Abortion Guy is quite the trip. He walks around in front of the State House with his 1974-vintage plaid sport coat draped with a necklace of plastic fetuses (fetii?), with a bible in one hand and a “Stop Abortion Now” sign in the other.
IIRC, he once sued the city or state when they held his bible with his property when he was thrown in the clink for disturbing the peace (he’s usually quiet, but apparently someone yelled something from a car and he went ballistic). He lost, since he was provided with a bible in the can.
I’ve always wanted to ask him how many unwanted children he’s adopted.
From this, I assume that some states ban switchblades (and a quick google confirms that 37 do so). Wow - you can own almost any gun you want but a switchblade is banned? Why doesn’t the “need to defend oneself and family” argument apply?
“Curiously enough, an edition of the Encyclopedia Galactica that happened to fall through a time warp from a thousand years in the future defined Michael Ellis as the first against the wall when the revolution came.”
Perhaps we might be able to install a little plaque memorializing all the terrified young women who bled to death in the back of taxicabs after botched illegal abortions.
Dude, that guy from Good Eats has an automatic knife. It’s not big dealio… wait… switchblades?
I’m not sure I ever understood the deal about switchblades. I mean, so they’re a little smaller and easier to conceal than a regular knife. So what? Regular knives are really easy to conceal too.
Just for completeness sake, I saw Abortion Guy [sup]TM[/sup] at the corner of Millwood and Gervais the other day (about a mile down the road from the Capital). So he moves around a bit. I never saw him on campus when I was an undergrad, but there were these other two guys who exhorted the student body to repent all their sins.
I think the abortion memorial would look good next to the memorial for all the Confederate soldiers who fought for freedom (with it’s Confederate flag) and across the walk from the statue in honor of Strom Thurmond for…being old I guess.
One could argue that it is idiocy for a state to editorialize upon its disagreement with the Supreme Court through some rather ham-fisted art. I applaud the legislators of South Carolina for having the audacity to be just such idiots.
If the state was New York in 1847…and they were putting up a statue of Dred Scott in chains…would that still be “idiocy”? (or find your own particular SCOTUS case you disagree with)
One can question the usefullness of this kind of “artwork” to make a point (I think the statue is an ineffective and lame way to make a point), but I don’t get this business about “disagreeing with the Supreme Court” being a part of the idiocy.
I saw “Abortion Guy” in front of the Capitol when I was in Columbia! (I thought he was just some random freak, but he does this every day?) I wanted to jump out of the car and have my picture taken with him, but then realized I would’ve had to talk to him, so I stayed safely inside with the windows rolled up.
So things like this THIS are the reason my brother wants to move out of South Carolina…
My post was short enough. I’m surprised you were unable to absorb it in its entirety. I’ll spell it out in simpler terms, and you can either grasp it or not.
You see, it is attempting to use an emotional appeal instead of legal means, or better yet, facts, to make your point. It has about the same degree of intellectual integrity as objecting to half a person’s post without reading the rest.
Fair enough…although I did read your entire post. Even short posts can <shockingly> be interpreted in different ways. As I pointed out in my reply…if you were arguing about the merits of cheesy art to make a political point (which you, upon clarification, were doing)… I’d agree with you.
I suppose it’s possible that the back-alley abortion is a myth or exaggerated, but that site isn’t going to convince me.
They’re not only obviously biased (not that they can’t be right also) but they they push the breast-cancer abortion link which has been well discredited.
Yes the web site is advocacy site (try finding abortion related quotes or info on non-advocacy sites ). It does contain quotes from a number of other sources…for example:
Since you and elucidator made the initial claim about the numbers of women who died due to “back alley abortions”, do either of you have a non-biased cite to support that claim?
Obviously, it’s tough to find non-biased sources on this issue. Do you agree with the fact that the site you linked has not only a bias, but should be suspect because it’s disseminating false info on the breast cancer link?
beagledave, if the anti-abortionists can say that one baby’s death from abortion is too many, can’t the pro-abortionists say that one woman’s death from an illegal abortion is too many?
). It does contain quotes from a number of other sources…for example: