Chick Dissection | Baby Talk

A teenager learns abortion is murder and Jesus is the only solution.

In other words, pray for a miscarriage!


Nothing draws in potential readers like putting a nightmarish, one-armed, half-torsoed baby with a wailing, adult-sized head on the cover of your comic.

You know, that’s a pretty useful idea — a car that shouts “Stop hitting me!

Fun fact: People who care about the environment are absurdly filthy, lazy, heathen retards with no consideration for their poor dear mothers or anyone but themselves.

Looks like she gets her jewelry at Au Bon Pain.

The guy’s mouth looks like “The Muppet that Ate Stonehenge”. And what’s with the white stuff all over his jacket? Either he was helping the Ghostbusters battle Stay-Puft, or he… on second thought, I don’t want to know.

Her “darlings” appear to be some ridiculous bone-munching kid who belongs in a zoo, a mustachioed kid who belongs in Zoolander, and a stereotypical Native American boy. Take a good, long look because aside from a brief appearance where a couple peer out from behind a couch, we will never see these children again in the rest of the Tract.

She’s gasping so hard, she inhaled her thumb and detonated her left ear.

Well, what the hell do you expect, naming him “Billy Bob”?

By the way, this is the last time we’ll be seeing him as well. Not sure why Jack decided to put these people in at all, since they have negligible bearing on the plot of this Tract as a whole. I guess maybe he found himself with a couple extra panels and figured he’d lash out arbitrarily at environmentalists by depicting them as goofy, ridiculously retarded, grunting fucksticks.

Yay, it’s Fang! The only thing to ever really like about a Chick Tract. What the hell is he growling at, though? Wait, it looks like… Why is there a mouse in blackface peering out from a hole in the corner of the couch?

Thelma didn’t have a hunchback a couple panels ago. Maybe when she eats, she gets a fatty hump on her back, sort of like a camel. Or maybe she’s farting so hard it’s blasting her skirt out in a huge funnel shape behind her, which could explain why the cat’s so pissed.

I can’t! I have to eat this whole tambourine before Eric shows up. Oop — my head is twisting off and rolling down my shoulder again.”

HAW HAW IRONY! This guy from this family calling Eric a bum!

Goodbye, family! We won’t see any of you but Thelma again!

Wait… is mom Jane Hathaway?

Ah, I can see what she sees in Eric, with his devil-may-care, no-helmet attitude… his beady eyes cushioned in middle-aged-looking bags hanging like droopy, raw eggs in his eye sockets… his fishy lips pulled into a permanently disgusted snarl…

UH-OH! CONDOMS! Rubber sheaths stretched over penises are EVIL.

You’re going to vomit again? What a coincidence — so am I! Are you reading a Chick Tract, too?

Parts of images that are most often lovingly detailed and realistically crafted in Chick Tracts: Toilets and gay men’s muscles. I’m not sure what conclusion to draw from this.

The girl in the second panel isn’t actually talking, she’s just really good at tonguing the massive groove in her teeth in such a way as to produce a range of sounds that resemble English.

You know, why the hell is she even necessary? This is the seventh character to which we’ve needlessly been briefly introduced who we will never see again.

“Don’t forget to pick up your condoms. You guys left them all over the floor after the last class, and the janitor refused to clean them up.”

Bahahahaha, erm, uh… you can’t be fucking serious. We’ve had a condom break, and, uh, it’s not the kind of thing a person can be oblivious to without, oh, say, missing a few chromosomes, having part of a fence lodged in one’s head, having a grenade go off in one’s sinus cavity, having a fishnet stocking enveloping one’s brain due to some kind of neurosurgery mishap… you see where I’m going with this. Anyway, point is, when a condom slips or breaks, you fucking know about it. This is a ridiculous presumption, that a woman wouldn’t notice chunks of rubber or a dislodged condom in her vagina. Though, I guess it kind of makes sense in the conservative Christian perspective, where women are supposed to just lay back and not question the penises and other things going in and out of their various orifices.

Oh, and when the condom does break or slip, you rush out to your nearest drug store (~$40) or Planned Parenthood (free) and get yourself some Plan B. Often mischaracterized by conservative Christians as “an abortion pill” or “the devil”, Plan B is merely something close to a triple dose of the birth control pill. It works to prevent ovulation, fertilization, or post-fertilization implantation. (No, for those who hold this belief, life does not begin at fertilization. Either pick up a reproductive biology textbook sometime, or demonstrate how much you really care about this arbitrary definition of “human life” as “a cell with human DNA in it that could potentially become a blastocyst, embryo, fetus, then baby” by going into perpetual mourning for the loss of all the fertilized eggs that naturally never implant.)

Oh, this is a great shot — blurry smudges from outside an obviously less than transparent window. Sometimes I think I spend more time mocking these goddamned things than he does actually drawing them.

What never ceases to amaze me is the fundamentalist ability to take every opposing argument and alter it to make it seem incredibly arbitrary and oversimplified.

Look how she’s drawn — she MUST be a villain. Chick can never make his antagonists normal- or innocent-looking people, because he can only make his argument through visually vilifying and demonizing people with perspectives that oppose or conflict with his own.

*gasp* Not tell her parents? But that body doesn’t belong to her, it belongs to them! That’s why daddy can fuck her whenever he wants — that vagina is technically his until she turns eighteen. (They also use her hair to strain pasta, her teeth to open bottles, and her armpits to ripen various cheeses.)

Er, uh… how would she be ruining his life? I thought she was getting an abortion. “Ew, temporary tattoo of a unicorn? I hate unicorns. It’s over!”

That’s not God up there, Ashley, that’s just a cat somehow levitating above your face. And he ain’t helpin’ shit.

By the way, either this is some kind of alternate universe where the girl from Bewitched? somehow never got hooked on drugs, or 80% of all “unsaved” teenage girls in Chick’s universe have black hair, the same face shape, and are named Ashley.

Eric went to the dentist once and the Novocain never wore off. Or maybe through some surgical mishap, doctors inadvertently installed an active goat anus inside Eric’s nasal cavity, and that’s a smell you never get used to.

LYING PROPAGANDA, YOU SAY!? Unlike Chick Tracts, right?

So “it’s not a kid yet” stated about a two-month-old development of what’s basically a roughly human-formed clump is an inaccurate statement because…?

“It’s time you heard the truth. Or, well, the fundamentalist interpretation of what’s going on around us. See, much like what we do with the Bible, where we focus nearly exclusively on a select number of excerpts and interpret them in whatever way reinforces our existing prejudices and preconceptions, we do the same thing with reality, rejecting the majority of our sensory input and information from the observable world and interpreting the information we do receive in whatever way reinforces our existing prejudices and preconceptions. Anyway, come on, let’s go listen to that.”

When I was in middle school, I once had a doctor — not our usual doctor — look down my throat and my sister’s throat and then tell my mom we didn’t have strep throat because he couldn’t see any white spots. When we were able to get to our regular doctor, he said he’d never heard of a doctor who could diagnose strep throat by sight only. It turns out my sister actually had it. Another doctor in the area told a kid from my school he “just had a stomachache”. A few days later, the kid’s appendix ruptured and he had to have emergency surgery. I’m not sure simply being a doctor necessarily somehow automatically makes a person an expert on all parts and functions of the human body. Especially when, I mean, is this guy even an OB/GYN, or is he just a general practitioner?

In any event, it might be living, but it’s not a “baby”. Until the eighth week it’s an embryo; after that, until birth, it’s a fetus. When it comes out, it’s a baby. It may seem like it’s just a semantics argument, but in this particular situation in this Tract, this is what is inside Ashley’s body. Compare that to this. Call me crazy, but it seems like there are a few subtle differences. I mean, if you’re really up for re-enacting Eraserhead, I guess you can consider what’s in the first image a “baby”, but…

Does nobody in this fucking town have windows made of transparent glass?

“As a medical professional,” huh? Certainly not as a rational, intelligent human being, apparently. “Well, you’re two teenagers, at least one of you has an extremely dysfunctional family, you’re both so mind-searingly stupid and oblivious that you didn’t notice a condom breaking during sex so I doubt either of you will ever get a job that doesn’t involve a paper hat, your combined checking and savings — if you’ve ever even been to a bank, let alone opened an account — probably add up to less than what I paid for my heating bill last month, and neither of you has health insurance, but I have to tell you the truth: Not having this baby would be one of the biggest mistakes you two could make.”

You know, anencephalic babies are technically “living [babies]”, as well. That doesn’t mean they’re human just because they’re roughly human-shaped and can piss and move around and process nervous sensation. Fetal pigs can piss and move around and process nervous sensation, too.

It’s a good thing Jeremiah wasn’t miscarried, then, isn’t it? If God wanted every single conception to result in a baby, there’d either be no such thing as miscarriage, or it’d be something that happens much more rarely than it does. And, you know, either God knows everything that’s going to happen or he doesn’t, make up your fucking minds already. Is God omnipotent or isn’t he? Is he so incompetent that he’s going to pre-ordain prophets who’ll ultimately be aborted or miscarried?

“But don’t worry, kid — she’s still in her first trimester. There’s a thirty percent chance she’ll miscarry it anyway. Pray for that. It’s not an abortion if God does it!”

That’s another thing, why are we equating something that happens naturally and rather often with murder? And what about if a woman accidentally, say, handles prescription medication or other materials that can cause pregnancy complications and she ends up miscarrying? Is that the equivalent of manslaughter? If you didn’t know you were pregnant and taking folic acid would’ve prevented your miscarriage, is that negligent homicide?

What??? Me? Responsible for murder? Why, that lightly dishevels my hair and makes me drip two beads of sweat while gently massaging my cheek!

“Doctor Harris was right on target, Eric. I mean, not with any of the reproductive biology stuff, but when he shot that deer when we were driving him back to his place.”

“I’ve changed into my referee outfit, and am going to read to you from the professional football rulebook.”

