- Written by Michael Z Williamson
The anti-self defense crowd claim to be anti-“violence.” They’re perfectly cool with thugs beating you to death, stabbing you, even shooting you. Don’t you dare shoot back. That would “escalate the violence.” Your life is expendable.
The other side ludicrously claim to be pro-“life.” The only “Life” they consider relevant to the discussion is the “innocent unborn child.” The woman is expendable. They’ll deny that, but everything they say proves it.
Most of my readers probably have a passing familiarity with the insanity of the gun control crowd, which should correctly be called the anti-self defense crowd. So let’s reference those and do the comparison.
Antis claim there are very self defensive gun uses a year, only about 400. This is based on ONLY considering cases where the perp was shot dead and a grand jury declined to charge the defensive shooter.
FACT: There are 1.5-2 MILLION defensive gun uses a year, including actual shootings, woundings, near misses, presentations of weapons, or just declarations of weapons.
Anti-choice types claim, based on who knows what, that only (I’ve seen varying percentages from .15% to .8%) of pregnancies are “life threatening,” when 2% are ectopic and life threatening before we get into any other factor including gestational diabetes, malformation of the fetus, eclampsia, etc. Before modern medicine, which includes medically necessary abortions, the number one killer of birthing-age women was…childbirth.
And both cases, the antis consider the survivors to be expendable to save the fetus/other party. Neither is pro life. They’re pro SPECIFIC LIVES.
Gun haters believe in some mythical “weapons of easy mass murder” that are somehow more powerful because of “assault features” like grips and adjustable buttstocks, the “Shoulder thing that goes up,” and bayonet lugs, because presumably people are shooting bayonets at each other, but if they can’t, that’s A-OK. And that the only reason to buy one is to murder a school, despite the existence of 30 million or more AR-15s alone, and a bare handful ever used in crime. It doesn’t matter how many examples you offer of armed self defense, the bleat will be, “It wouldn’t be necessary if no one had a gun.” Other than the fact big, angry men would beat the shit out of everyone else, murder without reprisal, and rape a lot of women. Those inconvenient facts and lives don’t matter. We would “Save lives” by getting rid of guns, because “there would be fewer killings with guns.”
Abortion haters believe, or not-so secretly fantasize about, some floozy who gets drunk and gang-bangs behind the bar, then waits 275 days before deciding to have an abortion that magically doesn’t take, at that point, surgeons, an OR, and quarts of blood, because it wasn’t until then the pregnancy became inconvenient. While the reality is that the vanishingly tiny percentage of such women usually show up at the welfare office, they choose to believe the straw woman exists, and “needs to learn that actions have consequences” (so they think of a baby as a consequence, a punishment) and to “keep her legs together” (because no woman ever had birth control fail (in reality, most fail at least 1% of the time https://www.yourcontraception.com/handbook/the-reliability-of-birth-control-methods so if she has sex 100 times with her husband, using only one method, even odds she gets pregnant)), and no woman ever didn’t have a choice in having sex (it’s called “rape,” which includes the guy getting her drunk without consent of what follows). None of those exist. Only their fantasy girl in the alley.
NOTE: All abortions are “elective” surgery, even for a severe ectopic. One can “elect” to terminate, or wait for it to explode. Just as with cancer surgery and heart bypasses. “Elective,” as we learned during the Covidiocy, only means, “You’re not dying at this moment.”
Consider the anti-gun claim that they’d allow defensive carry, if you can show “good cause,” and realize that Hawaii has such a law and has NEVER HAD SOMEONE PASS THEIR THRESHOLD of “good cause.”
Likewise the bullshit claim that “Every state allows abortion if the mother’s life is in danger.”
Okay, so if the doctor says that, they trust him unconditionally, and allow the termination, and do not second guess him that MAYBE a miracle would occur, so this doesn’t happen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Savita_Halappanavar. They NEVER demand some bureaucrat investigate to see if he has “too many” life-threatening cases, the way they investigate doctors now to see if they’re giving out “too many” painkillers to people living in agony?
