Point of evidence:
The comment string on Jeff Shallit's blog Recursivity about a post of mine on the cognitive dissonance of a press story mourning the death of a couple of baby dolphins at the Baltimore aquarium. The dissonance is that the press would never publish a story mourning the deaths of children killed in abortion clinics-- killed by the tens of millions in the U.S..
I had said:
The death of a couple of fish makes the news. We kill a millionBlind to the real issue-- our bizarre silence about millions of aborted kids while we mourn a couple of dead dolphins-- the folks at Shallit's blog found a shiny object:
human calvesbabies each year in abortion clinics. The media response is silence.
Or, more specifically, my use of the word "fish" to describe dolphins, who are really aquatic mammals.
Take a look at the comment string.
The irony of course is that the idiotic comment string makes my point: these imbeciles obsess over trivia, wander off into incoherence and ignore salient reality. My post is about the incongruity of mourning dead dolphins when we don't mourn millions of dead children who we've killed.
Now of course, you could disagree with me that children in the womb are children, or even human. You could disagree with me that there's any incongruity in mourning dolphins while not mourning dead babies. Those issues can be debated.
But the entire comment string at Recursivity is about ... taxonomy, icthology, mind-reading, weighing the soul at death, sexism, and farts.
These people are mad.