Don’t Be An Idiot

Planned Parenthood is not selling baby parts, you idiots

The silence of Planned Parenthood’s supporters in the last few weeks has spoken volumes. It’s been shocking how quiet many of my liberal friends have been in rushing to the defense of one of the greatest bastions of modern liberalism. But there have been a few who have vocally defended them. Most of the arguments they use are similar, so today let’s look at one which is representative of many others I’ve seen.

Apologies for the language this blogger uses, but I think there are a few important observations to be made from her video, and from the wider stream of similar Planned Parenthood defense arguments it represents. Click here for Rebecca Watson’s blog post where this video first appeared.

First of all, it’s important to note that her video came out before the most recent Center for Medical Progress video, which was released yesterday. It was even more damning than the first three, and was the first to explicitly include the word “selling” coming from the mouth of a PP “doctor”.

Three observations for Rebecca Watson, and for anyone else who would like to rush to the defense of Planned Parenthood:


As often as she uses the word “obviously” it’s almost as if she’s trying to convince herself that her assertion is self-evident. We can haggle all you like about the term “selling” (which, as stated, hadn’t been used by PP personnel in the videos released prior to her blog), but it could not possibly be MORE obvious from the footage (whether looking at the “maliciously edited” videos or the full-length versions) that Planned Parenthood is exchanging “fetal tissue” (baby parts) for money. No amount of ignorance or name-calling can change that simple fact.


The blogger compares believing Planned Parenthood sells baby parts to those who believed accusations that Jews or other “marginalized groups” were burning babies to ashes, baking them into cakes, and eating them. “How could anybody believe something so stupid?” she asks. But is this the best historical precedent for comparison to the present Planned Parenthood scandal?

I can’t say I’m familiar with the specific “heresy” she’s referring to (as she doesn’t cite any of her “research”), but the practice of widespread infanticide and child sacrifice is well-documented in many cultures throughout history. I’d be happy to provide citation links in the comments to anyone who cares to challenge that assertion. Peter Singer, professor of bioethics at Princeton, advocates for legal infanticide in the US today.

And using this blogger’s own logic, why would it be wrong to eat dead babies anyway? She argues that, since abortionists are going to kill babies anyway, why shouldn’t they use this “garbage” for the betterment of humanity? How is it different to argue that we shouldn’t eat unwanted babies? Is it better to just throw them away? But I digress…

I would argue that there is a much better historical precedent here, and one which is much more recent. In the memory of those still alive today, millions of people WERE slaughtered, burned to ashes. Yet there are those who vehemently deny that the Holocaust ever happened. No amount of evidence can convince them otherwise. And sadly, no amount of evidence seems sufficient to convince some of the Holocaust taking place in our own country at this very moment.

Which leads to the final, and most important, observation…


This blogger KNOWS that what Planned Parenthood is accused of is horrible. She describes the accusations as “obviously stupid and made up,” and accuses people like me of believing “the unbelievable.” By her own admission, chopping babies up and selling their parts would be an unbelievably horrifying thing to do. I agree!

So I ask: As evidence continues to mount that this IS, in fact, taking place, at what point will you join me in demanding that we defund Planned Parenthood? What amount of evidence will it take for you to condemn this atrocity?

Because, rest assured, there is even more incontrovertible evidence coming. So far we have seen four of the twelve videos we’ve been told are coming, and each has gotten progressively worse. I expect that trend to continue! Planned Parenthood does, too, which is why they’ve secured a restraining order to prevent footage being released from other meetings which took place earlier this year. They KNOW what they’ve said and done is going to come back on them in a bad way, and they’re doing everything they can to prevent it. But one way or another, it WILL come out. When it does, will those still defending Planned Parenthood go down with the ship? Will you continue to hide your heads in the sand and pretend everything is okay, or will you finally listen to your conscience? I pray it will be the latter, and eagerly wait to welcome you to the right side of the line that has been drawn in the sand about the most critical ethical issue of our time.

How “Deceptively Edited” Was the Video Claiming Planned Parenthood Sells Baby Parts?


In the last two days, millions of people have watched this video from the Center for Medical Progress, which asserts that Planned Parenthood has been harvesting and selling aborted baby parts. Several media outlets have rushed to the defense of America’s largest abortion provider in an attempt to “debunk” the video. One such attempt, penned by Alexandrea Boguhn & Hannah Groch-Begley, makes the following claim:

A deceptive video from a conservative group purports to show a Planned Parenthood official discussing prices for the illegal sale of fetal tissue from abortions. But the full, unedited footage and transcript released by the group undermines their sensationalist claims, showing at least three crucial edits that reveal the Planned Parenthood official was instead discussing the reimbursement cost for consensual, legal tissue donations.

I encourage you to read the rest of their article, and the evidence they provide for these “deceptive edits,” here. Let’s take a look at this defense of Planned Parenthood and see where we’ve been deceived.

DECEPTION #1: The goal isn’t to “sell” tissue. Planned Parenthood only does what is reasonable and customary.

RESPONSE: I’m no legal expert, so I’m going to refrain from commenting on the technical legality of what Planned Parenthood is doing. But isn’t the bigger story the fact that selectively crushing certain body parts for the sake of harvesting other, more valuable parts is considered “reasonable and customary”?

DECEPTION #2: Planned Parenthood does not “profit” from the sale of baby parts. They “donate” the tissue, receiving “reimbursement” for their services, and “if they happen to do a little better than break even, and in a way that seems reasonable, they’re happy to do that.”

RESPONSE: Fair enough. I didn’t “profit” from the trumpet lesson I just taught, either. I “donated” my time and received “reimbursement” for the services rendered, and I’m pretty happy that I did “a little better than break even.”

DECEPTION #3: What’s the big deal? The baby parts were “donated” with legal consent. For “scientific research.”

RESPONSE: I’m an organ donor. It says so on my driver’s license. If I should happen to die, I’ve given legal consent for my organs to be harvested. I’d love for my organs to be used to save the lives of others. But do you know why that’s a noble thing? Because they are MY organs to donate! How many people would come to my defense, do you think, if I were to offer the vital organs of one of my children (be sure to crush their throats so you don’t damage anything important) to be used for scientific research? [FYI, I just about threw up typing that last sentence.] I should hope it would be no one! Not even IF it saved the lives of others, which is certainly debatable in the realm of fetal STEM cell research.

CONCLUSION: Yes, the video is edited. But do you know why what “Dr.” Nucatola says sounds so horrible? It’s because what she—and the rest of Planned Parenthood—is doing IS horrible. The only ones deceived here are those who believe there’s nothing wrong with taking an innocent, defenseless human child and systematically ripping it apart in its mother’s womb.

[Image Source: Media Matters]

What’s Growing in Margaret Sanger’s Garden?

"The greatest sin in the world is bringing children into the world." ~ Margaret Sanger

With so much frenzy these days to expunge all vestiges of racism in our nation, perhaps the vigilantes of political correctness can find some rare common ground with social conservatives. Building a consensus on social issues is unquestionably difficult—some might even say impossible—but rather than bickering about cakes, flags, and dead generals, we ought to agree together that Margaret Sanger and the organization she founded have been far more effective at exterminating minorities than the most bloodthirsty Ku Klux Klan member ever dreamed of. Whatever you may think about Nathan Bedford Forrest, he is not the founder of the organization that continues to slaughter nearly 2,000 black and Hispanic children each and every week in the United States.

This despicable organization, founded with explicitly racist motivations, represents an insidious evil against which all who despise racism in any form can rally. And unlike exhuming the bodies of those long dead or tweeting trendy hashtags, there is one action which would make a real difference, preserving life and demonstrating powerfully that #BlackLivesMatter: DEFUNDING PLANNED PARENTHOOD.

Still need convincing? Allow me to introduce you to Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood.

In 1925, Sanger delivered a rousing speech promoting a vision in which we “would see this old world of ours converted into a beautiful garden of children.” Sounds good, right? But how to achieve this vision?

“Before you can cultivate a garden, you must know something about gardening. You have got to give your seeds a proper soil in which to grow. You have got to give them sunlight and fresh air. You have got to give them space and the opportunity (if they are to lift their flowers to the sun), to strike their roots deep into that soil. And always — do not forget this — you have got to fight weeds. You cannot have a garden, if you let weeds overrun it.” (Source)

Sanger wrote and spoke often of “human weeds” in her quest to promote eugenics (“good genes”), and while abortion supporters frequently deny that Sanger was referring to ethnic minorities and poor people when she described “reckless breeders… unceasingly spawning [a] class of human beings who never should have been born at all,” (Source) and attribute benign motives to her warning that “we do not want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,” (Source) the intentions of some of her colleagues are more clear.

Lothrop Stoddard, appointed by Sanger to the board of directors for the Birth Control League (later renamed Planned Parenthood), wrote in his book, “The Rising Tide of Color Against White World-Supremacy,” that the “white race” which had “pressed to the front and proved in a myriad of ways their fitness for the hegemony of mankind” was in danger of being overrun by races less fit to breed. He wrote, “Unless man erects and maintains artificial barriers the various races will increasingly mingle, and the inevitable result will be the supplanting or absorption of the higher by the lower types.” The lowest “type” of man in Studdard’s book? “Negroids.” (Source)

This influence is seen in Planned Parenthood today, where nearly 80% of clinics are located in African American and Latino communities (Source), with such a disproportionate number of black babies being aborted it’s nearly impossible to NOT see them as being intentionally targeted. Sanger’s disdain for immigrants, the disabled, and large families also fueled her desire to achieve “a cleaner race” through Birth Control (Source). “Equality” is an incredibly ironic buzzword to be bandied by those who also vociferously defend the organization which has carried out Sanger’s vision for the last 99 years.

Defunding Planned Parenthood on a federal level wouldn’t necessarily shut the organization down (and even if it did, it would merely put a dent in the atrocious U.S. abortion rate), but removing all taxpayer dollars from the organization would be a tremendous first step in reducing the complicity of all American people in the wholesale murder of the unborn. I call on those who truly value life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for ALL people to urge your representatives to join the fight to defund Planned Parenthood immediately.

I welcome civil discourse in the comments. And because of the preponderance of falsely attributed “quotes” on the Internet, I encourage you to fact-check what I’ve written above by clicking through the provided “source” links.

The Hayekian Book of Revelation

Gregory Alan Thornbury, the new president at The King’s College, recently gave a fascinating convocation address to begin the school year. In it, he made reference to Austrian economist Friedrich Hayek, and encouraged students to think about philosophical ideas that have stood opposed to some of the philosophies that dominated much of the world during the last century: “totalitarianism, fascism, and a century of holocaust.”

Jerry Bowyer of Forbes magazine interviewed Dr. Thornbury on this and other matters—ranging from economics to Harry Potter to Dr. Who to Christian eschatology—and I thoroughly enjoyed it! For those who don’t want to listen to the entire interview, Bowyer has transcribed the portion of the interview devoted to Hayek and John’s Apocalypse. Here’s an excerpt:

I think that when you study the texts of particularly the New Testament, although it has its origins in the Mosaic Law, I think what you see there is the seedbed of freedom of conscience. You see democratic religion in the pages of the New Testament. So whereas some people in Acts chapter 5 see some kind of nascent socialism, actually what you’re seeing is free people electing to gather together in solidarity around key principles and ideals and goals, and the people who joined in that were people like Lydia. There was a mercantile aspect to the early Christian movement. When I read Hayek and I see his argument for the link between private property and freedom, I see a direct line going all the way back to those pages of the New Testament, because what the Apostle Paul and others were representing was an alternative to totalitarianism. When you look at the Apostle John – and whatever else you think the Book of Revelation says about the future—what it definitely was, was the greatest political protest letter ever penned in the history of the world, because he was saying, “The state has no business telling us how we should govern our own life together.” And when I say “society” or “culture”, here’s how I’m defining that, Jerry: I take a nineteenth century definition by Johann Herder, who many recognize as the founding father of modern sociology. He said, “Culture is the lifeblood of a civilization. It’s the flow of moral energy that keeps a society intact.” So, when I see Hayek talking about making sure that we stay free of tyranny, I see the entailments of that going all the way back to the emperor and Domitian and the Apostle John.

This article is definitely worth your while! Read the rest here.

[Image credit]

Bottom-Up Leadership

I’ve been thoroughly enjoying Ron Paul’s latest book, The School Revolution: A New Answer for Our Broken Education System. Last night I particularly appreciated a passage where Dr. Paul wrote about the process of becoming a good leader:

Successful leadership begins with self-government. It is extended through successful followership. A person learns the basics of leadership by working closely with a competent leader who serves as a model. He gains access to the leader through his willingness to submit to leadership. This is the principle of bottom-up leadership. It begins at the bottom. Then, over a period of time, the follower advances in his level of responsibility. Maybe he attends a meeting on a regular basis; he shows up. This is basic and absolutely necessary to success in life, because a lot of people do not show up. Maybe he gets there early. He helps to set up the chairs. He learns how to make the coffee. He offers himself as a servant to whoever is running the meeting. He becomes useful to somebody else.

The themes of responsibility and servant leadership are recurring ones as Paul outlines his methodology for producing educated citizens who are ready to succeed in whatever course they choose to pursue, and to lead with humility:

So few people are faithful servants that those people inevitably rise in the chain of command, even if there is no official chain of command. So few people are reliable followers that leaders reach out to them, train them, disciple them, and put them in positions of leadership.

The discipleship model of servant leadership is prevalent in the Bible, so it should come as no surprise that Dr. Paul frequently credits his study of Scripture in forming his own style of leadership. Yet another reason to love the good Doctor!  I hope you’ll check out his book. You won’t regret it!

Only Bad People Send Their Kids to Private School?

Allison Benedikt’s recent editorial about public vs. private schooling is a top candidate for “Worst Article of the Year”. The title alone is enough to give you the basic gist: “If You Send Your Kid to Private School, You Are a Bad Person.”

Benedikt really, really wants you to give your children to the State. Because they’ll get a better education there? No. Because home and private schools fail to offer an excellent education? Nope. Because the State has their best interests in mind? Not a chance.

So why?

She freely admits that government education is often “crappy,” and that private schools are much more likely to provide a “superior education,” yet insists that it is in the best interests of future generations for everyone to be publicly indoctrinated. And even those inclined not to despise nationalized schooling ought to admit that her case is less than compelling. In fact, it is just the type of article I would write if I were tying to use satire to convince readers of the deficiencies of public education, though by all accounts she is actually serious. This quote should suffice to give you her basic argument, should you choose to spare yourself from further asininity:

I went K–12 to a terrible public school. My high school didn’t offer AP classes, and in four years, I only had to read one bookThere wasn’t even soccer. This is not a humblebrag! I left home woefully unprepared for college, and without that preparation, I left college without having learned much there either. You know all those important novels that everyone’s read? I haven’t. I know nothing about poetry, very little about art, and please don’t quiz me on the dates of the Civil War. I’m not proud of my ignorance. But guess what the horrible result is? I’m doing fine. I’m not saying it’s a good thing that I got a lame education. I’m saying that I survived it, and so will your child, who must endure having no AP calculus so that in 25 years there will be AP calculus for all.

Forgive me if I aspire to more than for my children to “survive” school. And it’s certainly debatable whether she is, in fact, “doing fine.” Anyone who can compare the educational benefit of “getting drunk before basketball games with kids who lived at the trailer park near my house” with the merits of reading Walt Whitman is practically begging not to be taken seriously.

I can only hope that the thousands of people who have read and shared this article in the last 24 hours are doing it, like me, to point out how utterly ridiculous it is, though my cynicism leads me to suspect that there are probably many who actually believe that continuing to sacrifice generations of children on the altar of government schooling is “worth it, for the eventual common good.”

No, thank you. I, for one, will proudly wear my “bad person” badge with honor as I fulfill my God-given responsibility to do everything in my power to provide my children with the best education possible, starting with their discipleship as followers of Christ. And as more and more “bad people” are awakened to the dangers of things like the “common core,” we’ll be here to welcome them to the exodus from State schools, which is the only real hope for the education of future generations.

EDIT: Here’s someone else who’s also “Proud to Be a Bad Parent”, and more reasoned in his response to Benedikt’s article than I have been.

The Great American Taxing Game

The folks at Learn Liberty have put out another interesting video. This one is interactive! Here you have the opportunity to choose between three commodities lawmakers seem to be particularly fond of taxing (gas, cigarettes, and luxury items), and then see some of the consequences of such a tax. Check it out!

These videos are a good way to demonstrate once again the “one lesson” from Henry Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson (my review), which is summed up in the following sentence:

“The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups.”