17

Let’s Pretend

 

 

 

Science Fiction author John C. Wright, a convert from Atheism to Catholicism, asks an intriguing ongoing question about the March for Life:  the zero coverage it receives:

My question for the reader is this: why can the Morlocks not even admit the size and vehemence of the opposition here?

What is gained by pretending we do not exist?

Or, to ask a more precise question, would not striking the pose that they are opposing such a large and bold movement allow them to portray themselves as heroes, and gain them more?

They cower before the weather, and before the Koch Brothers, which do not threaten them at all, but these marches display the strength of a society that bids fair to abolish abortion in our lifetimes.

The young and highly motivated survivors of the antinatal holocaust are gathering, and they see the economic disaster overpopulation scaremongers have done them, they can see the demographic disaster of Europe.

Why do the Left pretend real threats to their hellish hegemony do not exist, but flaunt in comical excesses of emotion their pantomimes gestures of exaggerated opposition to utterly unreal and imaginary dangers?

Go here to read the rest.  It has always been the conceit of the pro-abort movement that their cause commands overwhelming support and it is only fat evangelical preachers, evil Catholic priests and a few fanatics who oppose them.  The March for Life, with all its hundreds of thousands of marchers, most of them young and female, give the lie to this wishful thinking.  Hence the pretense that they do not exist, rather the same fashion in which the pro-aborts treat the unborn child.  Additionally, do not ever underestimate the sheer hatred that most of the mainstream media has for the pro-life cause.  If coverage will help pro-lifers, coverage will not be given.  Recall how the media had to be shamed into giving any coverage to Kermit Gosnell and his little abortion clinic of horrors.  Pro-aborts like to pretend that most pro-lifers simply do not exist, and if some of them had their way, we would not.  Movements dedicated to solving social problems through mass slaughter tend not to be picky, long term, as to how they deal with adversaries.

Share With Friends
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Donald R. McClarey

Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three and happily married for 35 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.

17 Comments

  1. Is was a sight to behold yesterday and so I want to share one very uplifting observation. There were indeed many young people full of exuberance. There were many of us older folks too. But there was also this—-an abundance of young religious. We saw Hope in action.

  2. Hilaire Belloc famously declared (during the Marconi Scandal) that the power of the Press was to surpress.

  3. I believe that Christ will forsake those responsible for every death of an unborn child.
    .
    And,
    .
    “Post-modern journalism is all about deciding which facts the public should not know because they might reflect poorly on democrats.” Jim Treacher

  4. The liberal press/blogs don’t write about what they don’t agree with, and that which they wish would go away. Contrast with conservative press/blogs writing and writing and writing about pope Francis.

  5. Roe v. Wade defined “who” as a people “We, the people” are in the abortion debate. Legalizing sodomy silenced any complaint. Denying the person of God, Jesus Christ, in every public place removes from “We, the people” any claim on the public place as belonging to “We, the people”. What better way to remove ownership of the public square, or the public domain. “You don’t own this”
    .
    Early on, in his presidency, Obama cut the patent office in half, 50% gone. Then, after eighteen months in the patent office, Obama placed the patents on the internet for any and all countries to read for free, without the inventor’s permission, as though he, Obama, owned the idea: usurpation. The state may regulate businesses, but the citizens own their own businesses. Not any more. By executive order, Bill Clinton usurped all free lands and waterways, making government contracts for grazing land defunct. Remember this: Romneycare was written by Hillary Clinton as Hillarycare. Hillarycare prescribed two years in federal prison for any doctor who treated a patient without her permission. Now that Hillary has grown more powerful than a female tsunami, Hillary is not planning on running out of victims.
    .

  6. Mary De Voe-Keep on keepin’ on; keep the main thing the main thing; and keep the Real Presence present. A slight clarification: Before the US decided to publish pending patent applications, they were kept secret til the day they issued; but many foreign countries already were publishing pending patent applications; and often one still secret in the US got published via foreign publication. When the US decided to do this, much of what was then published was already public. I won’t go into the policy reasons for this, but almost everything that gets filed gets published somewhere in the world via a patent office – not to mention that inventors and companies themselves publish vast amounts of information about what they do and what they have that is new. You are spot on re power people and evil ones defining who and who is not part of “people” -this has a long history; e.g. Jews – subhuman; Dred Scott, his wife and her unborn child and untold numbers of black people-subhumans; in many ways, women-subhumans; WWII Japanese allied POWs-subhuman. The convenient thing about subhumans, they have no human rights. Unborn subhumans who can move, suck their thumbs, have brain waves, have a heartbeat, and have totally unique DNA-subhumans. You can lynch them, gas them, torture them, sell them, abort them. Mary and everyone-have a fullofwonder weekend. Guy McClung, San Antonio [Regis. US Patent Attorney]

  7. Guy McClung and everyone-have a fullofwonder weekend.
    .
    I still will not accept the fact that the submission of one’s inventions to the patent office gives the patent office a free pass to publish one’s intellectual property any more than submitting a script for publication to a publisher gives anyone the right to plagiarize the script. The government “did not build that.”

  8. Why don’t we have a definitive way to verify the number of March for Life participants? If no way exists why not create one?

  9. Mary De Voe, you clearly don’t understand what the purpose of a patent is. It is disclosure in return for a short period of exclusive use. Patent applications have been open for inspection and copying by the public since the US Patent Office first opened. And most US patents of interest have been available for viewing on the Internet long before Obama took office.

  10. Micha Elyi wrote, “It is disclosure in return for a short period of exclusive use.”

    That is plainly right. A patent is the grant of a monopoly, its infringement is actionable and the public are entitled to notice, in the form of a specification, recorded in a public register, of what does and does not constitute such infringement

  11. Micha Elyi: “Patent applications have been open for inspection and copying by the public since the US Patent Office first opened.”
    .
    Michael Paterson-Seymour: “That is plainly right. A patent is the grant of a monopoly, its infringement is actionable and the public are entitled to notice, in the form of a specification, recorded in a public register, of what does and does not constitute such infringement”
    .
    How is infringement prevented if the patent application is posted before the patent is granted a monopoly? Can a lawsuit for infringement be made ex post facto?

  12. Mary de Voe asked, “Can a lawsuit for infringement be made ex post facto?”

    In European Patent Convention countries, protection exists from lodging the application, providing it is subsequently granted. One may obtain an interdict (injunction) during the pendency of the application, including seizure of offending articles, on giving an undertaking in damages, if the patent is subsequently refused.

    Once the patent is granted, damages or an account of profits will run from the date of the application, providing the infringer had notice of it. The statement, “patent pending” and the EPC application number on an article is sufficient notice of the application to make an infringer liable. Of course, it is prudent to give notice to any alleged infringer whom one can identify.

  13. Michael Paterson-Seymour: “In European Patent Convention countries, protection exists from lodging the application, providing it is subsequently granted.”
    .
    This is the heart of the matter. The proof of the date of conception of the invention is the application date for a patent. Infringement in America is predicated on the application date, provided that the patent is granted. In Europe, I understand that infringement is predicated on the date the patent is approved.
    .
    God is good.

  14. Mary de Voe wrote, “In Europe, I understand that infringement is predicated on the date the patent is approved.”
    No, that is not the law. Infringement of a pending patent is actionable, providing (1) the infringer had notice of the application and (2) the patent is ultimately granted. Otherwise, an inventor would not be able to market the article until the grant of the patent, for fear that others could reverse-engineer it.

  15. Michael-Paterson Seymour: Then the patent rules for Europe and America are the same. When the patent is granted, infringement is predicated on the date of application. (???)

Comments are closed.