What Chelsea said is no more stupid than Obama saying he does not want his daughters punished with a baby-----so he supports Planned Parenthood and even late term abortion.

Not far fetched to conclude Obama thinks his mother was punished for having premarital sex with Obama Sr when she became pregnant (unmarried teenager like Chelsea's great grandmother ) and subsequently punished some more when she gave birth to Obama.

But clearly Obama is glad he was born--yes?

jr565 said...

This reminds me of the scene in It's A wonderful life where Clarence is showing George his alternate universe and shows him his dead brothers grave.

Clarence:Clarence: [explaining] Your brother, Harry Bailey, broke through the ice and was drowned at the age of nine.

George Bailey: That's a lie! Harry Bailey went to war! He got the Congressional Medal of Honor! He saved the lives of every man on that transport!

Clarence: Every man on that transport died. Harry wasn't there to save them, because you weren't there to save Harry.

So, people shouldn't wish their grandmas had access to abortions, because it might mean that you wouldn't exist. If Clinton's great grandma had an abortion it might have meant Clinton was never born and so never became president. And then Chelsea would never have been born.

Wishing for a capability for women in the past that would retroactively remove you from the world may not be the worlds best idea. Unless you don't care that you're in the world. If that's the case, then carry on.

somefeller said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
somefeller said...

I'm not sure how Chelsea Clinton's looks became an issue here, but she is an attractive young woman and I am quite confident she's much higher on the desirability food chain (for a whole host of reasons) than those making comments about her appearance here. But that's no surprise. The Clintons have a talent for drawing out the grumbles from those who have much to grumble about. Actually, now that I say that, I see how here looks became an issue here.

Hagar said...

Chelsea Clinton appers to be a quite nice young matron, and she should stick to that.
Do not go on TV and say things!

traditionalguy said...

I posit Chelsea's subconscious is saying aborting Hillary would have been wonderful. It's too damn late now.

jr565 said...

Ann Althouse wrote:
There are lots of policy positions, but the most specious argument is you would not exist if that had been the policy.

More than a million a year not existing since the passage of Roe V. Wade. That is a pretty large number of nonexistent people who would have been born that would prove you wrong.

jr565 said...

All pro choicers owe their existence in this world to the fact that their parents chose life over abortion.
You get to have an opinion about rights of women because your mom decided not to have a doctor suck out your brains in the womb.

edutcher said...

somefeller said...

I'm not sure how Chelsea Clinton's looks became an issue here, but she is an attractive young woman and I am quite confident she's much higher on the desirability food chain (for a whole host of reasons) than those making comments about her appearance here. But that's no surprise. The Clintons have a talent for drawing out the grumbles from those who have much to grumble about. Actually, now that I say that, I see how here looks became an issue here.

The Baghdad Bob of Althouse does it again.

Only he would call Mrs Mezvinsky "attractive" and her position "on the desirability food chain" is solely based on who her parents were and not on any great abilities she has so far shown the world, which is more a European construct than an American one.

As creeley noted in a previous post, "Most of what being liberal is about these days is feeling superior, as somefeller now demonstrates".

I do agree with him Mrs Mezvinsky's look shouldn't be the issue here, but trying to convince us she's all that and a bag of chips is not flying.

Achilles said...

Ann Althouse said...

"What looks "foolish"?"

Trying to stick up for someone who said something stupid looks foolish. Chelsea was also probably trying to push the lie that planned parenthood does something other than abortions or that it isn't a giant slush fund for liberals to launder tax dollars into their political campaigns.

"Go ahead, make that argument then."

Funny how we bring up Hitler in this post. Planned Parenthood has been from the beginning an attempt to bring the final solution to the inner city poor blacks. Only bringing wanted children into the world indeed.

6/22/13, 11:13 AM

Paco Wové said...

"Looking toward the future, that makes sense."

But she's not looking towards the future. She's looking into the past, and wishing it were different for some reason. That reason appears to be a desire to take a contemporary political argument and anachronistically project it into some arbitrary time in the past. "I wish Spartacus had had a Piper Cub!"

jr565 said...

If we're going back to Hitler, then lets go back to Sanger:

"More children from the fit, less from the unfit -- that is the chief aim of birth control."


So, less retards, less feeble, less blacks and minorities. It's really bad that more in the minority communities didn't have more family planning clinics back in the days of Chelseas grandparents, because then, you know, we wouldn't be burdened with as many unfit minorities today.


Jay said...

Chelsea is stupid.

The left, as a collective, are stupid.

Here's your waffle, thanks for participating.

betamax3000 said...

We all owe our existence to countless murders and rapes that have occurred through the ages. This is The Essence of the Pain-and-Butter Room.

Paco Wové said...

"You know, I'll bet Caracalla really regretted giving all those barbarians a Path to Citizenship!"

dhagood said...

It is the question who should come into being in the future. Chelsea is expressing the preference for planned, wanted children. Looking toward the future, that makes sense.

one can make the argument that having only "planned, wanted children" in the future makes sense. that is not chelsea clinton's argument as she was looking into the past.

it is generally stupid to start down the historical "if only" thought process. "if only my grandmother had access to on-demand abortions..." "if only penicillin had been available during the first world war..."

"if only my aunt had wheels, she'd be a teacart" makes as much sense as what chelsea clinton said.

finally, i find young ms clinton mildly attractive, but i'm not impressed by her public utterances. i am also very tired of the ad hominem argument, usually expressed against women, that the quality of their ideas are dependent on their personal beauty or lack thereof.

James said...

"More children from the fit, less from the unfit -- that is the chief aim of birth control."

And Chelsea's unmarried, teenaged maternal great-grandparents would certainly be considered unfit.

I know several people who were at McKinsey when she was hired as a management consultant straight out of Oxford; none of them were surprised that she washed out soon after.

dhagood said...

and paco beats me to my argument by nine minutes. well played, sir.

Achilles said...

@Jay

Remember, when we point out that racism and eugenics are at the heart of progressive ideology, we are the racists.

Also I think it is important to point out that Chelsea probably thought she had nothing to fear from PP and rightly so. She was highborn and important. Only the poor babies and black kids have anything to fear from PP.

ricpic said...

I wonder how the Clinton machine intends to set Chelsea on the path to the presidency?

Jay said...

I love how the left just presumes their policy preferences = good.

Access to "family planning services" (WTF is that, anyway?) is a good! Good for you, good for society!

So there, tea party dummies!

My good are these people embarrassing.

Achilles said...

finally, i find young ms clinton mildly attractive, but i'm not impressed by her public utterances. i am also very tired of the ad hominem argument, usually expressed against women, that the quality of their ideas are dependent on their personal beauty or lack thereof.

HAHAHAHA. I am sure Sarah Palin appreciates your crocodile tears. Because her looks were treated SO fairly by progressives you know.

