Tuesday, January 18, 2005

Another Planned Parenthood cartoon

Planned Parenthood has another animated cartoon out. Bush is the manager of the "Gravel Rousers" (a team compromised of the Supreme Court justices). They are facing off against the "Roe Rangers" who aren't shown because presumably the viewer is supposed to want to join the "Roe Rangers" to stop Bush from packing the Supreme Court with right-wing idealogues who will overturn Roe and roll back a woman's right to choose.

The cartoon claims that the Gravel Rousers' "squad" is evenly split on the issue (Roe v. Wade). For one, you can't evenly split 9 people. That's just stupid. Second, it's just not true. Only 3 justices, Scalia, Rehnquist, and Thomas are opposed to the Roe ruling while 6 justices are in favor of keeping Roe on the books. That's a 2-1 ratio. Not quite "evenly split."

Are pro-choicers who visit this site that ignorant about the justices' views or do they know that Planned Parenthood is lying? If they know that Planned Parenthood is lying do they accept that lie as morally "ok" as long as it forwards their cause? Wouldn't it get tiring working for or supporting an organization that is continually dishonest?

These cartoons always have something funny though - this time I laughed when I saw that Anton Scalia has his hat on sideways like a little kid. Plus, I don't know how John Paul Stevens can play shortstop at the age of 84.

If I was doing this cartoon for Planned Parenthood, I wouldn't have put all the Supreme Court justices on the same team. It doesn't really make a whole lot of sense. Instead of the pro-choice justices (who should have been on the Roe Rangers) I would have put some prolife Senators and maybe the always dependable Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson.


  1. Anonymous2:42 PM

    You must be a man. If you have never been put in a situation to have to make a life changing choice such as abortion, then shut the hell up!!! Women should have the right to make thier own decisions about thier body without the govt telling them what to do.

  2. Such noble bravery, anon. Such incredible courage. You can actually end dialog before it begins with overheated rhetoric that accomplishes nothing. You're so confident in your enlightenment that you proudly sign your name. You spell so well, too.

    As usual, there's just one problem. Your argument has a gaping hole in it. Woman can certainly make up their own minds about their own bodies. No one disputes this. What prolife people dispute is whether or not a pregnant woman gets to make decisions for the other body that grows inside her. As in, the decisions that rob that little person of life. That's where prolifers draw the line.

    Try to follow that. Oh, and try previewing before posting. This way maybe you could catch those annoying spelling demons. Like "thier".

  3. Anonymous,
    Yes, I am a man. But how does my gender determine if my arguments are correct or incorrect? Would my position by correct if I was a woman because prolife women make the same arguments I do.

    Your argument assumes that the unborn are part of the woman's body which is the exact thing pro-choice advocates need to prove.

    All you have to do is prove to me that the unborn are part of a woman's body and I'll gladly drop my opposition to abortion.

  4. Hello all... are you pro-choice or pro-life? Why not Pro-Free-Life? Promote a healthy life and make big money with Himalayan Goji juice.

  5. I'm neither pro-choice nor pro-life. But I'm pro-free-life! Check out www.ProFreeLife.com.