The Washington Post has a new feature in which they supply blog hits to their online materials. This was done to me twice, the first time in reference to a link to the Judith Miller coverage (I wanted a non-NYT source). My significant -- for me -- number of hits today appeared to come secondhand though ... a good number is via an apparently pro-life/Catholic sort of blog, and well, appreciate it. Links to me are generally good, even if the piece basically disagrees with my arguments.
Many of the blogs that linked to the op ed did seem to like it -- though see here -- and I find that troubling. Now, perhaps, airing out the specious arguments is important, since many supported them. If so, you have to express them so that others can dispute the shoddy reasoning. But, like a firecracker in a crowd causes a reaction, there must be better ways to get the people's attention. The piece was kneejerk to the extreme.
I emailed the blog that appears to be the source of many of the hits and the blog mistress sent a nice reply. I don't really agree with it, but that's okay. A major sentiment is that abortion rights supporters fail to admit what they are asking for. In effect, they want to defend "killing," but do not want to say so. In particular, killing "human beings," but the first issue apparently particularly struck home.
As with one person in the comments (abortion will get you some, try it someday on a message board), this seemed to me to underestimate the public. The public, though I don't like their actions sometimes (but I'm a member of the public ... well, I don't like my actions sometimes too), is smarter than some give them credit for. They know what "abortion" means. They just do not fully agree that "abortion" is akin to "killing," a word that has certain connotations (as does "baby" by the way).
A strict definition would apply it to any number of cases (such as euthanasia, execution, self defense) in which we do not quite consider "killing." You know, in the "thou shall not kill" (though the translation some say is better put as "murder") sense. So, we use different terminology. Yes, in some cases ("beef" over "cow"), we do so to hide things. But, also we do so as a shorthand for complex nuances that we surely do understand, but often do not just come out and say.
Thus, the population as a whole -- not just the proverbial "reproductive rights" crowd -- says "abortion" and not "killing baby." As one can see, there are important issues here. Let us discuss them ... tossing in personal experiences. Just not in the crummy way of the original editorial.
I wonder if any of the visitors will come back, lol. I'll leave the light on for ya.