Lem said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jay said...

Chelsea is expressing the preference for planned, wanted children. Looking toward the future, that makes sense.

Actually, it makes no fucking sense at all since "the future" is how it is done in China.

You get really, really dumb Ann when you discuss abortion, religion, or gay marriage.

betamax3000 said...

In the Pain-and-Butter Room All the Negated Souls Witness in Mute Horror.

Jay said...

@Jay

Remember, when we point out that racism and eugenics are at the heart of progressive ideology, we are the racists.


I know. It is racist to disagree with them.

jr565 said...

Margaret Sanger herself had a large family. Her mother died of TB, young and had 9 children. And Sanger blamed her early death on having so many children.
Now, if Margaret Sanger's mom had acces to family planning, maybe she wouldn't have had Margaret Sanger or 7 or 8 of her other brothers and sisters. Which ones did Margaret think should never have existed?

Pogo said...

""What is "the inevitable outcome of the lament"? Could you be more clear?"
No Hillary. No Chelsea.
Why you think that there'd have been someone else is unclear, given the abortion-led demographic decline now evident among whites in the US, Europe and Japan.

"What looks "foolish"?"
Not following the inevitable logic.

"If women had more control over their reproductive lives back then... what?"
You mean if murder were allowed then as now? Fewer people.

"We'd have different individuals born if that were the situation."
Not true. Fewer people from the aborters, sometimes none.

"You might want to say, no, accidental conceptions are actually a great part of building the next generation of human beings."
Accidental?
Abortion is to family planning what suicide and murder are to estate planning.

jr565 said...

From Sangers biography:
Moreover, Margaret’s mother bore most of the responsibilities for this brood alone, for her father was a lovable but impractical political activist whose family lived in poverty. From her youth, she resolved that she would not repeat her mother’s sad history.

ANd she only got to make that decision because her mother didnt' abort her in the first place. Note, her dad not making enough money to support the family should have been grounds, under Sangers arguments for forced sterilization.

BDNYC said...

Chelsea is not stupid, but she's an untalented and boring mediocrity. Here, she made a pretty lame comment about the importance of women having access to family planning services. Nothing more, nothing less.

No, she wasn't wishing for her own demise.

SteveR said...

Yeah its all about promoting unfettered abortion now and in the future. Jay is right, there's a clear outcome in a culture where human life is devalued.

jr565 said...

From the stage at the recent Women Deliver conference, former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s daughter Chelsea revealed that her much-admired maternal grandmother was the child of unwed teenage parents who “did not have access to services that are so crucial that Planned Parenthood helps provide.”

Chelsea’s grandmother was born of an unintended pregnancy.

And if they did have those services what would that have meant? That Chelsea's maternal grandmother wouldn't have existed. Since she wouldn't have existed, neither would Hillary, and therefore neither would Chelsea.

Wouldn't Chelsea's maternal grandmother be exactly the type of baby that Sanger would say shouln't be born? Unplanned, by people who can't take care of them.That was the whole reason Sanger promoted Abortoins and famly plannning. So that Chelseas's maternal grandmother wouldnt' exist.

Rhythm and Balls said...

We all owe our existence to countless murders and rapes that have occurred through the ages.

Attempted murders I could see as a defensible statement as any attempted evil can unite people in a defense of the good.

The other part about rape bringing people together in the creation of new life is one I might otherwise advise you to rethink. But since you're a conservative, you probably don't see the problem in that idea that Akin, Mourdock, Walsh, Rivard, Koster, et al now do.

Personally, I'd be glad to know that I don't harbor the genetic neurological "endowment" of those with the urge to violate others and wreck the gene pool by force, polluting it with the potential for future generations of sociopaths. But then, I realize that I'm in the political minority on this blog. Little things like that are probably one of the reasons why.

Bob Ellison said...

"Chelsea is expressing the preference for planned, wanted children. Looking toward the future, that makes sense."

Do you really think that's her argument? Pro- and anti-abortion people tend to talk past each other, and this is a good example. If you believe that abortion is murder, then why does it change things because the non-aborted kids (who are obviously not part of the crime) are planned and wanted?

"You might want to say, no, accidental conceptions are actually a great part of building the next generation of human beings."

Perhaps one might want to say that, but perhaps not. Perhaps one might merely want to say that Chelsea's statement was stupid and obviously self-defeating on the face of it in a way that you seem to want to deny. She might really not exist. This isn't hard to figure out, is it?

Jupiter said...

"We have different preferences about what level of control we think women should have. We can debate about that. But I don't see what's stupid about what Chelsea said."

Ms. Clinton's expressed wish was clumsy. Either her grandmother would have aborted her mother, and Chelsea would not exist, or her grandmother would not have aborted her mother, and her lack of "access" to "services" would have been irrelevant. Her failure to see that obvious conclusion before she opened her rather attractive mouth may not be stupidity, but it was certainly the opposite of wit.

Rhythm and Balls said...

It's a rare woman who gives homage and appreciation to the suspected rapists in her pedigree for simply contributing.

No one ever said that Althouse was typical. But if in this regard she is, I'd certainly be curious to know that.

It's kind of funny that conservatives revile the idea of the chimps and bacteria in our lineage. But let's celebrate the rapists! If it weren't for them - (but not a lowly flatworm), we wouldn't be here - or so they tell me.

jr565 said...

"Talking about the past isn't like time travel fiction. Chelsea wasn't like Marty in "Back to the Future" (who needs to make sure that his parents, who aren't a loving couple in the present, really do get married, or he will never be born)."

In fact though it is a bit like that. FIrst off, Chelsea is saying she wishes the past were different for her maternal grandmother. So, what would be the outcome of her history if in fact her maternal grandmother were able to abort the child produced out of wedlock? No Hillary, and if no Hillary no Chelsea as we know them because their future as we know htem relies on her maternal grandmohter not having an abortion.

Gabriel Hanna said...

@Bender:Chelsea Clinton exists not because someone killed some possible ancestor of hers but because the ancestor she did have was NOT killed.

Every link the chain of events had to have happened the way it did Chelsea Clinton would not exist.

Otherwise you reject cause and effect.

Bob Ellison said...

Rhythm and Balls said "It's kind of funny that conservatives revile the idea of the chimps and bacteria in our lineage."

It's kind of funny that you think that. I try not to stereotype people, but you're fitting into a leftist stereotype so well that it's getting difficult.

FedkaTheConvict said...

For want of a sheep's intestine, Dorothy Howell was conceived
For want of a "rubber", Hillary Rodham was born
For want of a "pill", Chelsea Clinton was born

Bender said...

Chelsea is not stupid, but she's an untalented and boring mediocrity. Here, she made a pretty lame comment about the importance of women having access to family planning services. Nothing more, nothing less.
No, she wasn't wishing for her own demise.


