Life Links 5/6/08

Valenti responds again and instead of trying to defend her inaccurate portrayal of what abstinence educator Pam Stenzel said with reasonable arguments, she says she won't engage me because I have a "anti-choice agenda," claims what she said about Stenzel is likely true because supposedly no other commenter on her blog disagrees with her take and then ends by calling me a troll. I guess any prolifer who disagrees with Valenti and decides to leave a comment about it is a "troll." Pro-choicers will continue to lose the battle for hearts and minds if their young leaders (Valenti just recently stopped blogging for NARAL) are completely unable to defend their arguments without slipping into obvious logical fallacies and name calling.

Seriously, how lame would I be if I told pro-choicers who commented here: "I'm sorry but I'm not going to engage you because you have a pro-choice agenda. My position is correct because none of the prolifers here disagree with me. Does being pro-choice give you some magical ability the rest of don't have? I guess I shouldn't feed the trolls."


Amanda Platell in the UK's Daily Mail on the push to lower the abortion limit in Britain to 20 weeks.

We have the most liberal abortion laws in the whole of Europe, twice France's and Germany's legal limit of 12 weeks, and six weeks more than Sweden and Norway.


What can possibly explain the differential? What do these countries know that we don't?

While some prolifers claim incremental prolife laws don't work, pro-choicer Eleanor Bader of the RH Reality Check blog begs to differ. What I find interesting is how "exasperated" abortion providers get when they have to do something so "onerous" like have the abortionist or a nurse, instead of a "counselor" hand women informed consent information. It's like, "Hello, abortionists don't have time to meet women before abortions, they're too busy vacuuming out their children."