What? You Aren't Pro-Choice?

You may be aware of the Duggars, an Arkansas family, who just had their 17th child. I confess that the accounts that I read of them sounds a bit odd--giving every child a first name that starts with a "J"--but as I (and others) have pointed out before, demography is destiny. Evangelical Christians like the Duggars having children means that their culture will survive into the next generation.

If you want to see how tremendously hate-filled the left is, read the comments on the news story in the August 3, 2007 San Francisco Chronicle, here. Over here, however, is a pro-choicer who admits after thinking about it for a while:

Reproductive rights go both ways. It's HER uterus. PERIOD. She can do whatever she wants with it, and until my taxes start paying for her child-rearing, I should have a nice cup of [colorful expression deleted] and tend to my own business. As far as I can tell, these folks are not on welfare or any type of government aid. The kids are home-schooled, so they're not clogging the public school system. They're living in a 7000 square-foot home, not holed up in a log cabin in the Ozarks, inbreeding and plotting a government overthrow, or refusing to pay their taxes. The kids are well-nourished and well-dressed. We're not hearing about the girls being married off to cousins, or sold into prostitution. The boys aren't being arrested for hate crimes, drug trafficking, or gang activity.

So, you know what? Live and let live.

It is a rather interesting question, isn't it? Do pro-choicers really mean it when they say they are "pro-choice"? I'm afraid that a lot of the crowd you see commenting at the San Francisco Chronicle website are just pro-abortion, and anti-children.

UPDATE: Adam Graham has a roundup of liberal reactions to the Duggars. So much for tolerance!