Monday, September 14, 2009

Abortion is Murder, October 2, 2009, 7-8

Formerly Stop the Killing of Young People (skyp) and soon, perhaps, Stop Killing Preemies

October 2, 2009, Vol. 7, No.8
PO Box 7424, Reading, PA 19603
Phone – cell--610-809-3388, machine -- 610-396-0332
Email –
Web –
Circulation – 53`
John Dunkle, Editor

Abortion is Murder, a weak, pathetic response to baby murder, is sent out at least once a month. If the gestapo hasn’t jailed you for defending the innocent realistically, you either have to tell me you want it or go the website. Faxes and emails are free but snail-mail is free only for POC’s, $20 for others.
Because I believe we should use every legitimate means, including force, in our attempt to protect those being tortured to death, I want to hear from people who’ve been forceful. I’d also like to hear from those who disagree with me.

Prisoners of Christ:
1. Evans, Paul Ross 83230-180, USP McCreary, P.O. Box 3000, Pine Knot, KY 42635
2. Gibbons, Linda - Vanier WDC, 655 Martin St., P.O. Box 1040, Milton, ON, Canada L9T 5E6
3. Griffin, Michael 310249, Okaloosa Correctional Institution, Crestview FL 32539-6708 9/11
4. Howard, Peter Andrew 57760-097, FCI, Box 900, Safford, AZ 85546
5. Jordi, Stephen 70309-004, FCI P.O. Box 33, Terre Haute IN 47802 6/30
6 Knight, Peter CRN 158589, Port Philip Prison, P.O. Box 376, Laverton, Victoria, Australia
7. Kopp, James 11761-055, USP Canaan, P.O. Box 300, Waymart, PA 18472
8. McMenemy, David Robert 08168-030, FCI Elkton, P.O. Box 10, Lisbon OH 44432
9. Richardson, Alonzo Lee 12898-021, PO Box 474701, Des Moines, IA 5094
10. Roeder, Scott, Sedgewick County Jail, 141 West Elm, Wichita, KS 67203
11. Rudolph, Eric 18282-058 US Pen. Max, Box 8500, Florence CO 81226-8500
12. Shannon, Rachelle 59755-065, FCI Waseca, Unit A, P.O. Box 1731, Waseca, MN 56093 3/31
13. Waagner, Clayton Lee 17258-039, United States Penitentiary, P.O. Box 1000, Lewisburg PA 17837 8/25
14. Weiler Jr., Robert F. 39385-037, FCC - Delaware Hall, Box 1000, Petersburg VA 23804
15. Whitaker, Vincent , FCI, Box 699, Estill SC 29918

The Lord has asked people to make sacrifices related to opposing abortion which all but a handful have had too weak a heart to make. And they’ve looked for any pretense they could conjure up to claim that the sacrifice wasn’t required. They even deluded themselves, as people often do, into “believing” the pretense was real . . . When they get what they’ll get, they’ll fully deserve it. Peter Knight

Dear John, Hope you’re doing well. Thank you for the letter letting me know I can call. Actually, I was going to tell you how much I appreciated your skyp newsletter, and if you could possibly send any back issues, that would be great. I intend on contributing articles in the future but feel it best to wait till after my trial.
I’m enclosing a letter sent to Peter Knight which was returned. I put his address just like he instructed me but it was returned, nonetheless. Could you please mail this on to him for me. Thank you very much! I’m really looking forward to hearing from him and learning more about his situation.
I’ll probably keep my communication with you to letter form for now. The average cost per minute is about $1.00. So, unless an emergency, I’ll just write.
Like I said, your newsletter is great and a tremendous way for us like-minded believers to keep up on the latest in helping save babies!
Let’s pray this holocaust ceases immediately and the Wrath of Our Creator is abated. How blinded are those who advocate tearing a baby limb from limb from his mother’s womb. With no anesthesia!
It will be a bright day in America and the world when the least of us can and will be afforded the rights and protection our Creator gives us. Actually, the preborn have those rights, as do we all, but a corrupt and tyrannical government tramples on those rights daily. Yah help us!!
I’ll be contacting you in the future through mailings. Keep up the good fight to save our precious unborn!
Until them, sincerely, Scott Roeder

Hi John, Thank you for sending Abortion is Murder. I sent a short letter that came back to me. Don’t know why. Probably some pro-abort in the Postal Service. (?)
I hope you and yours are well and blessed. Everything is going great for me. God really answers people’s prayers. I’m out of the basement cubicle and in a good room in a great location, and I’m blessed with three wonderful roommates.
My job in horticulture is still great. Imagine being in prison but spending time outside in beautiful flower beds! I really love MN.
God is good. Love in Him, Shelley

I’ll bet Shelley’s letter was returned because it was addressed to Abortion is Murder. Address letters either to me or to skyp.

Eric’s Chapter 2 continues:

In the 1980’s the states used waiting periods and informed consent laws as tactics in the incremental approach. Planned Parenthood v Casey (1992) was the most important case to make it before the Court on these issues. Casey dealt with a Pennsylvania law that had five provisions. The Court focused on three in particular. The act required,
(1) a woman give her informed consent prior to an abortion, and be provided with certain information at least 24 hours before the abortion is performed; (2) the informed consent of one parent must be obtained for a minor to undergo an abortion, but a judicial bypass procedure is provided; (3) a married woman seeking an abortion must sign a statement indicating that she has notified her husband unless certain exceptions apply (for example, she is being abused by her husband). . . 36
It was the last provision in Casey that was controversial. The majority ruled that placing such a requirement on a woman past the age of consent placed an “undue burden” on her right to an abortion.37 Again, the core of Roe was upheld in Casey; however, the three trimester framework was rejected as unworkable.
Casey was significant because it was heard before the Court after a decade of appointments by so-called conservative presidents, Reagan and Bush. These two frauds aggressively
courted social conservatives, hinting that a few more appointments to the Court would do the deed on Roe. But Reagan’s and Bush’s appointees—O’Connor, Kennedy, Souter—voted to strike down Pennsylvania’s spousal notification law and uphold Roe v Wade as an unchangeable precedent—stare decisis. Exasperated at this betrayal, the pro-life forces had to wait out
the Clinton era before getting another shot at Court appointments.
Pro-lifers in the 1990s devised a new strategy, this one aimed at banning Partial Birth Abortion (Intact D). As described earlier, Partial Birth Abortion is nothing short of infanticide. By showing how the procedure is performed, conservatives received overwhelming support for a ban. The Marxist media were unable to blackout the issue. Only hard-bitten killers like Senator Diane Feinstein and the leaders of Planned Parenthood and NOW came out in defense of Partial Birth Abortion. The Republican controlled Congress passed a ban. In public, the leftist President Bill Clinton found it expedient to pay lip-service to the ban, but he would support it only if the lying health exception was attached. When Congress rightly refused to attach one, Clinton vetoed the bill.
The states were also moving against Partial Birth Abortion. After Nebraska passed a ban without a health exception, the issue came before the Supreme Court in Stenberg v Carhart (2000). In a close five to four vote the law was struck down because of its lack of a health exception.38
If you remember, it was the health exception dictated in Doe that nullified all attempts to restrict abortion after the twelfth week. On the surface, Blackmun’s three trimester framework and later the “viability” test allowed states to regulate and even proscribe abortions in the second and third trimesters. In reality, the health exception allowed woman to receive an abortion at any stage of gestation. No matter what law the states passed, if there was a health exception, the law was meaningless. A woman could walk into an abortion mill just weeks before giving birth and claim that the pregnancy was making her depressed, or costing her too much money and an abortion could be scheduled for a few days later. The only limitation was finding a qualified “physician” willing to carry out the murder.
Only after the election of George W. Bush in 2000 was a ban on Partial Birth Abortion feasible. Bush had used the same strategy as his father and Reagan before him, promising social conservatives that he would appoint “strict constructionist” judges to the bench, which is a code phrase for jurists who will interpret the Constitution as it was written. The strategy worked. He was elected and two justices came up for replacement: Rehnquist and O’Connor. Appointing Roberts and Alito in their places, Bush managed to remove one of the six votes (O’Connor) upholding the core of Roe. Now, of the five justices upholding Roe, one is a “swing” vote. This is Kennedy. While upholding
the basic right of abortion, Kennedy has allowed the states to restrict it after the first trimester. He, for example, voted to support Nebraska’s ban on Partial Birth Abortion in Stenberg v. Carhart. With Kennedy’s vote and the new Bush appointees, it was now possible to reintroduce a Partial Birth Abortion Ban, minus the health of the mother exception.
After the defeat in Stenberg, Bush managed to push a Federal Partial Birth Abortion Ban through Congress. Like Nebraska’s ban, this one had no health exception attached. As expected the Marxist judges on the lower bench ruled the law unconstitutional, so the same issue was back before the Supreme Court seven years later in Gonzales v Carhart. Bush’s appointments paid off. With Alito sitting in O’Connor’s seat and Kennedy voting with the majority, the law was upheld five to four, giving pro-lifers their most significant victory in over thirty-five years of legislation and litigation.
The Partial Birth Abortion Ban doesn’t challenge Roe directly. By destroying the health exception, however, it theoretically opens the door for the states to pass more laws proscribing abortion down to “viability.” But upon closer examination, the Court’s decision in Gonzales makes it clear that banning any abortion that takes place inside the womb is not going to fly with the Court. Those pundits are fools who see in Gonzales the imminent demise of Roe v Wade. The law is purely cosmetic, meant to push the bloodier aspects of abortion back inside the womb. As Justice Ginsburg pointed out in her dissent, “The law saves not a single fetus from destruction, for it targets only a method of performing abortion.”39
The Partial Birth Abortion Ban punishes only those doctors who, deliberately and intentionally, vaginally deliver a living fetus until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or in the case of a breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother, for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus; and (b) performs the overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the partially delivered living fetus. . . 40
In other words, unless a court can prove that an abortionist intentionally delivered any portion of the fetus’s body before killing him, there is no harm no foul. And the Attorney General explicitly stated he has no intention of extending the ban to cover abortions that are performed while the child is still in the mother’s womb, regardless of the stage of gestation: “In the litigation: the Attorney General doesn’t dispute the Act would impose an undue burden if it covered standard D & E.”41 And if the child should “accidentally” slip outside the birth canal during an abortion, the abortionist is not liable: “The Act requires a doctor to deliberately deliver the child to an anatomical landmark. Because a doctor performing a D & E will not face criminal liability if he or she delivers the fetus beyond the prohibited point by mistake, the Act cannot be described as a ‘trap for those who act in good faith.’”42 Under the provisions of the law, it is perfectly legal for an abortionist to kill a viable 26 week old fetus, as long as the killing takes place inside the womb:
In addition the Act’s prohibition only applies to the delivery of “a living fetus.” If the intact D & E procedure is truly necessary in some circumstances, it appears likely an injection that kills the fetus is an alternative under the Act that allows the doctor to perform the procedure.43
Ginsburg’s dissent points to the Act’s meaningless distinction, noting that there is no difference between killing a late term fetus inside the womb with a lethal injection, and killing an infant outside the womb with a pair of scissors:
Delivery of an intact, albeit nonviable, fetus warrants special condemnation, the Court maintains, because a fetus that is not dismembered resembles an infant. But so too does a fetus delivered intact after it is terminated by injection a day or two before the surgical evacuation, or a fetus delivered through medical induction or caesarian.44

I’ll post the conclusion of Chapter 2 in the next issue

Cardinal O’Malley and several other prominent Catholics shamed themselves at the funeral of the #1 anti-Catholic Catholic in America, Ted Kennedy. Two prolifers take issue:

I don't know or care where the subject title of your email came from, David, but it should be noted that the Catholic Church cannot shame itself. Individual Catholics can shame themselves, be they parishioners, priests, bishops, cardinals, and popes, just as St. Peter shamed himself when he denied Jesus, But the Catholic Church, founded by Jesus the Christ, cannot
shame itself because Jesus said that the gates of hell shall not prevail against His church, and Jesus does not lie.
In regards to news articles and statements about the funeral of Ted Kennedy, we should remember that everyone has the right to express his opinion on public events in the United States, even Catholics. Individual Catholics can be found on every side of every issue. But individual Catholics do not speak for the Church or define its doctrines.
Jesus said that every sin could be forgiven except the sin against the Holy Spirit. That sin is the rejection of God's mercy. God will forgive Ted Kennedy just as He will forgive me, and you, and everyone on every side of every issue, as long as we seek God's forgiveness.
May God forgive me, and you, and all seeking His forgiveness. Cray Ross

Hello, Mr. Ross, You wrote . . . "Individual Catholics can shame themselves." But the Catholic Church is what it does; not only individuals act, the Catholic Church as a whole acts as well. The Catholic Church as a whole permitted the Obama speech at Notre Dame University; the Catholic Church as a whole permitted the abomination of the Kennedy funeral.
If you go to the Bible and read Daniel's prayer to God, (Daniel 9:5-6) he repeatedly uses the word "we":
" ... we have sinned and done wrong. We have been wicked and have rebelled; we have turned away from your commands and laws. We have not listened to your servants the prophets, who spoke in your name to our kings, our princes and our fathers, and to all the people of the land."
The Catholic Church, in many ways, has repeatedly shamed itself in its hypocrisy in refusing to treat the killing of the unborn as what it really is, mass murder. As near as anyone can know, Mr. Kennedy died unrepentant of his mass murder of some fifty million children. If Edward Kennedy can be buried as a Catholic in good standing, then anyone, no matter how heinous or wicked, can be regarded as a Catholic in good standing.
If that is what the Catholic Church stands for, you can have it. The Catholic Church may not feel any shame, but speaking as a non-Catholic, in my eyes the Catholic Church as a whole has acted in utterly shameful ways.
Sincerely, a disgusted non-Catholic, David Rydholm

And a third joins the fray commenting on the Kennedy funeral:

Why is World Net Daily ( NOT reporting this hugely significant story of interest to committed pro-lifers who want to see abortion end?
How big of an issue is the slaughter of 3,000+ children per day in America for WND? It is important to God (Psalm 106:37-44, Lev. 20:3, Matt. 22:39, Prov. 24:10-12). It is the Number One reason God is turning us over to Judgment and Tyranny (can we all say O-B-A-M-A?)
Together with 1) pro-abort Obama speaking at Catholic Notre Dame University, and 2) the presence of Boston Archbishop Cardinal O'Malley plus six priests, including two Jesuits (the Chancellor of Jesuit Boston College, and the former 24-year President of Boston College) at pro-abortion extremist U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy's Catholic Funeral Mass, the 3) firing of outspoken pro-life hero Bishop Joseph Martino from his position
as Bishop of the Catholic Diocese of Scranton (PA) demonstrate that it is NOT just a few "bad apples" among the compromised American Catholic Bishops that are not pro-life. And it is NOT just a few "bad apples" among the compromised American Catholic Cardinals that are not pro-life.
IT IS THE VATICAN ITSELF, THE POPE, and THE JESUIT GENERAL that are not pro-life -- THAT is what the evidence demonstrates. Why isn't ecumenical WND reporting this story ?
Come on Joe Farah, WND ! -- you've done a great job with the Obama (lack of a) birth certificate issue, and other issues. WHY ARE YOU NOT REPORTING THIS VERY IMPORTANT STORY AFFECTING THE EFFORTS OF THOSE OF US WHO ARE COMMITTED TO WORKING TO END ABORTION ? (not just perpetually incrementally
"regulating" abortion as your Romanist buddies in the CNP, National Right to "Life" [sic], the Vatican's "pro-life" [sic] front group to false flag, and mislead the Pro-Life Movement in America, have done for a couple decades at least now, wasting the time, energy, effort, and resources of God's people who want to see abortion ENDED!)
From the presence of Catholic writers on the WND website, it is quite clear that WND is Ecumenical (violating God's Word in 2 Corinthians 6:14-18) -- however is that the reason WND has not reported this story that TIME Magazine has reported, that was
covered by numerous articles in the Scranton and Philadelphia daily newspapers, and that has been covered by Catholic blogs and pro-lifers ?
Why is WND censoring this important story from its readership? Steve Lefemine

I can usually defend the Church when Steve attacks it, but not here.