You have to have some level of suspicion about a guy who considers lying and murder equal. Especially when the punishment is the same infinitely overblown “eternal torture” for both. “What’s that? You shot three people in the face for no reason? Hell for you. *toss* Next! Says here you told your wife she wasn’t fat when she asked. Do you see that? That’s a cankle. Goodbye. *toss* Next! Bullshit, you didn’t actually like that sweater your aunt got you. *plunk* Next!”

“Hey, you’re SCARING me, Uncle Mike! You’re starting to look like a smug, drowsy Hitler in glasses! And you punched me in the face and gave me two black eyes!”

Eric looks like he’s aged about a decade in the last two panels. Thankfully he’s still got that disgusted look we’ve all grown to love!

“He doesn’t want you to go there, Eric. Sure, he made it the default for your afterlife, and sure, he’s omnipotent, and could just not punish you for the rest of time, and sure, maybe his instructions are vague and contradictory and he’s never really done anything to correct this, but really, he doesn’t want you to go to hell when you die.”

Uncle Mike might want to look into a house jack, before the entire thing collapses to the left.

Yeah, Jesus was a white guy. Everyone in the Middle East was white. You know, I think believing Jesus was white automatically disqualifies anything a Christian has to say about religion. Next time you’re arguing with a fundamentalist, ask them, “what color was Jesus?” If they say “white”, hit them hard with a rolled-up newspaper and then ignore everything else they have to say.

I’d like to say more about this panel, but the first half is just another goddamned translucent window, and the second half is just a bunch of people standing around with typical Chick boilerplate.

Oh come on, Jack — does the Bible really have all these little parenthetical annotations? Thing reads like the kids’ “trying to be funny” rendition of Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer:

o/` Jesus the bearded prophet / Claimed to be the son of God (up in heaven!)
And if you don’t accept him / You’ll be raped with hot, forked rods (down in hell!)
All of the Jewish people / Used to laugh and call him names (like “impostor”!)
They never let poor Jesus / Join in any Jewish games (like Scrabble!)
Then one foggy Easter eve, Romans came to say… (rabble rabble rabble)
“Jesus, you’re a fraud downright / You’ll ride on this cross tonight!”
Now people claim to love him / But they’re all led easily (duh-whee!)
Jesus the bearded prophet / Your fans twisted your legacy!

…sorry. This panel never leaves me much to work with.

“HOMPH HOMF OH UNCLE MIKE HOMPH I FOUND THIS CANDY EMBEDDED IN YOUR CARPET HOMPH HURMPH GLOMF DELICIOUS HURMPH JUJUBE HOMPH”

Well, if he didn’t notice the absence of a complete, semen-filled condom on his penis after pulling out, I don’t doubt he’d be easily convinced to buy any story anyone randomly told him.

Damn, that’s one smug prick.

So somehow he just telepathically knows “how God wants him to live”?

Hey, this is exactly what this Tract was in need of: More shrill disgust! Thank you, Jack.

I hope he never sees the sudden curve ’til it’s way too late.

If prayer has such an actual effect in reality, then, uh, why does abortion still happen? Why doesn’t everyone get a flat tire on the way to the abortion clinic? This is just silly. I wonder how many people are actually lured into conservative Christianity by the implication they’ll be given magical powers to manipulate reality through the power of God.

If she doesn’t want to do it, then why doesn’t she just fucking SAY she doesn’t want to do it? Why can’t it be that Ashley actually wants to have an abortion? “Pro-choice” means that it’s just as wrong to force people to have an abortion as it is to force people to not have an abortion. Why is Jack arguing against something that proponents of reproductive choice already agree is a bad thing?

@!!!**!

Wait, so she’s not getting the abortion, and the two main characters are getting saved? Never saw that coming.

So basically, a guy who at first wants his girlfriend to get an abortion changes his mind and prevents his girlfriend from having an abortion imposed on her against her own will. I don’t… what? This is actually more pro-choice than anti-abortion. If Ashley never wanted to have an abortion in the first place… I… I don’t… understand what Chick was trying to… And what was with the first few panels of this Tract? Billy Bob and his girlfriend’s “little darlings” that never fucking show up again, the girlfriend only being needlessly used as a plot device later in the story? It’s… I don’t… just… GODDAMN is this FUCKING STUPID.

@!!!**!

“You will always be second in my heart to this rather cruel, vindictive, petty person someone once convinced me existed and was the son of God, who will burn me for the rest of time if I don’t believe in him. And I’ll strap you in your car seat and roll the car into a lake if he tells me to.”

One year later, she has a two year old with a full head of hair?

– Ah, I see, so it’s perfectly okay to have an abortion, then, as long as you accept Jesus immediately afterward. What are fundamentalists so uppity about? If the whole point is to save people’s souls, not do anything to contribute to their lives, then why not let people have abortions and then accept Jesus afterward? The fetuses go to heaven, and the mothers go to heaven, then, too, right? Everyone wins!

– It’ll look kind of like a shrimp and will writhe around involuntarily on the floor incapable of any kind of thought, but yeah… your “baby” will be there.

– Bullshit.

– So basically, do whatever the hell you want to in life, even if it conflicts with conservative Christianity, accept Jesus right before you die, and you’ll go to heaven regardless.


The Only Moral Abortion is My Abortion

I couldn’t really figure out where to work this in above, since this Tract was so ridiculous and confusing and disjointed and probably Jack’s worst attempt at coherently flowing narrative to date, but it’s definitely something people should read. It’s rather amazing how hypocritical and self-centered fundamentalists can be, and how even when they’re given personal firsthand insight into the circumstances and contexts of the things they’re protesting, they’re capable of such intense cognitive dissonance that their situation is “moral” while the same situation for anyone else is somehow still “immoral”.

Why we let these obviously mentally fractured people who are so out of touch with reality it borders on schizophrenia have any say in governance of people as a whole, let alone the massive influence and mainstream airtime they already receive, is beyond my comprehension. America, home of the PFFF JESUS SPOKE THROUGH MY TOASTER AND TOLD ME TO HATE GAYS AND BEAT MY DAUGHTER FOR HAVING SEX

77 thoughts on “Chick Dissection | Baby Talk”

  1. (how conspiracies theories like Chick’s Catholic scares get started)

    “Dr. HARRIS was right on target ERIC”. -panel 13

    Harris Eric
    Switch it around and you’ve got
    Eric Harris

    A bit of a nitpick, and since this was written in 1994 I suppose it doesn’t mean anything. Or does it? Was Jack Chick predicting the future? HE MUST HAVE BEEN! OH HE MUST BE THE LEADER OF SOME SUPER SINISTER ORGINISATION BENT ON WORLD DOMINATION AND HE WAS COMMUNICATING WITH UNDERCOVER NEO-NAZIS TO…AND THEY…BUT THE BOMB ISN’T RUSSIAN…THE GRAYS AND THE RATHILLELIANS WILL INVADE EARTH…

  2. You know, Unitarians, atheists, agnostics, et al need to rally together in some kind of anti-religious lunacy party, because the religious lunatic demographic is the most active of all demographics, which is really bad.

    Also, I find it fascinating that religious lunatic candidates tend to hate foreigners, when there are overwhelming amounts of religious lunatics who are illegal immigrants (Korea, for example, has TONS of crazy Christians, and their presence is felt in New Jersey in particular). The whole movement is so riddled with contradiction it makes any sensible human being feel ill.

    Anyway. The Anti-Zealot Party. Stranger parties have certainly been made.

  3. “…don’t let anyone tell you that it is just some tissue***…”

    *** ISA 44:24

    Yeah, like the bible is actually going to have an accurate description of the development of a human in the womb, just like it knew that the Earth revolved around the Sun

    Anyone know what ISA 44:24 actually says?

  4. Isaiah 44:24:

    “Thus saith the Lord thy Redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself.”

    This could mean pretty much anything. I suppose Chick intended the “formed thee from the womb” reference to support his view that an embryo is a person, but if this is the best Biblical reference he could come up with for that purpose, it’s not very impressive. In fact, the use of the preposition “from” could be taken as implying that a person is “formed” by the act of removal from the womb, that is, birth.

    However, I do not know ancient Hebrew, so I can’t comment on the original version of the text, which would be the only legitimate way of assessing it. Neither, I suspect, can most American fundamentalists.

  5. ISA 44:24 says:
    Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

  6. “Hey you’re SCARING me, Uncle mike!”
    “That’s THE WHOLE POINT, Eric! You’ve just proved that I’m doing it right!”

  7. ISA 44:24 ” 24 “This is what the LORD says—
    your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb:
    I am the LORD,
    who has made all things,
    who alone stretched out the heavens,
    who spread out the earth by myself,”

    So by this it really wasn’t Eric who knocked up Ashley, It was god.

  8. This is beyond words.

    Although it does remind me of a story I heard about my friend’s cousin who became a father at 14 and it did save his life (because he figured he couldn’t be a druggie and a father simultaneously). True story. But, of course, that’s usually not what happens in those situations.

    Oh, and I love how Jesus comes along and evidently personally takes interest in saving the life of a fetus while there is genocide going on by the day. What a happy, positive view of the world: if you’re a blob of cells, Jesus will do whatever it takes to save you as long as someone prays. If you’re starving and being raped and your people are being killed, tough titties.

    @Rarend: I’m going to have Jack Chick conspiracy nightmares because of you. Thanks a lot.

  9. Is that the equivalent of manslaughter? If you didn’t know you were pregnant and taking folic acid would’ve prevented your miscarriage, is that negligent homicide?

    Actually, horrifyingly enough, there’s some precedent for stuff like this. Susan Faludi outlines some of the atrocious invasions of women’s privacy and bodily sovereignty in the eighties. Stuff like women having their children taken away or even being jailed for things like having sex while pregnant, not taking vitamins, eating junk food, etc.

    It’s not a long stretch from there to jailing women for negligient BAY-BEEEEE-cide. Or BAAAAYBEEEEEslaughter.

  10. That Crazy Guy redux! I don’t get why Chick has to make so many slight variations on the same theme. I suppose it’s because this is an anti-abortion tract, that’s what makes it different.

    I seriously thought that was an obese middle-aged woman with a frumpy dress on the cover.

    The teacher’s nose is dangerously sharp.

