i can't figure out what would be wrong with saying he's a maybe, not too short or to long...

perhaps it was just different times and different things, it might not have been in his head at all back then

funny you should mention something regarding pro-life. i was driving to work this morning on the interstate during morning rush hour traffic and saw a hideous sight: a truck with an enlarged REAL photograph of an aborted fetus in a garbage can displayed on all sides of the truck. underneath read the large words: abortion- may god have mercy on all of us. i was appaulled. i honked at the driver who was some old redneck-looking woman with no teeth and stuck my middle finger up at her and mouthed the words "F$@K YOU!" it was definitely my proudest moment. how can they let people drive that vehicle around? i can't even have a bumber sticker with the word "ass" on it yet i am allowed to see this during my morning commute- also when lots of kiddies are on their way to school. any thoughts??

Yes, I have a thought - If you can't spell appalled or bumper, and flipping someone off is your proudest moment, maybe you shouldn't be commenting. Yep, that's what I think...

did i offend you colfaxeng? was that you driving the truck this morning???
excuse me for not enabling spell-check every time i post. perhaps the message was more important than a couple of mis-spelled words. but hey, thanks for spending your precious time editing.

computerus and uterus rhyme! why didn't I think of that?

Dr. Seuss is not against abortion. He is merely saying that if you weren't born as you - you might be born as something else, such as three baked potatoes. He believes that the soul is looking for a vessel. He isn't adamant that the vessel be human. (Although I doubt baked potatoes get presents. "Bacon bits! Just what I always wanted!)

But I digress.

Once I saw this thing on Dr. Seuss, it was like one of those A&E biography's or something, and he used to write political cartoons before he wrote the children's book's, I found that really intresting they even showed some of his work and they were funny, in regards to the birthday thing I think he is just trying to make kids feel special for being born thats all.

I think that the problem here is reading too much into this. It's just a Dr. Seuss book. Plus, if you weren't born, I suppose that you would be an isn't!

God...people expressing their opinions in AMERICA? What will they think of next? I love the mental image of k-ron commuting, looking up and being bombarded with an opinion that OH HOLY JESUS isn’t his/her own, and thinking “this must be stopped!” An opinion that is being expressed so much more creatively then k-ron’s little and oh-so-original finger solute.

As if pro-choicers are the only ones with the right to be loud and vocal about this controversial topic. I'm only an eighteen year old girl, and even I have to say: grow up.

As for Dr.Seus (unless there's a bloody fetus featured on the page as well as on the side of a truck) we can probably assume he wasn’t being literal. I, for one, don’t want to start taking the man literally: "The racial and incestuous insinuations of Thing 1 and Thing 2 explained." Eep.

Red Snake- it's nice to know that you think a picture of an aborted fetus in a garbage can is creative. i am sure that's what the kids on the school bus thought too when it drove past them.
and by the way, i extend my finger salute is towards you too, my darling 18 year old.

i'd like to point out that Horton Hears a Who, another Dr. Seuss classic, has often been interpreted as having a pro-life message- "a person's a person, no matter how small"

Have you seen the one-finger salute?
It's given from a car that goes toot!
Or written about on a geeks' computer,
That's the story of the a lame saluter!

A lame saluter! Drats!

Don't you just love it when a liberal is offended! They are so cute when angry.

I wonder who she will flip off next?

Its that kind of spontaneous ability to verbalize ones thoughts that sets them apart. I'm sure that liberal arts degree comes in handy for such expressions.

Ok ok ok, perhaps she isn't representative of all liberals... Maybe she's here to represent morons (which I concede to exist on both sides of the fence).

Put your big girl panties on and get over it.

Seuss certainly falls back on "pleasant" enough -- or is that a running theme? I have to confess to not having read the book.

... and I'll take the offended liberal flipping the bird any day. When conservatives get offended, shit done tend to get blowed up.

dr. seuss was likely taking a creative approach in celebrating kids' birthdays - just my opinion, although it's interesting to hear he was a political cartoonist... kind of makes the mind wander then, eh? interesting...

i really want to comment that i can appreciate the repulsion k-ron felt at the pro-life truck. it actually shows an aborted fetus on each side of the truck noting the number of weeks it had developed before the abortion. for purposes of this discussion, my position on the pro-life vs. pro-choice debate is irrelevant - everyone should be allowed to take whatever stance they choose. what i do argue is this point: being stuck behind that truck at a stoplight was crude way of forcing the pro-life position on me.

I would imagine that the good DR. was just saying like many others believe you are special to be born!

I also think that the point of the large fetus(baby) image was to shock you and think that killing a baby is wrong and sick and is shocking. So maybe, just maybe those children that saw it will think twice about having carless sex and thinking that an abortion is the way out of responsibility. Hmmm.. so many people dont want to take responsibility for their actions. That could be the point of the large shocking picture..

hmmmmmmm...

I think you can take almost anything someone says and make it into a political message. I'd say Seuss was just simplifying the concept of a birthday to make children happier and happier.

As for the nasty truck thing, I'm an eighteen-year-old girl as well, and I agree with k-ron. A picture of a bloody fetus is just not something that should be put on a sign in public.

That's not to say a proclamation of opinion is wrong, Red Snake. There are plenty of ways to express your opinions that aren't disgusting. Try protesting, try bumper stickers with words instead of blood, try talking to people, try writing letters, try campaigning. Try something that actually makes a POSITIVE difference.

Obscene images are not appropriate and nobody wants to see that kind of thing. If I saw that while driving, I'd probably throw up. Ho wis it going to help the cause?

And colfaxeng, if your sentences are difficult to read because you don't know how to correctly punctuate quotations, such as "appalled" or "bumper," then maybe you shouldn't be correcting others' spelling.

Well, that fetus deserves the chance k-ron got (to be a good person and live a happy life). K-ron might not have taken advantage of that choice and turned to drugs to slowly destroy her brain, and, now that I think about it, K-ron blew her chance, maybe her and that fetus should swap places...

Is baby fetus mobile legal to drive? Isn't that a distraction to drivers? Or is that just a phrase made up so people can sue each other?

Also: Steve you are evil for knowingly starting all this. Enjoy the show.

Audrey, maybe people need to see that truck...most people never have to make the decision to abort a baby, and wouldn't know how horrible it is. There are two instances in which abortion is even remotely acceptable (and still disgusting and brutal) if a women is raped, or if keeping the baby will kill the mother and therefore kill the baby as well.

The bloody truck has a purpose. Most people think of abortion as something on the same moral level as a tonsillectomy, and don't realize that the end result, well, looks like THAT. Horrific as it is to look at, it brings the real issue to the forefront in the way that couldn't be accomplished by any number of touching slogans on bumper stickers. Unpleasant for kids to look at? Probably, and I'd want to be around when my kids saw something like that, to discuss it with them. But it was having seen pictures like that in the early 80's when I was nine years old that kept my pants on many a time as a teenager.

Regarding Dr. Seuss: I wouldn't put it past the guy (whose pre-children's-book political cartoons were quite conservative) to put a message like that in a book, but I wouldn't necessarily assume that's what he was doing, either.

I understand that the truck has its point, and to make that point is the objective. That's really not too big a stretch.

My question was simply this: if it is not appropriate for a child to see nudity in a movie, how then does it become acceptable for them to see bloody aborted fetus larger than life on a moving vehicle?

I don't disagree with the message, just the delivery.

While we're at it... why is it so surprising that someone would dislike green eggs and ham. Who would want spoiled eggs and ham??

Before anyone describes the good doctor as a conservative right wing republican, this was the same guy who wrote that story about the Lorax and the forest being destroyed. Sounds like a left wing liberal tree-hugger to me!

oh, yeah, and the guy was a genius at what he did. his work has probably influenced more contemporary artists than we will ever know.

I believe that it's necessary for someone making any decision to be sure that it's an informed one. I think FetusMobile had the right idea, but the wrong execution. People should not be stuck staring at something like that in the middle of a traffic jam, but to go about making an informed decision, you must know how abortions are done and what happens to the fetus afterwards. You should know all these things, and then make your choice.

Re: Dr. Seuss...
He's got a point. If you're not born... you wouldn't be much.

I would like to say one thing. Right or wrong, the aborted fetus truck is obviously effective. Don't you see k-ron, you have become an even more effective tool for their message than the truck itself. You actually have to be in their town, physically by the truck to see the message. On the other hand, you have now spread their shock-message to the far reaches of the world. You are nothing but a pawn in their little game MUWAHAHAHA.

Is it wrong to bring the reality of the situation to light in such a graphic way? Perhaps it is. I personally think that it is a tad on the inappropriate side. Would it be OK to campaign against drunk driving by showing the mangled body of an accident victim? Maybe not, but would we all be having this conversation if they were driving a big truck around that said "PRO LIFE ROCKS!”, I think not. I have to ask the question, are you so offended because of the inappropriateness of the picture, or because someone who has a differing opinion is using very effective propaganda?