The problem is that so many of our elites who hold themselves out as being smarter than the rest of us are either wholly incapable of thinking through the consequences of their ideas (which does make them stupid) or they are intentionally obtuse.

Which is worse?

jr565 said...

It's A Wonderful Life the Chelsea Clinton Version.
Clarence shows her a book of presidents. She reads the blurb about the 42 President being George W Bush.
Chelsea: That's a lie! My dad was the 42nd president. He served two terms and was the third youngest president ever.
Clarence: Your dad never became president because he never married your mom. Because she didn't exist. He instead married Jane So and so and they had 4 daughters, none of whom were named Chelsea. He never went into politics but instead became a successful saxophonoist and talk show host.
You see Chelsea, you owe your life to the fact that your grandma didn't abort her child.And that your mom similarly didnt' abort you.

edutcher said...

Paco Wové said...

You know, I'll bet Caracalla really regretted giving all those barbarians a Path to Citizenship!

More than he could believe.

Inability to habla Ingles will now be grounds to go on Disability.

The new RINO amendment allows permanent amnesty for overstaying a visa.

AmnestyCare waives many felonies for illegals.

Caracalla was a wuss.

ricpic said...

I wonder how the Clinton machine intends to set Chelsea on the path to the presidency?

Do like Mommy.

Marry a sociopathic empty suit and hector him there.

Darleen said...

what I don't get is how Chelsea *knows* if her great-great grandparents were NOT happy about the pregnancy and would have availed themselves of the PP abortion factory.

With a higher infant mortality in the past, most pregnancies were wanted, even if the first was a full-term that came only 7 months after the marriage.

Jay said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Rhythm and Balls said...

Bob, do you conform to a stereotype by mistaking someone who states a political, if unfair (in your mind) reality with a caricature?

It's not a stereotype to acknowledge that the majority of political objection to accepting the fact of evolution is skewed politically. Unless you believe that facts are inherently stereotypical:

Do conservatives deny evolution? According to Gallup (Newport, 2012) 58% of Republicans think God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years, whereas the figure is "only" 41% among Democrats.

Point out to me any left-of-center groups agitating to suppress the teaching of evolution and promote its replacement with biblical creationist ideas or frauds like "intelligent design" and I'd be happy to call them out. I'm sure you'd only do the same when it comes to conservative groups too, right Bob?

Jay said...

When I think: "Who would give sage advice regarding procreation, child-rearing, and public policies on abortion?" Chelsea Clinton immediately comes to mind!

And, if you don't realize liberals know all about planning, and history is chalk full of their central planning success stories, then you're a tea party dummy!

So, shut up!

Bender said...

You see Chelsea, you owe your life to the fact that your grandma didn't abort her child.And that your mom similarly didnt' abort you.

You obviously do not understand that her great-grandmother having that right and ability to abort her child would have been an existential and moral good, just like Hitler killing all those people was an existential and moral good so as to create the conditions where so many men and women could meet.

Jay said...

So who deserves more scorn, the not that bright child of a privilege who grew up in a bubbly because daddy was POTUS or the tenured law professor defending such idiocy?

Jay said...

the fact of evolution

That's fucking hysterical.
The "fact" seems to have no actual evidence regarding macro-evolution. Which is total coincidence, I'm sure.

Oh, and when can we get some links to the left going all hysterical about GMO's and vaccines causing autism? Those big science believers, them leftists!

Chip Ahoy said...

This is like trying to understand my sister. She's not even trying to make sense.

Chelsea, if we were to take her point, can express regret at her grandmother being born without that affecting her own existence because according to Chelsea she would have to be happy about something occurring to a party who also would not exist if her point about regret and PP were taken. Her point was not taken. Because Chelsea is too stupid. You honestly have to enter the magical Wonderland of Chelseaworld to follow her. It cannot be done. It is the three-dimensions reduced to two dimensions of Escher that make Chelseaworld impossible to follow the figures in line up the stairway, up around a corner, up around another, and another, then up the same stairway. Because Hitler!

Rhythm and Balls said...

There you go, Bob. 12:25. First conservative of the day (and what a surprise) to object to the fact that the structure and function of DNA in "big" organisms experience change in the same way that the DNA in "little" organisms do.

Sounds like all very science-y, and all, what with its scorn for science as a Breitbartian, evil institution. Because he put the word "big" in front of it! Genius!

Jay said...

So I have to conclude that Chelsea's view of the olden days of Grammy & Pappy Clinton is: Pappy Clinton just wantonly put his seed in Grammy Clinton's baby maker and there was no discussion about children, planning for children, or abstinence during fertile times or anything (they weren't Ivy Leaguer's you know!). And if Grammy Clinton didn't go along with this plan, I'm sure he beat her into submission.

So, family planning, wingnutz!!!

Rhythm and Balls said...

Are leftists objecting to and trying to change the teaching of immunology, Jay?

cold pizza said...

She is stupid. Her great-grandmother DID have access to "family planning services." Under the culture of the time, it was called "marriage."

Her great-grandparents also had access to condoms, abortionists, infant mortality, infanticide, and a world not crammed to the gills with self-suffering, "pity-me" whores. -CP

Saint Croix said...

We have different preferences about what level of control we think women should have. We can debate about that. But I don't see what's stupid about what Chelsea said.

Ideology is stupid when it's divorced from facts. She's wishing that her grandmother had access to (what?) birth control? Abortion?

There was birth control back then, the sponge and the condom. Both often failed, of course. There was a lot of ineffective birth control. And don't even get me started on the danger of abortion in 1940.

So is she just complaining about the past and bragging about how superior our technology is? It's a little ridiculous for any politician to go to a condom factory and talk about the Bad Old Days When There Were No Condom Factories.

"My poor grandmother did not have the internet."

If she gave that speech at Google, would we mock her?

Jay said...

Rhythm and Balls said...
Are leftists objecting to and trying to change the teaching of immunology


You don't really care, fucktard.

You have no clue what conservatives object too and completely overlook the comedic denial of science on the part of the left.

Because you get to pretend the left is for science.
That's what moron's like you do. Life is easier when you pretend.

jr565 said...

Another line from a movie:
“It's a hell of a thing; killin' a man. You take away everything he ever had and ever would have.”
See Chelsea, if you take away your grandmother from existence, because your great grandmother never had her you also take away everything she ever had or would have. Which is your family.
Now granted we can't know what will happen in the future, but you're talking from the future about the past. So we do know what happens.
Bottom line, Chelsea Clinton would very likely not be standing there making a speech about her wishing her grandmother had the right to abort, since Chelsea Clinton would be less than a speck of dust in the air.

ed said...