    I think the panel with the “What is this gift, Uncle Mike?” conversation can get the same treatment as “That’s Jesus?” in that crazy guy, especially since you can’t see them through the opaque window.

    It’s particularly interesting that, considering this
    Ashley is two months along in pregnancy, a year later her baby should be equivalent to a five month old.

    Sorry, I should have commented earlier, but I was busy chatting and flirting with a gay Jew.

  11. I remember somewhere in the bible (OT I think) that killing a man accidentally was punishable by death, but making a woman miscarry was treated like property damage.

    Wait a minute,a fetus doesn’t have a cns or even brain stem function until late second early 3rd trimester

    Wait again. . .I thought actions didn’t matter. . .just jesus. . .repent. . .salvation *head explodes*

  12. Why do you think so many people recant on their deathbed?
    Basically, christianity seems to boil down to “Say your sorry and that God/Jesus are great, and you’ll go to heaven”.

  13. Wonderfully entertaining as always! My favorite lines:

    “Parts of images that are most often lovingly detailed and realistically crafted in Chick Tracts: Toilets and gay men’s muscles. I’m not sure what conclusion to draw from this.”

    “Sometimes I think I spend more time mocking these goddamned things than he does actually drawing them.”

  14. Y’know, I think this all stemmed from a misunderstanding. Eric assumed the guy he was talking to was a ‘doctor’ because he was wearing a white coat and a stethoscope. Considering the evidence, I think it’s infinitely more probable that he’s actually some mentally ill homeless guy who just stole said pieces of equipment from the hospital where he woke up after his last meth overdose.

    But of course Eric, like all Jack Chick characters, lacks the capacity for rational analysis of himself and others, leading he and Ashley to have a shitling to call their very own. Comes complete with his own gaping maw!

  15. It’s about time! You sure now how to keep a guy waiting. Bloody brilliant as always; keep it up.
    Gotta admit, I was a bit more serious when i read this one, because it is a sensitive issue.

    I just realised something. When Doctor McChristian boasts “ultrasound scans have proven it!”, it didnt make sense. I mean, Ashley finds out she’s pregnant “two months later”.

    The Doctor says, 24 hrs later, that the baby is well enough developed to be a living thing. Doc’s saying that an 8 week old baby is developed enough to have a brain.

    But at 2 months, the baby is a 16 cell ball-it doesn’t have anything AT ALL resembling a human’s bdy part. Clearly Jack Chickenshit knows nothing about Biology.

    If you want my 2 cents, I think the cutoff point is fist trimester. A week or two after, maybe.

    BTW, does ‘partial-birth abortion’ actually happen in the US?

    Keep the tracts going lolz

  16. @Aisha: Exodus 21:22
    If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

    On an unrelated note: Did you hear that a Komodo dragon gave a virgin birth (well, hatching) close to Christmas 2006? Seems that Raptor Jesus shall redeem us all…
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komodo_dragon#Parthenogenesis

  17. Get eleven more of those two-month-old “babies” and some dip, and you’d have a great shrimp platter.

  18. Nah, the aborted foetuses (foeti? foetae?) don’t go to Heaven. They go to Hell, but they can’t feel any pain, so they won’t even notice their noses being ripped off. They grow till they look about five years old and go skipping merrily through the burning sands, befriending giant green bunnies and sapient fedoras.

    Virtual cookies for webcomic readers who get that.

    My own personal cutoff point for an abortion would be when the foetus (not baby, gotta remember semantic difference) was developed enough to feel pain, because that’s kinda … ick. I wouldn’t be comfortable with that. But that’s just me. I’d say it’s best to avoid abortion whenever possible simply because it’s an unpleasant procedure, but if the mother really couldn’t deal with a baby or the embryo’s carrying some horrible genetic defect, I’d say it’s a smart move.

    Huh. Would fundies or other pro-life groups agree to abort a foetus proven to be the Antichrist? Or would they have to let it be born and let it grow up under heavy guard all its life, because if they aborted it someone else would end up carrying the next Antichrist and they might be somewhere they couldn’t get an abortion?

    And why do I know I’ll be stuck thinking about that all through tomorrow when I’m supposed to be studying for an exam? Dammit.

  19. If anyone is interested, this website offers a view of what a
    embryo/fetus looks like in the first stages of pregnancy.www.wprc.org/parenting/fetal-development/first-trimester/
    Jack once again fails to make a point. He says not to have abortions yet he says “Whether you’ve had an abortion or not, receive Jesus Christ as your savior” So basically, you can have an abortion, accept Jesus Christ as your savior and you still go to heaven?

    And, does God cause flat tires in order to stop abortions? I’m not pregnant but my check engine light is on. What do
    you think this means? Anyone?

    Comment by Crane reminds me of the old joke….why do you see so many old people reading the bible? They’re cramming for finals.

  20. The baby/fetus distinction is one which people like to make in these discussions, but I think is ultimately a red herring. From the general dictionary perspective, *any* offspring can be a ‘baby’–I’m still my mother’s baby, even though I’m an adult with a baby of my own. My baby is still my baby, even though it hasn’t been born yet. Etc. From a *medical* perspective, of course, using the term ‘baby’ in this way is useless. If I call a doctor and say “I think there’s a problem with my baby,” the doctor does not want to sit there guessing whether I mean a 5 month fetus or a 24 yr old adult. So we have zygote and embryo and fetus and neonate and baby/infant and toddler and child and pre-teen and teenagers and adult and middle-aged and senior citizen and really old. These are all developmentally different stages of life. A fetus is developmentally different from a baby, and vice versa.

    But the thing is… as fun as it is to argue semantics, the abortion debate doesn’t hinge at *all* on whether or not the kid is a fetus or a baby or whatever. We can use ‘baby’ or ‘fetus’ until we’re blue in the face trying to make *emotional* arguments to sway each other, but from a logical standpoint, that’s all irrelevant. I may see my fetus as a baby, but I’m still fully willing to abort it if necessary, because I don’t see enforcing my bodily sovereignty as murder, I see it as a fundamental right.

    But Jack can’t talk about things like fundamental rights to bodily sovereignty, because then he’d realize that just because someone believes that it’s acceptable to abort a fetus doesn’t mean they’re going to go around forcing other people to abort fetuses. And that would just fuck over the entire strip.

  21. Felis wrote:

    But at 2 months, the baby is a 16 cell ball-it doesn’t have anything AT ALL resembling a human’s bdy part. Clearly Jack Chickenshit knows nothing about Biology.

    Neither do you. We’ve been linking to and discussing what status an embryo has at that point, and it’s not a blastocyst (cell cluster). It’s a blastocyst after about 2 days.

    But, as little_e- says above, that’s irrelevent, because it’s about controlling your own life, and in many cases men have a less valid say in the laws. And as Jabberwock says, it’s also about not investigating every miscarriage. Also, check out the link at the bottom to matters of pro-life women who don’t even realize they’re pro-choice – their OWN choice, of course.

  22. I totally agree with little e- and Janet in that the stages of the developing embryo are irrelevant. Felis seemed to have a bit of misinformation on the developmental stages so I suggested the website. Some folks put great value on this in their individual arguments against abortion.

    The thing that is most important is
    the individual’s decision and their circumstances surrounding
    this decision. What they decide is no one’s business and should be decided by the individual and not dictated by a
    bunch of lawmakers who don’t have a clue or a bunch of scripture thumpers who feel it is their mission to save the
    world.

  23. We were debating abortion in class the other day, and the general consensus was that it should be the mother’s choice and the mother’s choice alone whether or not to abort the baby. Our teacher, playing devils advocate, brought in a situation where the woman who is having a baby doesn’t want to abort it, while the man who impregnated her does want her to undergo an abortion. The woman, however, doesn’t get an abortion and now wants the man to support her child financially and takes legal action. Should the man have had any say in her abortion? Can a situation occur where an outside party should have the ability to make the decision for the woman?

    We were also discussing the cutoff points, and our stances were pretty varied. Most of the students (there are seven in our class) had the cutoff point somewhere between the first trimester and when a baby first looks somewhat like a baby. I, however, to the disgust of my fellow students, stated that the cutoff point should be when the baby is born. The rest of the class couldn’t imagine killing a baby that was 9 months old and ready to be born, but I posed the question “would that really happen?”

    How many times do you think some woman would be 9 months pregnant, start going into labor and being all like “Whoops! Sorry! Forgot to get that abortion! Better get one right away!”

    At this point, there are better options (adoption, surgery, etc).

    As Jabberwock once pointed out: It’s not always the raising a child that cannot be handled by the woman, pregnancy is not an easy thing to deal with. But if a woman has already (basically) finished with pregnancy, there is no reason to have an abortion.

  24. Jon: the problem of unwanted fatherhood is, IMO, irrelevant to the issue of abortion. Abortion doesn’t exist to rid mothers of the burdensome task of raising children. It exists to end unwanted pregnancies. *Adoption* exists to solve the problem of unwanted children.

    I speak from the perspective of a person whose biological father did not want to raise her and signed away his parental rights when she was an infant. I was later adopted by my stepfather. Men (and women) already have the legal option to get rid of unwanted children. Men do not have the legal option to get rid of pregnancies because… men do not get pregnant. (unless they’re abortion doctors. But you know what I mean.)

    Of course, to do this, the woman has to also agree that the man should give up custody. This is basically because once a child is born, it also has various legal rights, such as the right to be taken care of by its parents. It may sound harsh to say ‘sucks to be you’ to a guy caught in this sort of situation, but his life and health are not in jeopardy, and he doesn’t have the right to go demanding that someone else have a surgical operation (with a certain accompanying risk of complications such as sterility and hemorrhaging,) just because he doesn’t want to be a parent. After all, she’s not asking him to have any such operations. Hell, he didn’t even bother to get himself sterilized if he feels so strongly about it.

    There are two solutions as I see it: A, be such a pain in the fucking ass about the whole situation that the woman realizes that joint-custody with you is a bad, bad idea. B, Pass a new law which allows for a legal opt-out mechanism similar to the one already in place for sperm and egg donors such that two people can agree *ahead of time* that should any offspring result from them fucking, only one of them will be responsible for it.

    The only situations where I think any party other than the woman herself should make the decision would be a situation in which the woman is mentally incompetent/unable to make the decision–say, she’s in a coma, or mentally retarded, or just a small child (it’s happened, unfortunately.) In those cases, someone else should be trusted to make the decision for her, just as someone else would be trusted to make *any* medical decision for her.

    I agree with you on your last point about the time limit of termination–speaking as a pregnant woman, I don’t think most folks who aren’t/haven’t been pregnant have any appreciation for the sheer amount of hormones running through my brain going ‘cuddle babies!’ I’m like a zombie, only I want to cuddle babies and puppies instead of eat brains. I can only imagine that for any woman who finds it necessary to have a late-term abortion, it must be very difficult–far more difficult than the pro-criminalization crowd would ever admit. The only cases I could imagine of babies being aborted at nine months (instead of just induced or cesarianed,) would be cases in which they discover the fetus has some severe abnormality/malformation/etc. Like it has no brain and is going to die a slow, horrible death if it’s born.

  25. Chelonianmobile: The correct answer is “Fnar”!

    *chows down on virtual cookies*

    Remind me to start hanging out at the Jack boards again. It’s been too long.

  26. “If you are pregnant, don’t let anybody tell you that it’s just some tissue inside you. It’s a LIVING BABY God created.”

    Wait…I thought Eric created it? Or is Ashley having a virgin birth, making little Nathan the next messiah?

  27. This was an unusual tract for Jack in terms of its characterisation. Normally when Jack decides to do a bildungsroman, he very obviously follows the character who is to be saved from the start so that the reader will develop sympathy with them (or at least understand, with the aid of certain mental gymnastics that they should be developing sympathy with them).

    However, Jack spends the first three frames of this tract developing sympathy for Ashley, by showing us her fucked-up hippy family, only to finally introduce Eric in the fourth frame, poorly drawn and seemingly playing the usual Chickesque demonic influence as seen in ‘That Crazy Guy.’ He then proceeds to disappear again, and the next four frames continue centring on Ashley’s story. Then all at once, despite Eric being up to this point the flattest of one-dimensional characters, he gets the old Jack Chick Self-Insertion Jesus Treatment.

    Two theories present themselves here (well, actually, a lot of theories present themselves here, but these are the plausible ones):

    A: Jack Chick couldn’t develop a plot to save his life (let alone the life of a fetus), this simply being a particularly crap example of his work.

    B: Jack sees abortion as fundamentally a man’s issue, and is propogating the view that where the man leads, the vagina follows. Women need not not be converted. They will be beaten into submission by their righteous husbands once they have been converted.

    P.S. If you’re willing to take requests, I highly recommend ‘The Mad Machine.’ I’ve probably read half of his tracts and this, I must say, could actually be called an achievement. I’ve never seen a story where the central and only character is not introduced until the final frames of the tract. The whole thing is just one massive scene-setting exercise finishing with the obligatory “…therefore Jesus.” Remarkable.

  28. Felis wrote:

    But at 2 months, the baby is a 16 cell ball-it doesn’t have anything AT ALL resembling a human’s bdy part. Clearly Jack Chickenshit knows nothing about Biology.

    Neither do you. We’ve been linking to and discussing what status an embryo has at that point, and it’s not a blastocyst (cell cluster). It’s a blastocyst after about 2 days.

    Oh shit you’re right as well. Its been five years since I’ve even looked at a Bio book, lol. Still, my point is that it can’t feel pain at that point and it’s not alive.

  29. Hmm… maybe, since Eric and Ashley seem to be complete morons anyway, they were unfamiliar with the proper use of a condom. We don’t KNOW that he actually put it on. Maybe they just thought carrying it around with them would work like some sort of bad juju deterrent.

  30. Hmm… maybe, since Eric and Ashley seem to be complete morons anyway, they were unfamiliar with the proper use of a condom. We don’t KNOW that he actually put it on. Maybe they just thought carrying it around with them would work like some sort of bad juju deterrent.

    You know, they never mention on the box what the effective radius is.

  31. Well, it’s alive, but so is a shrimp. And even shrimps aren’t completely dependent on another body to stay alive. Closer to compare it with a tumor.

  32. Felis: A two month old fetus is clearly “alive”–hell, my unfertilized eggs are alive. So are sperm. So are my toes and my pancreas and eyeballs. If I had cancer, that would be alive, too. About the only parts of us which aren’t alive are our hair, fingernails, upper layer of our skin, and of course the crap in our intestines.

    The question of ‘alive’ or not is utterly irrelevant. The opposition to killing fetuses doesn’t stem from them being alive–conservatives are perfectly fine with cutting down living trees and sticking the corpses in their living rooms to celebrate Christmas, after all.

    When they say ‘alive’, what they actually mean is (but can’t say, because it would identify them as making a religious argument in the middle of a political debate, which our Constitution dictates is a ‘no-no’,) that it has a soul. Different religions posit that the soul enters the body at different times (if they even posit the existence of such a thing,) so ‘life begins at conception’ is really an attempt at disguising a conservative Christian opinion on when the soul enters the body and thus a ‘person’ is created. After all, these folks generally think nothing of killing a cow and eating it–they draw a strong line between ‘human’ and ‘animal’ (thus a lot of the opposition to evolution,) and that division is based on the notion that we have souls and they don’t.

  33. I also like, in this tract, how Chick paints women out to be completely and utterly incapable of making a decision about whether or not to continue with her pregnancy on her own. And how she is totally lost and would ONLY choose to have an abortion because she’s too weak to take care of a child on her own. BECAUSE Eric left… Ashley HAS to have an abortion. Because without Eric, she is nothing and her brain ceases to work correctly.
    This also seems to be pretty typical fundie thought. Women are stupid and require the guidance of men, especially when it comes to their own bodies and decision-making.

  34. What hit me as funny is that Jack promotes Ashley to marry “for the sake of the child” this smirking, cowardly, total prick. The only reason Eric changes his cowardly mind is because his Uncle Mike scares the shit out of him. Wouldn’t you like to see the follow-up on this loving family? Ashley has the baby, Eric becomes an alcoholic because he really isn’t in love with Ashley and never wanted children. Ashley ends up becoming a single parent anyway. She struggles with trying to raise a Christian child while working two jobs and can’t make it to church on Sunday because that’s the only day she can get any rest and she goes to hell anyway. And they lived happily ever after…….The End.

  35. Thanks for doing this one! I appreciate it.

    The worst part is the end. I wouldn’t feel that great if I were second to Jesus to my other.

  36. I knew a girl in highschool who was forbidden to even discuss the concept of sexuality in her home. And she wouldnt listen to anyone else talk about it. Her parents prevented her from attending any health class that dealt with the subject and as a result she had about a 1st grade understanding of sex and reproduction.
    When she was seventeen, she got pregnant. When her parents asked her when and with whom she was having sex she denied ever having it. They subsequently discovered she didnt know what sex was, only that it was “BAD”. But she was of course told by her parents she HAD to keep the child even though she was obviously thouroughly unprepared for life.

  37. little e: What you’re saying is a fair point, BUT I meant that the fetus (foetus?) is unable to feel pain at such an early poin in its development point. I was just speaking (a bit too) generally.

    And with the trees statement, conservatives are okay with cutting down trees etc., but that’s just because, well, they’re trees. Sure, they’re alive and all, and to take on out of the environment isn’t good.

    But, we’re way higher up then them. I would say we are, in a biological sense, animals, but we’re more than that by a mile. We have intelligence for one thing, and I don’t mean the sort that dolphins and apes have – ours is way more, and we can apply critical thinking and complex reasoning. Plus we have free will!

  38. Ew. Those babies are creepy. So accepting Jesus infects your babies with progeria?

    This seems like an appropriate place to link to this — have you ever seen the parody “Cthulhu Chick” tract? Better read it fast… every time someone posts it, Chick’s pet lawyers get it yanked.

    Who Will Be Eaten First?

  39. Hehehe, I’ve seen that before, actually. You know, I’m a little surprised nobody from Chick Publications has ever tried to get in touch with me about the Dissections. I mean, not that they’d have a case anyway, since I’m clearly within the protective boundary of Parody and Fair Use, but it’s interesting they’ve never even sent an empty threat in the hope that I’d get all scared and take it down.

  40. I’m impressed with Eric. He went from hating Ashley and being disgusted with her to wanting to marry her in a matter of hours.

    They are going to be so happy together.

  41. I am a Deist Christian who does not base his positions on ethics on the Bible or on any other propagandized bullshit that is spewed by mass religion for the taking over of the people.
    So, lets analyze abortion from a secular perspective.
    We know that an embryo has a high chance of developing into a concious being.
    Lets take an example. Say you drive your car through a green light and a person driving a different vehicle runs a red and slams into your car, putting you into a concussion. Lets also say that you have no brain activity, but that the doctors know that you have a 90% chance of waking up from this type of concussion (which doesn’t actually exist but is purely hypothetical). Does the person who hit your car have to keep you alive for nine months, or is he/she entitled to pay your hospital bills, etc. etc. in order to make sure you are able to wake up?
    Now apply this to abortion. The fetus will eventually be an eating, shitting, thinking human being and will have the same political rights as the rest of us–all of it started by a concious (or maybe unconcious if they were drunk etc. but they are still responsible) decision on behalf of the mother and the father. It is their responsibility.

    Obviously this breaks down if the woman is raped, since the fetus is an infringment on her right to her body (she did not choose to have sex, so the fetus is there by force rather than by her stupidity/ignorance), and the right of the mother trumps the right of what is infringing on her right.

    Just would like your thoughts, maybe you have not ever heard of this side with the idiot Christians flooding the waves with all their irrelevant opinions. You are doing a great job by the way, keep it up. Everything is God Damn hilarious.

  42. Reply to Garrett:

    [i]Does the person who hit your car have to keep you alive for nine months, or is he/she entitled to pay your hospital bills, etc. etc. in order to make sure you are able to wake up?[/i]

    This scenario doesn’t involve a violation of bodily integrity and thus is not analogous to abortion.