I also have to say that mouthing profanity and 'flipping the bird' as a means of combating inappropriate advertising is about on par with monkey throwing feces at the zoo. Sure, it feels good, and you get their attention, but are you really sending the message that you are a very 'capable' person ( I use the term capable because it is the end of the day and I am having some trouble coming up with a better term).

BTW, the good doctor rules. I have read 'Theirs a Wocket in my Pocket' every night for a month now. I don’t think that he is necessarily Pro-Life, I think that he is just a shrewd business man. Without kids, who would read his books? The man is simply trying to encourage children to grow up and have teeming herd of kids so that his book can fly off the shelves in droves.

I would also like to say that my grammar and spelling tend to be quite lacking, so feel free to point out any errors. I can take it.

Wow, k-ron...a litle angry?
The truck is definitely a good thing for people to see. You can't coddle humans and live in a bubble. That's why people are ignorant, because for fear of offending one person...no one speaks the truth anymore.

/who would want a sticker that says 'ass' anyway?
//i didn't think dr. seuss even liked kids that much

I'm not looking to get into the whole "isn't" and "wasn't" thing, but I am still a little freaked out by the "would you do it in a boat, would you do it with a goat" bit, along with "would you do it in a car, eat them, eat them, here they are..." Since the green eggs and ham door was opened, I thought this concern was on topic.

I wouldn't be surprised if there was a hidden message in the book. It is widely speculated that his book "Marvin K Mooney will you please go now," was a call for Nixon to resign at the height of the watergate scandal. Marvin K Mooney was my favorite book as a kid. I haven't had a chance to read it in a long long time but the book details all the ways Marvin could go home just as long as he gets lost as soon as possible.

""i'd like to point out that Horton Hears a Who, another Dr. Seuss classic, has often been interpreted as having a pro-life message- "a person's a person, no matter how small"

i thought Horton was a commie not pro-life. or is he both?

If you right-wing folks really believe that pictures of dead babies on trucks really scare kids out of sex or abortions you are very mistaken. I guess thats not really a new thing for you guys though, being mistaken i mean.

Dr. Suess:
When did we, as a country, get so deep into backwards political correctness that saying "not being born means you don't exist" is viewed as a politically biased message? I think it's stating the obvious, but the speculation itself is a sad commentary on people nowadays.

Fetus Mobile:
K-Ron's an idiot, but I can understand his reaction, and will try to explain it.

We live in a sheltered world where all kinds of horrific things happen behind our backs and we get only the neatly packaged bi-product. Hell, we're bombarded with advertising like 3000 times a day, but we don't see the cows getting slaughtered to make that juicy burger, or what the ACTUAL factory where that sassy new outfit was made in looks like. We get the end results. So for many people, abortions are supposed to look like little black baggies with a synch tie around the top. K-Rob's reaction was expected, it's the kind of reaction you have when you don't understand something. It made him angry and afraid. And remember, the first step is always denial, so he felt he needed to correct this injustice.

As for potential kids seeing it, I hope they DO see it. I hope they ask questions, and I hope the image becomes burned into their minds, because IT'S IMPORTANT. Sorry to blow the powdered sugar off your cake, but this is the world we live in. Informed decisions come from informed people, not blissful ignorance. And guess what people, the sex, cursing, and drugs you strive to keep your kids miles away from is inches from them on a regular basis, and there's not much you can do about it so long as you live on planet Earth. Your kids are smarter than you think, instill them with the ability to make decisions rather than putting blinders on them.

I was part of a pro-life demonstration recently and nobody gave me the finger.

I was so disappointed.

Bill Hicks on abortion (paraphrased):

"Have you ever seen an issue as divisive as abortion. Some of my friends think that these pro-life people are annoying assholes.... while some of my friends think they are evil fucks. Why can't we just get along, they are annoying evil asshole fucks"

Or something like that, it has been awhile since I have listened to Rant in E-Minor.

A lot of legal abortions aren't done so far into pregnancy as to recognize a fetus.

I would rather not rely on human beings' good judgement or inquisitive nature to find out the source of the picture.

In the end though, I don't think kids would be able to comprehend any of the political undertones that may be present in those books. A "wasn't" is simply another type of entity in the realm of Seuss.

Abortion is a touchy subject. I personally am not for abortion, but I have been faced with this problem.

My girlfriend got pregnant even though we were taking precautions not to. We both were not ready for a child. She wanted an abortion and I did not.

I gave her the choice because it was her body. She has to carry the baby. She has to deal with the consequences. When god comes down on judgment day it will be her who is judged. Not me, not you, but her.

The point im trying to make here is:

A woman's choice to abortion does not effect "you" wither you are for or ageist until you are faced with the "choice".

Who are you to judge someone else for the choices they make in life. Only god will judge.

