Trigger Warning: Pro-Life Articles May Be Dangerous To Your Psyche

by Michael Avramovich

Over the past several years, I have written a number of articles regarding the genocide taking place today against black babies, and have referred to the long-time and direct involvement of Planned Parenthood, our nation’s largest abortionist and baby part mills, in black communities.  Typically, I have written the articles in conjunction with Black History Month, one of which is available here. The number of abortions in the black community is a gruesome and dark stain on African-American history that is mostly unknown.  In fact, for every person murdered by someone with a handgun in the United States, more than 100 babies are aborted, of which approximately 36 percent are black.  More than 60 million abortions in the United States have taken place since 1973, and it is estimated that approximately 20 million abortions have been performed on African-American women.  In fact, according to the Center for Disease Control (“CDC”), African-American women are more than four times more likely to have an abortion than non-Hispanic white women.  In 2012, more black babies were aborted in New York City than were born, and the aborted black babies were 42.4% of all abortions performed in that city.  However, for merely compiling facts and figures from the CDC, I received no threats of any kind, but such is not always the case.

Madison Gesiotto

is a law student at Ohio State University (“OSU”) and an editor for the Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law.  (As we have heard repeatedly regarding Mr. Obama, he was the editor of the Harvard Law Review, and serving as an editor on a law review is one of the highest academic honors bestowed on law school students.)  Ms. Gesiotto recently penned a commentary that appeared in The Washington Times, titled “The Number One Killer of Black Americans,” available here.  In her commentary, Ms. Gesiotto exposed the high percentage of abortions on black babies.  She wrote:

You won’t believe what the number one killer of black Americans is.  It isn’t heart disease, it isn’t cancer, it isn’t homicide and it isn’t motor vehicle accidents.  In fact, the number one killer of black Americans is abortion.  Despite a lack of reporting by California, New Hampshire and Maryland, a total of 730,322 abortions were reported to the CDC in 2011, the most recently published reporting year.  405,994 of these reported abortions included cross-classified race/ethnicity data for 2011, of which 146,856 were reported to be black American abortions, equaling about 36 percent of the total number of abortions with reported race statistics.

As a result of her article, she was threatened by another OSU law student, but not one that she knew.  But interestingly, when Ms. Gesiotto set up a meeting with OSU officials to discuss her physical safety, law school officials dismissed her concerns.  Ms. Gesiotto recalled how school officials said, “This is a flawed article, it’s not a good legal piece; it’s not a good journalistic piece either.”  Ms. Gesiotto further stated, “[School officials] asked me to explain to them why I would put [this and that line] in, what that means, and how I should have followed that up by saying other things to support these black women.”  When Ms. Gesiotto said she tried repeatedly to direct the conversation back to the threat made against her, but the deans appeared to “blow it off,” in Ms. Gesiotto’s words.  After the meeting with school officials, Ms. Gesiotto said, “I was so shocked.  I’ve never been in a situation with people I respected and looked up to and felt so violated.”

Ohio State University is now under criticism for ignoring the threat against Ms. Gesiotto.  Since the last time most of us have been at university, the lexicon of Orwellian university-speak has changed dramatically.  Students now speak about “micro-aggressions,” “trigger warnings,” and “safe spaces.”  The notion of the “safe space” first emerged to describe a place of refuge for people exposed to racial prejudice or sexism.  But as Nadine Strossen, a law professor and former executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, recently observed that the phrase “safe space” has now changed its meaning to imply protection from “exposure to ideas that make one uncomfortable.”  Further, lecturers in some English departments are warning students of the potentially traumatic effects of reading literary classics that are considered “unsafe” to read.  Reading lists at some universities are being adapted to come with warnings printed beside certain titles: The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald (Trigger: suicide, domestic abuse, and graphic violence) and Mrs. Dalloway by Virginia Woolf (Trigger: suicidal tendencies).  And don’t even think about putting The Adventures of Tom Sawyer or Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain or Dante Alighieri’s Inferno on any reading list.

The hesitation now to engage in thoughtful debate and a sense that hearing opposing opinions damages the human psyche is a terribly dangerous development in the modern American university.  For those among us who have had the privilege of legal education, it is particularly out of place as every case describes a wrongful death, a person defrauded, violations of human rights, divorce and domestic abuse, a child born without an intact nervous system, a person falsely accused or wrongly convicted of a crime, the victims of war, and so on, which represent one painful, horrifying episode of human misery after another.  Ms. Gesiotto did a public service in exposing the genocide going on in our country against black babies.  Ohio State University owes an obligation to protect her as she exercises her First Amendment freedom of speech, especially from her fellow law students.  If you wish to call or write OSU Dean and Edwin M. Cooperman Professor of Law, Alan C. Michaels, you can reach him at or at 614.292.0574.  I am sure that he would be very happy to hear from you regarding Ms. Gesiotto.

