Thursday, January 15, 2009
You can hide, but ... well, actually, no, you can't.
If you're going to be deranged, anti-choice douchebags, at least have the honour and self-respect to be upfront about it. FCS.
IS IT JUST ME, or has anyone else noticed how Canada's fetus fetishists seem embarrassed to come right out and advertise their fetusy leanings? There were the sneaky fuckers at First Place Pregnancy Centre, then the stealth Parliamentary Pro-Life Caucus, and now the not-so-cleverly disguised Signal Hill twatwaffles. If you didn't know any better, you'd swear these yokels didn't want the word to get out or something.
How humiliating. It occurs to me that, if you keep yapping on about how much you want to "debate" the abortion issue, you should make yourself available. Publicly.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
The don't have facts on their side, so they mus resort to lies, deception and appeals to emotion, rather than reason.
They are also trying to hide their religious leanings and affiliations too.
Suzie-All-Caps might be a dangerously insane windbag, but she's at least obsessively upfront about it.
These guys are just liars.
They know they can't win honestly in an open debate, that's all.
They're a fairly unsightly lot, too. Maybe that's it.
Not only don't they have the facts, they don't have public opinion on their side either.
That's why they jump through hoops to make it look like they're something other than what they really are -- because the majority of Canadians recoil in loathing from these imbeciles, and they know it.
Unfortunately, 40 years down the road is a little late to be going for a makeover. And when they've still got nuts like Bill Wartcott running around depositing fetus porn in peoples' mailboxes, 're-branding' becomes an almost insurmountable task.
However, if even a few unwitting middle-grounders like our buddy Gord fall for it, their job is done. Which is why it's important to call them out at every turn.
Our buddy Gord has a new post trying to open a fucking debate on late term abortion. *sigh* I say: let's not play with him. I'm not going to.
fern hill - Gord probably means well, but he clearly doesn't get it.
What he wants to debate is "late term abortion for convenience" -- assuming he accepts medical emergencies as sufficient justification for the procedure, with or without a law.
So what he wants to debate is something that's basically *nonexistent*. Which I think I already alluded to in my first comment there, so obviously he doesn't believe me.
It's amazing -- some people are so hung up on having their lives run by laws that they can't conceive it could work any other way.
Post a Comment