visit online pharmacy and buy norvasc online, after that buy cheap wellbutrin online no prescription, and cheapest valtrex no prescription. Get your discount in pharmacy when buy arimidex online, and buy lasix without prescription. Make sure your are secure when you buy neurontin online without prescription, and buying cheap retin-a no prescription online. Best place to order flagyl online without prescription, and order cheap zovirax online no prescription, and order cheap zovirax no prescription. Go to the best pharmacy online to buy baclofen online, and purchase clomid online with no prescription, and buy diflucan without a prescription online, and purchase with no prescription premarin 15 mg online. Get a discount when buy doxycycline online no prescription, and buy cheap acyclovir online no prescription
Square Zero

But Who Are We Replacing?

Posted by Eric (March 31, 2008 at 1:30 pm)

The ReplacementsLast September this blog picked up an incoming link from the blog of  a woman named Alex Remy. In her post, “Reoccurring [sic] nightmare: I am pregnant and cannot find an abortion clinic”, she laments that pro-choicers—unlike pro-lifers—don’t do enough to make their case.

She’s right. Pro-choicers don’t do enough to make their case. But Remy misses the reason why: when it comes right down to it, it’s hard to make a good case for killing unborn babies. That’s why so often pro-choicers prefer to demonize pro-lifers.

That’s exactly what Remy does, and that’s where she links to this blog. She complains about “anti-abortion advocates, who frequently produce far beyond the replacement rate”, and links to my bio page, which mentions my eight children.

To be fair, Remy does try to present the pro-choice case. The problem is she keeps slipping into attacks on pro-lifers. The quote above is from a section on adoption, in which Remy begins by noting the problems of the adoption process (some valid points), then makes the strange claim that not that many people are willing to adopt (false) and finally resorts to criticizing my reproductive choices.

And as if that were not ironic enough from this advocate of “reproductive choice”, it turns out that Remy, too, is guilty of making reproductive decisions without regard to the “replacement rate” (said to be 2.1 children in the industrialized world). She boasts that she and her husband are “child-free”.

What’s more, Remy’s blog is called “writing evolution”, and she has another blog featuring her graphic art (she’s quite good) called “creative evolutions”. But evolution is all about passing on traits to the next generation. Remy is determined not to pass any of her traits on to the next generation, going so far as to declare that should be become pregnant, she would “immediately” seek an abortion.

SarahSo it turns out this “child free” couple are effectively being replaced my 2.1 of my kids. And after the 2.1 needed to replace April and me, we’ve still got enough children left to replace another 3.8 pro-choicers. Nice.

This entry is filed under Culture & Society, Family, Pro-Life. You can follow responses through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

13 Responses to “But Who Are We Replacing?”

  1. Annie says:

    What a super cute picture of Sarah!

    Comment posted March 31st, 2008 at 4:09 pm
  2. Karen says:

    Hey Eric, good to see you!

    How honored you must feel. I would if I were you. 😀

    Comment posted March 31st, 2008 at 4:31 pm
  3. Karen says:

    Wanted to add: we ought to also be very happy that they AREN’T replacing themselves– and that we are.

    Comment posted March 31st, 2008 at 4:33 pm
  4. Brian says:

    I’ve been thinking about demographics lately so it was nice to stumble over here. Secularists have a tough time reproducing, which is why you see Europe dying a sad slow death. My secular friends have no kids. This is a sad, sad thing for our country because they (and many like them) are extremely intelligent, overly educated, and good people. It’s ironic that those best equipped to support children are often those most reluctant to have children. But if your purpose in life is your self-satisfaction, it appears more fulfilling to be free to be able to go out every Friday and Saturday with no responsibilities. Of course, when you’re fifty and alone, you’ll live with that choice.

    Comment posted April 2nd, 2008 at 11:27 pm
  5. John Bowden says:

    and what a beautiful family!

    Comment posted April 3rd, 2008 at 9:40 pm
  6. Eric says:

    Annie, Karen, Brian and John—

    Thanks for your comments.

    Annie: Sarah gets cuter every day. I swear she’s starting to say “hi” to me!

    Karen: I am indeed pleased to find the pro-choice crowd so troubled by the bounty of our family.