@ Althouse

"Well, no, it is not. Otherwise, I'd have to be happy about Hitler, since my parents met in the Army in World War II. "

Whether you're happy about Hitler or whatnot is irrelevant. Clinton bemoaning the lack of abortion being available for an *ancestor* does indeed imply very clearly that Chelsea Clinton does not think very deeply of anything and that if you apply logic to her statement that in fact she is bemoaning her state of existence.

What else is there? Isn't there a binary solution set at work here? If abortion is available then her ancestor could have completely eliminated the chain of people who resulted in Chelsea Clinton. If that isn't possible then there is no point to her statement. If it is possible then she looks like a complete imbecile for having said that.

Logic is a pretty flower that sometimes smells bad.

Saint Croix said...

My father, who is conservative, bemoans technology all the time. He complains how nobody looks at each other or talks to each other. They're all looking down at their phones. He sees technology as dehumanizing.

The internet is amazing. I love it. And yet, doesn't it change us? Perhaps make us colder, meaner, a little more isolated?

And maybe those comments are dumb, too. Conservatives like the past and progressives feel superior to the past. And of course I am conservative. But I would suggest that attitude is both more respectful, and more helpful. If we feel smug and superior to the past, we are doomed to repeat it.

Rhythm and Balls said...

You don't really care, fucktard.

You have no clue what conservatives object too and completely overlook the comedic denial of science on the part of the left.


For the record, I care that established science since Jenner is attacked and misconstrued by dopes who can't separate a concern about mercury preservatives from the fact that autism rates have nothing to do with vaccination. I argue about it as often as I need to, not that you care.

But we were talking about conservatives calling out evolution deniers, which you implied that they do... until you proved the point by denying that evolutionary change is a process from which "big" animals are also not exempt.

But hey, it fit the Breitbartiste rhetoric, so there must be something to it, right?

Rhythm and Balls said...

...what conservatives object too...

I also object to (not too) conservatives or anyone else making a complete abomination of simple rules of spelling and grammar.

Minor mistakes and typos are ok, though. ;-)

jr565 said...

Ann Althouse wrote:
"It is the question who should come into being in the future. Chelsea is expressing the preference for planned, wanted children. Looking toward the future, that makes sense."

Except her grandmother wasn't planned. And Chelsea is looking towards the past, and saying she wishes it were different in the past for her great grandmother.
That her great grandmother should have had the chance to deal with an unplanned pregnancy. I read that as aborting it.
And the consequences are therefore, no Chelsea Clinton.

Saint Croix said...

And maybe she wasn't talking about technology. Maybe she's talking about politics. Do we know? Does she know?

Is she Sandra Fluke now?

Nobody's against birth control. It's widely available.

Liberalism is like a football team that will only play when their opponent does not exist.

"We like birth control! And racism is bad."

If she's a cheerleader, or trying out for Miss America, I would cut her some slack. But if you are giving a speech about the #1 abortion provider in the U.S., how about some honesty?

The way liberals hate to talk about abortion, it's almost like they're ashamed or something.

Althouse, as always, is excluded from this criticism. Since clearly she is willing to engage, discuss, and fight for abortion rights. And she does so with both honesty and compassion.

But giving a speech about birth control and your grandmother at a Planned Parenthood clinic? Bah.

Jane said...

This is a fun game, really.

If the British hadn't mishandled the Irish Great Famine, my great-great-great grandfather wouldn't have come to the U.S.

If Hitler hadn't come to power, my husband's mother and her ethnic German family wouldn't have left Poland as refugees in the 50s.

And my husband's father's family wouldn't have left Berlin for safety in Bavaria.

If the spread of tuberculosis had been stopped by the 1860s, my great-great-grandmother's first husband wouldn't have died and she wouldn't have met my great-grand-father and given birth to my great-grandmother. Or maybe my great-great-grandfather wouldn't have died of TB (G-G-Grandma had bad luck) afterwards, she wouldn't have been an impoverished washerwoman, and my great-grandmother's life might not have met my great-grandfather.

Etc.

AJ Lynch said...

There is no rational reason to defend Chelsea's ignorant, illogical statement unless one is an unrepentant librul ie. Ritmo and I guess Althouse.

Saint Croix said...

Is she talking about abortion? Isn't that subliminal hostility against one of her parents?

"When my grandmother was pregnant with my mom, I wish abortion was available." Isn't that an odd thought to have? She's focusing on her grandmother, and what (she imagines) pregnancy cost her. But we know there's a child. And so to us we see a hostility against mom.

And of course it is stupid for children to insult their parents.

"You're a bitch!"

"Well, you're a son of a bitch."

"Oh."

But of course she did not frame it in those terms. She did not say, "pregnant with my mom." (Or dad, I don't know who it was). She has dehumanized the baby--her parent--and is thinking solely of her grandmother in isolation.

But that's what drives pro-lifers up the wall. There is a baby, a specific baby, your parent.

Re-framing the question introduces parental hostility, right? And I don't mean to suggest that. My suggestion is that she has mentally eliminated the baby, her parent. She's wiped them out of the picture.

That's what is kind of scary about liberalism. How they are so willing to wipe out humanity (in this case, your own parent) in order to make an ideological point.

FedkaTheConvict said...

She was talking about her mother's grandparents who were unmarried teenagers.

Pogo said...

I can only make sense of this by assuming that the people resulting from random events are random and meaningless themselves, and so, yes, the present would be different but so what?

But in fact I think that people are unique and valuable and non-random. So I find Chelsea's comment risible, or maybe evil.

Bob Ellison said...

If the butterfly hadn't flapped its wing a minute ago, something later might not happen. (That's not OK. Mixing past and future.)

If my dog hadn't eaten this morning, she might not be farting now. (That's not OK. Scatological.)

If I don't strike this match, the grill might not light, and we probably won't eat what we thought. (That seems OK. Nuanced.)

Saint Croix said...

Another aspect of this that strikes me as stupid is the Cult of Birth Control. And I like birth control!

You know why I like birth control? Helps me get laid.

I daresay that's why man invented birth control.

I wish women would be a little more cynical about the Miracle of Birth Control. I know you like it. But why do men like it? Why did men invent it?

50 years into the sexual revolution, and we have discovered that breast cancer rates have jumped significantly for women, and the pill is one of the reasons.

Isn't that, you know, kind of a front page headline?

If Chelsea Clinton was a right-wing dummy, she'd be giving a speech talking about how glad she was her grandmother never had the opportunity to get drunk, go to an orgy and get a tattoo, herpes and breast cancer. Chelsea would shout, "My grandmother learned how to knit sweaters!" And all the right-wing dummies would applaud.

Saint Croix said...

She was talking about her mother's grandparents who were unmarried teenagers.

Ah, sorry. She nuked her granny!