You’re a liar and you know it. They will second guess every single incident because of their throbbing erection over “innocent unborn children,” when they have never once said, “The health and safety of the woman is the most important part of the pregnancy.” Because they really don’t give a shit if she lives or dies. They don’t think about her at all.
And every doctor is going to shrug and refer the patient out of state rather than risk jail because some fetal-obsessed drooling retard really doesn’t grasp that pregnancy is dangerous. Dangerous enough that the Spartans considered death in childbirth the equivalent of death in battle.
In the news right now is the 10 year old in Ohio, raped, pregnant, and having to go to Indiana for a termination, as long as it’s legal in Indiana, but the primitive savages in the Statehouse are vowing to fix that ASAP.
First it was, “It’s probably fake.” And the Ohio AG even claimed so, without actually familiarizing himself with the case, because no one had called him personally.
Then it was, “It’s real, but it’s a straw man.” Which is exactly backward. Real examples are not strawmen.
And “It’s real, but very rare.” Okay, so it’s rare. How many 10 year olds are you willing to sacrifice for your fetus fetish?
How many “very rare” unarmed victims should we sacrifice because “guns are bad, mmkay?”
And “Ohio has exemptions for rape.”
No, they fucking don’t:
Archer in the letter addresses whether “minor victims of sexual assault are able to receive abortions within Ohio after six weeks gestation.”
No doctor wants to be a test case, losing his livelihood, freedom, and impoverishing his family when some retard who worships Bronze Age savagery but happens to work for the state can say, “It looks fine to me,” and have him prosecuted. Whether or not said retard has any clue about reproductive biology. My anecdotal experience is that every single abortion opponent I’ve met A) had zero fucking clue about reproductive biology or pregnancy, beyond that at a possible 5th grade level, and 2: was convinced they ABSOLUTELY KNEW as much as the doctors in the field. Dunning-Kruger anyone?
As an example, I offer this: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/nov/29/ohio-extreme-abortion-bill-reimplant-ectopic-pregnancy
It’s as retarded as the mythical “smart gun” that knows who’s handling it and will magically work or not accordingly. Oh, and with the government’s ability to override the decision if it feels it wants to, by remote coding.
Much like I’ve yet to meet a gun hater who could even explain the terms “militia,” “assault rifle,” “Well-regulated” (they have a fantasy definition of it), “Stand your ground,” or summarize a muzzle brake or how an adjustable stock makes a rifle more dangerous.
And tellingly, while I did see some people advocating for executing the rapist, not a single “Pro-lifer” publicly said, “Oh, the poor innocent child should absolutely be allowed to terminate.” Because she’s not “unborn,” so she doesn’t matter and that side doesn’t give a shit what happens to her. She doesn’t exist. There is no woman, only fetus.
I pre-emptively blocked a couple of filth who bleated, “No one would have known if the doctor wasn’t seeking headlines.”
No, you vile piece of shit. Headlines are how you make ignorant retards aware this kind of thing happens, and that it’s not that uncommon. Not that that will have any effect on their pinbrains, because they’re too busy jerking off to pictures of fetuses. (I’m going to hammer on that, because they are, just like gun haters obsess that every gun is an AR-15 with heat seeking explosive bullets.)
Then it was, “Why wasn’t the rape reported?” and “Oh, it was reported to wrong agency. CONVENIENT.” As if that matters. THE GIRL IS 10 YEARS OLD. IF SHE IS PREGNANT, IT WAS RAPE. There is no fucking question, because it’s illegal to have sex with a 10 year old in every US state.
Well, there could be a bunch of reasons for it not being reported. First is a bunch of fetus-worshippers harassing her, which has already happened. Second could be fear of reprisal. Third could be expectation that the case will run into some kind of procedural error and get dropped. Fourth is THAT’S ALL ENTIRELY SECONDARY to scraping his rapescum out of her.