It should be a woman's right to choose.

And as far as the fetus truck goes. You have a right to protest, but that is going to far. Children do not need to see a gigantic bloody fetus while traveling to school. body. She has to carry the baby. She has to deal with the consenquences. When god comes down on judgment day it will be her who is judged. Not me, not you, but her.

The point im trying to make here is:

A womans choice to abortion does not effect "you" wether you are for or agaist until you are faced with the "choice".

Who are you to judge someone else for the choices thay make in life. Only god will judge.

It should be a womans right to choose.

And as far as the fetus truck goes. You have a right to protest, but that is going to far. Children do not need to see a gigantic bloody fetus while travling to school.

The previous post doesn't get it from the pro-life point of view. Could anyone simply stand by while a mother killed or hurt her child? THAT is how a pro-life person sees the fetus-- as a child who simply hasn't had a chance to be born yet. This is the big difference between the two sides, of course. If you DID believe in that point of view, that the fetus WAS a child, how could you not try to act? I empathize with their strong emotions. If you had that point of view, how would you believe God would judge YOU if you did nothing. I don't believe most of these people are trying to tell a woman what to do, they are simply acting on their conscience.

Next subject please, Steve.

Gladly. Some people are pro-choice, some people are pro-life -- but just about everybody is pro-fart story. New (old) subject coming up. :)

I'm agreeing with Hazeleyedpisces here, or rather continuing the thought.
Let's say it is ok to have photographic images of dead fetuses displayed publicly with the intent of dissuading women from having abortions.
Then I think it should be acceptable to show a blown up photograph of a woman putting a condom onto a man's penis on all sides of a truck.

heck, just the picture of a penis on the side of a truck would be enough to dissuade girls from having sex. ew.

I hate it when people say its a womans body so its her choice. The life in her is not her body it is a whole other body who is living in her waiting to be born.

What gets me is that if I were to somehow injure a pregnant woman on the way to an abortion clinic and the baby died I could be charged with murder! How is that? She was going to go kill an innocent life inside her but because my action caused the death then its murder by law. Something sounds mixed up. Either killing the baby in her is murder or it isnt. You cant have it both ways. It is not the mothers choice to kill. This is not the wild. We are humans. We do not kill our babies just because they get in our way!

Or we could just use birth control in the first place. The there'd be no need to even have this discussion.

Duh!

"What gets me is that if I were to somehow injure a pregnant woman on the way to an abortion clinic and the baby died I could be charged with murder! How is that?"

How is that? Well, that's because our openly anti-abortion president made it a crime, as part of his long-term effort to overturn Roe v. Wade.

The aborted fetus on the truck: A "real" picture of what a woman does when she aborts a baby? I didn't see it, but have seen similarly grotesque images for the same purpose and none of them were remotely represenative of what a fetus looks like in the first - or even second term.

Pro-life maniacs: please, please get your facts straight before posting your illiterate rants on a website. How can someone have a debate when they are too lazy to research their own position?

These are the kind of people who derive their political opinions from pictures on the sides of trucks.

In regards to the ORIGINAL question, which is whether or not we think the book contained a message about abortion in the first place:

In what year was this book published? Was abortion still illegal at the time, or had the law already changed? Was it an issue that was being debated publicly? Dr. Seuss's stories very often contained messages and lessons that plenty of adults hadn't learned, so I wouldn't put it past him to include a pro-life message in this story during the height of controversy.

FDL -- at 21 weeks -- middle of the second trimester -- babies who are born accidentally can now sometimes be saved. Did you know that? And they look just like the picture on the truck... except their limbs, torso, and head are still connected, and they're not lying in a bloody mess in a trash can. It is still fully legal to pay to have that child killed for any reason at all as long as his/her head is still inside his/her mother. At twelve weeks gestation (still in the first trimester), a baby looks remarkably like, well, a baby, except she's the size of a newborn kitten. Her heart's beating, she can suck, her synapses are firing, her kidneys are making urine. Speaking of not researching your position.

At 28 days a baby is already able to move a mimic walking motions. 28 days people!

The "opinion" I express is not just politcal FDL. It is the truth that Murder is wrong and just because a woman chooses to kill the life inside her because she chooses not to take responsibility for her actions doesnt make it right. It is still murder and should still be treated as such. I thank God that your mother didnt murder you!

The line of defense for pro-choice people is growing slimmer and slimmer with every year. As our technology increases, we are able to discover things about babies in the womb that we could never see before, and so to arbitrarily draw a line in the sand between "living person" and "fetal matter" is becoming more and more invalid and contributing to junk science. I've heard people justify abortions as not an act of murder for many reasons:

- the fetus has no memory (neither does someone in a coma, or a newborn baby).
- the fetus cannot operate independantly (should we do away with life support then?)
- the fetus has no feelings or emotions (at 5 weeks it's yawning, crying, and stretching).
- the fetus is still developing (what is the definition of developing? Splitting cells and growing our organs to full capacity? We "develop" in this manner until well into our 20's).

When you get to the bottom line, there is no black and white way to say that a fetus is anything short of a human life. I used to be pro-choice until MY WIFE convinced me of this now obvious fact. For many it has to do with God, for me it has to do with science.

And now, a childhood memory:

During Saturday morning cartoons there would be a LOT of anti-abortion ads from some Christian sect, I forget which. But the ads were always vague and ended with "Life: It's a beautiful choice".

The only thing about the ads I remember is that the end of each one I thought: "Wow, Mom's are killing so many kids they have to ask them nicely to stop? Will Mom kill me next?"

I was a confused child.

So lets say abortion becomes illegal. Are all you pro-lifers who have nothing better to do than obsess about this going to have the time to adopt some of the God knows how many adandoned babies? Some drug/alcohol addicted, abused, or mentally/physically handicapped. What about the ones who have it even worse, living with parents who never wanted them and are abused or just treated like.....furniture? oh.....you guys are gonna take them all in? whew. that was a close one. (And I think Dr. Seuss was just a kids book)Please excuse spelling!

You're right, cindylouwho. They're inferior, and a hassle. We should just kill them all from the getgo to make room for the worthy people. Zeig heil!

I am pro-Life but i believe it should be up to the woman. It is her body. Reguardless of what you may think about the fetus. It is not and should not ever be anyone eles decission.

It people like you, who complain about everything. Smoking for instance

They are passing laws banning smoking, every where.

Who the fuck is the government to dictate wether i can smoke, or have an abortion. I am a free person and i should have my own choice.

Abortion --

Your arguement, "I am pro-Life but i believe it should be up to the woman. It is her body. Reguardless of what you may think about the fetus. It is not and should not ever be anyone eles decission..." is very weak.

The fetus in question has a separate DNA from the mother -- it has a separate growth rate from the mother -- it has a separate set of nutritional needs from the mother. And as any mother can tell you, once pregnant , it isn't "just your body"...

"Smoking" is not a valid comparison.
If you choose to smoke around someone else, it typically doesn't kill them -- it might annoy them or make them sick, but usually doesn't kill.

Prior to becoming pregnant, 99% of all women chose to have sex. The government does not regulate this choice. The consequence of the choice was pregnancy -- the baby by life's very nature wants to live. The baby does not choose abortion, and it IS the body belonging to the baby that is at issue -- the mother may believe herself to be inconvenienced, but science will tell you that there are definitely two bodies involved in the choice.

You have your right to choice already... you can choose your partner, you can choose your romantic location, and you can even choose your baby's name. None of those are regulated by the government.

You have plenty of choices -- making a choice yields consequences. Sometimes consequences are good things, like babies that love their mother unconditionally. Sometimes they are not -- like bleeding to death or being dismembered.

choose wisely...

The "Face of Pro-Choice America" includes little saline-fried ones. We can't get around that fact, and being stuck behind a truck with that disgusting image is the perfect metaphor for our dilemna. K-Ron is right to be horrified by those photos - it's a horrifying thing. The display of them is surely less horrifying than the fact that we do this to our fellow human beings. Think about it without importing your political views into it. People treating people as disposable items is not something that helps women and children. It is a distorted sense of compassion that sees the destruction of another as the proper response to an unwanted child. Women and children deserve better than that. And K-Ron, despite your anger at the truck driver, do you have no sense of human solidarity with the baby shown in that image that would make you angry that someone mutilated him or her? I honestly believe that many pro-Choice folks want to be compassionate - it's just that there is this unavoidable fact of what actually happens.

igaudreau - "Audrey, maybe people need to see that truck.....There are two instances in which abortion is even remotely acceptable ..."

Number one, I don't think that the "need" of certain people to see the truck would justify the horror of many others at having to see it.

Also, your opinions about when abortion is "acceptable" are certainly not those held by everyone else in the world, and do not justify the actions of the rest of the world. Some of us do think differently, and a disgusting truck driven by a redneck isn't exactly going to change a strong conviction.

I completely agree with Megan - good intention, but a bad way of carrying it out.

And Bobby, saying it isn't "really" political - if you haven't noticed, this is a comedy website....

I have read Seuss' biography. He was a left-leaning liberal, and when some pro-lifers began to use the line from Horton Hears a Who, "a person's a person, no matter how small," he took legal steps to prevent them.

"And Bobby, saying it isn't 'really' political - if you haven't noticed, this is a comedy website...."

When did I say that? I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say. Much confusion...

"When did we, as a country, get so deep into backwards political correctness that saying "not being born means you don't exist" is viewed as a politically biased message? I think it's stating the obvious, but the speculation itself is a sad commentary on people nowadays."

My point was that Steve opened this for the sake of humor, poking fun at people who read deeply into things like that. Saying Dr. Seuss wrote a parable against abortion is a joke.

Ahh, okay. Gotcha. Although I would argue that Steve was genuinely contemplative about the subject. Coulda been tongue in cheeck though, I suppose.

hahahaha.
and
"... and I'll take the offended liberal flipping the bird any day. When conservatives get offended, shit done tend to get blowed up."
exactly.
hehehe.

Jessica,

... and when scared women exercise the right to choice that some liberals like to celebrate with big parades and balloons, babies tend to get burned and diced. And that's not too damn funny.

bobby - i think we're somewhere in the middle. there is obviously a real discussion going on here right now, but if people don't reminf themselves that it is partly ironic, they miss the point.

"Would it be OK to campaign against drunk driving by showing the mangled body of an accident victim?"

umm....actually, they sort of already do that, but a little less to the extreme. When I was in high school i saw a don't-drink-and-drive sort of presentation one time, that had a slide show. two things i specifically remember him saying: "This is a car that had burst into flames. see where it looks like melted plastic on the seats? that's actually melted skin and fat! and see, that white thing right there? that's a skull!" and also, "Here is a car that flipped [enter number of times here] and landed on it's roof. See right there where i'm pointing with my lazor pointer? that's a foot!" I think what disturbed me most was the chipper, chearfull voice the presenter used.

am I going to join in on the pro-life/pro-choice debate? No. Not because i don't have an oppinion, but because....i don't feel like arguing today. you're all doing a wonderful job without me.

also, i can see how the Dr. Seuss passage could mean that, or be taken that way, but i can also see how it could just be another silly, catchy type thing that Dr. Seuss came up with.

*dee

PS: Dr. Seuss is the best. I read Oh! the Places You'll Go at my High School Graduation.

That is funny, Audrey - I was just reminding myself how hilariously ironic it is that many people who honestly wish to protect the disabled and most vulnerable members of our society, become apoplectic if someone brings up the dismemberment of living fetuses.

Well golly I think you all need to grow up.
This is a website for humor and you make me throw up.
Steve sneezed and hundred of you got all in jumbles.
A poor concerned Ben flipped a bird and you all started the mumbles.
So what if this is the way a guy takes care of his troubles.
The lesson to be learned is a fair one indeed.
This is America the beautiful land of the free.
Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion.
So don't insult over overexamine like a doctor to an incision.
Let the kid flip off whomever he wants.
I personally thinks it disgusting to see babies who can't grow up.
This doesn't mean that all I'm pro life or pro choice.
It just means I stated my opinion by using my voice.

Whoops. K-Ron.

So what's your point? K-Ron expressed his opinion, and so are we. You're kind of stepping all over your own argument there.

PS - dee* that's so cool, I got that book as a present at my high school graduation!

Two cents: I live in what is known nationally (and embarrasingly) as one of the most conservative cities in our great country. We ban and censor all kinds of things, especially art. So, imagine my disgust when I passed the Planned Parenthood and saw petitioners with BIG posters of mutilated and unborn children. These were GORY with forceps and the whole nine yards. I thought to myself, OK...what is more offensive in this city: "pornography" or the exploitation of children? (and I'm saying an unborn fetus is a child because that is the context that those picketing use.) I don't think they should be allowed to show those photos on the street. A television station could never show anything so graphic.
But on the Dr. Suess business? I think that he is simply posing a question...consider if you hadn't been born? And maybe that is the first time a child explores the idea that the world may exist without him or her in it? Very thought provoking. It wouldn't occur to a new reader, but golly, has it made a bunch of grown ups in this forum think...

Special K

I would just like everyone to know that I was just referred to this site by a friend. He first pointed me in the direction of "Love & Methane: An Open Discussion" where I proceeded to laugh my ass off. I then quickly realized that I will now not be getting much done at work today. That is until I came across this article that brought me crashing back to reality and reminded me of why I need to encourage everyone to VOTE DEMOCRAT. No, not liberal... Democrat.

Why can't everyone just leave everyone else to their own opinions and shut up. That is a crack at both sides because neither side would be having the discussion if one of them hadn't started it.

Yes, by the way, that picture is ridiculous it shouldn't be displayed where it can be seen by children like that. The people that use those pictures are the same ones that complain about the violence on television, talk about being desensitized.

The redneck looking woman driving that truck probably has a brother that was convicted of murdering an abortion Dr.

Dr. Seuss's "pre-children's-book political cartoons were quite conservative"?

I don't think so. Check out Richard Minear's book, "Dr. Seuss Goes to War." He worked for the far-left magazine PM, where his cartoons savaged anyone to the right of Harry Hopkins. He was about as "conservative," and about as nice, as Herblock. (And oh, yeah, he published some particularly nasty wartime cartoons portraying Japanese-Americans were all buck-toothed, four-eyed fifth-columnists who should be rounded up and interned post-haste.)

When I re-read "Horton Hears a Who" after my first child was born (after not having seen it for nearly 30 years), the pro-life implications of "a person's a person no matter how small" jumped off the page at me, since it directly refutes the arguments of those who argue that "a lump of cells" can't possibly possess rights. Since Dr. Seuss was a screaming leftie, I often wondered whether he stuck with the left on abortion, once that became a live issue in U.S. politics. If so, I wonder how he dealt with the cognitive dissonance he must have experienced between his pro-choice views and the language he had used in "Horton Hears a Who."

People..People!!! I think the whole "Abortion Klabortion" posting was supposed to be funny. It's now turned into a whole political debate on abortion.

I think Dr Seuss was a brilliant writer and Illustrator. before he came up with some fun stuff, kids were reading "Dick and Jane". All his book seem to have a positive message.

"happy birthday to you"-message: everyone is unique and special
"Oh, the place you will go"-message: life is an adventure, with ups and down, dont be afraid to live it
"Yertle the turtle"-message: a dictator who exploits his people for his own personal gain, will fall eventually.
"Gertrude McFuzz"-message: If you are not happy with your apperance, be careful what you wish for
"Horton hears a hoo"-message: we are all different, but we all count"

In my opinion if Dr Seuss was alive today, he would be voting for anyone but Bush. Bush is Yertle the Turtle and Kerry is a Turtle named Mac. Read the book if you want ot know how this election is going to end.

i am against abortion but i dont think i could persuade another mother to have an abortion. it is the womans body, and every woman is different.

PBS is premiering a film on television called "The Political Dr. Seuss" on October 26 which ought to be of interest to some of you, it portrays the originating idea behind Horton Hears A Who as a "political statement about democracy and isolationism." But I think Dr. Seuss was good at creating wonderful moral fables which individuals can apply in a wide range of specific issues, and in a sense, the original specific inspiration does not matter as much as the underlying universal truth and its applications.

It was actually not Seuss himself but his widow who took legal measures to stop a pro-life group from using Horton hears a Who on a poster. It doesn't necessarily reflect on his or her opinion on the issue, just on whether his illustrations can be used for such purposes without consent.

I think abortion should remain legal:

While I myself do not give a damn about OTHER PEOPLE (that means not yourself) I do not believe Pro-life should impose its opinion on OTHER PEOPLE(that means not yourself). You have no right to dictate if some OTHER PERSON(that means not yourself) can or cannot have an abortion if they so please.

Other people might call me a hipocrite since the fact that I do not give a damn about OTHER PEOPLE (that means not yourself) and the fact that I believe abortion should be legal might be interpreted as conflicting. This is not so. I believe abortion should remain legal so that the option remains open. If you are a pro life person then influence your family and friends to become pro life as well, and simply don't use abortion clinics.

No one has the right to impose their opinions over other people's. You are not some OTHER PERSON(that means not yourself) that means that you do not know some other persons reasons or circumstances should they choose to abort.

And for the 'abortion = murder' bit: fuck off, unless you just murdered your pregnant girlfriend it is none of your business.

Right... because a fetus is only a human life when its own murder is simultaneous with its mother's. That makes sense.

Hey Raffy there are actually two people involved in every abortion, the mother and the fucking baby (that means not yourself). Sure would be nice if the person getting KILLED (that means not yourself) had a say in things.

You know, I love the fact that all of you are debating abortion here, many of you spouting off your pro-life rhetoric, and yet I'm willing to bet that none of you have actually ever had to make this choice. It's easy to sit there in your cushy computer chair and point fingers, make assumptions, and dictate how people should behave. Are you adopting? Are you volunteering your time at shelters? Are you coming up with ideas to help educate kids not to have sex? What are you doing to make this world a better place?

If your great plan--to make abortion illegal--actually gets passed by the idiot I'm forced to call president, have you actually thought through what will happen? Have you considered that people will still have sex, women will still have dangerous abortions, and the amount of unwanted children in the world will multiply? But I'm sure you're not thinking about that.

I get so disgusted by right-wing anti-abortion rhetoric, because it so often ignores the woman. It ignores what will happen if abortions are made illegal. And it ignores the simple fact that you don't get to decide for someone else how to live their life.

Wow. I know I'm getting into this debate late, but I just have to comment on yet another oh so prevalent example of public ignorance and partisan hatred as a substitute for even a semblance of intellect. Anyone who honestly believes a person cannot reasonably be either pro-life or pro-choice is, simply put, a fool. Here's why.

If a person believes life begins at conception, then Roe v. Wade provides women with the constitutional right to commit murder. If a person does not believe life begins at coneption, then Roe v. Wade provides no such thing. It is this fundamental difference that makes the debate not only so hot, but also so unwinnable.

Furthermore, most people don't understand that for many the desire to overturn Roe v. Wade is less about abortion rights and more about preserving our constitutional jurisprudence. The Constitution does not give women the right to terminate their pregnancies - that right was inferred by the Court. What's more, it was inferred in part out of a belief that fetus viability does not begin until the 3rd trimester. This is a presumption at which modern science continues to chip away. Therefore, some argue that the Court must either affirm Roe v. Wade on new grounds or return the issue to the states.

As to Karen's argument, do you see that it is flawed? All someone needs to do to refute it is say "I believe life begins at conception." Your "ends justifies the means" argument then cannot stand up. Furthermore, taken to its logical extension, your argument would allow for babies to be killed after the mother gives birth, or at any time as long as doing so would reduce the number of unwanted children in the world. What's more, you suggest that a person cannot take a moral stand on an issue unless he/she is proactive in advancing the cause. I'm sure you see how silly that position is.

Brilliantly put, JD.

Karen, don't make bets you can't win. It makes you look ignorant.

"You know, I love the fact that all of you are debating abortion here, many of you spouting off your pro-life rhetoric, and yet I'm willing to bet that none of you have actually ever had to make this choice.... Are you adopting? Are you volunteering your time at shelters? Are you coming up with ideas to help educate kids not to have sex? What are you doing to make this world a better place?"

My mother-in-law had an abortion, and my wife has miscarried. I know the pain that comes along with it. Although we are perfectly healthy and capable of producing a child, we ARE considering adoption in our future. Also, as a designer, I'm currently working a client to produce sex education materials. For free. Also, I'm making the world a better place by EDUCATING people like you, who are so wrapped up in your own universe, where murder is okay because we're overpopulated anyway. Once again, zeig fucking heil.

Perhaps the real "rhetoric" here is the pro-choice agenda that has been hammered into our heads over the last few decades.

"...it ignores the simple fact that you don't get to decide for someone else how to live their life."

There is such blind hypocrisy in this statement that I don't know whether to laugh or cry. The woman gets to make her decision in the bedroom. She decides to take the risk of producing a child, or to not take it. Now, stop me if this goes over your head. If you're KILLING another being inside of you, after the fact, are you basically DECIDING how that being gets to live their life... they don't.

"Have you considered that people will still have sex, women will still have dangerous abortions, and the amount of unwanted children in the world will multiply? But I'm sure you're not thinking about that."

You know what's funny... murder is illegal, yet people still seem to get murdered. Same thing with rape. Same with any criminal action really... I guess according to your logic we should just live in anarchy.

hey k-ron if you see that truck again, stick a turnip up the tailpipe for me:) maybe if abortion becomes legal there will be trucks driving around with pictures on it of all the women who will die from trying to give themselves a miscarrige through drugs, or dirty "backdoor" abortions (this was done before abortion became legal usually with a broken bottle on a broomstick for those not in the know, and many died) by the way since bush has been in office abortions have reached an all time high, compared to being at the lowest point ever when clinton was in office.

I may have missed it if someone else has already posted this, but if you want to know what the good Dr. meant in a number of his works (although I dont recall them talking about Happy Birthday to You, unfortunately) you should watch the PBS Independent Lens film called "The Political Dr. Seuss" http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/politicaldrseuss/film.html. I saw it last week (i think) but you can also get the video from the site.

Bobby:

Tell me what's fascist about choice.

Your posts are exactly what make me so afraid to be living in this country.

You go ahead--call me a fascist because I respect a woman's right to choose. Give your good pal JD a pat on the back. Here's a gold fucking star for being such a brilliant debater. It must feel good to be so self-righteous, huh?