Pay Taxes! Fund Immoral Acts!
I stumbled across the blog of a guy named Nathan Bradfield. He says his articles are also posted at Stop the ACLU. He calls his blog “Church and State”, as in he thinks they should be one and the same. A recent article he wrote is called Using Tax Dollars to Fund Immoral Actions. Let’s see what he wrote:
Ever since last November’s elections, which resulted in a pro-abortion leadership in both the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate, national abortion groups have boldly pushed an agenda of death—forcing taxpayers to pay for it! In 2005 Planned Parenthood got $272 million in our taxes, twice the money it made from its 255,000 abortions that year.
I’m not even going to bother with this paragraph other than to say that almost every phrase is a mischaracterization of the facts.
Abortion is murder and immoral.
“Immoral” is a personal opinion, so Nathan is entitled to use it. “Murder” has a legal definition. Abortion is not murder in the eyes of the law, so he is overreaching here.
Since it was made legal and uses tax dollars to fund it, translates into government-funded murder.
Well that just isn’t a sentence. I think he means “…[abortion] translates into government-funded murder.” We’ve already rejected the murder label, so this argument collapses as well.
Not only is Planned Parenthood being reimbursed for child-killing…
Really, Nathan? Name one child they’ve killed. You can’t, because they don’t! They do abort fetuses, but those aren’t children.
Notice a trend here? This is typical of the fundies. They keep redefining words to fit their purposes. You can’t do that!
…they are making huge profits, 100%, off these innocent children’s deaths.
I’m not sure what that means. I know what he’s doing, however. He’s trying to paint Planned Parenthood as a business whose product is child murder. The more children they murder, the more profitable they become. This is hogwash, of course. Planned Parenthood is a non-profit organization whose job is to help women plan and manage their fertility and reproduction.
When conservatives argue that taxpayer money should not be used to fund immoral actions, such as abortion, they counter that because they disagree with the War on Terror, their taxpayer dollars should not be used to fund that.
Umm, Nathan? Who are “they” and “their” that you are referring to? You put those words in italics, so I have to assume this is some sort of fundie code, just like “activist judges” is fundie code for judges who rule against fundies.
This argument could not be more inaccurate. It’s comparing apples to pimples.
Gross, Nathan! We know fundies are the assholes of America, and you’re the pimple on the asshole, but you shouldn’t brag about it!
Reason: Abortion is a moral issue turned political by liberals. The War on Terror is a political issue turned moral by liberals.
Actually, it’s the fundies who made abortion political. If you’d just accept the ruling of the Supreme Court and shut the hell up; if you’d stop pushing for laws to circumvent the Constitution and the courts; if you’d stop using abortion as the litmus test for all politicians and political appointees, then it wouldn’t be a political issue.
Second, the War on Terror isn’t a “political issue turned moral by liberals”. Whether to go to war is political. A “war on terror”, if such a thing were possible, is also a political issue. The only thing immoral is the specific actions of that war, such as torture, indefinite detainment, and of course the waging of a specific war (Iraq) that had nothing to do with terrorism in the first place.
This is not a new trick by the
Don’t ask me why he did that strikethrough. I’m just reprinting what he wrote.
They did it to pass Roe v. Wade,…
You aren’t very bright, are you Nathan? Let me say this slowly and clearly: The Democrats didn’t “pass” Roe v. Wade. No one did! It was a court decision! You see, there are three branches of government: Executive, Legislative, and Judicial. Look it up.
…they use it to push for homosexual marriage,…
What? No scare quotes around “marriage”? You fundies are starting to slip!
…and child-murder laws today are no exception.
How so? The only child-murder laws I’m aware of make it a crime to kill children.
But not even Sean Penn, Cindy Sheehan, or flip-flopping Hillary can argue that conservatives have doubled their money on the War on Terror.
You guys must really hate Hillary Clinton. You won’t shut up about her, and you’ll drag her name into every rant, no matter how far afield.
I think the “[doubling] their money” phrase is a reference to his comment above about Planned Parenthood making profits of 100% by killing children, a claim that we’ve already rejected as befuddled and incoherent.
