Quid Pro Quo

“There is something deeply perverse about using children to promote a political agenda.”  (Ben Shapiro, talking about kindergartners being used in anti-gun / gun control demonstrations.)

I hope that all those folks who are bitching about children being “used” to further an anti-gun agenda have the same kind of revulsion when they see something like this:

And just a reminder, before the SHTF in Comments:  I hate abortion with a passion — if there were a single aspect of the human condition I could fix, this would be it — but I also hate children being used as props. It’s immoral, and that’s the beginning and the end of it.


  1. “deeply perverse” – a very elitist phrase for:
    just plain sick, mentally ill, deviant to a major degree, twisted, all f00ked up in da head…
    “And this is what we’ve finally come to.”

  2. The biggest difference between the two is that the anti-abortion folks have their kids with them, while in this particular case the left is presenting it as *the children* sparking the protest.

    Also with abortion children are kind of the point, no? This (fetus) becomes that (child) unless you stop it.

    So I sort of mostly agree with you–putting words in children’s mouth, funding them, using them as astroturf is just another morally and intellectually questionable tactic. The Abortion case is (in many ways) slightly different.

    Children largely are ignoramuses and “out of the mouth of babes” should be an insult.

    1. That’s not actually true. My oldest son attended catholic school for part of kindergarten. We pulled him out in late January because I learned that the school intended to bring all the kindergarteners to the March for Life at the Supreme Court. They never asked our views or sought our permission. Pulled him out of that wretched place and enrolled him in public school, which has its own moments but didn’t subject him to that kind of crap.

      1. I’m a little surprised they tried to do that without parental notification. Our SMILE youth group does fund-raising throughout the year to hire buses to make the trip. Everyone who goes does so willingly and with appropriate chaperons.
        Both little Gizzpers have done 12 years of Catholic school and as difficult as it has been to keep up with the tuition it was a choice we made early and have been quite pleased with the results. YMMV

    2. yes, there is a difference between “leading the protest (allegedly), and “happen to be there with parents”. Otherwise, I agree with Kims’ premise.

  3. “But it’s for the kids!” Is pretty much the left’s “Swiss Army Knife” of phrases. And no matter the subject; simple issue, cause or struggle, it cuts.
    Whether used by current incarnations at any level, Goebbels, Uncles Ho or Joe, it grates on my sensibilities.
    Bottom line, kids are being taught a conditioned behavior. No matter whether the object of said behavior is babies, a slow-learning student or grandpa approaching an arbitrary expiration date. As they are taught, so will they will act and come full circle to teach.

  4. I actually do not have a problem with taking kids to political rallies, how the heck else are they going to learn about such thing. (… and I include for causes I disagree with, because goose/gander and all that.) It is like taking them hunting or fishing or anything else that is part of being an adult human but is not done every day. If they do not participate in it when they are young, they don’t learn it.

    I do have a problem with using them as props or spokes people though, which is fairly different and just a symptom of the youth movement political crap which I cannot abide for pretty much the same reason as above. Goldberg riffs on this point quite well at times: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/03/08/parkland-shooting-kids-can-protest-guns-but-we-shouldnt-assume-they-know-more-goldberg-column/401160002/

Comments are closed.