    Brian: Turns out “those best equipped to support children” are not those blessed with material wealth—for many of whom that blessing becomes a curse.

    John: Thanks! We have a lot of fun together. My kids are some of the coolest people I’ve ever met.

    Comment posted April 4th, 2008 at 9:26 am
  7. Brian says:

    I knew that I could have phrased that sentence better . . . “It’s ironic that those OSTENSIBLY best equipped to support children are often those most reluctant to have children.”

    Comment posted April 4th, 2008 at 10:13 am
  8. Lawrence Leach (In Gods Image) says:

    You can find information and Fr. Frank Pavone’s You Tube Video, on Abortion, You can also find Silent no More, and other Pro-life Ministries there on our Myspace Site.
    Thank you for all you do for Pro-life. These are some links to our music on the Internet.
    http://www.cdbaby.com/InGodsimage
    Audio Lunchbox
    FaithMP3
    Apple iTunes
    BuyMusic
    QtrNote
    GreatIndieMusic
    PayPlay
    GroupieTunes

    Remember All Life is Precious, Born & Unborn!!

    Lawrence & DianeMarie Leach (In God’s Image)
    Go to our http://www.myspace.com/InGodsimagemusic
    or our http://www.soundclick.com/InGodsimage
    or our http://www.shoutlife.com/InGodsimagemusic
    Websites and click on button for the Word of Promise Bible,
    and support our music ministry.

    Comment posted May 15th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
  9. Cure of Ars says:

    Only way that pro-abortion people can make their case is by playing with the meaning of words and this only works on a superficial level. Throwing the word “choice” around when women usually only have abortions is when they feel like they don’t have a choice doesn’t cut it. With ultrasound, the psychological damage abortion does to women, and pro-life people having more children, abortions days are numbered.

    Comment posted May 30th, 2008 at 9:07 am
  10. Alex Remy says:

    Eric,

    I am happy to see you got a chance to visit my website, and I’m gratified to learn that you enjoyed my art. A few points regarding this post:

    1. As my “about” page states, I am not a radical feminist. I understand you have since amended this word choice, but my technorati page shows the original context, so I wanted to make that point transparent.

    2. You dismissed my criticism that most parents are unwilling to adopt. Am I correct to assume, then, that your eight children are adopted?

    3. If this is not the case, it appears your children are a surplus in an already overpopulated world. With thousands upon thousands of children living in tragic foster care conditions, waiting to be adopted, the decision to have large families in the modern climate is beyond irresponsible. My sympathies lie with those children who have been born, only to be discarded.

    I understand you do not respect my life choices, and I assure you, the sentiment is reciprocated. You believe my decision not to have children is selfish. However, I know it is a wise choice, made by a loving couple who seeks to improve the world in ways that do not involve straining it’s fast diminishing resources.

    And on that note, we must agree to staunchly disagree.

    Comment posted June 19th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
  11. Eric says:

    Alex—Thanks for dropping by.

    Sorry about the “radical feminist” thing. You do call yourself a feminist, and from where I’m sitting your views are pretty radical, but I don’t see where it helps to use polarizing language like that.

    On adoption—what a breathtaking non sequitur! I dispute the notion that there are insufficient numbers of adoptive parents, and it follows that my eight children must have been adopted?

    I suppose it’s pretty clear from the photo that my kids are not adopted. But what’s it to you?

    That’s my point: you claim to advocate reproductive freedom of choice, and clearly resent any criticism of your own choices in that regard—yet feel free to characterize my reproductive choices as “beyond irresponsible”.

    That sounds just a little bit hypocritical to me.

    Nor did I say anything about your decision not to have children being “selfish”. I did say that you’ve made that decision without regard to the “replacement rate”—the criterion upon which you based your original criticism of my family size.

    As to the world’s “fast diminishing resources”—and the inferences you draw about how this impacts needy children—check out Jeff Jacoby’s column in the Boston Globe earlier this week.

    Comment posted June 20th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
  12. Father Joe says:

    You have beautiful children. They are a wonderful testimony of love and the sanctity of life. God bless!

    Comment posted August 17th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
  13. Lexington Green says:

    Great photo.

    Comment posted September 4th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
hd teen porn
bahis siteleri