Tuesday, September 23, 2008

My open message to talk show host Barbara Simpson

Yes, Barbara Simpson, there probably was a day when someone "would take a guy like me out in an alley and beat me beyond whatever because they thought I deserved it." There was also a day when women would die from the abortions they had in back alleys because their individual and legal rights were not respected. You and your other "Pro-Life" allies may pine for those days, but as long as I draw breath, as long I am still standing, I will fight you with every fiber of my being.

And if some moron you whipped up into a frenzy does beat me or does kill me as so many who think like you have wished in this past week, I feel secure in guaranteeing you this: thousands will take my place. You and your ilk cannot win here and you will not; not when right and reason are on the side of the good.


Dan G. said...

I'm pretty sure calls to violence like this are verboten by the FCC if not flat-out against the law. Perhaps the station should be made aware of the liability that Barbara Simpson is opening them up to.

Dan G. said...

For those interested this is the start page for filing a FCC complaint:


And here is the contact page for the station:


Andy said...

Isn't it horrendous how both the New Right and the New Left have decayed to the point where they don't even pretend to be civil? Neither has qualms about invoking force or violence.

God be with you Nick.

Andy Clarkson

Cal said...

In think Dan G.'s idea of making a formal complaint is a good one.

Luke Murphy said...

Thank you, Nick, for not backing down from your stand. I used to not think the abortion issue was important, but now I know that it is. This controversy in particular has really demonstrated the evil of the "pro-life" movement. It is a movement that MUST be stopped, and that can only be stopped by people taking proud moral stands as you have. The wimpy subjectivist left "pro-choice" argument, which attempts to ignore the fundamental moral issue of whether or not a fetus has rights, does not stand a chance.

Anyway, you've been straw-manned, quoted out of context, and subjected to all sorts of verbal abuse all over the internet and radio now (and from my own family unfortunately, this has been a major controversy on our blog and has led me to quit discussing politics with them altogether). Still, you've been sticking to your guns, and rightly so. Your first-hander attitude has been clearly demonstrated. Keep it up, it's appreciated.

Renee Katz said...

How barbaric. Zygote advocates are dangerous.

Luke Murphy said...

Renee Katz? Hey! You're on YouTube!

(this is Beethovens7th, BTW)

Charles T. said...

I sent an email to the station protesting her comments as arguably criminal, and insisting that she be officially disciplined for inciting violence.

revereridesagain said...

Take the Barbara Simpsons and the Laura Ingrahams and lock them up in a room full of older couples whose grown daughters died from botched abortions before Roe v. Wade and invite them to tell those people that their daughters were murderers and deserved their fate. Or that they miss those poor aborted zygotes more than their daughters.

Lock them up in a room with women who have been forced to give birth "naturally" to dead fetuses with umbilical cords wrapped around their necks because "partial birth" abortions have been banned.

Lock them up in a room full of rape victims and let them try to argue that they should have been willing to continue any pregnancies resulting therefrom.

They want you to be subjected to violence for your views? Lets see if they are willing to take that chance themselves. Not advocating it, mind you, just speculating.

Acolyte4236 said...


Plenty of women die from legal abortions every year now. The question is not whether women die from abortions, but whether abortion is moral and should be legal.

And rape and incest together make up less than 2% of abortions in a given year so using them as a basis for allowing 98% of abortions which are done for convenience seems a bit specious.

And the numbers of women who died prior to Roe given to the Supreme Court were actually fabricated by the testifyin doctors as they later admitted.

And as far as rape goes, it seems reasonable to punish the rapist and not another being for the crime. Further it seems morally better to suffer an evil rather than commit one.

Granted that carrying a pregnancy to term would be difficult. But it doesn't seem reasonable that the role of the state is to remove individuals from all of life's difficulties.

Renee Katz said...

Acolyte: Of course the state is not there to remove individuals of all of life's difficulties. It's there to protect individual rights, which is why the zygote advocates are wrong.

(Hi Beethovens7th ;)

Steve Rodgers said...

With all due respect, Acolyte4236's concern over abortion is completely misplaced here. The theme of this post is a radio talk show host's wish for violence against Nicholas Provenzo on the grounds that he somehow "deserves it."

Mr. Provenzo does not deserve it. He deserves nothing but praise, even from people who disagree with his stand, for nevertheless stating his case publicly at now ever-increasing risk to himself.

Furthermore, where are the Objectivists? Where is the outage from every corner in our land from those who claim that they stand for reason, egoism and freedom? Why are they not here saying "We stand beside you, Mr. Provenzo?" Why isn't ever Objectivist blog responding to the attacks against him in outrage?

Maybe I don't really understand Objectivism after all. I never though it was a philosophy and movement where an innocent and righteous person would be left with so little support and encouragement. I thank those who have joined me in saluting Mr. Provenzo, but I say he deserves far, far more than he has received thus far.

I am reminded of the legendary words of Sam Adams, American patriot:

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."

All I can say is: Amen. Amen. Amen.

Justin O. said...

Keep fighting the good fight, Nick.

It's absurd that so many people associate what you said with eugenics. The idea that anyone with any disability or is of marginal value to society should be killed or engineered out of existence is a collectivist idea. This is something that Objectivism and Ayn Rand would not and did not advocate. It is also clear this is not what you advocate.

The people who such claims have no argument that explains the leap from abortion to eugenics. They make no attempt to explain how defending a woman's right to weigh the costs of her choices, and act accordingly, is the same as saying that all Down Syndrome babies should be killed. Maybe they pretend that this is all self-evident. They act as if saying that it's immoral to make choices and act in ways that force an unchosen burden on others is somehow controversial and evil... so much for the personal responsibility the Republican's have claimed to represent.

What a parade of monsters. The idea that people like Barbara Simpson claim to be on the side of morality is an open joke that is so absurd that it people seem to have a hard time getting the punch line.

RyanTheEgoist said...

Though I like to refrain from profanity in public discourse, fuck her. She is a ridiculous person and quite inconsequential. Her calls to violence are bare emotionalism, and I'm sure no one listening gave a second thought.
Rest assured though, Nick; in the highly unlikely event you are attacked, individuals like myself will simply not stand for it.

zigory said...

Simpson needs to defend her own argument. Why would having a child who will suffer for a lifetime a good choice? No other comment is necessary. Did Barbara Simpson (and Sarah Palin) think things through even that far? Or is thinking, to them, irrelevant when it comes to this issue?

Rick "Doc" MacDonald said...

Defending the right to life with threats or incitement to violence indicates a troubled mind. I would say that her right to broadcast her views has definitely interfered with others right to live peaceably as as they determine to be in their own rational self-interest. Totalitarianism is ugly no matter the source.

Charles T. said...

For what it's worth, I did get a reply from the radio station stating, "We'll make sure this is looked into."