Big new zombie report up at PajamasMedia — you won’t want to miss this one:

Pro-lifers outnumber pro-choicers 500-to-1 at massive S.F. abortion rally

With lots of juicy photos like…:

24 Responses to “Pro-lifers outnumber pro-choicers 500-to-1 at massive S.F. abortion rally”

  1. 1Ringo the Gringo on Jan 27, 2010 at 8:11 am:

    Great report, zombie!

    Glad to see you’re back out in the streets.

  2. 2Starless on Jan 27, 2010 at 8:58 am:

    Meanwhile, some of the folks over on the mostly white pro-choice side were still imagining that they represented the interests of oh-so-oppressed minority groups.

    Those confounded ethnic minorities with their confounded insistence on sticking to their religious convictions just don’t understand that their rightful place can only be on the Progressive side.

    Despite appearances I don’t think the person in the first image could possibly be a woman. He/she/whatever clearly has no concept of what an actual vagina looks like.

  3. 3Bryan on Jan 27, 2010 at 10:12 am:

    Excellent, Zombie. My wish came true!

    I was at the march and I believe you hit every angle worth mentioning and I especially thought your discussion of the minorities was spot on.

    I also think the drop in numbers of pro-choice demonstrators can be attributed to the rain. Although america is split 50-50 on the issue I believe there is a strong difference in each side’s zeal for their position. Rain couldn’t keep pro-lifers away – it only made our witness stronger.

    The pro-life side is young, hispanic and committed – three trends I’m happy to have on my side of this issue. Strange that the media’s (lack of) coverage is keeping many pro-choicers in the dark about this shift. Its doing more harm than good to the pro-choice message, in my opinion.

  4. 4Dane on Jan 27, 2010 at 11:15 am:

    Another great article, Zombie.

    I find it kind of odd that you started from the same reasoning basis as I used to determine my position on the issue, but ended up drawing the opposite conclusion.

    I am not a terribly religious person. That being said, I think it’s clear to all but the most intellectually dishonest participants in the debate that at some point before birth, that fetus is no longer just a clump of cells, but a distinct being. The issue then becomes – when does that happen? And like you, I agree that neither modern medicine nor modern philosophy can definitively tell us when exactly that change takes place. Once I’d come to that realization, the conclusion seemed pretty simple: unless we can be certain, we probably should not to take the chance.

    (Incidentally, this was the same line of thought that led me to decide I am against the death penalty – better to let a guilty man live than risk killing an innocent one; if the conviction is overturned later you can let a man out of jail who was wrongfully imprisoned but you can’t take back an execution.)

  5. 5Soothsayer on Jan 27, 2010 at 11:51 am:

    Your crowd numbers are way off. Just because somebody claims that an anti-war march has 100k people, that doesn’t make it so.

    Tom Ammiano and his people were there – did you count them? No. The initial parade of pro-choice marchers had 130 people in it. Were you aware of that? Obvously not. Did you see the people in the brass band? Did you count them? You’re worse than the organizers, who have a lower count than you – and they’re lying on purpose.

    Why did one pro-life come up with 22,900?

    Why did right-wing PipeLine News come up with 23-25k?

    Why did the Catholic News Agency come up with 25k?

    Check yourself, Zombie. A ratio of 100-something to 1 is similarly impressive – there’s no need to exagerate.

    The mayor of SF showed up in 2005 to actively oppose this march, but the thinking now for most people is to ignore it. That’s part of the reason for the low numbers of SFers showing up.

  6. 6Beckaholic on Jan 27, 2010 at 2:09 pm:

    I had read the top photo as “MY CMNY, MY CHOICES” ?!? Oy. My mind just doesn’t want to go there………Is it a generational thing that I suddenly feel about 150 years old?

  7. 7Ken on Jan 27, 2010 at 9:28 pm:

    The only problem I really have with the “pro-life” set are the types who carry graphic pictures of fetuses during their demonstrations (like the one guy depicted in Zomb’s report). It’s not that I’m against people being confronted with reality, but those are contextless pictures. How do we know that the placard that one guy was carrying (with the head in the forceps and petri dish) wasn’t a “therapeutic abortion” ordered to save a mother’s life? How do we know it wasn’t from a late-term miscarriage (which, while rare, do happen)? Graphic pictures only shock, they don’t contribute anything to the discussion or demonstration and may very well not even be accurate. I guess, in the war of words, getting your point accross may be more important to some than honesty.

  8. 8Starless on Jan 28, 2010 at 5:45 am:

    Ken: I guess, in the war of words, getting your point accross may be more important to some than honesty.

    Yes it is. Additionally, in the world of someone who is willing to carry a large sign with the image of a gruesomely dead baby on it, there’s no such thing as a “therapeutic abortion” and a late-term miscarriage is likely considered a punishment from God for past misdeeds.

  9. 9Bryan on Jan 28, 2010 at 9:43 am:

    First of all, I have never used pictures of aborted fetuses to try and get my point across. I’m pretty sure I never will, either.

    But some of my friends have, and they do make some good points. First of all, gruesome pictures have been employed to inspire social change – quite effectively – in the past. Pictures of Emmet Till were effectively used to motivate the Civil Rights movement, to name just one example.

    Local Newspapers have gone ballistic against their group, and I’ve followed debates closely and it comes down to one important question… why are people so upset about the pictures, yet so accepting of the act that the images portray?

  10. 10Starless on Jan 28, 2010 at 4:10 pm:

    The thing about the aborted fetus pictures is that they’re qualitatively no better than signs with drawings of vaginas and the word “cunt” on them. They’re not going to persuade someone who hasn’t taken a strong position on the issue, they’re just going to offend them and then the issue is going to be the image, not the message. The only purposes intentionally offensive images serve at a protest is to throw red meat to the believers and piss off the non-believers. IOW, the only purpose they really serve is to perpetuate the fight. And as a person who isn’t strongly pro-life or pro-choice, that’s what really pisses me off — the blatant display that the important thing isn’t to come to some sort of solution, but to continue the fight for the sake of the fight.

  11. 11Ken on Jan 28, 2010 at 4:15 pm:

    yet so accepting of the act that the images portray?

    Didn’t I just point out above that those are contextless images that may not even be the results of actual abortions? Carrying pictures of Emmit Till or Rachel Corrie or whomever is completely different. The accounts of their deaths are known, the details are there, there were eye-witnesses, their deaths are historical records. The same cannot be said, however, for an anonymous fetus in a picture. You don’t even know where that image came from!

  12. 12CattusMagnus on Jan 28, 2010 at 5:13 pm:

    Zombie you are on a roll lately. These reports are great!

  13. 13incognito on Jan 29, 2010 at 7:41 am:

    Great job Zombie! I appreciate your intellectual honesty and also an attempt at an objective journalism and explaining how photographic journalism can be deceiving if there was a certain agenda to downgrade another side that the news media opposes. News should be objective and report events AS IS as accurately as possible.

    Ken, about those anonymous abortion pictures…either way, the result of abortion does look like what it is…a very small dead body. I don’t like it either…the number of percentage of abortions to save the life of mother relative to abortion for convenience sake is pretty small is what I hear as to make the point moot…but it is interesting that it is an argument that is repeated constantly by the pro abortion group.

    One could argue why if a person destroys bald eagles’ eggs get $100,000 fine and one year in jail while a woman who willingly kills her fetus gets scot free. Are eagle’s eggs (which may or may not be even fertilized) more valuable than a fetus who could grow up to be a Heisman Trophy winner or even write Pastoral Symphony like Beethoven?

  14. 14Dianna on Jan 29, 2010 at 11:46 am:

    A brilliant essay, zombie.

    BTW, you’re probably in the majority in your view on abortion. Squeamish, not enthusiastic about either extreme position, and wishing people could find a way to stop screaming at each other.

  15. 15Starless on Jan 30, 2010 at 6:49 am:

    incognito: a fetus who could grow up to be a Heisman Trophy winner or even write Pastoral Symphony like Beethoven?

    Or a Hitler, or a Jeffrey Dahmer, or, as is much more likely, working the cash register at BurgerWorld.

  16. 16Bob on Jan 31, 2010 at 12:47 am:

    Wait… So is this report going to end up on Zombie Time or is it PJ Media’s property?

  17. 17Bryan on Jan 31, 2010 at 1:28 pm:


    Your link from CNA is from 2008. I have been at every march except for the first, and each one was noticeably larger than the previous. I expect a large discrepancy between what organizers might claim and what opponents might claim, but what I think is nuts is that the oppositions numbers the last couple years have stayed the same or even gone down. That juts doesn’t make sense.

    There is simply no way this march was under 30,000.

  18. 18incognito on Jan 31, 2010 at 1:40 pm:

    Starless, someone working at the Burger World cash register could be supporting a family with a child who could be the next Heisman Trophy winner or the next Beethoven!!

  19. 19Starless on Feb 2, 2010 at 5:30 am:

    incognito: Starless, someone working at the Burger World cash register could be supporting a family with a child who could be the next Heisman Trophy winner or the next Beethoven!!

    Or he could just be like these guys.

  20. 20Marauder on Feb 4, 2010 at 6:09 am:

    Working the cash register at BurgerWorld? Oh, the HORROR. What an absolutely worthless life! Clearly, such people are incapable of love, kindness, or contributing to the human race in a positive way. Starless, I don’t know you, but you sound like a snob and a half.

    People aren’t born to be Hitlers or Jeffrey Dahmers. Hitler and Dahmer were born with as much chance as anybody else to be good people, and their experiences and decisions later on were what made them evil.

  21. 21Formercorpsman on Feb 7, 2010 at 5:39 am:

    Starless, you realize your arguments is truly idiotic, right?

    Dane just pointed out the improbability of having the exact determination of when the fetus goes from cellular clumps, to a genuine human being.

    There are is no guarantee. Nonetheless, the one thing I can take from your comment, and being of a conservative mindset like I am, I commend the guy who grew to become the burger flipper. I have a much healthier respect for someone determined to make their own way, despite what someone else thinks of them, or their station in life.

  22. 22Formercorpsman on Feb 7, 2010 at 5:39 am:

    are is, is as you are, as you were.


  23. 23Adam on Mar 9, 2010 at 1:03 pm:

    Another awesome report, Zombie!
    Nice to see you’re doing reports again!
    While this Walk for Life report wasn’t as fun to see/ read as your report on the Walk for Life a few years ago (What with the three different efforts from the pro- choice freaks to forcibly stop the march, all three of which were wonderfully foiled by the police), it is very encouraging to see that the Walk for Life was such a success, with such a large gathering of pro- lifers and such a small contingent of pro- choicers . Nice to see so many people value the lives of the unborn, and even in a city like San Francisco.
    I’d also agree with all the commentary you gave on the differences between the two sides, both in terms of their racial makeup and in terms of their messages.

  24. 24wxxnrleqb on May 26, 2013 at 12:03 pm: