September 26: Nuclear Abolition Day
We’ve added ourselves to the long list of endorsers of the Joint Appeal. This includes calling on governments to:
Affirm that the threat or use of nuclear weapons is inadmissible; Advance tangible measures by nuclear-armed and allied States to implement this obligation, including standing down nuclear forces and adopting policies never to initiate a nuclear war; Pledge to achieve the global elimination of nuclear weapons no later than the UN’s centennial anniversary in 2045, and immediately undertake actions, including through multilateral negotiations, to implement this pledge; Cut nuclear weapons budgets, and end public and private investments in the nuclear weapons industry; and Redirect these funds to strengthen the United Nations, advance peacekeeping and conflict resolution, accelerate steps to protect the climate, and meet human and economic needs as required under Article 26 of the UN Charter.
Politically-Motivated Assassinations
The core of our mission is to oppose currently practiced and socially-approved killing. The category of deliberate killing that has a political or activist target, as with the recent murder of Charlie Kirk, has the feature of not being socially approved. It’s already as illegal as possible and couldn’t be made more so. It also already has the vast majority of the population aghast.
On the other hand, the political motivation makes it “approved” in some corners of the population. Which corners vary and depend on the leanings of the target.
Whether the target is left or right is beside the point, on principle. Additionally, we’ve had plenty of both in recent years. The recent series of lone killers haven’t articulated thoughts coherent enough to accurately categorize them either way.
We naturally oppose the murder of Charlie Kirk, as would be expected. We also have a special interest in opposing it because we also are activists who are frequently targets of hostility when we try to engage in dialog. Any language suggesting such killings might be at all acceptable, in addition to being an outrage, makes us nervous for ourselves.
More than U.S.: Problems at Planned Parenthood
The Problems at Planned Parenthood website, which gives documentation from official and mainstream media sources, has now added two countries other than the U.S:
Canada has only four PP centers, independent from each other. There are negative patient reviews, one malpractice complaint and three employee suits alleging racial discrimination.
Mexico has eight or nine centers – its website is inconsistent, and the centers don’t have their own pages as the U.S. ones do. Information such as lawsuits are yet to come, but since there were almost a hundred Google reviews, and 28 of them indicate medical dangers, this bilingual page is started.
The Latest on the Blog
What would happen if we actually applied what the word choice means to pregnancy policies? Ms. Boomer-ang considers this in "Choice": The Word's Meanings and (Mis)uses.
Jim Hewes weighs in on the practice of showing pictures of the results of violence in Exposing Injustice Through Graphic Images.
Quote of the Week
Orion Kim, Staff Reporter
[sub-title] At Tuesday’s debate, in which the YPU voted 60-31 against the resolution “choice over life,” attendees underwent heightened security precautions.
Yale News, Sep 17, 2025
In a claim that drew many hisses from the audience, [Lila Rose] compared abortion to historical examples of people being deemed “subhuman,” including Jews during the Holocaust, slavery, and Israel’s ongoing war in Gaza.
“When you strip people of their humanity, you open the door to every kind of violence,” she declared.