    [i]Now apply this to abortion. The fetus will eventually be an eating, shitting, thinking human being[/i]

    Not always, for instance 50 percent of all pregnancies are estimated to end in spontaenious abortion without the woman knowing she’s pregnant. 20 percent off all recognised pregnancies end in a miscarriage.(I got the statistics from Sam Harris book Letter To A Christian Nation, btw.) Besides, arguments from potential lead nowhere. A child has the potential to become an adult and thus have the right to vote. That doesn’t mean that because of this potential it should have the right to vote now.

    [i]Obviously this breaks down if the woman is raped, since the fetus is an infringment on her right to her body (she did not choose to have sex, so the fetus is there by force rather than by her stupidity/ignorance), and the right of the mother trumps the right of what is infringing on her right.[/i]

    Regarding pro-life-rape-exception, would the woman have to prove she was raped in order to get an abortion? if yes, then by the time the legal case had finished the baby would probably been born, or it would be too late for an abortion. If no, people would just lie to get an abortion.

    Besides, this argument implies that the worth of the fetus is not what one is worried about–if one really cared about the fetus one would make the woman carry to term no matter what. The rape exception implies that the baby is a punishment for sex.

    [i]by her stupidity/ignorance[/i]

    Not all women who get unwanted pregnancy are ignorant and stupid. Contraception may have failed for instance. This argument also seems to assume that all unwanted pregnacies are the result of unprotected one night stands which simply isn’t true. 54% of women that had an abortion in America actually used some form of contraception. (http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html)

  43. Reply to Lith

    “This scenario doesn’t involve a violation of bodily integrity and thus is not analogous to abortion.”
    the only scenario where the woman is “violated” is in rape, which I mentioned as a case where she has the right to an abortion.

    “Not always, for instance 50 percent of all pregnancies are estimated to end in spontaenious abortion without the woman knowing she’s pregnant.”
    And since that is natural no one can be blamed for it. Dieing of old age is natural too–but does that mean that we should, or have the right to, kill old people early?

    “A child has the potential to become an adult and thus have the right to vote. That doesn’t mean that because of this potential it should have the right to vote now.”
    The right to vote is supposed to be based (somewhat) on your intelligence and maturity level, the right to life is based on your potential to eventually be able to support yourself. Otherwise, we should be able to kill 3 year old toddlers as well, since (although they look like humans), they have very few of our reasoning skills.

    “Regarding pro-life-rape-exception, would the woman have to prove she was raped in order to get an abortion? if yes, then by the time the legal case had finished the baby would probably been born, or it would be too late for an abortion. If no, people would just lie to get an abortion.”
    then that is a problem with our legal system. Maybe in cases where the rape victim wanted to have an abortion, they could have a pre-trial to make a verdict as to whether or not the mother was likely telling truth can be determined. On the legal implications I am not sure. But I would like to focus on the moral issues.

    “Besides, this argument implies that the worth of the fetus is not what one is worried about–if one really cared about the fetus one would make the woman carry to term no matter what. The rape exception implies that the baby is a punishment for sex.”
    You are assuming that I am taking a religious approach, as if God is punishing you or nature is punishing you, and I am not. I am simply recognizing that if you had sex you have, by your actions, created a being which will become concious and therefore has rights. At the very least you are then obligated to take it to term in order that society might adopt it. You see the inconvienience of having a child and selfishly believe that people should have the choice of whether or not to rid things that inconvience them. This is perfectly understandable, everyone is selfish. I perfectly understand why you think the way you do, you are empathizing with those who are embarased by their large bellies or by their girlfriend’s large belly. I understand, that would be embarassing–the reason is because you did something stupid and you don’t want to suffer the consequences for your actions.
    I could just kill the man in a coma, that would make everything a whole lot easier. I wouldn’t have to pay for his hospital bills anymore, and he is braindead anyway isn’t he? But we know that he has the potential to think, and therefore he has rights. You must recognize the validity of this argument.

    “54% of women that had an abortion in America actually used some form of contraception.”
    bla bla bla. They still had sex, and probably without a condom. Most car accidents are not intentional and we even take precautions against them, but we still get in the car and are legally and morally responsible for what our 2 ton piece of metal hits.

  44. Reply to Garrett:

    “the only scenario where the woman is “violated” is in rape, which I mentioned as a case where she has the right to an abortion.”

    No, I don’t think you understand me. The woman’s bodily integrity is violated by the fetus itself.

    “And since that is natural no one can be blamed for it.”
    I was merely pointing out that the “90% chance” think in your post isn’t actually a 90% chance. That’s all.

    “Dieing of old age is natural too–but does that mean that we should, or have the right to, kill old people early?”

    I don’t see what you’re getting at, here.

    “Otherwise, we should be able to kill 3 year old toddlers as well, since (although they look like humans), they have very few of our reasoning skills.”

    A three-year-old isn’t parazitising anyone’s body, that’s the difference.
    A three-year old is not violating the woman’s bodily integrity by existing. a fetus is. It’s not analogous.

    “You are assuming that I am taking a religious approach, as if God is punishing you or nature is punishing you, and I am not.”

    Pro-punishment veiwpoints are not necassarily religious ones. I’m confused as to why you thought I was implying it was a religous thing.

    “At the very least you are then obligated to take it to term in order that society might adopt it. ”

    Nobody should be forced to have their bodily integrity violated for the sake of somebody else. Adoption only solved unwanted parenting, NOT unwanted pregnancy.

    Also, the adoption system (at least in america) is unfair. If the child is not newborn & causacian it’s often unwanted. So you’re condemning the child to a crappy life aswell in many cases.

    “You see the inconvienience of having a child”
    INCONVENIENCE?

    Here’s a list of some preganancy complications for you:

    A list of symptoms to look out for while pregnant:

    Maryland Medical Women’s Center(http://www.umm.edu/pregnancy/index.html) Wrote:
    “* Vaginal bleeding
    * Vaginal discharge that is different
    * Severe, persistent, frequent headaches
    * Pain or burning with urination, or decrease in urination
    * Persistent nausea or vomiting
    * Leakage of fluid from the vagina
    * Sharp pelvic pain or severe cramping
    * Frequent dizzy spells or fainting
    * Visual disturbances such as blurred vision, white lights or flashes, dots in front of the eyes
    * Sudden swelling in hands, feet, and face
    * Falling or hitting your abdomen
    * Noticeable decrease or absence of fetal movement
    * High fever with chills, over 100.4º Fahrenheit orally
    * Contractions more often than four an hour if you are less than 37 weeks
    * Low back pain that comes and goes but never goes away
    * Any other problem that feels unusual”

    This is a list of compications During and after Childbirth:
    (http://www.med.umich.edu/depression/pregnancy.htm)
    “Possible Complications

    * Bleeding
    * Uterine infection
    * Urinary tract infection
    * Perineal tears, including tears through the rectum
    * Complications requiring forceps, vacuum extraction, or cesarean section
    * Blood clots
    * Mastitis (breast infection)
    * Postpartum depression

    What to Expect in The First Few Weeks After Childbirth:

    After your baby arrives, you’ll notice you’ve changed both physically and emotionally.

    Physically, you might experience the following:

    * Sore breasts–Your breasts may be painfully engorged when your milk comes in, and your nipples may be sore.
    * Constipation–The first postpartum bowel movement is typically delayed to the third or fourth day after delivery, and sensitive hemorrhoids and sore muscles may make bowel movements painful.
    * Episiotomy–If your perineum (the area of skin between the vagina and the anus) was cut by your doctor or if it was torn during the birth, the stitches may make it painful to sit or walk for a little while during healing.
    * Hemorrhoids–Although common, hemorrhoids (swollen anal tissues) are frequently unexpected and initially unnoticed.
    * Hot and cold flashes–Your body’s adjustment to new hormone and blood flow levels can wreak havoc on your internal thermostat.
    * Urinary or fecal incontinence–The stretching of your muscles during delivery can cause you to inadvertently pass urine when you cough, laugh, or strain or may make it difficult to control your bowel movements, especially if a lengthy labor preceded a vaginal delivery.
    * “After pains”–The shrinking of your uterus can cause contractions that worsen when your baby nurses or when you take medication to reduce bleeding.
    * Vaginal discharge (lochia)–Heavier than your period and often containing clots (sometimes golf-ball sized), vaginal discharge gradually fades to white or yellow and stops within two months.
    * Weight–Your postpartum weight will probably be about 10 pounds (the weight of the baby, placenta, and amniotic fluid) below your full-term weight, before additional water weight drops off within the first week as your body regains its sodium balance.

    Emotionally, you may be feeling:

    * “Baby blues”–About 80% of new moms experience irritability, sadness, crying, or anxiety, beginning within days or weeks postpartum. Like the more severe associated syndromes of postpartum depression and postpartum psychosis, these baby blues result from hormonal changes, exhaustion, unexpected birth experiences, adjustments to changing roles, and a sense of lack of control over your altered life as you adjust to your new baby.
    * Postpartum depression (PPD)–More serious than the baby blues, this condition is evident in 10-20% of new moms and may cause mood swings, anxiety, guilt, and persistent sadness. Your baby may be several months old before PPD strikes, and it’s more common in women with a family history of depression.
    * Postpartum psychosis–Postpartum psychosis is a severe and fairly rare condition that makes it difficult to think clearly or function and may become life-threatening to you or your baby. It’s common for women with postpartum psychosis to have thoughts about harming themselves or their babies. If you experience any such feelings, call your doctor immediately.
    * In addition, when it comes to sexual relations, you and your partner may be on completely different pages. Men may be ready to continue where things left off before baby’s arrival, whereas women may not feel comfortable enough—physically or emotionally—and may be craving nothing more than a good night’s sleep.”

    Not quite a mere “inconvienence.”

    “the reason is because you did something stupid”
    You seem like one of those people who seems to think that ALL unwanted pregnancies are with people who aren’t married or have sex really young, or are uneducated people who don’t know anything about contraception. Not true. There can be unwanted pregnancy in marriage. There can be unwanted pregnancy in a long-term serious relationship.
    I never want children. Should I never have sex?

