The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPat Buchanan Archive
'A New Dark Age'
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

“If God does not exist, then everything is permissible.”

Ivan Karamazov’s insight came to mind while watching the video of Deborah Nucatola of Planned Parenthood describe, as she sipped wine and tasted a salad, how she harvests the organs of aborted babies for sale to select customers.

“Yesterday was the first time … people wanted lungs,” said Nucatola, “Some people want lower extremities, too, which, that’s simple. …

“I’d say a lot of people want liver. … We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part, I’m gonna basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact.”

Nucatola is describing how an unborn baby should be killed and cut up to preserve its most valuable organs for sale by its butchers.

Welcome to God’s Country, 2015.

Planned Parenthood’s image — a progressive organization that provides free birth control to women who seek to space pregnancies as they plan their families — will not easily survive these tapes.

For Nucatola sounds as though she were reading from a film script about a 1940s clinic in Nazi Germany devoted to the disposal of “useless eaters” in the Third Reich.

Watching these tapes, one name comes to mind: Mengele.

Defenders of Planned Parenthood argue that those who taped Nucatola did so surreptitiously, and they misrepresented themselves as buyers from a human biologics company. Moreover, the tapes were deceptively edited and the women undergoing abortions had agreed to donate the organs of their dead fetuses for biomedical research.

Perhaps. But even if all of that is true, the tapes have thrown the “pro-abortion rights” movement in America onto the defensive and brought calls for complete Congressional defunding of a Planned Parenthood that receives $500 million yearly from taxpayers.

Set aside the legality of what Nucatola describes. Do Americans want hundreds of millions of tax dollars provided to an organization that harvests and sells the body parts of aborted babies as a potentially lucrative sideline business? Do Americans want to be associated in any way with an organization with the moral mindset exhibited by Nucatola?

That Americans were stunned by those tapes is undeniable. People are not faking their moral revulsion. Indeed, “pro-abortion rights” Democrats are hiding in the weeds because they rightly sense that the disgust is widespread and genuine.

Yet there are questions raised by what these tapes reveal that apply to all of us. Were we really in the dark? Were we unaware that 55 million unborn have been killed since Roe, many by such crushing methods as described by Nucatola?

Is the Black Lives Matter movement unaware that the execution rate of babies in the womb is highest among African-American women? However many black men or boys are killed in clashes with cops each year, it is not one-tenth of 1 percent of the black babies aborted in the USA?

ORDER IT NOW

Did we think that these abortions were almost all painless, like some sick pet being put to sleep, euthanized? Did we not know that the abortionist stabs the baby in the womb, or tears it to pieces coming out? And the more developed the baby, the greater the pain and the suffering and the bloodier the inescapable death?

But if one believes an unborn baby is not a human being, not a human life, why object to selling its body parts?

Trash haulers and garbage men find uses for what they pick up. Scrap metal collectors find folks who want to buy it. Conservation they call it. Why would we think that abortionists, who regard fetuses as human tissue, not human beings, were any different?

We have long known and praised family members of the victims in auto accidents who volunteer the organs of their loved ones to save or extend the lives of others.

What makes this tape so different, so appalling, is that, at some level, there a sense in all of us, which ideological indoctrination cannot wholly suppress, that, morally, something terrible is happening here.

Listening to that Planned Parenthood woman discourse casually on the hearts, livers, lungs and lower extremities, we know something else. While the women undergoing the abortions at Planned Parenthood may have volunteered those body parts, the butchered children had no say in the decision to be torn to pieces and have their organs put up for sale to a laboratory that was the highest bidder.

Speaking after the fall of France, at the beginning of the Battle of Britain, Winston Churchill said, “But if we fail, then the whole world … including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science.”

Those phrases, “perverted science,” and “a new Dark Age,” do they not fairly describe our future if the views and values of Nucatola’s Planned Parenthood are the future of America and her people?

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority.”

Copyright 2015 Creators.com.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Abortion 
Hide 78 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says:

    “Do Americans want hundreds of millions of tax dollars provided to an organization that harvests and sells the body parts of aborted babies as a potentially lucrative sideline business?”

    If it’s the body parts of Negro babies, what’s not to like?

    “Is the Black Lives Matter movement unaware that the execution rate of babies in the womb is highest among African-American women? However many black men or boys are killed in clashes with cops each year, it is not one-tenth of 1 percent of the black babies aborted in the USA?”

    That’s the beauty of abortion. Fewer Negroes.

    It’s too bad Ann Dunham didn’t turn Obama into spaghetti sauce.

    It would have been hilarious if O-baby-fetus had been cut up and sold like meat.

  2. @Priss Factor

    You should have chosen “The Piss Factory” as your username. Better yet: “The Shit Factory”.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  3. I’m glad Pat quoted Winston Churchill. It’s now obvious that it was the liberal West that has turned out to be morally depraved. Too bad Churchill couldn’t spot the demon in its liberal cradle.

  4. Humans have practiced abortion for 6000 years. Civilization, aware of pragmatic necessity, did not interfere. The Roman Catholic Church turned a blind eye to it until it suddenly realized that more people=more money for the RC church (forehead slap).

    Planned Parenthood should NEVER have been given Federal money. Nor should any RELIGIOUS organization be given any Federal money. Nor should any religious organization be given tax-immunity. All organizations, religious or non-religious, should pay their own freight and shut the hell up.

  5. Eustace Tilley (not) [AKA "Schiller/Nietzsche"] says:
    @John Jeremiah Smith

    It is very important that religious institutions remain tax-exempt.

    All of those “welfare” functions (hospitals, orphanages, etc.) that have recently been usurped by the Almighty State were once the province of the Church. In England, the desperately poor were forced to go “on parish relief”; now it’s “the dole”. Has the State done a better job here?

    Almost all of the great (and small) art of Western Civilization (and Eastern, too) was produced by and for religious people. This includes everything from Stonehenge to the Parthenon to the Shaker clothespin and black gospel music. (Oh, yeah, I left out the Book of Kells, Bach’s “St. Matthew Passion”, Handel’s “Messiah”, Oxford University, and a few other things).

    Why do you, Mr. Smith, wish to take money from religious groups (and I include Hezbollah, whose social and military efforts I greatly esteem) to fatten the coffers of the bloated, inefficient, mendacious, corrupt warfare/welfare State? With the trillions of dollars our masters already have, they can’t secure the borders, establish permanent peace, keep our cities crime-free, or even establish justice in the courts (see today’s Paul Craig Roberts article).

    You seem to be on the side of Janet Reno; I’m on the side of David Koresh (the book to read here is “The Ashes of Waco” by Dick Reavis).

    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith
  6. @Eustace Tilley (not)

    Mr. “Schiller”, the notion that religious institutions should be tax-exempt because they perform some degree of “welfare” function is non-sequitur. Should monies expended by religious institutions for true “welfare” functions be tax-exempt? Possibly.

    Some churches control large amounts of wealth, and use that wealth in many ways that are not, by any stretch of the imagination. contributory to the welfare of indigent and poor.

    Should churches be taxed? Absolutely.

  7. Tom_R says:

    THE ISSUE OF ABORTION AND RACIAL DIFFERENCES.

    Thanks for the interesting and insightful article, Sir. I agree that what this Planned Parenthood official did is truly disgusting and they should be criminally prosecuted.

    However, I think the issue of abortion among blacks needs to be considered in light of some facts.

    First of all, you did not provide any hard statistics, so I am not sure if the black rate is really higher, or it is just a tactic of the left.

    Secondly, even if the rate of abortion among blacks is higher, we must consider the fact that black men have higher levels of testosterone and are more aggressive and seduce/bed women at much higher rates. Black women are more promiscuous, start sexual activity at an earlier age without marriage, and without knowledge of birth control, etc. It is not uncommon to see black man with 10 children by age 30, compared with 0-1 child for a white man at the same age. Thus black hyperfertility is about 10 times compared with whites, so their abortion rate must be 10 times as much. I doubt it is that much more than the white race, as blacks have a greater incentive to have children (welfare) and less cost (the loss of property and payment of child support during a possible divorce which are serious deterrants for whites to have children). Thus, our entire system is actually designed to ethnically cleanse whites out and replace them with black and brown people, including using immigration for that purpose.

    Thus, black hyperfertility can lead to many children being born out of wedlock, increased black crime for the entire society and burden on the welfare state.

    If Planned Parenthood can provide free long term contraception for blacks, in the USA and in Africa, that is one affirmative action program many would support, as it would reduce the rate of abortion and black family breakdown (children out of wedlock).

    I do not think we should resort to race-baiting and bring up the issue of abortion among blacks to argue against abortion.

    • Replies: @abj_slant
  8. Realist says:

    ““If God does not exist, then everything is permissible.””

    That is a silly statement. It suggests that humans are inherently such scumbags that if they don’t fear the wrath of god they will do unspeakable things. It is certainly true that there are way too many scumbags on this planet. But the idea that religion must scare adult humans with a revengeful ‘sky daddy’, into doing the ‘right thing’ is childish. The denizens of the bible belt can’t wait to join the hegemonic military so they can kill, kill, kill! The United States has needlessly caused the deaths of a thousand times more Americans, not to mention others, than abortion. All in the name of ‘our Christian country’.
    Tune into the Fox News cable channel for the latest on religion and war…the two things they care most about.

    I am in no way condoning the actions of Planned Parenthood, what they are doing is despicable.

  9. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    If you are an organ donor driver in accident and can’t afford health insurance the same sorts of doctors and CEOs may find it more expedient to their financial interests to harvest you instead of save your life. That’s the bottom line in an America that’s made selfishness the new morality.

    • Replies: @pyrrhus
  10. Realist says:
    @Priss Factor

    Being against forced integration is one thing…for genocide a totally different thing.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  11. Eustace Tilley (not) [AKA "Schiller/Nietzsche"] says:
    @John Jeremiah Smith

    Just because “some churches control large amounts of wealth, and use that wealth in many ways that are not, by any stretch of the imagination, contributory to the welfare of indigent and poor” does not lead a humane and rational philosopher to the conclusion that their “large amounts of wealth” should be transferred to an alternative institution (the State) which also controls “large amounts of wealth” (through the IRS and the Federal Reserve, to name two), and uses “that wealth in many ways” (such as NSA, CIA, DEA, FBI, and IRS snooping on all and sundry; drones, smart bombs, Stealth bombers, Tomahawks, and Apaches bombing, burning, and terrorizing many; Head Start, Affirmative Action, ACORN, Section 8, and Title IX providing a new, US Government-approved society for all; not to mention innumerable other instances of state-sponsored idiocy) “that are not, by any stretch of the imagination, contributory to the welfare of indigent and poor”.

    Having powerful alternative institutions (not just churches but corporations, voluntary associations, and families) as counterweights to the State is the only way to provide a bulwark against tyranny. It is unfortunate that we no longer have barons to force King Obama to sign a new Magna Carta, nor a Pope Alexander to force him to do public penance for his sins.

    Your obvious antipathy towards religion is, of course, in keeping with the current Zeitgeist of nihilism. Ever since Dr. Guillotine first slaked his thirst with noble blood in the Place de la Concorde, ressentiment has been the dominant mood of the “educated” bourgeoisie. How can I blame you for taking the easy way out, by adopting the intellectual fashion of the current degenerate age?

    Thus spake Zarathustra.

  12. @Eustace Tilley (not)

    Schiller:

    Churches control huge amounts of wealth and profit from it. The local Catholic diocese just sold off a nice big chunk of real estate, once a school and nunnery, for $30 million dollars. Whatever portion of that capital gain they want to spend on real, verifiable welfare, they can be tax exempt on that. The rest, no. Businesses sort out their expenditures and revenues, and pay tax on profits. Churches can do the same.

    Your assumption that I hold “antipathy” for religion is a waste of time on your part. Were you under the impression that I value your opinions? Perhaps you believe your assumptions about me act to bolster your own, for lack of a better term, “airhead” opinions? They don’t.

    • Replies: @jimbojones
  13. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Realist

    That is a silly statement. It suggests that humans are inherently such scumbags that if they don’t fear the wrath of god they will do unspeakable things.

    That’s not what is meant. The point is metaphysical: without God their is no moral law.

    That’s what it means.

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @Drapetomaniac
  14. @John Jeremiah Smith

    “Businesses sort out their expenditures and revenues, and pay tax on profits. Churches can do the same.”
    This is ridiculous on its face. Businesses are out to make a buck – churches are not. To be consistent, you have to also ask that all “non-profits” are taxed. Is that your position?

    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith
  15. Realist says:
    @Anonymous

    “That’s not what is meant. The point is metaphysical: without God their is no moral law. ”

    The same thing. Without a ‘sky daddy’ people will have no morals.

    Religion is used to control people.

    P.S. Should be there….not their.

    • Replies: @Muse
    , @Hibernian
  16. Realist says:
    @Eustace Tilley (not)

    “Having powerful alternative institutions (not just churches but corporations, voluntary associations, and families) as counterweights to the State is the only way to provide a bulwark against tyranny.”

    Corporations pay taxes!

  17. @jimbojones

    This is ridiculous on its face. Businesses are out to make a buck – churches are not. To be consistent, you have to also ask that all “non-profits” are taxed. Is that your position?

    You are wrong. Churches actively seek to gain wealth.

    As far as “consistency” goes … do you understand what the word “consistent” means? Beyond that, there’s nothing “consistent” about taxation. It is applied to gain revenue for the government, and hopefully is equally and justly applied to all resident entities.

  18. “Welcome to God’s Country, 2015.”

    Arrogant blasphemous piece of shit.

  19. @Epaminondas

    Churchill, of course, was as morally depraved as they come.

  20. @John Jeremiah Smith

    Here in the Poconos, there are a number of churches proclaiming themselves The Korean Presbyterian Church, The Korean church of Christ, etc etc.

    They almost universally consist of a single family residence with an enterprising Asian owner sick of the taxes.

    They do occasionally post service times but keeping a low profile is the main strategy.

    This guy is one of ones the who failed

    http://www.nonprofitfacts.com/PA/Korean-American-Presbyterian-Church-Korean-Presbyterian-Church-Of-Pocon.html

  21. Mr Buchanan is fearful of America’s future if Planned Parenthood’s attitude to foetuses persists and spreads. He need not fear. Less dynamic but more civilised countries are doing just fine with the straightforward approach to legal abortion which took off nearly 50 years ago.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  22. Art says:

    I wonder are the mothers of these crushed babies being told what is going to happen to their flesh and blood offspring?

    Do they receive compensation for their baby’s body parts?

    p.s. The saddest places on our planet are abortion clinics.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  23. Mark Caplan says: • Website

    Rather than label tens of millions of Americans “Nazis,” consider that a fetus is not a cognizant, self-conscious, self-aware being. Therefore, according to the understanding of tens of millions of Americans who are not doctrinaire Roman Catholic, Evangelical Christian, or Ultra-Orthodox Jewish, the fetus is not a person and does not have the moral standing of a person.

  24. pyrrhus says:
    @Anonymous

    And based on what I have heard from medical personnel, such opportunistic “harvesting” has already happened. I know people who are revoking their organ donor election on the drivers license..

    • Replies: @Billl
  25. @Realist

    Well said Realist. I will add an another quote. Steven Weinberg made this observation
    “With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things that takes religion”

  26. @Silver Miner

    There were real anti-religion regimes in recent history. We all know how it developed. And you talk like it’s a novel idea that has never been tried before.

    It is my lifelong observation that the anti-religion types have their own moral problems unresolved. Religion (which always means Christianity) irks them.

    • Replies: @Realist
  27. @Realist

    See my reply to Silver Miner above

  28. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says:
    @Realist

    “Being against forced integration is one thing…for genocide a totally different thing.”

    How is it genocide when Negresses wanna kill their own kids?

    Plenty of ‘people of color’ rejoice that white folks aren’t having kids and are dying out.

    So, why not rejoice that some black women choose to kill their own kids?

    Margaret Sanger, a great woman, would have agreed.

    • Replies: @Realist
  29. Muse says:
    @Realist

    How do you propose to enlighten the left half of the bell curve so that they might live well and not have them and their children be a burden on the rest of society? You must admit nearly 50 years of the “Great Society” programs have been a disaster.

    • Replies: @Realist
  30. Realist says:
    @Silver Miner

    Thanks.

    I very much agree with Steven Weinberg.

  31. Realist says:
    @Pseudonymic Handle

    “Religion (which always means Christianity) irks them.”

    When I say religion I mean all religions. If I meant Christianity, I would say Christianity.
    Religion doesn’t irk me I just get tired of the whining.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  32. Realist says:
    @Priss Factor

    Perhaps you’re right. It’s not genocide….you’re just a sick bastard.

    • Replies: @abj_slant
    , @Priss Factor
  33. Realist says:
    @Muse

    “You must admit nearly 50 years of the “Great Society” programs have been a disaster.”

    Of course that’s true, but what has that to do with religion?

    End government welfare programs and leave the indigent to private organizations, many of which are not religious based. I am not for forced elimination of religion.

    • Replies: @Wyrd
  34. Wyrd says:
    @Realist

    Religion bad!

    Atheism good!

    -Frankfurt’s Monster

  35. @Epaminondas

    Three problems with your essay, Pat:

    Speaking after the fall of France, at the beginning of the Battle of Britain, Winston Churchill said, “But if we fail, then the whole world … including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science.”

    wait a minute.

    The we that Churchill refers to did not “fail;” Churchill, Stalin and FDR incinerated 75% of Germany and killed 7.5 million German people. The Allies’ plan “succeeded.”

    And still we are “sinking into the abyss of a new Dark Age.”

    Fairly compelling evidence that it was not the Germans but all those Survivors, like Susan Freudenheim who are behind Planned Parenthood and other efforts to push western civilization over the abyss.

    btw

    is there any societal anomaly or bad act in today’s culture that cannot be characterized by reference to Hitler/ Nazis / German / holocaust?

    It seems as though there are guilty parties out there who really really want to be unburdened of their sins — people who know that huge parts of the holocaust hoedown are hoax. Michael Ledeen, of all people, said in a 1996 C Span appearance that “we really should stop talking about the holocaust.”

    He knows.
    He knows that the holocaust is a hoax, and he knows that overuse of reductio ad Hitlerum is a sign of a guilty conscience–the beating of The Telltale Heart — and also that it will keep the topic on the front burner and give legitimate opening to revisionists to do what sound history requires of them; namely, to keep exploring and revising and ever more closely approximating reality-based truth.

    Several months ago NPR interviewed a Jewish woman who testified at the trial of the 93-year old baggage handler who was charged (and convicted) of 300,000 counts of murder. The woman said she and her twin sister were at Auschwitz (she must have been about 11 yrs old). She recalled in vivid detail how she was deathly ill with a fever and was in the German hospital where Dr. Mengele himself appeared at her bedside and said she would be dead in two days.
    The interviewee said, “If I had died there would have been two deaths because he would have killed my twin sister.”
    On what basis does she leap to that hypothetical?

    In any event, obviously Mengele was wrong.
    Or the woman was delusional.

    I’d sure like to know what sound evidence Pat has to support his comparison of the Planned Parenthood person to Dr. Mengele.

    come to think of it, the words reveal the source:

    “For Nucatola sounds as though she were reading from a film script about a 1940s clinic in Nazi Germany devoted to the disposal of “useless eaters” in the Third Reich.
    Watching these tapes, one name comes to mind: Mengele.”

    A film script.

    Holocaust history is produced by Hollywood.
    What is known about Dr. Mengele is gleaned from film scripts and delusional people like the woman who gave testimony convicting a 93 year old man based on a hypothetical that didn’t happen.

    The Planned Parenthood criminals are in their own category, Pat.

    You weaken your argument when you resort to reductio ad Mengelem.

  36. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Eustace Tilley (not)

    You should have chosen “The Piss Factory” as your username. Better yet: “The Shit Factory”.

    I think he (or she) was just making a point, and used comments which would subsume the horror of what is going along with the banality of evil.

  37. @Anonymous

    “That’s not what is meant. The point is metaphysical: without God their is no moral law.”

    Bunkum. Morality is a collection of behavioral adaptations particular to a culture that serve to promote the survival of its people.

    The problem is that morality is both a tool and a weapon.

  38. @John Jeremiah Smith

    Humans have practiced abortion for 6000 years. Civilization, aware of pragmatic necessity, did not interfere. The Roman Catholic Church turned a blind eye to it until it suddenly realized that more people=more money for the RC church (forehead slap).

    Humans have practiced a lot of stuff for thousands of years–slavery, serfdom, conquest\genocide, mass rape, torture and of course war.

    Trying not to do those things including abortion is called “moral advance” (forehead slap)!

    I can think of some specific scenarios that a woman couldn’t control\foresee where abortion would seem a reasonable “pragmatic” response. But these corner cases aren’t driving the massive number of abortions we have. It’s just lazy, promiscuous women’s birth control … and yeah it’s morally grotesque. Exactly the sort of thing religions are supposed to speak to to improve our behavior.

  39. abj_slant says:
    @Tom_R

    If Planned Parenthood can provide free long term contraception…

    What is “long term contraception”?

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
  40. abj_slant says:
    @Realist

    Lol…the more often ‘The Priss Factory’ posts, the harder it becomes to rationalize his/her rants.

  41. @Mark Caplan

    Rather than label tens of millions of Americans “Nazis,” consider that a fetus is not a cognizant, self-conscious, self-aware being.

    This is true. But it’s also true of newborn babies. Development is a process, there isn’t any magic switch that occurs at birth.

  42. Humans have practiced a lot of stuff for thousands of years–slavery, serfdom, conquest\genocide, mass rape, torture and of course war.

    Trying not to do those things including abortion is called “moral advance” (forehead slap)!

    Pardon my amusement. “Moral advance”, huh? Indeed, the world has dedicated great effort to moral advance, witness the very call-outs you made.

    Not.

    Abortion is a pragmatic and effective method to terminate a pregnancy. What the world needs now is a LOT more terminated pregnancies.

    Human life is not sacred, and embryos are not little people.

    Get your religion out of my government and laws!!

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
  43. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says:
    @Realist

    Why do you care about the kids of your enemies?

    They will only grow up to be the enemies of your children.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  44. @Realist

    The denizens of the bible belt can’t wait to join the hegemonic military so they can kill, kill, kill! The United States has needlessly caused the deaths of a thousand times more Americans, not to mention others, than abortion.

    Why do you folks say stuff that is so mind bogglingly stupid?

    (It’s like some of the immigration cheerleaders. Math really isn’t that hard.)

    Pat says there have been 55 million post Roe abortions. That passes the smell test, as abortions were running running at a quarter to a third of live births, well over a million a year and have now dropped a bit below it. (A million a year for 42 years gets you 42 million, so Pat’s 55 million figure is certainly believable.)

    The total deaths combat\civilian in WWII are estimated at around that 55m number. The US wasn’t responsible for even a majority of them. You can throw all the Cold War conflicts and post-911 stuff onto that pile; they are–in relative terms–small beer.

    Your “needlessly cause the deaths of a thousand times more Americans …” on the other hand–would be 55m * 1000 = 55 billion. A few times more people *than have ever lived on planet earth* not to mention Americans who have ever lived.

    This is why even rote education is important. Some basic grasp of facts and figures is necessary to have some basic grasp of reality. Without it … sheer nitwitery.

    You can argue that abortion is not morally interesting. But if you’re going to argue numbers and scale, then at least try to have some grasp of the relevant figures and some grasp of math.

    • Replies: @Realist
  45. @John Jeremiah Smith

    Human life is not sacred, and embryos are not little people.

    Embryos are of course “little people” in the basic biological sense. Politically, morally, religiously … that’s to argue.

    Get your religion out of my government and laws!!

    I’m not particularly religious and not opposed to legal abortion. (Though i’d vote for a more circumspect regime than what the supremes legislated.)

    I was merely pointing out your justification by 6000 years of human history argument was lame. And it is.

    And if you don’t think that humans have moral progress–eliminating (most places) serfdom, outlawing and suppressing slavery–and that Christian ideology, Christianity based cultures and Christians have been at forefront of it … then you’re just an ignorant fool.

    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith
  46. @Silver Miner

    Well said Realist. I will add an another quote. Steven Weinberg made this observation
    “With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things that takes religion”

    Steven Weinberg–whom i met during my physics grad school days in Texas–is a talented particle physicist. However, all his non-physics mumblings are pretty cluelessly stupid–pretty much high school level philosophical bullshitting.

    Not exactly a huge surprise. Having a high IQ doesn’t necessarily make one particularly “wise”, and people who have a narrow intense focus, often end up being not very “smart” or “wise” about other human affairs.

    However, this particular comment–given the history of the 20th century that Weinberg grew up in, where secular ideologies inflicted insane and bizarre horrors and rolled up a 100m+ death toll–just shows Weinberg’s particular philosophical idiocy.

    • Replies: @Realist
  47. @AnotherDad

    I was merely pointing out your justification by 6000 years of human history argument was lame. And it is.

    Tradition and long-standing are used by every society and culture to justify policy. The Catholic Church, as additional example, prides itself on 2 millenia history of liturgical and theological underpinning.

    “Precedent” is an established concept in legal applications.

    IOW, don’t hand me any nonsense that tradition, duration, and long-standing don’t count.

    No, embryos most emphatically are NOT “little people”, even in the biological sense, much less as legal entities, identifiable individuals, etc. — things that count in real life.

    What is “moral progress”, oh ye who call others “ignorant fools”? Morality is a set of behaviors defined by a culture. The world is as full of different moralities as it is different cultures. If abortion is regarded as moral in one culture, by what process do you PROVE that it is not moral in yours? You can’t. It is cultural; it is history; it is tradition.

    However, if you can step away from your tendency toward vituperation, we can discuss ethics as a branch of true philosophy, rather than as religion-based mystical hoo-hoo. You have a very long way to go to get to a proof of life being sacred. And from there, asserting a necessity and ethical requirement that embryos not be aborted. The reason you have to sidetrack through “sacred” is to establish a true spiritually-elevated human condition — as compared to monkeys and dogs, who, given voice, might feel they were being short-changed. From that proof, you can begin to establish a consistent universal morality.

    I look forward to your thesis.

    • Replies: @Art
    , @AnotherDad
  48. Realist says:
    @AnotherDad

    “(It’s like some of the immigration cheerleaders. Math really isn’t that hard.)”

    In the first place you don’t use math to solve the problem….it is call arithmetic.

    “(A million a year for 42 years gets you 42 million, so Pat’s 55 million figure is certainly believable.)”

    Forty=two million…..fifty-five million what the hell.

    Regardless of the numbers, I will rephrase my comment:The denizens of the bible belt can’t wait to join the hegemonic military so they can kill, kill, kill!

    Republican Credo: Every conception should be carried to term….there will be plenty of time later to brutally kill or maim the result in a needless, senseless
    war.

    How’s that?

  49. Realist says:
    @AnotherDad

    “Steven Weinberg–whom i met during my physics grad school days in Texas–is a talented particle physicist. ”

    I am glad you said physics and not English…the word “I” is always upper case. People with an IQ of at least 100 learn that in 3rd grade.

    Tell us more about your theories on IQ and wisdom.

    • Replies: @Wyrd
  50. Hbm says:

    Catholic anti-abortion fetishism. How exciting.

    200 million more blacks would have led to a new Age of Enlightenment, I’m sure.

  51. Wyrd says:
    @Realist

    …the word “I” is always upper case.

    Thank you for this and earlier grammar corrections, Schoolmarm.

  52. @abj_slant

    A hormone implant (usually in arm)

  53. David says:

    It’s good that the first comment to “A New Dark Age” is a call to turn more unborn black children into spaghetti sauce. That’s a yes, Mr Buchanan.

    The odd thing about people prone to correcting others’ language usage is that they often don’t know much. For example, arithmetic is a branch of mathematics. One doesn’t have do be doing real analysis or differential geometry to be doing math. And as St Augustine points out, language warriors take their stand in such a trivial field, in the scheme of things.

    Insomuch, that a teacher or learner of the hereditary laws of pronunciation will more offend men by speaking without the aspirate, of a “uman being,” in despite of the laws of grammar, than if he, a “human being,” hate a “human being” in despite of Thine.

    • Replies: @Realist
  54. Wyrd says:

    It’s good that the first comment to “A New Dark Age” is a call to turn more unborn black children into spaghetti sauce. That’s a yes, Mr Buchanan.

    Priss gonna priss, m’kay?

  55. Art says:
    @John Jeremiah Smith

    “No, embryos most emphatically are NOT “little people”No, embryos most emphatically are NOT “little people””

    Whether a fetus is a “little human” is a scientific decision – not a cultural decision.

    A fetus’s brain, nerves, ears, and muscles are all active before birth – except for breathing air, almost nothing changes at the time of birth. To say that a baby a minute before it is born is not a “little human,” is absurd.

    What comes first the chicken or the egg – the answer is neither – the chicken and egg is a unending process – the same is true of the human process. A human entity starts at conception and does not end until death. To say that at any point in the process that the individual is not human is scientifically untrue.

    It is true that not all cultures value that pre-born “little human” – just the highest.

    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith
  56. @John Jeremiah Smith

    Tired thread … but four quickies, to try and answer your points, John:

    Tradition and long-standing are used by every society and culture to justify policy. The Catholic Church, as additional example, prides itself on 2 millenia history of liturgical and theological underpinning.

    “Precedent” is an established concept in legal applications.

    IOW, don’t hand me any nonsense that tradition, duration, and long-standing don’t count.

    Absolutely agree. I’m actually a big believer in the “gelled knowledge” of tradition. And arguing against this gay marriage silliness, i would make the same argument you did of “thousands of years of tradition”. But then i’d take the next step and try and say *why* our marriage tradition existed, why it had evolved that way, what purpose it served, and why changing it was stupid\harmful. (All pretty easy to do because marriage was about managing reproduction in a way that allowed men to do something other than fight and mate-guard and do useful work. ) My argument with you is that simply stating that some social arrangement existed in the past—while definitely relevant—is not in of itself all that compelling an argument for it now. Slavery’s the obvious example.

    Furthermore, i’ll note that abortion was not some kind of continuous accepted universal. Generally it’s highly frowned upon in most cultures. (For pretty obvious reasons–abortion is not an aspect of success, but failure.) And the laws in the West were distinctly hostile. Suppressing it was seen as progressive social improvement. Laws–and the Catholic Church didn’t create these laws, the US is the big *protestant* nation–were on the books in most US states restricting\banning it. So it wasn’t the continuous history you somewhat implied of permissiveness that Pat Buchanan\Catholics\religious are trying to overthrow. Rather it’s more nuanced, and the drastic overthrowing can from the left, with Roe.

    ~~
    The biology is clear. Human embryos are indeed little homo sapiens. Obviously development is a process. But they immediately have their unique human genetic identity that any lab can look at and say “human being” and distinguish from other non-twin human beings. Then they very quickly have brains, hearts, hands, feet. All this well before most all of the abortions. How folks want to take this info … up to them. But it’s annoying to have people pretend that what is, is not. The abortionists have to invent this weird language “clumps of tissue”, “products of pregnancy” which is an indicator of dishonesty. Don’t lie, just make your argument for why abortion should be legal. Or legal under whatever development timelines or circumstances one is arguing for.

    ~~
    “Moral progress”
    Well it’s like the Potter Stewart quip–I know it when i see it.
    You’re absolutely right, morality varies between cultures, and–my point–between various times in cultures. And certainly folks living outside the West or at an earlier age, didn’t have my exact sense of “morality”. However, neither do i believe that everyone one waking up to another day of slavery or serfdom was immune, because of their “culture”, to some of the same feelings i would have. A sense of “fairness” or “justice” seems to be a very innate human characteristic. It varies across cultures how “fair” folks demand things be. But no one likes getting the short end of stick.

    If you want something more sophisticated, you can make an argument with a thought experiment that you’re going to be airdropped into some culture with some moral system in place in a random social position. (My understanding is this argument is in the Rawls magum opus, but i haven’t read it and am certainly not a Rawlsian utilitarian.) Then you ask yourself: “What culture and morality do i prefer?”

    Most people would then dismiss slavery, serfdom, caste, unchecked state power, arbitrary “justice”, etc. Most would opt for rule of law and more republican social arrangements. Ergo i’d label our movement toward those sorts of systems that seem more in line with natural human notions as “moral progress”.

    ~~
    “However, if you can step away from your tendency toward vituperation, we can discuss ethics as a branch of true philosophy, rather than as religion-based mystical hoo-hoo. …”

    Not sure if it’s intended, but there’s a bit of hoo-haw in there that there’s some sort of “true philosophy”.
    Afterall, our back-n-forth opened with me objecting your appeal to tradition. And the moral tradition in most cultures has some sort of religious philosophy wrapped around it.

    Even more on point, unless you actually believe in the sky fairies—which you clearly don’t—obviously all these religious moral teachings were simply the precepts that leaders\teachers\”philosophers” in those cultures believed in. Example: The Ten Commandments—beyond the first few about “God”—they are a bunch of rules about how to behave with other people in the tribe. Again, unless you believe that “God” actually did hand down the Ten Commandments to Moses … we’re talking about moral guidelines that the leaders of the Jewish people thought were good ones. And they undoubtedly thought they were good ones because they were the ones that *worked*–minimized conflict in the tribe and allowed it succeed. Such systems are inherently evolutionary. Tribes that didn’t come up with guidelines—say against stealing or adultery—would have had much more conflict among the men in the tribe … and those tribes would bicker, be defeated by more organized tribes, their men killed, their women carried off and no longer exist. The Jewish moral rules were sufficiently useful, that the Jews were still around under the Romans. And the slightly modified—in emphasis and atmospherics—Christian rules were sufficient to help not just a tribe, but an entire civilization get into the present day … and in fact get it there as premier civilization on the planet.

    The mystical “hoo-hoo” is just … mystical hoo-hoo. But religious moral codes have a much better track record, than *any* philosophical b.s.ing. The religious based moral codes that have survived into the present day have an actual *track record*. They—unlike philosophical argument—have been proven by evolutionary experiment: Cultures used them … and they worked!

    But the secular post-Christian West on the other hand, doesn’t look to have much of future. It seems unable to even argue for its own preservation—much less produce societies that actually –close their borders, promote a return to eugenic fertility–preserve themselves.

    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith
  57. Billl says:
    @pyrrhus

    It’s not that it has already happened, it’s that it is routine. Beating heart donors are anesthetized to prevent them screaming during harvesting. It’s part of the published protocol for such donations.

    Similarly, euthanasia is a routine part of medical practice. The euphemisms it hides behind are paper thin.

    We already live in the country Buchanan is warning of. Mordor.

  58. @Art

    Whether a fetus is a “little human” is a scientific decision – not a cultural decision

    . No, it is a made by legal decision, by legal definition.

    You appear to be arguing from a position of emotional involvement. Have a nice day.

    • Replies: @Art
  59. Realist says:
    @David

    Don’t be a chickenshit. If you have a comment about my comment address it to me!

    ” For example, arithmetic is a branch of mathematics. One doesn’t have do be doing real analysis or differential geometry to be doing math. ”

    People use the term ‘math’ or ‘do the math’ when they really mean arithmetic (add, subtract, multiply or divide), to give there comment gravitas. Arithmetic….the most basic form of math.

    What is a “uman being,”?

    • Replies: @Realist
  60. J1234 says:

    This is all a logical progression of the leftist train of thought. Why would anyone treat a fetus with respect when you are already allowed to murder it? Why would any pro-choice movement not ultimately accept infanticide when only a few weeks, days or moments determine whether a human life is a fetus or a baby?

    Yet leftists say, “Oh, this will never lead to infanticide. What kind of monsters do you take us for? You’re a reactionary.” Yes, that’s what they used to say back in the 1970’s. Have you noticed they don’t say this anymore?

    The left also tells us, “We don’t want to take all of your guns.” But they’re incrementalists by nature. They’re quite happy to have some future generation take your guns. Or maybe take your two week old child (that exceeds the 2076 federally mandated two child per family limit) on down to the human parts factory.

    As others have mentioned, however, what would the poor, welfare dependent and criminally inclined black population in America be today if it weren’t for llegal abortion? 100 million? More? I consider myself pro-life, but find myself in a moral conundrum. But the source of the conundrum resides in the welfare mentality of our government and elected officials. Why wouldn’t a low income single mom have five kids if their survival existence is guaranteed by the gov’t?

  61. Ha ..Good article up till quoting Churchill. A war monger with the blood of millions on his hands.

  62. Art says:
    @John Jeremiah Smith

    Art — Whether a fetus is a “little human” is a scientific decision – not a cultural decision

    No, it is a made by legal decision, by legal definition.

    You appear to be arguing from a position of emotional involvement.

    You are 100% wrong – abortion is a legal cultural matter – whether a fetus is a “little human” or not, is purely a scientific decision.

    p.s. As too emotion – clearly you have too little – life is sacred – you are out of the mainstream of Christian philosophy. Most every women who has an abortion is emotional about it – period.

    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith
  63. Realist says:
    @Realist

    “give there comment”

    Should be ‘their.’ comment.

  64. @AnotherDad

    The mystical “hoo-hoo” is just … mystical hoo-hoo. But religious moral codes have a much better track record, than *any* philosophical b.s.ing. The religious based moral codes that have survived into the present day have an actual *track record*. They—unlike philosophical argument—have been proven by evolutionary experiment: Cultures used them … and they worked!

    Which came first, philosophical dialog or moral codes? How does any “moral code” become refined into a greater degree of conformity with ethical thought — usually as a product of social experience over time, i.e. as some development from philosophical dialogue over time?

    Second … I didn’t say embryos are human; I said they are not little people, which they are not. And I do not prioritize “tradition” over “precedent”.

    When anti-abortion religious hate begins to dictate to individual rights (whether or not privacy is truly an individual right being a matter for further discussion), then we must talk in terms of legal definitions. What is a person? What is an individual? At which point in development is a human embryo a person, an individual with rights? Consistency counts, too. Does a 4-week embryo have property rights? Society must take great caution in allowing re-definitionizing of “What is a person?”

    Anyway, this medium grows restrictive. You have demonstrated that you are not some ideological robot of religious doctrine. That is sufficient for the meantime.

  65. @Art

    You are 100% wrong – abortion is a legal cultural matter – whether a fetus is a “little human” or not, is purely a scientific decision.

    p.s. As too emotion – clearly you have too little – life is sacred – you are out of the mainstream of Christian philosophy. Most every women who has an abortion is emotional about it – period.

    Don’t get hysterical.

    Provide a proof that life is sacred.

    • Replies: @Art
  66. Art says:
    @John Jeremiah Smith

    “Provide a proof that life is sacred.”

    The word “sacred” has two main attributes – the first is related to notions of god. We hold as sacred – the things that we believe god values. Of course no human has ever truly known god – what we believe that god values is conjecture on our part – it is a matter of philosophy. People who believe that there is god also believe that god created the universe. The universe blessed us with brains. We can begin to know god’s universe – we can gather knowledge about ourselves and our surroundings. Our conjecture has great value – it can extend our lives. Is there anything more important to each of us, then extending our lives. The same goes for every living thing – the same goes for every physical entity in the universe – everything in god’s universe wants to extent its future. God must value the future. Every atom within us, ourselves, and our culture all want a cozy safe place to continue existing. That is the shared nature of all of god’s universe.

    The second attribute of the word “sacred” says that what is sacred is inviolate – that it must not be destroyed – it must be unaltered – that it be kept pure. Clearly it is true that different cultures hold different things sacred. There is one culture that has been more successful at extending the future of its adherents then other philosophies – it is the philosophical Christian culture – is it perfect, clearly no – does it always do the right thing, absolutely not – but it does create a more safe life extending future for its adherents, better than any other philosophy. That philosophy correctly holds that the general principle of holding life sacred makes for a better more lasting future. It works, the proof is its history.

  67. Hibernian says:
    @Realist

    “It suggests that humans are inherently such scumbags that if they don’t fear the wrath of god they will do unspeakable things.”

    Sort of like suggesting that the Pope is Catholic.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  68. Hibernian says:
    @Realist

    He is not a “sky daddy.” “The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us.”

    • Replies: @Realist
  69. Hibernian says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    War is Peace, Slavery is Freedom.

  70. Hibernian says:
    @Art

    [It’s not a good idea to have multiple, very short items, which clutter up the comment-thread. Instead, these should be combined into one or two much longer and more substantive comments.]

    Amen.

    • Replies: @Art
  71. Hibernian says:
    @Mark Caplan

    They are cognizant. They feel pain.

  72. Hibernian says:
    @Silver Miner

    Apparently good people, who do evil things, usually suffer from a lack of guidance, not an excess of it. Sensible people know this.

  73. Hibernian says:
    @Realist

    “Thou dost protest too much.”

  74. @Mark Caplan

    Indeed well said. The ridiculous idea that science can compel a different answer** is unfortunately prevalent and it reinforces the willingness of religious people to use the criminal law to enforce their unprovable ideas of right and wrong concerning zygotes, blastocysts, embryos and foetuses. That is surely an unnecessary, indeed highly undesirable, complicating factor in a pluralist multi-cultural country which no longer has the strength to ignore the rest of the world’s preferences and behave stupidly.

    Surely the starting point should be “what criminal laws do we need to ensure adults, adolescents and large strong children do not threaten each others’ life, liberty and property? And the end point so far as concerns foetuses.

    **though science has of course demonstrated that the Catholic Church, still in the Catholic Evcyclopaedia of about 105 years ago was still teaching damaging nonsense about foetuses.

  75. @Hibernian

    That intolerant fanatic but also scholarly humanist Sir Thomas More – also called Saint T – wrote his famous if unread Utopia in which he stipulated that it was a capital offence to deny that God had created an afterlife in which people would be punished for bad deeds. He knew socialism wouldn’t work without fear of God to restrain the strong.

  76. Realist says:
    @Hibernian

    You’re religious, I am not. We disagree.

  77. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says:
    @Priss Factor

    We need a bumper sticker with the words: WHITE LIBERALS AND NEGROES, PLEASE KILL YOUR KIDS.

    Federal funding for white Libs and Negroes killing their own kids is a great idea.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pat Buchanan Comments via RSS