As far as his claim that no one can argue that “conservatives have doubled their money on the War on Terror”, he’s absolutely right. Conservatives haven’t doubled their profits. They’ve tripled, quadrupled, and in some cases increased their profits 10-fold, 20-fold, or more.
The regular defense contractors, who make equipment and munitions, are doing very good business indeed. What’s sickening, though, are the likes of Haliburton and similar Bush buddies whose profits are astronomical.
The War in Iraq could reach costs in excess of $1 trillion, though keep in mind this figure is from the liberal PMSNBC.
I don’t know what “the liberal PMSNBC” is. That figure can’t be far wrong, however. Right now, Congress and the President are locked in a showdown over a $120 billion appropriations bill for the war. That’s just one bill. This war will continue to need comparable amounts on a regular basis until it’s over.
But since the War on Terror is actually a political issue, tax dollars should be spent for our nation’s safety without complaint.
He may have a point, but the War in Iraq has nothing to do with protecting us from terrorism.
Abortion, on the other hand, is a true moral issue and tax dollars used to fund such immoral actions deserve protest.
But we’ve already established that the War in Iraq is a moral issue. Therefore, by his own logic, it is proper to protest the war, even though he claimed earlier in his article that it isn’t.
But hey, since you can’t put a price on a baby’s life, you can’t divide the total cost of the War on Terror by each American soldier who died either. Let’s remember to compare apples to apples here.
That’s a relief. I was afraid for a moment that he wanted to compare ass pimples again.
So let’s look at lives by war compared to lives aborted now, shall we?
Shall we? Shall we? Yes! We shall!
- Revolutionary War – 4,435 deaths.
- Civil War (both sides) – 498,332 deaths.
- World War I – 116,708 deaths.
- World War II – 407,316 deaths.
- Korea – 25,604 deaths.
- Vietnam – 58,168 deaths.
TOTAL – 1,110,563
But we can’t forget both wars in Iraq. Let’s bump our total up by another 20,000 for those and to silence any whimpering over death count discrepencies.[sic]
That puts us at 1,130,563 for ALL of our nation’s wars.
No it doesn’t, retard! You left off the War of 1812, the Mexican war, the Spanish-American war, and a host of others. These additional wars don’t hugely affect his total, but how are we supposed to believe anything this guy says if he’s this ignorant of history?
Our total aborted number:
Hey, Nathan! I thought you didn’t want to compare apples to your ass pimples? That’s exactly what you’re doing here.
1. Not all of those wars were “immoral”.
2. You can’t compare the death of a live human being with the removal of a non-viable mass of tissue. Have you ever had a cyst removed? Maybe a wart? Ever peel off a scab? MURDERER!
I am merely pointing out the hypocricy [sic] of the left that utilizes its advantages in the liberal media,…
Like Fox News? Like most of CNN and MSNBC? Like 99% of A.M. talk radio?
…the far left Hollywood that isn’t used to having to think for themselves because they always use a script (who is writing theirs now???),…
Help! I’m afraid of Rob Reiner! I’m afraid of Meathead!
…and their flip-flopping politicians…
All politicians “flip-flop”, the
reich right at least as much as the left. Flip-flopping is just another baseless Republican talking point.
…to protest and whine about our “poor soldiers” having to “fight in a war they don’t agree with” (all two of them)…
Really, Nathan? Where did you come up with that figure? Did you squeeze your ass pimple and that’s what popped out? I’ve got news for you. It’s a lot more than that.
…all the while, more babies were murdered in 5 months in 2005 than have been killed since we began the War in Iraq.
To quote the fundies’ (in fact, all conservatives’) favorite president, Ronald Reagan: “There you go again!”
Abortions aren’t murder. The War in Iraq has nothing to do with terrorism (except for creating more of it by pissing off and radicalizing Muslims). You can’t compare the two.
I guess calling a spade a spade has never been the strong suit for Democrats, no pun intended.
If only Nathan were capable of calling a spade a spade.
Their “card tricks” will only last so long and they’ll have to find more creative ways to lie to the American people or they’ll sacrifice their power.
Now we come to the irony. You can’t have a fundie rant without irony. It is the Bush mis-administration that has been lying to the American public for six years in an attempt to retain power.
Poor ass-pimple Nathan. His arguments shrivel under the Clearasil of logic.