Your Worst Nightmare, I salute you for this parody! And I hope all you "pro-choice" Satans out there see this parody, as well!

Thanks, Panic Pagoda! I presume you got that name from Weird Al's original song, "Bob". It is nice to know there are other people around here that are pro-life.

For a guy named Your Worst Nightmare, your views seem awfully uptight. Regardless, which is worst: killing the unborn, or killing people with the death penalty that turn out to be innocent (like Bush did so much of in Texas as governor), or killing third world citizens in the name of oil (like we're doing in Iraq)? Until you're against all three of these things, you can't say that you are pro-life. You're just pro-conservative, which is a BIG difference.

A fetus is aborted almost exclusively because it's not wanted by its parents. So you want to force parents who don't want their children to have them anyway. And then you want the parents to bear the financial brunt of this or have them throw the kids into foster homes, I assume, because people like you rarely support public entitlement programs. And then, when the unsupervised child grows up to be a murderous drug dealer, you'll want to execute him--all the while saying "Well, you had free will; you didn't have to do what you did." Pretzel logic, my friend. And feminists are not Nazis. They're women who are sick of having men control them, sick of having only two of nine Supreme Court Justices, sick of having only 12 of 100 senators representing them, and sick of people like you deciding if the organism inside their uterus is something worth bringing into this world.

I agree with you "your worst nightmare" because when i rape women i like to watch them give birth to it 9 months later for kicks.

Go to hell, Your Best Wet Dream! And if parents don't want a child, why not just have it adopted?

How can the parents (or single mother) be sure that they'll be able to find people willing to adopt and able to competently raise the child? Also have you heard of the problem we've been having on Earth called overpopulation? Banning abortion makes it worse. Then there are self-esteem problems from being unwanted that could turn into dangerous emotional problems and the pain of childbirth and the list goes on and on.

So you'd rather the children be dead than have self-esteem problems? We all deserve a chance at life. No one shoulkd be denied life because they were inconvenient. You already chose to have a kid when you had sex. It's simple as that.

Exactly!

Ah, yes, it's soooo simple. Especially when you're not the one who's pregnant.

In a perfect world, an abortion ban would work. With reality being what it is, banning abortion is not only invasive, but it's also classist. Do you really think an abortion ban in this country would prevent a rich woman from having one? She could just go to another country and get it done. So, in truth, you're just preventing the poor and most of the middle class from having abortions. The rich, as usual, would be able to do as they please. Think about that for a moment before you point the finger at so-called "pro-choice Satans" as Panic Pagoda so eloquently put it.

Oh my GOD!!! Panic Pagoda should have been aborted!!! That was in God's plan!!! This must be the work of SATAN!!! PANIC PAGODA I banish you back to HELL!!!

I can't individually reply to every one of these comments, but let me say that there is no such THING as overpopulation. There are food and resources everywhere. Why, you say, is there world hunger? Certain characters with lots of money and power (such as Saddam Hussein who Bush captured) hoard all the food. In places like America, people are too lazy to get a job. Luckily, now that Bush is in power, they have to be contributing to society in some way in order to receive welfare, instead of what the democrats want, which is that people sit around on their lazy bums, getting cash. That is communism; not working, but receiving money anyway.

For the Bush bashers out there, did I mention Bush in my song? Did I say 'Bush is so great'? So why are you bringing him up? I'm certainly not the biggest Bush fan. Things like keeping the country under surveillance, and using the federal government to ban homosexual marriages are wrong. Also, I believe that the death penalty should only be used when there is 100% proof when someone has commited murder. Then, and only then, will the death penalty be valid. Not that Bush is completely horrible in my book. He has done great things like helping Iraq, and establishing tax cuts.

Anyways, back to the point. Why is it not considered murder when someone kills an unborn child? It doesn't make sense. It is illegal once they are outside the womb, but when they haven't come out yet, they're fresh for frying. Does anyone else see how messed up that is? And what's with people saying that the baby might have no place to go? So you'll just kill it? Even if somebody had a baby and dropped it off somewhere where someone could find it, it would be better than killing it.

"Ah, yes, it's soooo simple. Especially when you're not the one who's pregnant." But, the point is, if you don't want to have a child, don't have sex. There's a reason humans have sex, and that is to reproduce. So, if you can't bear raising a child, then why not forget sex? Isn't THAT helping overpopulation?

Dear (real) Jesus Christ, there is a blasphemist who said I should go to hell and stole your name. He's several messages up. Please strike lightning upon him.

A fetus is not a person until its 22 week of development inside the womb. Then it gains higher brain function (you know, the point where the thing actually has the ability to think rather then just keep its heart beating and have spontaneous reflexes like a coma patient?) and becomes viable. My mother is a neonatal nurse. She is 100% pro-choice and she works with babies every day and we both know that what this world does NOT need more of is crack babies being born to parents who don't want them, who won't care for them, and who will probably grow up either in terrible poverty and pain or die within the first weeks they are taken home due to neglect and abuse. I bet most of you anti-abortion morons don't even give money to the homeless or support programs for impoverished mothers or would ever consider adopting a handicapped child or a child with an expensive medical problem. Hypocritical jerks. I noticed you mentioned tax cuts. Yeah, tax cuts for the rich. None of the people who actually need that money are going to see it and Bush has lost the most jobs in this country since the Great Depression. Obviously you have a lot to learn. But I'm guessing from this you are a spoiled, male, rich kid who has never known poverty, rape, abuse, or anything else in your little sheltered rose-coloured world.

Someone who knows...what I got from your comment is that it's okay to kill off babies as long as they're poor.

That's about the same thing I got from his comment too, ???. Why do you call us hypocritical jerks, SWKMTY? You say that although we should fork over money to people who refuse to work, we should kill babies. I guess a dead baby is better than a poor baby?

You gotta love the religious folks who think abortion is "killing". If you want to believe life is that precious, you're more than welcome to take and rise the child as your own until it's a full grown adult. Last time I looked around, there are BILLIONS of people in the world. Guess what, life ain't that precious. Almost everyone can create new life. Some people realize they're not ready to nuture a child, and decide they shouldn't have one.

Someone Who Knows More then You and Dude....for the 1st person...a baby exists from the moment of conception. Dude...what do you think we do in front of abortion clinics? You think we scream and threaten, but in reality, we are offering to adopt every baby that they want to kill! I have worked outside clinics, visited 'doctors' who abort and had the clinics call the police on me because I was praying the rosary, and more, for over 20 years. These babies are precious and a gift to be protected.

A very good job on your parody, YWN. 5's

Sorry, but saying that the union of an ovum with one of a billion random spermatozoa instantly creates a baby is like saying that typing two characters together on a keyboard instantly creates a novel. Those two characters certainly are essential in the process of creating a novel. They may well become a novel; they may not. But let's be realistic here - until a great deal more happens with those two characters, you can hardly call them a novel.

Thanks Adagio. And "Pro-Thought", it makes no sense to compare a baby to a novel. Can you kill two letters? If everyone believed in your logic, we could also kill small children because it would be a while until they were adults.

I should have known better than to attempt analogies with the literal-minded. Jesus, as I recall, encountered the same difficulties.

Here, I'll simplify it for you: The argument that you have a human baby the instant a sperm cell connects with an egg cell is neither logical nor scientific; it is purely political. If you are attempting to win converts to your cause, you will have a tough go of it if you hold to such an extreme position.

from the moment of conception? give me a break. Strictly a RELIGIOUS belief that the formation of a couple of cells is the moment life begins. If that were the case, you're destroying PRECIOUS LIFE everytime you eat something, or breath, etc. The lack of knowledge of science the anti-abortion folks display is amazing (the term pro-life is wrong, since you're not pro-life, you're anti-abortion). It's your religious belief, you're entitled to it, just like I'm entitled to IGNORE IT COMPLETELY. If you want to believe life begins at the moment of conception fine, just don't expect anyone rational to believe it as well.

Pro-Thought, although the instant the sperm connects with the egg is not instantly a baby, it grows into a baby. However, it is life. So, you are killing what could grow into a full-sized baby. As I said earlier, if that logic made sense we could kill anything that isn't fully grown. And what do you mean, "Jesus encountered the same difficulties"? I am saying that you can't compare a baby to a NOVEL. Think about this. If I can refuse to read a novel, and if your analogy makes sense, wouldn't I be allowed to refuse to let a full grown baby out of the womb live?
As for dude, you're saying that abortion is killing something that isn't alive? That's an oxymoron, don't you think?

For all your arguments pro and con, I think you all owe YWN thanks. Instead of a mutual admiration society, ("Your song is great! Your's is too! Group hug!), there's a lively debate going on. Much more interesting than the average comment board.

MA!!!!!! LOL! :-)

You're the one referring to it as killing, not me. I've seen in other comments you've made that you're 12. I believe it. You spout off viewpoints from other people, while having never come to a conclusion on your own, your arguments are all just recycled religous propaganda. If you were older, it would be pathetic, instead it's just annoying.

Actually, I am 13, and what do you MEAN I have no conclusions of my own? Personally, I think you are annoying.

I noticed two people have given me 1's. One of those could be due to the infamous 1's guy, but c'mon, I spent a lot of time perfecting the pacing, going over the lyrics several times to get it just right, so you could at least give me 5 for pacing.

YWN - DKTOS, I probably wouldn't have voted either way since I believe your parody misrepresents legitimate and reasonable opposing viewpoints. I can't fairly vote on parodies that I believe do that but I wish people who DO vote would do so fairly. If the pace is "on" then the voter should vote it that way. But just about everybody who writes opinionated or political stuff here runs into this once in a while. I just kind of expect a bit of that up front when I submit political pieces.

Personally, I don't think that killing unborn children for moronic reasons, such as "they might end up delinquents", would be considered a "reasonable opposing viewpoints". But anyways, I bet most of the people who voted on this either agreed or disagreed with me, but have never heard of Brent Burns. As far as I know, and I could be wrong, he only performs concerts around Florida and south of Alabama. He's not nationally famous. He does have several albums though, but I don't know how far they're sold.

BTW, why is it that the feminazis think the only reason people want to ban abortion is that we are so perverted, we enjoy watching women suffer, including several women themselves? I wonder what's worse in the loony left? Tree Huggers or Male Bashers? Anyways, these women may have noticed that I mentioned "I'm also anti-choice about murder and theft". I am anti-choice on LOTS of things. "Shouldn't I have a right to do what I want with my baby?" Sure you do. Although that has nothing to do with abortion, unless, perhaps your baby is a classified organ. You see, your child is a separate body, not part of yours. But I guess I shouldn't be reasoning with the unreasonable here, seeing as it would only result in flames such as "sexist pig".

Oh yeah, and then there's partial abortion. It seems that people keep discovering ways to make horrible things worse. I guess it isn't enough to murder the baby painlessly, but to stab it in the head, inflicting deep pain. Of course, the feminazis have said that it is the 'women's choice' to do that. I wonder how far this doctrine can go. Perhaps it could turn out to be a woman's choice to kill their offspring, regardless of their age, then finally, women's choice to kill their spouse. The original feminists that gave women their rights, THUS ending a need for feminists, doubtedly would have tolerated this at all.

I forgot to mention that tree huggers are a factor in a child slaughter. Although they think it is wrong to eat animals, most of them are pro-death because they think that all humans are evil, and they have to stop populating the earth. So three (un)reasonable opposing viewpoints are for abortion. 1. (greedy abortion doctors) We don't want the child to suffer in a horrible society. So let's kill him. Euthanasia just works best. 2. (Feminazis) It is a woman's choice whether or not she can kill her offspring. In fact, our modern day feminists are thinking of a plan so where we can kill children our children if they are under twelve. 3. (Treehuggers) As everyone knows, man is the root of evil, and should be eliminated from society at all costs. That is why everyone should kill themselves once they hit 65, preferrably earlier, like in the womb. So what if they might grow up to cure AIDS? In fact, we environmentalists think people DESERVE HIV. That's what they get for polluting society with their dreadful automobiles.

Apparently you little 13 year old idiots should pick up a biology book and learn something about anatomy. Then you might realise that personhood does not begin at conception, but at either viability or birth. Partial birth abortion is a term that anti-choice morons made up. Do some research before spouting off ridiculous idiocies, will you? You are 13 so presumably you can read. Find a book. You might learn something (god forbid). And moron, no one is saying that a fetus isn't alive. Lots of things are alive. Tumors are alive. Bugs are alive. Grass is alive. Cows are alive until you make hamburgers out of them. "Alive" is not the same as "a person". What I get from your comments is that you are a moron. Looks like I'm right.

Pro-lifers did not invent the term "partial abortion". In case you do not know, partial abortion is when a woman delivers a baby early and the doctor stabs it in the head. The baby experiences much pain before he or she dies. It is sad that you buy into the myth that fetuses are merely a clump of cells. At five weeks, they already have their own heartbeat and fingerprints.

I don't agree with this parody anymore. I hardly agree with anything I believed last summer. I am very much against abortion, but this wasn't about how bad abortion is. It is just a cheap political jab.