Seriously, isn't she complaining about technology? "My great-grandmother never had a cell phone. And she did not know what a pizza was. Can we have a moment of silence, please? She did not have access to a pizza, or Chinese food, or air conditioning. I don't even think they had sodomy back then."

Saint Croix said...

Your great-grandmother. Are we still in the 20th century?

Saint Croix said...

Here is Hillary's ancestor tree. Lot of working class people. No word on the "countless murders and rapes" that made HIllary, Hillary.

I feel like there were a lot of good-looking people in my timeline.

donald said...

Wanna throw up in your mouth?

Picture her parents (Web and Hillary) conceiving.

That IS Web Hubbell's face.

somefeller said...

This thread is golden because it managed to bring out not one but two species of monomaniacs: Clinton-haters and anti-abortion activists. Well played, Althouse.

edutcher said...

As well as the Leftier-than-Thou Conservative-hating monomaniacs.

Dimly played.

Jay said...

So I have to conclude that Chelsea's view of the olden days of Grammy & Pappy Clinton is: Pappy Clinton just wantonly put his seed in Grammy Clinton's baby maker and there was no discussion about children, planning for children, or abstinence during fertile times or anything (they weren't Ivy Leaguer's you know!). And if Grammy Clinton didn't go along with this plan, I'm sure he beat her into submission.

Interesting view of Willie in that case, and maybe Hillary!, too.

Could be Grammy rode Pappy every chance she could and didn't think about consequences (apparenly the Clintons are like that).

Trooper York said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
edutcher said...

Oh, noes, here we goes again.

Achilles said...

somefeller said...
This thread is golden because it managed to bring out not one but two species of monomaniacs: Clinton-haters and anti-abortion activists. Well played, Althouse.

6/22/13, 2:16 PM

Don't forget progressive supporters of eugenics and rape apologists who still support grabby Bill.

jr565 said...

somefeller wrote:
This thread is golden because it managed to bring out not one but two species of monomaniacs: Clinton-haters and anti-abortion activists. Well played, Althouse.

So if you question the logic of a Clinton, you suddenly became a Clinton hater?
If this was said by anyone other than a Clinton, the logic would still apply.

The basic question, which Althouse rejects, still holds true: "isnt this basically like saying you're sad to be alive today?"
When your statement speaks agaisnt your own self interest and survival as a family, it's not Clinton hatred to point that out.

John Althouse Cohen said...

More than a million a year not existing since the passage of Roe V. Wade. That is a pretty large number of nonexistent people who would have been born that would prove you wrong.

There's no way to know how many children have been born because of legal abortion. A woman who's forced to give birth might hate raising the child and make sure not to have any more. If she had had an abortion, she might have waited till she was ready, willing, and able to have kids, then happily had 2 or more kids. Those kids will tend to be healthier, more productive members of society, and those kinds of people might be more likely to have kids. They'll also be less likely to be incarcerated, and incarceration does tend to prevent people from having kids.

From Inwood said...

Prof A

Good grief. As many have explained to you, you're defending the indefensible here. You'd demolish a student who attempted to reason as you have here.

In any event, it's rather amazing that when some people speak before a friendly audience to which they're trying to appeal they carelessly step into s**t, OOPS make that fall into such laughable illogic, as Chelsea did.

But not to worry Clintonistas, the LSM will cover for her & the late-nite comedians — and, alas, our Prof A — will give her a pass.

Unlike Sarah Palin who was ridiculed on SNL & a New Yorker cover cartoon for something that she never said.

From Inwood said...

Prof A

Or, on the other hand, perhaps she, like The Anointed one, has made it via grade inflation and whatever is recorded on her college transcripts (presumably not discoverable by NSA surveillance, ha, ha) may not be an adequate reflection of her intelligence.

James said...

There's no way to know how many children have been born because of legal abortion. A woman who's forced to give birth might hate raising the child and make sure not to have any more. If she had had an abortion, she might have waited till she was ready, willing, and able to have kids, then happily had 2 or more kids. Those kids will tend to be healthier, more productive members of society, and those kinds of people might be more likely to have kids. They'll also be less likely to be incarcerated, and incarceration does tend to prevent people from having kids.

Is there a credible study you can cite that supports this view?

From Inwood said...

Or perhaps she hasn't bothered to understand the need for clear thought in public speech, relying on glibness to confuse a fawning public.

Strelnikov said...

You're analogy is painfully inapt.

Where as what you describe would require your ancestors to be thankful for everything that happened, or didn't, in the world since the beginning of time, culminating in you, Chelsea specifically stated she was sorry her ancestors did not have the benefit of Planned Parenthood's services when one of them turned up pregnant. That means she was bemoaning the lack of one of two things: contraceptives or abortion. (What? You think it was mammograms?) Either way, if PP had been there to provide their highly needed services, no Chelsea. Oh, it was stupid alright. Painfully so.

From Inwood said...

Or shall we say about Chelsea's words something like:

What difference at this time does it make?

Bender said...

There's no way to know how many children have been born because of legal abortion.

A son follows his mother in plucking his eyeballs out and then claims there is no way to know if there is anything out there.

Let's see -- since 1973, two generations ago, there have been about 55 million abortion in this country alone. Of course, not all of those would have resulted in live births so, being generous with a 10 percent miscarry rate, that leaves 50 million persons who would have been born but for being killed in utero. Figure 25 million of them were female.

How many children would those 50 million people have had? Given the current birthrate, one can surmise at least one child per couple, or another 25 million. So we are talking about 75 million people are missing today give or take, with 50 million intentionally killed and 25 million never conceived as a result.

Jason said...

Well, of course her grandparents didn't have access to Planned Parenthood. They weren't in the undesireable ethnic group targeted by Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood's early founders and the progressive movement for genocide.

Jason said...

Chelsea is the smartest, most well-adjusted and trustworthy Clinton I've ever seen.

Dante said...

Another way of thinking of this is towards the future. It seems to me those who are higher up in the socio-economic ladder tend to have fewer kids, sometimes none. Some might say they are more responsible. I say they are committing a kind of cultural genocide. And they think they are smart, righteous people for doing it.

Dante said...

It is the question who should come into being in the future. Chelsea is expressing the preference for planned, wanted children. Looking toward the future, that makes sense.

A lot more is going on than that. There is a kind of antagonism towards women who don't want to work. The government has set up the environment such that it requires more money per household than ever before, because so much of it has to go to the reproductive class.

For whatever reason, that group shows very little adaptation to the 21st Century work force.

So while it sounds good on paper, the empirical evidence indicates the broad social mores are not working, and it's going to bring this country down, unfortunately.

The pill is one of those things. Perhaps the pill would be OK if the family unit were put back together. But that seems like a lost battle.

edutcher said...

Dante said...

Another way of thinking of this is towards the future. It seems to me those who are higher up in the socio-economic ladder tend to have fewer kids, sometimes none. Some might say they are more responsible. I say they are committing a kind of cultural genocide. And they think they are smart, righteous people for doing it.

You're right, of course, that's why there's the Roe Effect.

It's also why white Democrats want to import 35 million Mexicans (they're more fertile).

PS Maybe we should stop calling them RINOs and start calling them DIABNs (Democrats In All But Name), might be more accurate.

MCD said...

I don't care what Chelsea has to say, and I don't know why anyone else should either. She has been escorted past people who actually worked their ways up at a hedge fund and a top news organization and, now, has been named chair of a foundation. They don't get the chance; she does. And now we have to listen to her I'll-informed, anti-historic views? Meh.

n.n said...

The problem with the need for family planning services is that it implies two things. First, that women were inadequately educated or they refused to accept the terms and circumstances of reality. Second, that women are incapable of self-moderating, responsible behavior. Either way, every time a woman visits a family planning service, we individually, and as a society, lose a little liberty, and, with Planned Parenthood's idea of service, we suffer a general devaluation of human life.

edutcher said...

n.n., anybody who says women don't have a little head that can cause all kinds of trouble if it's allowed to do the thinking in the same way men have hasn't looked at any history or literature.

Or "reality" TV.

Eeyore Rifkin said...

Hitler wasn't the proximate cause of anybody's birth. Sheesh.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Chelsea is not stupid, but she's an untalented and boring mediocrity. Here, she made a pretty lame comment about the importance of women having access to family planning services. Nothing more, nothing less.

No, she wasn't wishing for her own demise.



I agree with the untalented mediocrity.

However, the stupid part is that she doesn't seem to be able to think through the ramifications of her statement of wishing her Grandmother had access to family planning....being abortion and birth control. Had her Grandmother those "tools" at her disposal, the butterfly effect of her grandmother or grandfather not being born to procreate and create Hillary, her mother, would mean that Chelsea wouldn't exist.

Butterfly effect wherein Hillary doesn't exist. Doesn't marry Bill Clinton. Maybe Bill doesn't exist either. Doesn't have Chelsea.......and we wouldn't have had to put up with all of their bullshit for these last 20 some years.

Maybe not such a bad thing after all. But the concept seems to have totally eluded dimbulb Chelsea.

Ann Althouse said...

It's beyond question that without Hitler, I would not have been born.

Ann Althouse said...

How many people have this clear of a view? My father was drafted because there was a war. My mother became a WAC, because there was a war.

I must also credit the Great Depression.

And I was a planned child.

Saint Croix said...

Chelsea is expressing the preference for planned, wanted children.

She's not pushing against her assumptions. She's not working her brain. Her comment is softsoap for the mind.

A smart comment to Planned Parenthood is that we have over 2 million unplanned pregnancies every year. And pro-lifers are upset because so many people are going to Planned Parenthood to end an unplanned pregnancy, and, to them, killing an unborn child.

"Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare." Bill Clinton said that. It's a rather famous comment. She could riff on that, and talk about ways to make abortion rare. She could challenge them! She could think outside the box.

She could mention that the founder of Planned Parenthood was opposed to abortion. Almost all the early feminists, who came along after her great-grandmother gave birth, were opposed to abortion. Why is that? Infanticide? Health risks to women?

She could talk about the rise in breast cancer rates since the 1960's. Is that related to the pill and/or abortion? And then she could talk about the way Komen was forced to continue to give money to Planned Parenthood. She could question that, push against it. Are we silencing debate about breast cancer because we love our reproductive autonomy so much?

She is a name, and the media listen to her, because the media is a celebrity business. She has an opportunity to say hundreds of interesting things.

She's got nothing. Sooner or later the media will stop reporting what she says, because it's mindless. It adds nothing.

Paco Wové said...

"without Hitler, I would not have been born."

Well, there's always Tojo.

Saint Croix said...

It's beyond question that without Hitler, I would not have been born.

"I'm glad Hitler was around, because I wouldn't be here if Hitler hadn't existed."

It's kinda funny, Althouse went Godwin on her own argument!

"I wish somebody had shot Hitler in 1939. But if they had, I wouldn't be alive, and that would suck."

Your brain immediately jumps to logical issues. Chelsea's brain does not. It does not seem to occur to her that if her great-grandmother had access to family planning to stop an unwanted pregnancy (excited applause), "then I would not be here" (crickets).

MayBee said...

It's beyond question that without Hitler, I would not have been born.

6/22/13, 6:39 PM


No, it isn't beyond question.

I love the movie "SlidingnDoors"

Icepick said...

I just don't want to talk about Chelsea because that will only encourage her to think we care. Can't we talk about the new Royal instead? Or even North Kardashian West?

Icepick said...

I mean, talking about those other two merely makes me want to bang my head against the wall, as opposed to drive an icepick through my ear.

Saint Croix said...

Chelsea Clinton seems nice, and she probably is nice. I guess she's following in her parents footsteps, giving speeches about abortion, trying to create some sort of political life.

Would you vote for her? Has she done anything? Has she said anything?

It's hard to come out of your parent's shadow. The Bush daughters (and, I bet, the Obama daughters) avoid the spotlight. Chelsea seems to be seeking it out, right?

When should people in the media stop protecting her ("famous child alert!") and start challenging her? There's a reason nepotism is awful. And son-of-politician-celebrities suck.

I barely have any interest at all in anything Ronald Reagan Jr. has to say. And when I do have interest, it's more like celebrity gossip interest. What he is going to say about his famous father?

Why was Chelsea Clinton invited? What has she written or said that earned her the right of our attention? She's actually talking about her family. Which reminds us why we know who she is. So maybe Hillary told Chelsea this story? Was Hillary hostile to one of her parents? Maybe she was hostile to her stay-at-home, cookie-baking mother?

We don't know. But geez, I wish they had abortion in 1882! (Do we see the implicit hostility if one of the Clintons' numerous enemies had made that comment?)

Saint Croix said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
El Pollo Raylan said...

Ann Althouse said...
It's beyond question that without Hitler, I would not have been born.

I suspected that Hitler was ultimately responsible for this blog.

Saint Croix said...

Jane Roe is pro-life now. She is hostile to the judicial opinion that was written about her specific case.

Why is that?

Perhaps because she gave birth to a daughter before the case was decided. And she gave her baby up for adoption. I don't know if she's close to her biological daughter, or they barely know each other. But knowing she exists, knowing how she wanted to abort her, has to weigh on her mind.

Jesse Jackson's mother was going to abort him. Her preacher talked her out of it. This made Jesse Jackson, not surprisingly, pro-life.

But we all know that liberals are inhospitable to pro-life arguments. So when he ran for President, he had to shut up about it.

Some of the most eloquent pro-life speakers are people whose moms tried to abort them. What do you say to these people? "I wish we had better abortion services so your mom could have made you disappear." Isn't that rather a hostile thing to say?

Abortion is not just an ideology, not just a "choice." It's a real event, in real people's lives. When you abort somebody, you make somebody disappear. That's why the failed abortions and the oops-I-cut-your-arm-off upset the party.

Saint Croix said...

That is Ana Rosa Rodrigues. Nat Hentoff writes about her here.

Saint Croix said...

Rodriguez, sorry.

Saint Croix said...

Maybe she was hostile to her stay-at-home, cookie-baking mother?

That is pure, ugly speculation on my part. Rude!

On the other hand, Hillary was a Republican when she was young. And then she became a rabid-hater-of-Republicans.

Here is Hillary talking about baking cookies.

Note that video was put up by people who are proud of the comment! (Damn, those mommy wars are serious).

I watch that video and her hostility jumps out at me. I do not want to be like my mother!

Just a guess.

Hillary (or Bill) realized what bad public relations her statement was. And Hillary baked cookies to make amends. Maybe she was forced to bake cookies after one of the Clintons' famous fights.

"You're going to bake some fucking cookies, Hill!"

"No I'm not! Get one of your fucking flacks to bake the fucking cookies! And I'll say I baked them. But I'm not baking any cookies! Not for you! Not for anyone!"

But if I'm right, and Hillary does have some (submerged?) hostility to her stay-at-home mom, how does that weigh on how she raised her own daughter?

"My grandmother was pregnant with my mom. And they were young and they were forced to get married. She had no access to family planning. It's horrible how oppressed she was."

So that's a lot of unfounded suspicion coming from me. I can't prove that Hillary is hostile to her mother, or that Chelsea got this story from Hillary.

Feminists like to say, "the personal is political." And with the Clintons we might say, "the political is personal." And maybe I'm the bad guy, speculating on the Clinton's private off-the-record conversations with their daughter. But if she's going to regurgitate this mindless crap, well, I blame mama bird.

Dante said...

How many people have this clear of a view? My father was drafted because there was a war. My mother became a WAC, because there was a war.

I must also credit the Great Depression.

And I was a planned child.


Sorry if I'm not impressed. If your mother rolled over after sex she might have had a boy. There is a huge amount of randomness. I'll go further. No one knows if the world of today would be better off had Hitler never been born. No one. Maybe the Soviets would have created the Bomb, and used their huge armies to conquer the world.

We could talk about the incredible, random journey that led to humans, and how unlikely your (or my) existence is. Vanishingly small. You have to live in the present, and make decisions from present conditions.

There are some things we ought to be able to agree on. Western Civilization is dying out.

Let's take, for example, your apparent belief that planning is good. Is it? Perhaps if you couldn't plan, more smart people would be born in proportion.

Furthermore, both Europe and the US are pulling in people who have very little in common with the kinds of ideas you profess. Why are you so suicidal to your own values? Will people who have so little affinity for these ideas allow them in the future?

Shouldn't you look to a society that can maintain and enhance your values in a constructive way, perhaps yielding that not all of them were so wonderful?

To me, the abdication of responsibility of women to their basic nature, on account of people telling them it's wrong, has been horrible for this country and Europe too.

In my view, the only hope is technology improvements outstrip the damage of the experiments that have empirically proven to not work. By that I mean genetic engineering, or robotics to increase capacity. These good things may counteract the reckless advances of feminism, Political Correctness, Multiculturalism, and leftism.

somefeller said...

A smart comment to Planned Parenthood is that we have over 2 million unplanned pregnancies every year.

That's a bit like saying every theft in the US is a smart comment to the police. Actually, what it shows is that Planned Parenthood's work isn't done and it still has a big role in our society. But keep up with the monomania, Saint Croix!

Pogo said...

The idea that it doesn't matter who's born, that everything is random anyway so what difference does it make if someone aborts a kid sounds like a theory that could justify almost any behavior, however awful.

If particular people do not matter, no one matters, and if no one matters, nothing is really evil. People get killed every day, why not you?

And the idea that people abort when they 'aren't ready' and then invest in a kid they really want has never been proven at all. Having killed off one sibling, their view of the second is inexorably changed. Love becomes conditional on the mood of the parent. What if they're 'not ready' for a teenager? What if they're not ready for bipolar disorder or chronic pain or ER visits?

No one is ever ready for parenthood. Not really. It's a bullshit concept.

n.n said...

Saint Croix:

Excellent commentary. I tend to focus on the bare essentials, but there is so much more directly and incidentally related which must be addressed.

Assuming that people do indeed desire positive progress (hat tip/shame), then we must consider the causes and consequences of normalizing abortion for the individual, society, and humanity. The political/marketing labels are clearly insufficient to properly characterize this issue.

Saint Croix said...

That's a bit like saying every theft in the US is a smart comment to the police.

You see those breeders as bad and Planned Parenthood as the regulatory state that needs to keep them in line? Okay!

But keep up with the monomania, Saint Croix!

I will, as soon as I google it!

Captain Ahab is given as an example. That's a good example. I think it's a fair comment, but it doesn't really get you anywhere. Most of the amazing things in life are accomplished by people who are single-minded and passionate.

When I was young I had a teacher who said you need to cultivate your obsessions. And I thought that was a weird thing to say. Obsessions are bad, I don't want obsessions. Obsessions are ill!

Now that I'm older and wiser I think he was right.

Althouse, by the way, blogs every day. Have you noticed? She never takes a day off. I think that's amazing. I could never do that. I don't even begin to approach Althouse in terms of determination, persistence, and making-your-life-what-you-will.

One day I hope to make a movie about the Supreme Court and abortion. Got the screenplay ready to go!

n.n said...

edutcher:

Women are sexual creatures, and they have an ego, too. Who could have known? Still, the problem is normalization of dysfunctional behaviors.

The link between action and responsibility seems to be missing, and the solution has been to treat symptoms for profit. This missing link is evident throughout many facets of our society; but, it is most consequential in basic human behaviors.

Saint Croix said...

Thanks n.n. I think abortion fascinates me because it involves sex (which I love). And it's possible that not having children has made me more passionate on the subject in middle age.

I don't like the society I am in. I watch pre-feminist movies like On the Town, and that's the society I want to be in. I love the way everybody is pursuing sex in that movie. And how happy the pursuit is, and how they are motivated by love. I just see that as a happier time. And of course it's art, it's fiction. (1949 was right after the Holocaust and the atom bomb!) But the art was more innocent. And the pursuit of sex was more innocent. Because, yes, abortion was illegal and babies could happen. So you needed to have love in your heart, and people knew it.

I'm staying at home tonight, watching Bye, Bye Birdie, which is a great movie about alpha/beta dynamics in men and the sexual desires of women. Good stuff!

somefeller said...

One day I hope to make a movie about the Supreme Court and abortion. Got the screenplay ready to go!

You know, I've known more than a few filmmakers, mostly on the documentary or experimental film circuits, so I say this sincerely: I hope you succeed in your dream. No joke, if that's your artistic dream, go for it. I probably wouldn't watch the film, but I won't belittle an artist's dream project. This of course assumes you're more Ingmar Bergman than Ed Wood, but the latter's films are more fun to watch so maybe that wouldn't be so bad either.

Paul said...

Maybe Chelsea want's a few of her cousins snuffed.... I mean her great great grandma had other children, right?

Dante said...

The link between action and responsibility seems to be missing, and the solution has been to treat symptoms for profit.

Interesting point. Again, I would suppose that, in general, lower classes more often have abortion. Or should I say those who consume more than they produce.

In that sense, provided abortion happens prior to the fetus being alive (don't jump on it, but follow the reasoning), it is a good thing in that it provides more resources for the productive class, to do, among other things, procreate.

n.n said...

Saint Croix:

Ah, so you're perspective is romantic with responsibility. There is always a honeymoon phase, but maturity endows an individual with the capacity to distinguish between fantasy and reality, and to appreciate each in its own context.

My perspective is slightly different, perhaps more pragmatic. Actually, it seems to be more libertarian. I recognize that for us to enjoy optimal (i.e. reconcilable) liberty, we must be capable of self-moderating, responsible behavior. We must recognize and respect the intrinsic (i.e. not imparted or earned) value of human life and the unique dignity of each individual. This recognition and respect must be present throughout our evolution, from conception (or perhaps emergence of consciousness) to death.

It is likely because of this perspective that I have not focused on related issues as you have. Still, our perspectives are reconcilable, and your commentary is welcome and educational.

Thanks. Enjoy the movie.

Saint Croix said...

Thanks somefeller!

I got 13 screenplays, actually. Cinema is another passion of mine. One of them, The Unelected, is all about the Supreme Court and Carhart. It's also got a romantic triangle between a Supreme Court Justice and his two clerks. And a dead body and a cover-up.

Another one is a love story with an unplanned pregnancy. Lot of sex in that one, and Christianity. There's some brief reference to abortion but it's not the focus.

My other 11 screenplays have nothing to do with abortion. But almost all of them are about sex! I think I really like sex or something.

I did a Hitchcock, you can see our animatic here. I made my protag a virgin, trying to keep sex out of the movie. And people were like, "why is she a virgin?" Even when I try, I can't escape sex.

Here is my thesis, which is probably my strongest movie so far.

I also did a movie book where I try to rank every single movie I have seen, with ad hoc commentary. That's an on-going insane project of mine. I'm approaching 5000.

n.n said...

Dante:

I recognize that argument. Unfortunately, I am not entirely pragmatic. My perspective is heavily influenced by an ideal state. It is my interest to reconcile this ideal and real state of existence.

There are other considerations, for example sponsoring corruption and dysfunction, which constrain any ideal, universal solution.

I am, in fact, looking for the optimal compromise. Perhaps you already know the criteria (e.g. principles) which guide my adaptive frame of mind.

Saint Croix said...

Thanks, n.n.! Ditto.

Saint Croix said...

pogo, that's a brilliant comment at 9:15.

Saint Croix said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
somefeller said...

I like the thesis film. It looks like the sort of film that was in the space I used to play in during an earlier life. The actress was particularly engaging, but the actor was a little emo-bro for my tastes. Keep it up, though it seems like the microcinema/experimental film fest scene is getting smaller while online video proliferates.

Saint Croix said...

The actress was particularly engaging, but the actor was a little emo-bro for my tastes.

I agree!

Her name is Chelsea. (Ironic!) She's not an actor and has no interest in being an actor. So of course she's awesome at it!

I noticed her because she was sewing. And I had never seen a 20-year-old sewing before. I just thought that was so feminine and cool.

She defriended me somewhere along the way, so I've lost track of her.

I think I yelled at her during the film shoot? She was doing two movies simultaneously (while working a job as a maid). And of course I'm not paying her anything. But one day she was like 2 hours late, and she had to leave several hours early, which put me in a panic.

Anyway, I had a blast that entire film shoot. Second best experience of my life. Almost as much fun as sex!

I did almost drown, though. We were doing a thing with a message in a bottle, and I was trying to be environmentally conscious and not pollute. So I would swim after the bottle. Riptide pulled me out. And I was in street clothes, which got incredibly heavy. And I was desperately swimming and not getting any closer to the shore. Utter panic!

And a voice in my head said, "maybe you can stand up." And I tried to touch bottom and my foot barely made it. So I walked out of the ocean instead of swimming. I was completely exhausted. And my entire crew had no idea I almost died. Kinda funny.

Anyway, Chelsea was awesome. I had a little crush on her but I kept it to myself.

Saint Croix said...

That's me kicking water on her, by the way. The actor wasn't there. Or he was too nice, maybe? Anyway, I was splashing her with water. Maybe that's why she defriended me! The splashing.

I've been defriended by 3 women, I think? 3 or 4 that I've noticed. I've never been defriended by a woman I've slept with. Maybe I should start using that as a line. "If you sleep with me, you'll never defriend me." And it's true!

Eeyore Rifkin said...

If Frick, Göring, Jodi, von Neurath, Rosenberg, and Seyss-Inquart hadn't been executed at Nuremberg, they'd've been on the hook for a heck a lot of child support. Does nobody think these things through?

Saint Croix said...

lol

Rusty said...

Ann Althouse said...
It's beyond question that without Hitler, I would not have been born.

So were a lot of other assholes. So what.
Had there not been a Hitler there would have some one else at another time and place and perhaps your parents would 't have met. And there would still be a whole lot of other assholes, just not us.
History happened. Here we are.

We all do exist. An infinite number of others do not exist. That is an accident of history. abortion being the purpose of policy.


You might want to say, no, accidental conceptions are actually a great part of building the next generation of human beings.

Go ahead, make that argument then.

Well. In my oldest daughters case a happy accident.I suspect, in the past, there were many happy accidents.

But lets look at it the other way. Do you want society, through policy, dictating when you get pregnant and how many children you can have?

That society is much more frightening.






Paco Wové said...

Althouse

The blog spawned... by HITLER!

Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Shop AMAZON*

ken in sc said...

Without the atomic bomb, I wouldn't have been born. My father was in the navy en-route for the invasion of Japan, when the first two were dropped. He drove those Higgins boats that went up on the beach to let out Marines. He wouldn't have survived very long.