What is Information?

Salvo senior editor Casey Luskin on “What Is Information?

Note: I’ve gotten a few requests for notes or a handout from my recent talk at the Christian Scientific Society meeting, “A Taxonomy of Information and the Design Inference.” The talk should be available online eventually, but for the time being below is a condensed and reader-friendly reformatted version of my notes from the talk. The rough notes are also available here as a PDF.

The question I want to address is this: What are some common definitions of information, and which definition is most useful for making the design inference? To answer this question, let’s review several different definitions of information.

What Is Information?

Information is not always easy to define, but it often involves a measure of degree of randomness. The fundamental intuition behind information is a reduction in possibilities. The more possibilities you rule out, the more information you’ve conveyed.

Nature can produce “information” under certain definitions. Intelligent agents also produce information (certain types, at least). As Henry Quastler observed, “The creation of new information is habitually associated with conscious activity.” continue…


“A Mind Is A Terrible Thing to Lose on Campus”

by James M. Kushiner

Mad Student Disease is sweeping our nation’s campuses, while Foot-in-Mouth Disease is allegedly spreading among faculty. Where will this end? A Bang? or Just Whimper Softly? Thank you, Academy: You’ve trained these students as our Future Leaders. The tenured radicals who were/are responsible are/will be in their graves as the fruits of their labors ripen and fall. And the bonus: students get to go into debt for all this “education.”

Two Wolfes

Mizzou and the Master of Our Universe: Why Tom Wolfe is the most important writer of the twenty-first century by Matthew Continetti at The Washington Free Beacon. (The other Wolfe referred to in my title is Tim Wolfe, University of Missouri’s former president.) I highly recommend you read the entire article, but here’s one of the standout paragraphs.

Here is where Wolfe finds his material. We hold doggie yoga classes while selling fetal brains. We denounce global warming from conferences we arrive at by private jet. We recite the hosannas of diversity while suppressing opposing views. We release prisoners even though the communities most likely to be harmed by such a policy are the majority-minority neighborhoods we profess to care so deeply about. We inhabit a continent of poses and struts and vanity and incompetence. It’s a thick soup of the absurd, the frustrating, and the maddening.

Depends On What You Mean by “Equal”

I just received the newest issue of Wired in the mail. On the cover is Serena Williams alongside headlines such as “Equality in the Digital Age” and “Let’s Change the Future.” As you would expect, there is a heavy focus here on race, gender, etc…

Regardless of whatever “age” we find ourselves in, I believe that we all are equal in dignity, and society flourishes when we acknowledge this. For example, from the Catechism of the Catholic church: “The dignity of the human person is rooted in his creation in the image and likeness of God (article 1); it is fulfilled in his vocation to divine beatitude (article 2). It is essential to a human being freely to direct himself to this fulfillment (article 3). By his deliberate actions (article 4), the human person does, or does not, conform to the good promised by God and attested by moral conscience (article 5). Human beings make their own contribution to their interior growth; they make their whole sentient and spiritual lives into means of this growth (article 6). With the help of grace they grow in virtue (article 7), avoid sin, and if they sin they entrust themselves as did the prodigal son1 to the mercy of our Father in heaven (article 8). In this way they attain to the perfection of charity.”

But there is no such thing as ultimate, absolute equality in everything–and life will seem very “unfair” to you if you truly believe that there is. There are inherent differences, as the Williams sisters can attest to. Does anyone remember this?

1998: Karsten Braasch vs. the Williams sisters

Another event dubbed a “Battle of the Sexes” took place during the 1998 Australian Open[33] between Karsten Braasch and the Williams sisters. Venus and Serena Williams, aged 17 and 16 respectively, had claimed that they could beat any male player ranked below 200, so Braasch, then ranked 203rd, challenged them both. Braasch was described by one journalist as “a man whose training regime centered around a pack of cigarettes and more than a couple bottles of ice cold lager.”[34] The matches took place on court number 12 in Melbourne Park,[35] after Braasch had finished a round of golf and two beers. He first took on Serena and after leading 5–0, beat her 6–1. Venus then walked on court and again Braasch was victorious, this time winning 6–2.[36] Braasch said afterwards, “500 and above, no chance.” He added that he had played like someone ranked 600th in order to keep the game “fun.”[37] Braasch said the big difference was that men can chase down shots much easier, and that men put spin on the ball that the women can’t handle. The Williams sisters adjusted their claim to beating men outside the top 350.