Just like you don’t call the police in the middle of a gunfight, and if you were doing anything societally questionable for which the anti-gunners will claim you deserved to get shot at, you probably won’t mention it if you can avoid it. Or, your local DA may be completely anti-gun himself, and will either not press charges against the other party, or might press charges against you.
And note: It takes months or YEARS to try an adult rape case. So even if everything were to proceed normally, the rapist’s little bastard will either be gone or born. And, if abortion is allowed “in case of rape,” but he wiggles out of it two years later, that’s when the mother and doctor get charged with murder. And if you say you’d never do that, we come back to, “So you accept the doctor’s word unconditionally?”
But note: Every single comment was an attempt to avoid admitting, “Yes, this termination should take place and no one should question it.”
I propose an interim solution: A lottery. We draw one anti-choicer’s name from the list, and the name of one pregnant woman seeking abortion. If the woman carries the baby to term, the anti-choicer accepts all financial responsibility and arranges all necessary child care until the child graduates high school. After all, they’re “pro-life,” right? They want that life to be productive.
If the woman dies or suffers injuries the doctor anticipated, the anti-choicer is immediately crucified on the side of the road of US 40. If at any point there allegedly loving god resurrects one, we’ll agree life begins at conception. Of course, then he’ll need to answer as to why 50% of them flush out within two weeks, “naturally.”
But they, “don’t want to pay for her welfare for her bad choices.”
Both anti-gun and anti-choice groups are vile, inhumane, filth who utterly hate the concept of individual autonomy. It’s not enough that they have their insane fantasy. Everyone else has to have it too.
I hope they eliminate each other in mutual annihilation. The world will be better for it.
- Written by Michael Z Williamson
This is going to upset a lot of Brosheviks, many of whom should know better.
I'm going to point out the hate fact that Ukraine has not committed ANY war crimes.
ALL PHOTO DOCUMENTED:
Russia started by attacking civilian habitation with no military necessity--shelling apartment blocks to the ground and calling in strikes on entire subdivisions IN CLEAR ON THE RADIO.
Three days in, they were stealing food without payment or signing for compensation.
They bombed marked hospitals, including a maternity hospital.
They bombed a marked civilian shelter.
They murdered refugees who didn't take the official, "we'll only let you flee to Russia" route they declared.
They stated they'd murder uniformed mercenaries as "War criminals," which they are not. But if Russia does murder them, it certainly is a war crime.
While sending in their own mercenaries to rape and murder.
They raped and dismembered civilian women.
They desecrated bodies by pulling out the gold teeth to sell.
THEIR PRESIDENT PUBLICLY STATED AN INTENT TO GENOCIDE THE ENTIRE POPULATION AND MAKE CHILDREN "SUFFER" FOR THEIR PARENTS DARING NOT TO BE RUSSIAN.
Genocide counters any Hague or Geneva restrictions.
Ukrainians rounding up Russian "soldiers" and exterminating them like vermin isn't a "War crime." It's more like scraping dogshit off your shoe.
Russia hasn't abided by any LOAC since this started. None applies to them. They are invading savages and terrorists, not a legitimate military force.
- Written by Michael Z Williamson
Historical background: The day Germany lost the Battle of Britain.
During the Blitz, a reporter asked Elizabeth, Queen Consort (Later the dowager Queen Mother) when the Royal children were leaving London.
She replied, "The children will leave when I leave, I will leave when the King leaves, and the King is not leaving."
If the King would not leave, his people would not leave, no matter the threat.
They were all one people, and they would fight and live as one--Princess Elizabeth, the current Queen, trained as a truck mechanic and ambulance driver for the Territorial Army. She was 16.
Germany should have given up at that moment.
This is a Ukrainian recruiting commercial from about four years ago. I think it defines the entire war, and is possibly one of the best commercials ever, from a production and market standpoint.
Let’s go through this: It starts with shovels in farm and industrial use, and used as toys. It establishes the humble shovel as a critical tool for an agricultural society, a common link for everyone.
Next, we move to the battlefield—management of expectations. You are not joining the Ukrainian Ground Forces for some PT, foreign travel, and college money. You are joining a military that expects to fight. But you will have a shovel. You can dig a hasty position, a tank sump, trenches and breastwork, raise it over the parapet to look for enemy fire, paddle across a river. If you don’t have a (I believe the actual word in the original is a generic “chopper” that can refer to any tool such as a cleaver or axe) to cut your frozen bread in the trenches, you will have a shovel. If you run out of ammo, you will still be in the fight, because YOU HAVE A SHOVEL.
Then they conclude that shovels will be used to build a fortress around their nation.
The commercial doesn’t glamorize the rifle, the tank, doesn’t even show missiles and aircraft, which they have plenty of. The most important tool for a Ukrainian soldier, or any Ukrainian, is a shovel.
The Russians can invade with aircraft and tanks, artillery and missiles, but as we’ve seen from the stranded convoys and horrifically outdated logistics (about 1930s tech), the Russians don’t have shovels, or at least not enough.
They really thought they could beat a people who are that down to earth, in all definitions.
- Written by Michael Z Williamson
Wear a mask!
What NIOSH rating do you recommend?
The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health has ratings for masks and respirators, depending on what type of contamination they protect against.
It doesn’t matter.
So, if you were going to be exposed to phosgene, you’d just rely on some random scrap of cloth? Because you’d die. You need specific filters for specific contaminants. That's why it specifically says on the labels they don't stop viruses.
They have to say that for liability reasons.
Incorrect. Your fluoride toothpaste can say it reduces cavities, because it has been proven to do so in extensive studies.
It stops the droplets.
Droplets that contain the Covids.
Viral particles can be aerosolized in large droplets that stop in cloth, and in droplets small enough to pass through, or airborne, or can transmit through the fecal-oral route, or several other disseminations. Cloth masks bottom out at a 3 micron mesh. Coronavirus particles are about .1 nanometers. They're smaller than cigarette smoke or VX nerve gas. A cloth mask is incapable of stopping them.
The mask helps.
The most favorable meta-study in 2020 claimed a 1.9% reduction in spread, but failed to account for demographics, movement patterns, population density, or natural or artificial environmental factors. A recent study cherry picked one village in Bangladesh, rather than comparing, say, Houston to New York or LA, and only found a 1% reduction in spread, only above age 65, and again failed to account for any other factors. This is a failure.
Why don’t you have faith in science?
First of all, science does not involve faith, it is a methodology, and when your observed facts, such as above, contradict the hypothesis, then the hypothesis fails and is junked.
Masks work! The fact checkers say so!
The fact checkers are usually journalists with zero scientific credentials, disputing people who do have credentials. They also usually misstate the claims. When they attempt to refute a claim, they tend to use a single recent pop article, or out of context single study, to argue against 50 years of professional research that random cloth masks don’t do anything.
Just wear a mask and this will be over!
That claim was made in July 2020, that “6-8 weeks of masks” would end the virus. Once again, observable facts contradict the hypothesis, therefore, it fails and must be junked. There was no statistical difference in disease spread between areas requiring masks and areas not.
Wearing a mask is doing something!
You could also hit the ground with sticks. In our study group, 100% of people hitting the ground with sticks daily avoided COVID.
That’s ridiculous. How would a stick possibly work?
The same way a mask does. At least it would be doing something.
I hope that by not wearing a mask you die.
But if the mask is to protect others, then why would not wearing one affect me? Please make up your mind how it works. And, if it stops viral particles going out, why wouldn’t it also stop them going in? Also, that’s a pretty uncharitable position.
Follow the science!
There are fifty years of research on masks, regarding viruses and other contaminants. I’m following that science, which also means questioning claims. Including the recent claim that a random scrap of cloth is effective at anything other than reducing airflow.
(At this point you’ll either have broken their programming, or they’ll insist you’re a “Trumper” and refuse to debate further.)
Page 1 of 123