    “you are empathizing with those who are embarased by their large bellies or by their girlfriend’s large belly.”

    Not all abortions are for convienience. What if the woman can barely feed the children she’s got and having another one would mean they would starve? What if the woman is an alcoholic and doesn’t want to ruin a child’s life because it’ll have fetal alcohol syndrome.?
    I don’t really give a damn WHY people have abortions, anyway.

    “bla bla bla. They still had sex, and probably without a condom.”

    That’s EXACTLY what I’m getting at with the pro-punishment view. “They deserve it for wanting to show their love for each other! Damn them!”

    BTW, what’s the man doin’ while his poor girlfriend is having a baby? Sitting on his ass?

  45. “No, I don’t think you understand me. The woman’s bodily integrity is violated by the fetus itself.”
    No, I understood you perfectly. Violated is the wrong word, since she helped put it there.

    “A three-year-old isn’t parazitising anyone’s body, that’s the difference.
    A three-year old is not violating the woman’s bodily integrity by existing. a fetus is. It’s not analogous.”
    So the very natural consequence of having sexual intercourse with someone, which will result in the eventual life of a thinking being, is now called a “violation.” I would call it “an eventual concious being existing near that same place you wanted, and had, his large pumping dick.”

    “Pro-punishment veiwpoints are not necassarily religious ones. I’m confused as to why you thought I was implying it was a religous thing.”
    Because that is a common aspect of the religious argument, but is not an aspect of mine.
    creating a being which will eventually be concious in not some kind of punishment, it is simply a fact. Just like making the man unconcious was simply a fact. What you do about it is a discussion of ethics.

    “Nobody should be forced to have their bodily integrity violated for the sake of somebody else. Adoption only solved unwanted parenting, NOT unwanted pregnancy.”
    its not “for the sake of somebody else” its “because you created someonebody else.” You are not obligated to other people having trouble with their lives unless you are *responsible* for the trouble they have with their lives. You, and the man you had sex with, are responsible for the baby. I hope you can admit that much at least.

    “Not quite a mere “inconvienence.””
    well, not life threatening at least (unless it becomes life threatening, at which point the baby should be aborted)

    “You seem like one of those people who seems to think that ALL unwanted pregnancies are with people who aren’t married or have sex really young, or are uneducated people who don’t know anything about contraception. Not true. There can be unwanted pregnancy in marriage. There can be unwanted pregnancy in a long-term serious relationship.
    I never want children. Should I never have sex?”
    depends on the risks you want to take.
    All of these are true of course. There is also that anoying example of the unconcious person you have failed to adress. Should we just be able to kill him off, because he will cause pain? Lets spice it up and even say that in order to keep him alive, you have to give blood to him twice a week, making your arm sore and reducing your sexual desire… or something.

    “BTW, what’s the man doin’ while his poor girlfriend is having a baby? Sitting on his ass?”
    well I could only hope that voters are inteligent enough to get their states to pass laws which require that the man pay child support (at least) and be obligated to raise the child if that is the mother’s wish.
    In fact… i think this is already a law in most States.

  46. “No, I understood you perfectly. Violated is the wrong word, since she helped put it there.”

    No, violated is exactly the correct word. Consent by its nature HAS to be ONGOING. If I’m having sex with a man and I tell him to stop, if he doesn’t, it’s rape, a violation of me. If i find out I have a fetus in my body and withdraw my consent to have it there, it’s a violation of me whether it’s my “fault” if it’s there or not.

    “creating a being which will eventually be concious in not some kind of punishment, it is simply a fact.”

    MAKING the woman carry to term becuase she DARED to have sex is a pro-punishment attitute. We already know it’s not the life of the fetus you are worried about, since you said it’s ok for her to have the abortion if she was raped. And your posts have betrayed you and show that basically you consider it a punishment in a sense.

    “You, and the man you had sex with, are responsible for the baby.”
    We cannot hurt peoples that don’t exist. We cannot hurt something hat isn’t consious.

    “well, not life threatening at least (unless it becomes life threatening, at which point the baby should be aborted)”
    It has the potential of being life thratening, and you’ve indluged in the fallacy of argument from potential a few times, so by your own logic:
    Potential person = real person
    Potential harm to mother = harm to mother.

    “Lets spice it up and even say that in order to keep him alive, you have to give blood to him twice a week,”

    Nobody should be forced to give blood agaisnt thier will, that’s a violation of bodily integrity aswell. It may be an assholish thing to do to refuse, but taht’s not the point. Forcing someone into blood donation is almost as bad as forcing them to be walking wombs, because people who are pro-life show that this is what they think of women.

    “man pay child support (at least) ”
    Child support only happens whan the kids born. what about the expenses of pregnancy?

    “and be obligated to raise the child if that is the mother’s wish.”
    I disagree. I don’t think any man should have to raise a child he doesn’t want.

    The world is no more likely to be robbed of a potential person by an abortion thatn chaste abstinence from intercourse. By the “potential” logic, we should all be trying to have babies, all the time.

  47. “If I’m having sex with a man and I tell him to stop, if he doesn’t, it’s rape, a violation of me.”
    but telling him to stop doesn’t cause him to die, although it might be painful 😉

    “MAKING the woman carry to term becuase she DARED to have sex is a pro-punishment attitute. We already know it’s not the life of the fetus you are worried about, since you said it’s ok for her to have the abortion if she was raped. And your posts have betrayed you and show that basically you consider it a punishment in a sense.”
    this is irrational. Saying that because I don’t think she should suffer the consequences of someone else’s actions upon her body (i.e. rape), is not the same as saying that I agree with abortion in all cases.
    I believe in justice, not punishment. The woman should not have been violated in the first place, and because she was, the baby has become a further violation.

    “We cannot hurt peoples that don’t exist. We cannot hurt something hat isn’t consious.”
    So you are saying that you should be able to end the life of the man you [hypothetically] ran over? You haven’t given a clear answer yet.

    “Potential harm to mother = harm to mother.”
    not “harm to mother”. “Death to mother”

    “Nobody should be forced to give blood agaisnt thier will, that’s a violation of bodily integrity aswell. It may be an assholish thing to do to refuse, but taht’s not the point. Forcing someone into blood donation is almost as bad as forcing them to be walking wombs, because people who are pro-life show that this is what they think of women.”
    Now your just bullshitting me. He is in that condition because of your [hypothetical] incompetence. If you can save his life and conciousness without it meaning your death, you ethically owe him that much.

    “Child support only happens whan the kids born. what about the expenses of pregnancy?”
    I assume you mean the emotional expenses? (if you mean monetary, then he should also support in paying for them. Obviously).

    “I disagree. I don’t think any man should have to raise a child he doesn’t want.”
    if the woman decides not to raise the child, then the responsibility would naturally fall to the father, who could then decide to put it up for adoption if he wished.

    “The world is no more likely to be robbed of a potential person by an abortion thatn chaste abstinence from intercourse. By the “potential” logic, we should all be trying to have babies, all the time.””
    Oh please, don’t pull any of this bullshit. The natural consequence of an action is the creation of a living being, that doesn’t mean we don’t have a choice in that action.

  48. “I believe in justice, not punishment.”

    By forcing people to give birth, you are essentially punishing them for sex.

    ““We cannot hurt peoples that don’t exist. We cannot hurt something hat isn’t consious.”So you are saying that you should be able to end the life of the man you [hypothetically] ran over? You haven’t given a clear answer yet.”

    It is still technically true that you cannot hurt an non consious being, I never said you should let him die, though.

    “So you are saying that you should be able to end the life of the man you [hypothetically] ran over? You haven’t given a clear answer yet.”

    I told you the situation wan’t analogous, so i didn’t have to answer it. The one with the blood donation is more analogous to abortion.

    “Now your just bullshitting me. He is in that condition because of your [hypothetical] incompetence. If you can save his life and conciousness without it meaning your death, you ethically owe him that much.”

    Just because you think someone is ethically obliged to do something, doesn’t mean that they should be FORCED into it. There’s a difference.

    “if the woman decides not to raise the child, then the responsibility would naturally fall to the father, who could then decide to put it up for adoption if he wished.”

    That’s not what you said in the post. What you said was that a man should have to raise a child if the mother wanted him to. That, in my opinion is wrong. Not anly would it force the father to be possibly unhappy, it’s not gonna do the kid much good either.

    “Oh please, don’t pull any of this bullshit. The natural consequence of an action is the creation of a living being, that doesn’t mean we don’t have a choice in that action.”

    It’s a natural extension of your logic.

  49. So, Garrett, I assume that you’re going to help medically, financially, and emotionally support all those women who would otherwise have an abortion? After all, you want to make their choice for them, so you should help with the consequences of that choice. You can support the ladies who make a difficult choice, because they can’t afford to raise a child, or their child will be born with health issues, or their child will die shortly after birth, or because it will affect their health (physical and mental), or because they know they won’t be able to care for this child. You can also reform the adoption system, so all those ladies having abortions have somewhere to put a kid that won’t have the possibilty of screwing them up for life.

    Oh, but wait. You won’t do that. After all, those pregnant ladies were obviously stupid to get pregnant, and besides, it’s nothing to do with you anyway.

    By the way, god says “love thy neighbour”. Also, he’d like his judgement pants back, because he’s the only person allowed to wear them.

  50. To Lith:
    “Just because you think someone is ethically obliged to do something, doesn’t mean that they should be FORCED into it. There’s a difference.”
    what if a woman decides to bring the baby to term, is she ETHICALLY OBLIGED to “do something?” Is she ETHICALLY OBLIGED to raise the child as best she can, without beating it or hurting it? Why is she not allowed to beat her child, why do we FORCE her to not beat her child, why are the laws that FORCE her not to beat her child just?

    If you steal someone’s gold watch and sell it, are you not ETHICALLY OBLIGED to repay him the value of the watch? If you cause someone to be in need of blood in order to survive and think again, are you not ETHICALLY OBLIGED to pay him his due, even if that costs your own blood?

    Yes, yes, and yes. You should be forced to give your own blood.

    “Not anly would it force the father to be possibly unhappy, it’s not gonna do the kid much good either.”
    Fine, whatever. I was simply pointing out that if the mother just dropps the child off at his house, he also helped to create it, so he would then be required to try and find a place for the child. Maybe he should be allowed to demand child payments, or whatever. This isn’t that important to this discussion anyway.

    “It’s a natural extension of your logic.”
    No, its not. An egg or a sperm will not develop into a living being by itself, it requires a HUMAN ACTION to do so, a human has to join it in someway, and leave an unhindered pathway to join them. It is defiantly not an extension of my logic.

    To Marissa:
    “So, Garrett, I assume that you’re going to help medically, financially, and emotionally support all those women who would otherwise have an abortion?”
    All the women I get pregnant, yes.

    “After all, you want to make their choice for them, so you should help with the consequences of that choice.”
    I didn’t make the choice for them to have sex with someone they wouldn’t consider raising a child with, and I would never want to make that choice for them. But yes, I will try to prevent them from committing infanticide.

    “You can also reform the adoption system, so all those ladies having abortions have somewhere to put a kid that won’t have the possibilty of screwing them up for life.”
    these all seem like good things that those fervent to allow people to kill potentiol life could be doing instead of campaigning for abortion.

    “By the way, god says “love thy neighbour”. Also, he’d like his judgement pants back, because he’s the only person allowed to wear them.”
    I don’t give a pile of shit what God “says”. I don’t trust the bible to make up my mind for me.

    and your reference to judgement pants seems to say that you don’t think others have the right to judge people. Fine for you, bad for the judicial system and the foundations of government.

  51. I am a fervent supporter of choice, because if it should happen, it is -my- choice. What right or priviledge do you have to tell me that I should never make a mistake, and if I do, it’s all my fault and obviously I am stupid to make a mistake anyway? That is what your argument boils down to.

    I don’t have to reform the adoption system. I support choices. You are the one that wants kids in it, you fix it. Maybe people will use it then, instead of having those nasty abortions that are legal in a lot of places.

    Oh, I have no problem with the legal system, although the one in my country allows abortions. I just have problems with people who sit on their thrones of righteous perfection and sneer at those who make mistakes.

  52. Garrett: Your first comment’s analogy is a bit of a stretch. You can’t really just assume that it will definitely develop to term. The miscarriage rate is, if I recall correctly, somewhere around 35-50%. But if we’re operating on what things “will eventually become”, then it’s just as bad for a woman to menstruate without having been impregnated, because that egg, if fertilized, would’ve (barring miscarriage) eventually become a baby. If I’m on my way to donate to a charity, but notice something in the window of a store that I’d like to buy instead, do I get arrested for stealing from charity because it was a foregone conclusion that the money I had in my pocket belonged to charity simply because it was going to belong to charity?

    Anyway, the whole “in a coma but will almost certainly regain mental functioning” thing is entirely different. A coma is not brain death. If the victim becomes brain dead, then yes, by all means, pull the plug, because all you’re doing is artificially keeping a person’s body functioning with no mental activity at all. (See also: Terri Schiavo.) If they’re simply in a coma and there’s still brain activity (e.g. not brain dead), then there’s a possibility they’ll eventually come out of it. But it’s an entirely different scenario from pregnancy. I’m having difficulty even hammering it into the same form to even point out the contrasts, it’s that different.

    And since that is natural no one can be blamed for it. Dieing of old age is natural too�but does that mean that we should, or have the right to, kill old people early?

    Well, they’re going to eventually die anyway. I mean, if we have to keep blastocysts and fetuses alive simply because they’ll eventually become humans, why can’t we kill old people because they’ll eventually become dead? The ‘now’ means nothing — it’s all in potentials. Right? I mean, this was the “logical extension” Lith was talking about: It’s not so much what’s being argued — your “right to life” — as it is how its being argued — through “potentials”.

    I am simply recognizing that if you had sex you have, by your actions, created a being which will become concious and therefore has rights.

    I reject your teleology that the sole purpose of sex is for reproduction. Humans are not alone as a species in using sex for bonding and recreation and just general pleasure. The idea that pregnancy must always accompany sex is ludicrous, and the vast majority of people do, in fact, use birth control to separate the two. Again, that sperm and that egg would’ve otherwise combined to eventually (again, barring miscarriage) become a living human, so isn’t it just as wrong, then, to use any form of contraception as it is to abort? If it’s the potentiality that’s important, does it matter where it’s interrupted?

    And, as Lith pointed out, this has nothing to do with religion. I, too, am confused with your reading a religious implication into the “pro-punishment” thing.

    well, not life threatening at least (unless it becomes life threatening, at which point the baby should be aborted)

    Well, there are different degrees of “life-threatening”. Shouldn’t we, if it’s all in the potentials, weigh the potential of ending the mother’s life to the potential that the fetus will develop to term? Why does the mother’s well-being suddenly count? If she could bring the baby to term but it was determined to be likely she’d die during birth, should she still do it? I mean, this is the consequence of her actions, right? She can’t just back out of the inconvenience — she CHOSE to put that there. It’s going to be a living human. That supersedes all else, doesn’t it? I mean, do you care about the potentiality of this fetus or not?

    I agree with Marissa as well: Since you’ve decided it’s your place to make people’s decisions for them, should you not bear some responsibility yourself for these decisions? Again, I reject your teleology that the purpose of sex is procreation.

    Why do you care so much what other people do? Why is a “potential baby” a few hundred miles away of your concern? Do you mourn every time someone has a miscarriage, saddened by the “potential” loss of life? You don’t want an abortion? Fine, don’t get one. If you knock someone up, do your best to persuade them not to get one. But in the end, it’s ultimately her decision. Sure it’s unfair, and sure it sucks, but it’s her body, not yours, and her body doesn’t just potentially exist, it’s actually there, right now, in the present. If you want that baby there and she doesn’t, that’s akin to rape, really, to force her to keep it in there. In fact, it’s almost a logical extension. As has been pointed out, if she doesn’t want something in her body, she has a right to remove it, regardless of how she wound up in the situation. Whether a consensual sex act became suddenly unwanted or a pregnancy became suddenly unwanted, no means no.

  53. “Anyway, the whole “in a coma but will almost certainly regain mental functioning” thing is entirely different. A coma is not brain death. If the victim becomes brain dead, then yes, by all means, pull the plug, because all you’re doing is artificially keeping a person’s body functioning with no mental activity at all. (See also: Terri Schiavo.) If they’re simply in a coma and there’s still brain activity (e.g. not brain dead), then there’s a possibility they’ll eventually come out of it. But it’s an entirely different scenario from pregnancy.”
    that is why I asked you to suspend a tiny amount of disbelief by saying “Lets also say that you have no brain activity, but that the doctors know that you have a 90% chance of waking up from this type of concussion (which doesn’t actually exist but is purely hypothetical).” This brings the analogy much closer.
    If you want to, we can change that chance to 40% or whatever, but you still owe it to them to try and keep them alive for the nine months that they have that 40% chance to regain brain activity (lets say they have a 0% chance after the nine months are up).

    “I mean, if we have to keep blastocysts and fetuses alive simply because they’ll eventually become humans, why can’t we kill old people because they’ll eventually become dead?”
    because old people still have the potential for further thought. If you want to look at this from a utilitarian perspective, you could say they still have the potential to benefit humanity. If you want to look at it from a Lockean Natural rights perspective, you could say that we all have the right to live as long as we can enable ourselves to do so, because why else would we exist on this earth, if not to live and be as happy as we can without violating the natural rights (negative rights) of others?

    “I reject your teleology that the sole purpose of sex is for reproduction. Humans are not alone as a species in using sex for bonding and recreation and just general pleasure. The idea that pregnancy must always accompany sex is ludicrous, and the vast majority of people do, in fact, use birth control to separate the two.”
    However you got this inclination, it is not what I intended. The sole purpose of driving a car is not to run into people and put them into temporary brain dead comas–but in our example, that unfortunately happened. Doing an enjoyable action sometimes has consequences, that doesn’t mean we can just kill the people who inconvienience us.

    “Again, that sperm and that egg would’ve otherwise combined to eventually (again, barring miscarriage) become a living human, so isn’t it just as wrong, then, to use any form of contraception as it is to abort? If it’s the potentiality that’s important, does it matter where it’s interrupted?”
    I went into this with Lith, maybe you missed it, which is understandable (considering the large amount Lith and I bickered over the subject). Here is what I wrote: No, its not. An egg or a sperm will not develop into a living being by itself, it requires a HUMAN ACTION to do so, a human has to join it in someway, and leave an unhindered pathway to join them. It is defiantly not an extension of my logic.

    “I mean, this is the consequence of her actions, right? She can’t just back out of the inconvenience — she CHOSE to put that there. It’s going to be a living human. That supersedes all else, doesn’t it? I mean, do you care about the potentiality of this fetus or not?”
    I care about the life of the mother as well. It is up to each individual person whether they want to sacrifice themselves for someone else — but I think the blood transfer example is a good one here, in my opinion.

    “Since you’ve decided it’s your place to make people’s decisions for them, should you not bear some responsibility yourself for these decisions?”
    this is like saying that because I’ve decided to make the decision FOR a murderer to send him to jail, I should take some responsibility for that decision. Its actually kind of ludacris when you look at it from the extension of using abortion being infanticide.

    “Why do you care so much what other people do? Why is a “potential baby” a few hundred miles away of your concern?”
    I don’t think you fully understand my position. I am quite sociopathic towards people I don’t know and don’t see. It is difficult for me to evoke any kind of hatred or anger towards the words “death of babies” or anything like that unless I can immediately empathize with their positions (and since I don’t remember being a fetus, so I don’t empathize with them much. I could easily just sit back and let you do what you want and it really wouldn’t bother me at all, as long as it doesn’t affect me too much. I simply enjoy debating ethics, but am pretty much completely detached from any anger towards people who get abortions, doctors who give abortions, etc. etc. Honestly, I feel nothing. I think your condoning the murdering of innocent children, but I feel pretty close to zilch negative feelings towards you. It is just hard for me to empathize with people I don’t know, it is just the way I am. But I am trying to discuss this from a reasonable perspective, and see if you can have a reasoned argument about it–which you are all doing a very good job at doing. Not that I haven’t encountered your responses before.

    I’m not really sure what the rest of your argument was an appeal to, just the “no means no” cliche and somehow the belief that forcing a woman to give birth to a child = rape (slavery might be a better comparison, although it would fail at a few levels, but oh well). Whatever, I think this will probably be the last response I will give on this article–God knows I have said enough and am growing tired of debating the subject.

  54. “this is like saying that because I�ve decided to make the decision FOR a murderer to send him to jail, I should take some responsibility for that decision. Its actually kind of ludacris when you look at it from the extension of using abortion being infanticide.”

    If you decide that your place is to determine who is a murderer and who isn’t, then yes, it is your responsibility. Also, foetuses are not infants, therefore abortion does not and cannot equal infanticide. Foetuses do not even have brain activity in the first trimester, and it’s debateable whether they have it in the second trimester.

  55. The fundamental flaw in your argument is placing so much importance on “potential” in the case of abortion, but completely abandoning that importance in other cases. Then you argue that the key is “we all have the right to live as long as we can enable ourselves to do so”. But blastocysts and fetuses, if removed from the womb, would be no more capable of enabling their own continued survival as a walrus in low orbit.

    The critical difference between your “coma” analogy and abortion is that the man’s life isn’t just “potential”. This is an interruption in a life that already exists, in the present, not one that might eventually exist. You made something that was already a living human being capable of its own survival suddenly stop living. In the case of abortion, all you’ve destroyed is the potential. You stopped some theoretical living human being that would, barring miscarriage, probably eventually come into existence.

    Speaking of miscarriage, a fertilized egg won’t just automatically develop to term in every case. Similarly, not every act of unprotected sex will result in fertilization. And it’s not like it’s just a “set it and forget it” kind of thing, either. Maintaining the pregnancy also requires human action. Say a woman had a condition where if she exerted herself too much, she’d have a miscarriage. How is that human action different from the human action of fertilization? In any event, you keep stressing the importance of “potential”. If it’s the “potential” that’s important, then every egg that goes unfertilized is lost potential. Any sex act that could potentially result in a pregnancy but doesn’t through human intervention is cutting off just as much potential as abortion.

    Society does, by the way, take responsibility for sending people to prison. Do you think they operate with magic? People pay for prisons to exist and operate through taxes. If they didn’t, there wouldn’t be prisons. Thus, if we choose to give enough of a shit to send people to prison for various crimes, we have to, as a society, take the responsibility of actually putting them there. Similarly, if people want to oppress women into not getting abortions, they’re going to have to take the responsibility of dealing with pregnancy costs and the subsequent (barring miscarriage) babies. Those things ain’t going to feed or deliver themselves. You’re also going to have to shoulder the bill, if you criminalize abortion, of investigating every single pregnancy termination to see if it was “natural” or not.

    As for your last paragraph in your response, whether it’s a baby or a dick, a woman has a right to decide what’s in her body. Forcing either into her violates her. Nobody but her has any right deciding what goes into or stays in her body. It doesn’t matter how she arrived in that position. It doesn’t matter if she said “sure, I’ll have sex with you for the next nine months straight”. If after three weeks, she decides she’s no longer up for it, just because she said “yes” at first doesn’t mean I can continue doing it. And just because I want her to carry and have a baby, it doesn’t mean I can force her not to get an abortion if she wants. Her existing body and life, right now, supersedes any “potential” life that might result.

  56. jghlkgykjokfogofogoooogjfojjojfdosxdemt diuretmfgjcfg 4yyt84y87 5y8ry8tfudt8r.Chick has such bad reasoning skills, that he shouldn’t even be allowed to have the brain power to make the previous sentence.

  57. Did…did anyone notice her dad saying “Just don’t get pregnant!” ?

    I…I…what? Right, because all middle-class American dads, on finding out their daughters are seeing their boyfriends, say “Bye, honey! Have fun! Oh, and don’t get pregnant!”

  58. Good one. Jabberwock doesn’t jabber on too much in this one. The jokes are good, and I liked the Jesus song.

    By the way, is it just me, or does saying “precious blood” sound condecending to anyone else? Like “here’s your precious cookie, jerk” or “oh no! I crushed your precious, precious dolly. I’m sooo sad, and will go to bed and cry now”. But then again, a lot of biblical terminology sounds condecending these days.

    Behold my computer, for it is the gift of life!

  59. Heh, I saw this on the original Chick Tract site, but I stopped reading after less than a minute…not because it was so stupid/hateful/close-minded/any-of-the-other-reasons-I-can-only-get-so-far-with-many-of-these-comics, but because I was completely LOST as to the storyline! x_x I think I killed some brain cells trying to figure out what relation the gang of hippies has with the family, who was getting hit in the car, and how they came up with that rooming arangement.

    Also, as for the first comment, I thought I was the only one who noticed 😛
    Hey, what’s that cat in panel 13 doing? Looks like he mistook the nest for a litter box.

  60. “you’ll see your baby in heaven.”

    Wait, but it was an unborn fetus! I bet it didn’t accept Jesus! TO HELL WITH YE, NON SENTIENT BEING.

    Wait…that’s a bit like abortion isn’t it?? 😐

    I had a teacher once who mentioned being saved by God at least twice a day. I was about 9 at the time, so I hadn’t really formed a religious opinion yet. From my education thus far (ie a priest popping in on Thursdays to read Bible stories to us, and the obligatory week or so every year in which we learned that Christianity is not indeed the only religion)I had been taught in such a way that I believed that Christianity was the true religion and all other religions were just practised by people from other countries. Anyway, this teacher told everyone one day that God is our Father, and we should love him more than anything else.

    My response to this was, ‘But I have a dad’. A few other people said this too, and he explained to us that God is a kind of ‘higher’ father and we should love him more. I’m still pretty much a kid(15) so I haven’t fallen in love yet, and to this day I can’t imagine loving anyone more than my dad. As in, the man who raised me and cared for me and loved me throughout my life. Not the man who condemned me to Hell from birth because some woman ate his lunch one day.

    I’ve kind of rambled on a little. But fundamentalist Christianity is stupid. I consider myself to be open-minded and I accept that people have different beliefs to me, but some things… gah. There’s no diplomatic way of saying some things.

    If it interests anyone, I do believe in a god, but not an exclusively Christian god. I think that there is only one god, but no true religion- the only ‘true’ religion is the one that you as an individual believe in from the heart, and that makes you the best person that you can be- and this includes atheism (which I understand is not a religion) and other ways of life such as humanism.

    Basically, as long as you’re a good person, it’s fine.

    Ooh my, that was some ramble.

  61. Avoiding the “abortion is murder debate”, two huge issues:
    1. How is it that in Chick Tracts there is almost always someone in a position of authority cramming their religion down people’s throat. That’s probably the most egregious abuse of power possible.
    2. “You’ll be held accountable for murder” “That’s ok, I’ll just get ‘saved’ before I die, and it won’t matter how many people I’ve murdered/tortured/raped/etc”

    Boy, that’s a world i want to live in. “You’re in a possition of weakness right now, and I am an authority figure. Let me warp this to my twisted advantage and cram my religion down your throat with a guilt trip and promise of everlasting misery. “

  62. You know what I don’t understand?
    This entire idea whether human life starts at conception.
    I argue that it is a potential human.
    My friend got pissed at that. He said
    “ALL LIFE STARTS AT CONCEPTION.”
    So I asked him, “Do they deserve the same human rights?”
    He said yes.
    I asked him this “Than tell me, what is your opinion of twins absorbing each other?”
    It becomes problematic. You have people who have done nothing wrong. Yet in the womb, they absorbed a twin. Thus they are murderers because of that.
    It becomes an extremely messy situation.

  63. Aaaand a pretty awesome ramble too, Laura. Kudos.

    On another note, the baby in the last panel… I had a nagging feeling I’ve seen him before. Then it hit me…

    Look at his mouth! Someone just add the caption “IMMA FIRIN MAH LAZOR!!!”

  64. Does anyone else think that last panel was taken out of context? “Oh, my life wouldn’t be the same without you, I might have actually gone to college, and gotten a job that wasn’t at a fast food place. I wouldn’t have to work two jobs just to pay for your ridiculously high medical bills.”

    Also my theory is this: Eric had a severe mental disability, but he had cosmetic surgery, which made him look normal, except for the fact that he looks disgusted all the time; those doctors couldn’t quite get his expression right. This is why he didn’t notice that broken condom. Ashley knew nothing of this until her horribly deformed baby was born, (it runs in Eric’s family; Uncle Mike had it too) and thus figured out Eric’s terrible secret.

  65. “Yes you’re the most precious gift I’ve ever recieved. It kinda sucks. Like, that’s the best you can do Jesus? How bout some money? Or even a normal looking baby?”

  66. As stupid as Chick tracts consistently are there’s a funny thing about Christian love here that I think goes unaddressed because it’s more of a sideplot.

    Fact is… if there’s one thing Jesus preaches in the bible, it’s to take care of the poor. The poor are blessed, and rich people go to hell.

    Yet these right-wing christian fuckers like Chick LOVE the rich and HATE the poor and Chicklefuck here depicts his view of what poor people are like with Billy Bob and his family.

    Far as Chick and his ilk are concerned poor people… actually Chick and his ilk treat poor people with the exact same contempt his kind treats women. To these right wing conservative motherfuckers a woman is either a pure but infantile and childlike angel or a filthy whore. And poor people are either dewey eyed sad little children or filthy troglodytes.

    Fact is, if you’re poor and you lose your job, that really fucking sucks, especially if you have a family. Chickypoo on the other hand, showing his christian love for the poor, depicts such people as filthy slobbish retards.

    And that’s the damned funny thing about Consie Capitalist Christians. (The CCC’s) Because if their religion where TRUE… well they’d all be burning right next to us unbelievers and the rich people they love so much.

    Better pray your god is NOT real Jack T. Chick… because you might be in for a toasty afterlife then…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *