Eewww! So tacky!

By Diogenes ( articles ) | Sep 02, 2010

Alveda King, the niece of Rev. Martin Luther King, denounced the abortion mentality during Glenn Beck’s rally at the Lincoln Monument last weekend. Liberal pundit Bonnie Erbe deems King’s comments “tacky and wrong-headed.”

When you say that someone’s stand is “wrong-headed,” you imply that there are logical flaws in that stand: flaws that you can expose. But when you say that someone’s statement is “tacky,” you’re making a judgment based on style rather than substance. Erbe levels both charges against Alveda King. Let’s see which one she develops:

Sorry, but abortion rights and racism simply are not comparable.

That’s the question, isn’t it? Alveda King compared them. And your rebuttal, Bonnie?

Racism is unacceptable and violates a basic human right. Abortion is quite something else again.

Something else again. Such as what, pray tell?

The irrepressible Erbe continues her argument—and I’m not making this up, nor leaving out anything:

I support abortion rights but I'm not sure I would go so far as to call it a human rights issue.  

You’re not sure. Why aren’t you sure? And if you’re not sure, how do you know that King’s argument is wrong-headed? Where’s that flaw in her logic? Where’s that proof that abortion and racism aren’t comparable?

We way overuse the terms "human right" or "civil right" to the point where everyone claims something they want and don't have is a civil right.

We “way” overuse the terms. I see. Suddenly it all becomes so clear! Erbe doesn’t spell out the argument, but her meaning is clear enough:

And so she was, like, I don’t know, like, abortion is, like, y’know, “Eeew!” and everything, and I was like, y’know, that’s way harsh, and it was all so, like, y’know, just so tacky!

(Lest readers be confused, let me make it clear that the last sentence above was not actually written by Bonnie Erbe, but only implied.)