Dedicated to the opines CG.

Please opine.

288 Responses to “CG.com”

  1. http://web.mac.com/charlesgregory/ABORTICENTRISM/THE_CLOSEST_IT_GETS.html Says:

    Rogelio, somewhere you ask me to respond about other “life issues”: euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research and the death penalty. Here are my answers:

    1. If the embryo wasn’t kindapped from the uterus of a woman who claimed it was her baby, it’s fair game for any purpose. Nobody wants to raise it as a child, and it has no opinion or stake in the outcome.

    2. Euthanasia– only the very angry and the children of the very wealthy favor euthanasia. As for its cousin, “death with dignity,” (aka assisted suicide), have you noticed how everybody who’s opposed to it is healthy?

    3. The death penalty– Having run fathering courses in the local prison, I realized very quickly how much a medium-security prison is like a high school. If some person killed a member of my family, I would want to inflict on him the maximum pain possible. I would want him to spend life in prison. Executing him would be his ticket out, and I wouldn’t want that. My own feelings aside, it’s cheaper to imprison than to execute, too many people have been executed, and the person who is executed is often quite different from the person who committed the crime (e.g., Carla Faye Tucker).

    Like

    1. John Dunkle Says:

      Chuckles, I just noticed #3 here. That’s the “Mario Cuomo” argument. Mario said he was against the death penalty because it didn’t inflict enough pain! I didn’t realize you are as screwed up as he.

      Like

  2. rogelio Says:

    good morning, chuckles

    regarding #1 does adult stem cell research being the only means of medical progress not have any bearing? do you feel that we should accelerate research with embryonic stem cells despite adult stem cells being the base for progress?

    what of the findings of embryonic stem cells causing malignant tumors?

    how do you feel that we should move with this?

    # 2 we are in partial agreement. but then again, i see that quite a bit. 🙂

    sometimes i worry that in cases where assisted suicide is permitted, the person who is terminal will be coerced into stating that this is what they want, when they really don’t.

    i hear many times of people stating that they don’t want to be a burden to those they love.

    it could be very easy to make someone feel that this is what they are doing.

    that is one of the reasons i am against it, among others

    does that ever worry you about assisted suicide?

    # 3, i think we could discuss for ages and we would agree because we both see it for what it is.

    Like

  3. http://web.mac.com/charlesgregory/ABORTICENTRISM/THE_CLOSEST_IT_GETS.html Says:

    Welcome back, Rogelio!

    #1 “does adult stem cell research being the only means of medical progress not have any bearing? do you feel that we should accelerate research with embryonic stem cells despite adult stem cells being the base for progress?

    “what of the findings of embryonic stem cells causing malignant tumors?

    “how do you feel that we should move with this?”

    Those questions are for the science community to work out; they are technical in nature, rather like discussing how anatomical dissections ought to be done after settling the question of whether it’s all right to use human cadavers to advance our knowledge of the world.

    # 2 “we are in partial agreement. but then again, i see that quite a bit.

    “sometimes i worry that in cases where assisted suicide is permitted, the person who is terminal will be coerced into stating that this is what they want, when they really don’t.

    “i hear many times of people stating that they don’t want to be a burden to those they love.

    “it could be very easy to make someone feel that this is what they are doing.

    “that is one of the reasons i am against it, among others

    “does that ever worry you about assisted suicide?”

    Of course it does, but that is why I have to make sure nothing like that happens to people I care for, but not to the people I only care ABOUT.

    You have to understand the difference between the two. The aborticentrism site has a treatment of it. Caring “for” means you will work and if necessary sacrifice for a good. Caring “about” means that you will act only to see that the subject (somebody else’s kid, the quality of the neighborhood noise level, the Clinton marriage) meets your standards for that subject.

    For example, there was three miles from my house a family of five– Dad, Mom, two schoolkids and an infant– who lived in a brand new suburban home, dressed well, behaved well, went to church on Sundays and generally met the approval of the neighborhood. Until it was revealed that the infant had been dead for a month and hidden in the attic. We cared about them as neighbors, but nobody cared for the infant. Nowadays we hire people to care professionally for infants– they are called social workers.

    Another example is if I were to champion the rights of those “unborn innocents” it would satisfy my need to fight the demon abortion, but that would only be by caring ABOUT them. If I cared for them, I would spend my time, money and talents to ensure every pregnant woman had a maximally healthy pregnancy.

    See the difference?

    So, when I care FOR someone exposed to the path of assisted suicide I act in their best interest, defending them from some of my relatives (and boy, do I have the in-law story!)

    But if I only care ABOUT people being manipulated into suicide (the Kevorkian ouevre, by the way), then I blindly flail about, not caring or knowiing whether my actions are actually harming those who wish to establish their own rite of dignity in dying. FOR

    Like

    1. rogelio Says:

      that’s terrible about your neighbors, chuckles!

      re: #1 ya know, something i totally respect about you is that you don’t try and BS others by pretending that you have all the answers when you don’t. i try to do the same when i don’t know and think it is best left for someone more knowledgeable than myself to answer. thank you for that.

      re #2: >>>If I cared for them, I would spend my time, money and talents to ensure every pregnant woman had a maximally healthy pregnancy.<<<

      i can picture you doing that. you never down me for being pro-life, but you do expect me to walk my talk.

      i can picture you showing compassion like that to someone in need.

      i think that is another common ground that we have despite our differences regarding abortion.

      with # 3, you go into a great deal of detail that i don't usually focus on.

      i usually focus on the immorality of state sanctioned murder, and of the fact that too many innocent people have been put to death for crimes that they didn't commit, but your thoughts on the retribution aspects as well as the economic aspects are interesting.

      i am going to remember those aspects when i denounce the DP to the next neocon who wants to quench his thirst for blood.

      Like

  4. http://web.mac.com/charlesgregory/ABORTICENTRISM/THE_CLOSEST_IT_GETS.html Says:

    …oops, sent in mid-sentence.

    FOR vs. ABOUT. Think about it.

    # 3 (the death penalty) “i think we could discuss for ages and we would agree because we both see it for what it is.”

    You might well be right, as Bill Buckley once said.

    Like

  5. Amy Weintraub Says:

    Abortion is a legal right.

    Like

    1. John Dunkle Says:

      And?

      Like

  6. http://web.mac.com/charlesgregory/ABORTICENTRISM/THE_CLOSEST_IT_GETS.html Says:

    A long-time friend of mine died a while ago, and another friend and I took his ex-wife and adult child to dinner when we found outselves in the same town. As we were parting, my friend made a brief, poignant summary about the influence the friend had had upon all of us. The adult child teared up; the ex-wife said to me, “When our children were still pre-schoolers, you advised him you could do me a real favor by taking care of them for a full week while I went on vacation. He never did that.”

    Until then, I’d never guessed that he’d had the impulses of a so-called “pro-lifer.”

    Like

    1. John Dunkle Says:

      Geeze, Chuckles, this might be interesting, but you lost me toward the end. Could you rewrite the section after “teared up”?

      Like

  7. John Dunkle Says:

    Doesn’t anybody else find this interesting? If so ask Chuckles to expand on it. He won’t do anything I ask him to do because he realizes now that I can see through him.

    Like

    1. Jacobtoo Says:

      Yeah, Chuckles, I want to know too.

      Like

  8. RESPONSIBLE Right to Life Says:

    Jacobtoo, the hallmark of the aborticentrist– the self-styled “pro-lifer”– is to agonize over abortion, to tearfully or malevolently persuade the woman to bear a child and then to walk away. Which is a much more pronounced version of my late acquaintance’s attitude toward his own children– they were completely the woman’s responsibility. He got along with them famously when they became grown-ups.

    Like

    1. Jacobtoo Says:

      kinda

      Like

  9. Jacobtoo Says:

    Getting there, and now this: “When our children were still pre-schoolers, you advised him you could do me a real favor by taking care of them for a full week while I went on vacation. He never did that.”

    Like

  10. Pat Richards Says:

    Hey, boys! Just catching up to these other commentaries and I see you two are still having fun. So, where are we? Has anyone been converted yet?

    Like

    1. Jacobtoo Says:

      Not yet, Pat, but so far I’ve doubled the distance between Chuckles and the Evil One. What about yourself.

      Like

  11. RESPONSIBLE Right to Life Says:

    When reading some of Dunkle’s material– and seeing that he is now writing as two people–I am reminded of a description Beaudelaire wrote of an elderly woman, how her fingers moved randomly and ceaselessly over the counterpane in her final moments. My mother had such a burst of activity a week and a half before her death. Nothing to see here; move along.

    Like

    1. John Dunkle Says:

      Oh Geeze, let me get rid of jacobtoo. At a rescue in North Dakota years ago, we had to give the leader aliases. I said “Jacob.” He said, “We already have a Jacob, but that’s OK, you can be Jacobtoo.”

      Like

  12. Frank Akron, Ohio Says:

    I’ve been reading this blog for a while.

    That Dunkle writes like a multiple personality person.

    Is it the Jacob person that is the other Dunkle?

    Like

  13. Vilma, Delaware Says:

    Responsible,
    I appreciate your writing.

    You make your positions very well unlike people like Dunkle.

    Like

    1. RESPONSIBLE Right to Life Says:

      Thank you. In order to deal with the issues that drive him to do what he does, he cannot engage as fully as he would like to. Evasion, distraction, obfuscation, pretended or real obtuseness are all necessary tools for him to continue a dialogue here. At least he is trying to engage.

      Like

      1. John Dunkle Says:

        Now, folks, compare Chuckles’ attack today — “Evasion, distraction, obfuscation, pretended or real obtuseness are all necessary tools for him to continue a dialogue here” with mine yesterday — “Why, when dealing with me, does he continually evade, excoriate, lie, belittle, and run?” I’m gonna make this psychologist literate yet! (Cut down on the Latinisms, though, Chuck.)

        Like

      2. Andres Garcia Says:

        Thank you Responsible, reading your comments are interesting.

        I am amazed that anyone does not understand.

        If you do not mind I am going to paraphrase them in Spanish.

        Like

        1. http://web.mac.com/charlesgregory/ABORTICENTRISM/THE_CLOSEST_IT_GETS.html Says:

          Muchas gracias! Favor de trasladar toda la informacion de aborticentrismo, tambien!

          Like

    2. John Dunkle Says:

      “unlike people like Dunkle” — you won’t find any of them! Me is all you got!

      Like

      1. Pat Richards Says:

        yeah, how come no other pro-lifers chime in on these blogs, John?

        Like

        1. John Dunkle Says:

          They are watching me running in the clear and approaching the goal line.

          Like

          1. Susilowati Says:

            Superbly ilmntinaliug data here, thanks!

            Like


          2. Knowledge wants to be free, just like these articles!

            Like


          3. Now I know who the brainy one is, I’ll keep looking for your posts.

            Like

  14. Nancy Says:

    I have been pro life for years,
    Have written on this blog,
    And have seen many other ProLifers write here.

    Why would you say this fanatic is the only pro lifer on this blog?

    Like

    1. John Dunkle Says:

      because I think Pat can see right through you, Nancy

      Like

    2. Seth P Says:

      The fanatics are so crazy – no one should even bother with them.

      Nancy, how do we know you are not a fanatic?

      Do you believe women should be allowed to use birth control?

      Like

  15. Mila Says:

    Nancy,
    You are not the only pro lifer on this blog.

    Do you support the Death Penalty?

    Like

    1. Seth P Says:

      Mila,

      Are you Pro Life?
      Do you support the death penalty?

      Like

      1. John Dunkle Says:

        Will you kids read what we all wrote about you earlier, and just listen!

        Like

      2. Erin, Gainesville Says:

        I support the death penalty.

        They should apply it to murderers that Murder innocent people.

        Like

      3. Youseff Malick Says:

        The anti abortion maniacs that murder innocent Doctors that service the community performing abortion services should be put to death by the government through the legal system as many of those lunatics already have.

        Like

        1. John Dunkle Says:

          no go — thick as a brick

          Like

          1. Youseff Malick Says:

            Thick As A Brick was a great Jethro Tull song.

            If your response was to my comment, you must have the ability to discuss a topic at the level of a third grader.

            So Dunkle – the third grader – In my opinion people that think Murderer’s are Martyrs – As you do – should be placed in a place for the criminally insane.

            Like

          2. Erin Says:

            I agree.

            Read more of what that brainless wonder writes.

            He should be warehoused.

            Like

            1. Patty Says:

              Dunkle is a Brainless wonder to worship murderers.

              Like

        2. Patty Says:

          Demons,
          Like the ProLife Murderer Loving Dunkle, only a demon would think a Murderer of an innocent Doctor that provides safe Abortion care legally is a Martyr!

          Like

  16. frostw Says:

    I Like your Blog Post. Do you have more Articles Like These in your Blog

    Like

    1. RESPONSIBLE Right to Life Says:

      frsotw, I am of an age that prevents me from comprehending the term “your blog”. I did a website to the best of my ability on aborticentrism. The easiest way to find it is Google the term. There is a button there you can click if you want to communicate at length about what you find.

      Like

  17. Calls Says:

    Just discovered this site thru Yahoo, what a pleasant surprise!

    Like

    1. John Dunkle Says:

      Yeah, Calls, you’re in for a treat!

      Like

      1. Pat Richards Says:

        As long as CG “dumbs it down” for us dense ones, it’s great reading…

        Like

        1. John Dunkle Says:

          I call that “mucks it up.”

          Like

  18. Abortion Rights Says:

    Yeah, the Dunkle is gone!

    Like

    1. Pat Richards Says:

      Gone but not forgotten. And dont kid yourself, he’s watching…

      Like

      1. John Dunkle Says:

        prescient, yes you are

        Like

        1. Pat Richards Says:

          That’s pretty funny…

          Like

  19. John Dunkle Says:

    Geeze it’s April, like 100, now. Doesn’t anybody want to talk to Chuckles?

    What about this, “There is a button there you can click if you want to communicate at length about what you find.” Didn’t Chuckles tell us that Abortiencentriamly is not a blog? Because we cannot talk there? One slippery dude.

    Like

    1. Pat Richards Says:

      Not sure what you are asking, John. What’s up?

      Like

      1. John Dunkle Says:

        Just trying to revive Chuckles’ defunct space here. And didn’t he tell us that his own blog, the one I can’t spell, is more like a pulpit? Cause we can’t respond? And isn’t he changing his tune here: “There is a button there you can click if you want to communicate at length about what you find”?
        I can understand Chuckles when he forgets what he thinks he learned in those psychology classes, and he’s good a disguising his anger, too; so, I don’t want to lose him.

        Like


  20. For any movement, no matter how whacky, to survive, it has to be able to peddle its memes.

    A meme is an information packet– one or two words that trigger a flood of associations in the mind. “Family values” is an example. Someone from the hinterlands of Nunavik might hear the words and let them pass, but any semi-sentient American will conjure up all the images the Republican Party has implanted in the cultural consciousness over the last thirty years.

    The meme reinforces the existence of its creator– an attack on the hypocrisy of the Republican promotion of “family values” serves both to reinforce the meme itself, but also to remind the listener that the Republicans are the ones promoting it. To ignore a meme is to let it begin to die quietly.

    The so-called “pro-life” movement has its memes. The central one is “abortion.” Fight the movement by arguing for abortion rights, and you provide it with lifeblood. You will never eliminate the movement as a potent political force until you re-define the terms of the engagement, leaving their memes to wither by the roadside.

    Like

    1. John Dunkle Says:

      Chuck, you gotta be kidding, you just gotta be! “Abortion” is the word you killers’ helpers used to get child slaughter legalized! Medical personnel used that word as short for spontaneous abortion or miscarriage. Kayhaitchers transferred that specialized meaning into the minds of politicians, those smart on how to get elected but stupid on everything else. Politicians then accepted abortion as a medical necessity (you know, a women’s health issue) and forgot that it is killing a child. Even we prolifers now think of it that way. If the bishops, for example, would substitute “child killing” for “abortion” in their pronouncements, that would be a step in the right direction.

      Like


      1. I’m still waiting for you to get back to me on what creates feral children and why. I’m also waiting for you to clarify your answer about how God views me when I abandon children I insisted be born.

        Like

        1. John Dunkle Says:

          You do love to pile up the questions.

          What credates feral children? Say “who” rather, and the answer is God.

          Why? Adam and Eve.

          How does God view me when I abandon children I insisted be born? The same way he would view you when you abandon children you insisted celebrate their first birthdays.

          Like

        2. Alexandra Says:

          Your article was exelnlcet and erudite.

          Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s