Dear John, I think people should know who Troy Newman is. Although they may have heard about Operation Rescue in the past, Troy Newman has given the organization a new face and style. Simply put, Troy Newman is Operation Rescue "under new management." Under his management, Operation Rescue has been driving trucks around America's towns and cities with pictures of the victims of abortion on the sides.
That said, the joke I tell about Troy Newman is that he should be making billions as a defense contractor. There is a lot of money to be made selling to the U.S. military. What he needs to do is to outfit thousands of trucks with pictures of the victims of the September 11th attack on the sides and sell them to the military. That way president Obama can have his troops drive them around in Afghanistan in hopes the Taliban will reverse itself someday!
Our troops can protest in front of the places where the Taliban operates. But they have to maintain a 20-foot buffer zone. Also, while encouraging them to be vigorous, the president should tell our soldiers to refrain from doing anything divisive, because we all need to find a common ground of respect in this debate!
But rather than employing Troy Newman's peaceful tactics, the president has adopted Israeli tactics instead, by firing missiles into crowds and torturing prisoners. That's not peaceful. Instead, shouldn’t president Obama be following Troy Newman's tactics if he wants to be peaceful? Why does the president think it is okay not to be peaceful when people are killed in the September 11th attack, but not when an even greater number are killed day after day at American abortion clinics? Sincerely, Cal.

You guys who keep up on these things will see that Jimbo sent me this back in March. Richard Cowden-Guido, who is in jail for doing a one-man rescue in July, prefaced the story with this:

George and Tina are grand old friends who rescued often and bravely; they are biker sorts, Evangelicals last I knew, with whom Silvana sometimes stayed when I was locked up in Atlanta. Amazing and delightful and a little unnerving as the following story is, it sounds just like them:
A lone sidewalk counselor at a Cherry Hill abortion center is suffering from serious injuries after a young man driving his pregnant wife to the abortion facility reportedly struck the counselor and ran him over. The incident took place Saturday
morning at the South Jersey Women's Center on Haddonfield Road. George Krail was walking toward the clinic's driveway to offer literature as a car approached, when the driver ran into and over Krail, crushing and twisting his leg. The initial impact was so severe it may have broken several of Krail's ribs.
Krail was taken to Cooper Hospital in Camden, where he is stable but continues to await surgery as of Saturday evening.
When asked George's condition, his wife Tina told (LSN) that "George is fine spiritually. His leg's really messed up...pointing backwards."
Mrs. Krail, who is a veteran pro-life protester along with her husband, went on to say that the bizarre event "was orchestrated by the Lord."
Some time after George left for the mill, Mrs. Krail received a call from him asking for help. "Tina, I'm hurt - someone ran me over. My leg's turned around. Tina, come right away," George reportedly told his wife.
Though badly shaken, when she realized her husband's life wasn't threatened, Mrs. Krail remembered her husband had been injured because someone else's life was in danger.
"I thought, 'What would Jesus do?’" she told LSN. "So I walked over and I said, 'Ron, I'd like to talk to you. I forgive you for hitting my husband.' And he said, 'Oh, I'm so sorry,' and his whole face just changed.
"Then I said: 'I want you to look at me in the eyes. I've been where you're at, and I can tell you my husband also forgives you, and he probably wants me to tell you that if one broken leg would save your child, he would do it over again.
"You should know that God has something in store mighty for
you, and you should take this as a sign from God. And he said, 'I know, I know.’ And they never went in [the abortion centre]."
She recalled that she embraced both and exhorted them to "think about this child important this child is,'" she said.
Asked by LifeSiteNews how long they'd been participating in pro-life witness, Tina replied cheerfully, "We've done it for the last twenty years. Yeah, it's been our life - and this'11 probably be our death too. What's our life worth anyway?"

And Jimbo followed up with this:

Effundetur – don’t just “give up” your life grudgingly – Dump it out on the ground all at once. Hurry!
If Christ came again while you were still hanging on to some of it – you could lose it all.
The only thing your life is good for is dumping --- quickly. Then, it has eternal value. If you hang on to it, it will rot and be useless.

Here’s more of Peter Knight’s letter:

The very important question – what does God really require people to do about abortion? – is a question which should have been considered and answered by everyone. Forget about those, and they are well and truly in the minority, forget about those who are so bereft of judgment that they say abortion is good, or that it is justified. Just look at the small percentage of people who would describe abortion as murder, what response does God require of people in that group?
There have been some, not many but some, who decide to do what Greg Cunningham suggests, to try to change people’s opinions with the photos. They decided that the response they would give was to turn up at an abortion center, hand out the photos and some other literature to the “I’m here for a murder clientele,” and hope that the photos and literature would do the job. I expect, John, that you would know the huge failure rate this had. Not even 1% of would-be murderers were turned back home.
This activity, the response these people decided to give, is of course in no way addressing the problem of the millions of children being murdered. For it had not the slightest chance, not the remotest remote chance, of ever halting the massacres. No matter how many people they got to do what they do, even if they had dozens of them stationed at every abortion center on the planet, this could never save more than 1% of the babies from the attacks planned by their murdering mothers.
It was always guaranteed that this weak response, and those who gave it, would permit the slaying of millions for years and years to come. And, since they had an effective means of stopping the problem, which they refused to use, they have therefore made themselves responsible for the slayings.
These people, and a much larger group of others, including Greg Cunningham, have waited for the election. Waited, and waited, and waited, and waited, and waited, and, they still go on waiting. The election 10 or 20, or 30, or a thousand years into the future, which they have managed to delude themselves into believing might bring an end to the murders – in their small part of the world anyway.
Despite being fully aware that abortion and abortionists have the approval of the vast majority – abortion didn’t get legalized in virtually every country of the world because people were against it – despite knowing that less than 1% of those who favor the killings or who don’t give a damn about them changed their views when they were shown the photos and literature – all they see is a non-human or sub-human or pre-human fetus – despite that, these people who have waited and waited still see a time in the future when the photos will miraculously do what they’ve never shown any sign of doing before, a time when the failure photos will gain gloss and persuade large numbers of those who favour the killings or who don’t give a damn to change their minds.
What do these people who have waited and waited ever, ever, ever expect to get? I know little about American politics, John, so correct me if I’m wrong. But as I understand it the decision whether or not to criminalize abortion in the USA is in the hands of the states. However, the Supreme Court has told the states, We’re the top dog here and we’re telling you that you cannot criminalize in this this this this this this and these other five hundred circumstances. Even if the Supreme Court didn’t override a decision by the states to criminalize abortion, how stupid would you have to be to think that you could get every state to criminalize it? How stupid, and how fantastically optimistic would you have to be to think that there would not always be a very substantial number of states with legalized abortion? And what good is that to anyone? American states do not occupy particularly large areas. If murder seekers couldn’t get what they wanted in their home states, with the exception of Hawaii, they’d have very little trouble crossing into a neighboring state where they could. Further, there’s hardly a politician in existence who proclaims himself to be anti-abortion who does not have his exception clauses to the criminalization of abortion. It’s OK to kill an innocent child if the child has been conceived by rape, or alleged rape. If you’re the type of person who wants to selfishly murder an innocent child because there’s a 15% chance you may lose you life if you don’t, then that’s OK too. That’s what the self-proclaimed anti-abortion politicians say almost without exception. A person who opposes all abortion would have to be one of the most delusional of people to think he is ever going to get what he wants from democratically elected governments.
All that is doing what you possibly shouldn’t be doing though. All that is stepping aside from the critical point that it is never right to wait twenty years, or even five years, or even two years, for a solution to a problem this serious when you have the effective means to wipe out the problem overnight. And the only reason I do know it is to point out how unrealistic and how stupid many people’s hopes and expectations are. They are as stupid as the reasons they put up to condemn Paul Hill and his actions. (tbc)

Reflections on Jim Poullion's Murder
By Jonathan O'Toole

Jim Poullion's murder, like a scene from Foxe's Book of Martyrs, has provoked no little reflection.
In 20 years of showing the images of murdered babies in public, I have directly observed tens of thousands of people reacting to the images of babies killed by abortion. Many were high school or university students. Having spoken to dozens of these ape-like imbeciles, enduring hours upon hours day after day listening to these greasy little monsters go on and on about rape, incest, the life of the mother, I catch myself reconsidering Darwinism.
Not all, mind you, but an unsettlingly disproportionate band of mentally defective lunkheads colors our nation's taxpayer funded centers for learning and higher education.
Recently, I found myself harangued for the better part of an hour by a wordy individual named Kaye. I had paid his illustrious institution a visit that afternoon with signs depicting graphically mutilated babies, and though traffic was sparse, I managed to lasso this intellectual giant. Yee-haw.
Like a hundred other carbon-copy clones, Kaye went around and around in nauseating rhetorical circles until I was ready to hurl all over him and his college. It’s her body. She has the right. He wouldn't have an least not after the heart starts beating. Or a certain day. Or a certain week. Or when the moon is full. It’s her body. She has the right. I try not to get my girlfriend pregnant, but if she does...It’s a baby, but only if you stand on your head during the equinox. It’s her body. She has the right. Anyway, says Kaye, he's a man (a questionable assertion) and women have to bear the consequences of having babies (like a baby's a disease).
"Poor fool!" I thought, "another brainwashed slave to his girlfriend's whim." But then I reconsidered.
I considered his response disingenuous. A cop-out. Kaye is a verbose example of the general depravity evident in the reactions of American men to legalized abortion. Yet, at least Kaye stopped to talk. At least his rambling, despite his words, was an outward sign of a deap-seated distress at the images of death and suffering. Kaye's hair was long, his disposition not altogether thoughtless.

More perverse, more depraved by far are the other men in their early twenties who walk by and say nothing. Men void of natural human affection: these are the rule, Kaye the exception.
Jim Poullion's murderer was another exception. He got the message of the signs, and the signs assaulted his ego at the deepest level of his soul. Instead of just walking by, he reacted with the satanic audacity available only to murderers confronted with the undeniable evidence of his crime. Such audacity is a dark-side supernatural gift, in some ways transcending the murderer's human consciousness, and making him directly available to satan.
In his 1729 essay "a Modest Proposal For Preventing The Children of Poor People in Ireland From Being A Burden to Their Parents or Country, and For Making Them Beneficial to The Public" GULLIVER'S TRAVELS author Jonathan Swift suggested, tongue-in-cheek, that the poverty problem in Ireland be solved by eating Irish babies.
“I have been assured,” quoth Swift, "by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled”
Rather toward the end of his essay, Swift goes on to observe that "...Whereas the maintenance of an hundred thousand children, from two years old and upward, cannot be computed at less than ten shillings a-piece per annum, the nation's stock will be thereby increased fifty thousand pounds per annum, beside the profit of a new dish introduced to the tables of all gentlemen of fortune in the kingdom who have any refinement in taste. And the money will circulate among ourselves, the goods being entirely of our own growth and manufacture."
How little did this Christian author and advocate for the Irish people suspect that in less than three hundred years his ridiculous suggestions would represent the REAL POLITIK of America and Europe? Trotted out to shed light on the calloused and abusive treatment by England of the people of Colonial Ireland, and the dehumanization of poor Catholics, Swift’s absurdity has become the reality faced by God's children every day. "Looks like chicken," and "mmmm...yum!" are frequent ejaculations gurgling spontaneously from the dark subconscious depths of the minds of passers-by.
In this context, why should we be surprised by Jim Poullion's murder? As the economy lurches toward an abyss of hyperinflation and unemployment rises, the thin veneer of civility is dissolving between the sons of Belial (lit.. bastards, "sons of nothing") like Jim's murderer the small minority like Jim with the holy audacity to speak the truth in love to them.
Wisdom dictates that God's people take advantage of every legally available option to arm themselves under these disintegrating circumstances. Even as we seek to snatch a remnant from the flames, God's born children should be ready to defend themselves from these monsters, just as we would defend ourselves against the zombies from "Night of the Living Dead," keeping in mind that in this sequel the zombies control the federal government! The next time they attack one of ours, let's hit back with two to the chest, one to the head, and a wooden stake through the heart!
Marvelous essay – so good that even though I am a Catholic, I am reading Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, and Swift’s essay is also marvelous, even to the point of making the cannibal an American. (Talk about foreshadowing!)

