I would guess that for a number that rounds up to 100% of the readers (well, those who don't realize NYMag is anything other than propaganda and social engineering) all their cognitive processes halted as soon as they hit "right-wing" in the subhead.
How many of them stopped right there to consider: "If children do not in some sense 'belong' to parents who would then exercise a level of control over them, to whom would they belong? Are they just like wild animals belonging to no one? What other candidates are there? Passersby? Highest bidders? Ah, of course, the only other reasonable candidate is the State. Children are not property, and thus belong to the State. Wait--is that right?"
Through this "reductio ad absurdum" we can see that these people cannot possibly be exercising rational cognitive processes. We should all stop silently assuming they do.
What liberals actually believe is that children are adults, and therefore belong to no one in the same sense that you belong to no one. It sounds ridiculous, but these are the same people who believe animals are people, men are women, good is evil, lies are truth, and niggers are human.
I wonder how they settled the issue about when a "mass of cells" becomes an adult?
Ha, as if! Typical trick question by conservatives! The answer is "whenever is convenient to the liberal claim at hand, but better left undefined, and better left unrecognized".
I wonder how they settled the issue about when a "mass of cells" becomes an adult?
Obviously, they consult the Talmud, which says the breath of life, which they also consider to be the soul, enters the body when the baby first gets air in its lungs. And now you know why liberals are so insistent on believing that life does not begin at conception. Their god (Ba'al) says it doesn't!
I would guess that for a number that rounds up to 100% of the readers (well, those who don't realize NYMag is anything other than propaganda and social engineering) all their cognitive processes halted as soon as they hit "right-wing" in the subhead.
How many of them stopped right there to consider: "If children do not in some sense 'belong' to parents who would then exercise a level of control over them, to whom would they belong? Are they just like wild animals belonging to no one? What other candidates are there? Passersby? Highest bidders? Ah, of course, the only other reasonable candidate is the State. Children are not property, and thus belong to the State. Wait--is that right?"
Through this "reductio ad absurdum" we can see that these people cannot possibly be exercising rational cognitive processes. We should all stop silently assuming they do.
What liberals actually believe is that children are adults, and therefore belong to no one in the same sense that you belong to no one. It sounds ridiculous, but these are the same people who believe animals are people, men are women, good is evil, lies are truth, and niggers are human.
I wonder how they settled the issue about when a "mass of cells" becomes an adult?
Ha, as if! Typical trick question by conservatives! The answer is "whenever is convenient to the liberal claim at hand, but better left undefined, and better left unrecognized".
Obviously, they consult the Talmud, which says the breath of life, which they also consider to be the soul, enters the body when the baby first gets air in its lungs. And now you know why liberals are so insistent on believing that life does not begin at conception. Their god (Ba'al) says it doesn't!