3. Pets Yay, Kids Nay. Growth of movement to spare our puppies and kiddies; industry of megastores catering to their every need; heartrending stories of furry creatures in trouble; increasing use of animals of all kinds as surrogate children- all exponentially increasing since Roe V. Wade. And denegration of children comes in all forms. A nuisance bar is located near a bus stop where I conduct my daily transit. Scary people running in and out of it all blessed night. In rather scary neighborhood. Which became scarier about 1:15 A.M. this morning. Many shots fired outside emporium. Five people wounded. Including two children sitting in a car waiting for one parent or another to emerge from tavern. Two thugs caught- one with Glock on his person, the other with AK-47. But we weep for abandoned kitties.
Gerard E. | 03.30.06 - 3:26 pm | #

I was raised Catholic, but this does not make me a bad person.
Cranky Lawyer | 03.30.06 - 3:30 pm | #

Dag!

Cranky Lawyer beat me to it!

...but that does not make me a bad person.

PVO
mulopwepaul | 03.30.06 - 3:33 pm | #

Did anyone notice that Ms. Dunigan's profession was listed as EMT? If called to an accident scene where let's say a car hit a deer would she treat the deer or the passengers of the car first?
Marv Wood | 03.30.06 - 3:52 pm | #

I just noticed that it wasn't Ms. Dunigan who made the outragous statement but she is critical of someone who does make an outragous statement.

To qoute Emily Litella: "Never mind."
Marv Wood | 03.30.06 - 3:56 pm | #

Rats!

Cranky Lawyer and mulopwepaul beat me to it!

...but that does not make me a bad person, even though I was raised Catholic.
Meg Q | Homepage | 03.30.06 - 5:18 pm | #

My response to the "I was raised Catholic" mantra is to quickly interject "Too bad it didn't take!".
Donald R. McClarey | 03.30.06 - 5:39 pm | #

man, that second forum is .... upsetting. I have no problem with people who choose to be childfree, but I have a problem with me or my child being referred to in the extremely offensive terms found there. ugh ugh ugh.
TiaKay | Homepage | 03.30.06 - 6:13 pm | #

TiaKay, those of us who merely don't have children are childless, whether it arises from our choice or not.

"Childfree" in my experience means, at best, a childless narcissist who expects to be admired for her selflessness in not having a child when all her reasons are purely selfish, and at worst -- well, you read the link. Anyone else who wants to know can also read it.

You note the opinion that the parents ought to save the child. It comes up just about every time I see such "childfree" groups: parents are wholly responsible for the actions of their children. No matter how typically childish the action is and how little actual control the parent has. I suspect they do not want to feel any obligation because they were allowed to reach adulthood unstrangled, and they can fob off any blame for their childish behavior on their parents.
Mary | 03.30.06 - 7:44 pm | #

Mary, I understand what you are saying. I agree that a lot of the CF mindset is different from a mindset of someone who simply doesn't have children. But still... such harsh approaches to other people.... ouch.
TiaKay | Homepage | 03.30.06 - 10:47 pm | #

Let's see. I wasn't raised Catholic, was indeed an atheist (practical and otherwise) for far too many years, thought for many years only of the great things I would do if only I got enough money together and got the kids out of the house, measured life in terms of money and how to get to where there would be enough, and was a general-purpose stick-in-the-mud.

Well, I’m still a stick-in-the-mud (though far more specific in current application) and of all things that one might possibly become not having been raised Catholic, I’m now an NFP teacher. We gave the dog away after we got pregnant with the most recent kid (and kids are so much more fun anyway). And while I won’t claim goodness – or even mediocrity – I will now claim Catholicism.

And that doesn’t make me a bad person.
Chris | 03.31.06 - 12:56 am | #

Sorry, these are bad people.

They need serious prayer and help.
Louise | Homepage | 03.31.06 - 9:06 am | #

Heck, that's run-o-the-mill among the animal rights crowd. I've spent many a fun hours debating peta-ites, alf's, and Singer alocolytes; and lemme tell ya. There's lots of em, and they're all wacko nut balls. They really do mean it when they say, "save a seal (but let the children die.)" Scary, scary bunch.
Steve | 03.31.06 - 10:24 am | #

SAVE THE BABY RUTABAGAS!!!!
A. Nonymouse | 03.31.06 - 11:15 am | #

In Christina's combox, it didn't take long before some pro-choicer decided to trot out the oh-so-trendy "fire in an IVF clinic" dilemna:
http://www.haloscan.com/comments...4526553/ #315020

I think we did a good job of answering him, but I have to ask: What is the origin of this bogus question? I'm seeing it all over pro-choice blogs lately. They really think they've found the Perfect Plan To Expose Pro-Lifers As Idiots, and they're spreading it as widely as possible.

Tip to pro-choicers: Either you aren't as brilliant as you think you are, or pro-lifers aren't all as stupid as you think we are, or maybe a little of both....
Naaman | Homepage | 03.31.06 - 1:35 pm | #

I just read the question. Going over it carefully, I realized that it was NOT phrased as "either/or." I'd save both the three-year-old AND the petri dish with the five fertilized embryos.

Gosh. That was tough. I almost had to think on that one. Tuck the kid under one arm and the petri dish in your pocket. Whoa. What a concept.
A. Nonymouse | 03.31.06 - 3:08 pm | #

Oh, yeah. If it IS changed to "either/or" -- tough. What law says you have to stay within the parameters of a stupid question?

I foresee, however, the following conversations:

(1)

"Suppose you're FORCED to save only one or the other?"

"By whom?"

"By me."

"Then Scalia-gesture you, Bubba. You'll have to kill me to keep me from trying to save them both."

(2)

"Suppose you're FORCED to save only one or the other?"

"By whom?"

"By the fact that the fire will kill you if you grab one and try for the other."

"Then it becomes impossible, and no one is required to do the impossible."

"But which ONE, huh? Huh?"

"Whichever one is closest you grab first, and make a try for the second."

"What if they're both exactly the same distance from you?"

"If you're left handed, grab the one on your left. If you're right handed, grab the one on your right, then the one on the other side."

"But the fire will kill you if you take the time to pick up the second."

"If the fire is moving that fast, I'm barbecue, anyway. Grab 'em both. I will at least go out in a blaze of glory, and know with absolute certainty that I won't have to listen to any more of your silly-ass questions."
A. Nonymouse | 03.31.06 - 3:18 pm | #

Oh, yeah. What's a three-year-old doing hanging around an IVF clinic, anyway?
A. Nonymouse | 03.31.06 - 3:20 pm | #

I was raised a bad person....
mike the analyst | 03.31.06 - 4:30 pm | #

...but that doesn't make you a Catholic.
Ed the Roman | 04.01.06 - 3:49 pm | #

I was raised as a bad Catholic person.
New Jersey Lawyer | 04.01.06 - 11:24 pm | #

"Scalia-gesture you, Bubba."

I nominate this for the new St. Blog's™ Official Insult©. For when you just can't keep it inside, but you don't want to sin against charity any more than possible. Especially if you're part-Southern-Italian, or, like me, half-Irish and all red-head.

(I'm sure to piled-on for totally being against charity here, but I still like my idea. If you had my temper, you'd understand.)

Maybe to be accompanied with a teeny flick of the index finger from the chin, instead of the entire back of the hand.
Meg Q | Homepage | 04.02.06 - 10:11 am | #

My years of sacrifice in advancing the work of civilization: $-0-.

My years of faithful attendance at Mass on Sundays and Holy Days: $-0-.

My one off-the-cuff and slightly off-color comment: Priceless.

For this I win immortal fame. Oy.
A. Nonymouse | 04.03.06 - 12:03 pm | #