House of cards


Watching the recent histrionics of pro-abortion (let’s be honest, they’re not really pro-choice) protesters after Roe v. Wade was overturned, it got me thinking: Why are these people so enraged? What is driving them to curse, spit, yell, attack, threaten, and even call for violence?

You see similar gesticulations when LGBTQ advocates are challenged on their beliefs. They claim that to even question transgenderism is tantamount to threatening their very lives.

My theory to explain this phenomenon of unhinged anger is this: the further away your particular ideology is from actual scientific and philosophical truth and coherence, the more angry you become when challenged.

This is especially true when your ideology is intimately linked with your sense of identity.

Social progressives may have rationalizations or justifications for their beliefs, but rarely can they stand up to rational scrutiny, and so to preserve their grasp on such tenuous beliefs they have to resort to name-calling and temper tantrums to halt any discussion.

Contrast that with how pro-life advocates handle themselves when challenged, insulted, or threatened. They remain calm, they smile, they bless their enemies. And they welcome a robust debate on the subject. They do not stomp and whine when someone challenges their view of abortion or their faith.

But people who embrace leftist ideologies of all sorts are engaged in embracing a “fantasy ideology” that asserts as true things which are not true. It’s a fantasy to believe that you can just claim your sex has changed, or that you can have meaningless sex with no consequences, or that abortion does not involve the killing of a human life. So when someone calls you on that fantastical notion, you know deep down that you may be wrong, and very terribly wrong, and so you react with anger and hysteria. 

When your house is built on sand, it crumbles easily with the slightest puff of wind, but when built on the bedrock of truth, can withstand the howling winds of contempt and hatred.

So, ask yourself: how calmly and cooly are you able to defend your particular house of cards when winds of criticism come? The degree to which you can remain calm is the degree to which your house is built on the foundation of truth.

Trey Hoffman

Peachtree City, Ga.


  1. The Court made the right decision to return the issue to the respective States. Whether you’re pro or anti abortion is a personal choice. It always has been and will always be a divisive issue. Roe v Wade was a bad SC decision. It’s been over ruled. Now the States and it’s citizens will decide the laws they want to enact.

    • You believe the decision by the Supreme court was right – that is an opinion. If abortion is truly a personal choice as you mentioned, then the Court made the wrong decision. Now those “personal choice” women living in states that all but ban abortions are not being represented. Yes, they can travel to the nearest state that allows the procedure, but it is another road block in a series of hard decisions that the woman has to make. You may say, well, if you don’t like the laws of the state you live in, then leave and go somewhere else. (TSWL keeps blabbing about New York. Yay for you.) Basically, the states that enact the harshest terms for abortions are saying to the women of their state – “Eff you ladies. We don’t care what you need, or what you want. We don’t really care about you unless you’re popping out some babies and by the way, we don’t give a d @ m n about the kid after it’s born either.”

  2. Substitute “Election fraud believers” for “pro-abortionists” in Hoffman’s letter and think of the calm demeanor of the 45th president and the January 6 “tourists.” Hoffman is such a complete hyper-partisan that he is incapable of engaging in even mild reflection.

    Truth is stranger than fiction!

  3. Poor Trey. Watching the recent histrionics the of Anti-Choice (let’s be honest, they’re not really pro-life) crowd, it is difficult to understand their jubilance. Do they think that forcing mostly minority and poor women to have unwanted children out of wedlock is cause for celebration? Is it because the anti-choice crowd is excited about helping poor minority unwed mothers care for their unwanted child? Are they volunteering en masse to give them money for medical bills, maternal leave, child care? Are they clamoring for Medicare for all? Are they offering to adopt, babysit, job train, and tutor, the child they found so precious in someone else’s womb? Are they giving up their big truck and trip to the beach to buy school clothes and college tuition to the forced-to-be-born? Methinks not. Perhaps Trey et al enjoy forcing their will on others.
    It is strange that the self identified “christians” plead the sanctity of human life as their rationale that all embryo must be born. Do not Christians believe that any unborn child that died would go directly to Heaven to be eternally with God? On the other hand, the Bible makes no bones about the destination of the majority of folks born into this world – they will burn eternally in the lake of fire. Given this scenario, why would “christians” want to snatch paradise from the unborn and replace it with probable eternal suffering? Could it be that the truth of the Word was not inculcated within their minds due to lack of meditating on it day and night, so that they may be careful to do according to all that is written in it?

  4. Trey, you’ve been spouting your anger and hysteria on these pages for years.

    How does it feel to know there will always be access for abortion somewhere? Sure, the ruling made it more difficult, but it didn’t stop abortion. Yes, leaving it up to the States to decide will in turn make it more difficult, but access to abortion will still be available.

    The court just opened a can of worms mobilizing pro-abortion voters. Businesses and private groups will facilitate in helping women get to states that allow abortion. Abortion isn’t going away – it will never go away. It just shifts how it gets done.