Here’s another episode in Jim Kopp’s “Stacey & Hutch” saga:

The Case of the Disappearing Switch

Our story to date: Recently Stacey and Hutch have been reminiscing on long road trips about their early days, and all the time they learned from their mistakes, and how scared they used to be at police contact, whereas more recently they did everything but shamelessly flirt and stage mock fights, to call upon the Sir Galahad (or whatever . . . ) in every cop.
But all these enigmas pale in comparison with to the Riddle of the Disappearing Switch, a mystery which boggles them still, to the present day . . .

It was a dark and stormy night. No, really. Stacey and Hutch rolled into a small Midwestern town, running on rest-stop naps, pretzels and coke, as usual, only to find. . . no switch!
They trolled the yellow pages,. They called after-hours answering services.
"Well, pinch me," Stacey said. "Is this some kind of Alice in wonderland thing? Down a rabbit hole ? Who doesn't have a switch?"
They double checked the map. A serious-sized exurb, check.
How could a town this size not have a Central Office switching building?
It turned out to be true. It did not.
After a lot of hassling, talking to with older answering service ladies who remembered the old days, and maybe even exposing themselves a little to legitimate curiosity as to why anyone would be so gosh-darn interested in a fairly arcane questions at 10 o'clock at night, Hutch finally found out that, unlike most cabling set-ups, the switch was actually located in a smaller town fairly far away, which treated the town they were in as just another exchange.
Something to do with the rapid growth of the exurb, or summat like that.

How To Get to Carnegie Hall: Research!

Good clutch players that they were, S & H checked into No-Tell Motel near dawn., still outside the donut, and slept like rocks until early afternoon.
In the next town was a marvelous switch, pristine ''architectural" rough concrete block surfaces just screaming out for identity which S & H gave them
But when they got home, they decided to optimize their next outing by doing a little research at home.
This involved nowt but going to a little nearby institute of higher learning (JC or Ivy League, it don't matter) and look up switches in the over-the-road yellow pages.
In the old days, these used to be hard copy, and now they were either microfiche flimsies or CD rom kind of stuff, or even web sites the library paid for (although fishing around on a web site
doesn't always give the right feel as a proper printed yellow page).
But ahhh! Nothing quite like a nice huge section of hardcopy yellow pages to just ramble through looking for switches, and looking over your Rand McNally trucker's atlas, and dreaming.
The big Rand McNally trucker’s atlas that has little city maps in it, and sometimes you get lucky, and the street the switch is on is in the city map. but more often you need to get a map when you get near the edge of the donut, or maybe even back home, provided you buy it someplace no one knows you (next town over?)

Mapology 101

The three cardinal rules of mapology are:

l) never, never never ever mark a map. This is like putting a sign around your neck "I stole the Lindbergh baby"
Or, like keeping a receipt one microsecond after you pass out the doors at the Home depot.

2) Always write the address of the switch on a small scrap of paper, in the most abstruse-shorthand you can manage, and still be able to read it. Better you not be able to read your own shorthand, than some Frenchy be able to read your longhand. Be creative, use symbols you make up, phonetic stuff, or Greek letters, funny symbols from high school geometry. Mom didn't waste tuition on that one!
Then shred it and toss the confetti out the car window as soon as you find the switch that night.

3) Never, ever, ever take a local donut map home. Never. But you can still take home your pristine, unmarked Rand McNally map, which anybody could have. (tbc)

No comments: