Internet Chronicle

INTERNET — Saturday, Donald Trump’s ex-wives came forward with shocking stories of the bombastic Republican presidential candidate’s multiple abortions, alleging he coerced them into aborting when they wanted to keep their babies.

Trump’s first wife, Ivana, told reporters, “He was obsessed with having unprotected sex with me at all moments of the day, and I got pregnant ten times during our marriage. The first time he just scowled and said ‘you’re getting an abortion’ even though I wanted to keep the baby. I had no choice at all. He wouldn’t even pull out.”

Amidst tears, Ivana explained her reason for coming forward, “I knew I had to say something when Donald was on TV saying his views on abortion had evolved because he knew a man who was not aborted. That man is his own son, who he wanted to abort so badly that he gave me a black eye. But I kept three of my babies, mostly by lying to him, and he resented it so much he left me for Marla.”

Trump’s next wife, Marla Maples, met up with Ivana Trump after the debate to talk about their ex-husband’s love for abortion. “I used to hate Ivana but we went through the same meat grinder. I always asked Donald to wear a condom because I didn’t want to get pregnant, but he hated them and called them ‘cocksocks.’ I always felt like he enjoyed it when he’d get me pregnant and take me to Planned Parenthood, and Ivana said she went through the same thing. He definitely took pleasure in aborting his babies. But now we know how much a fetus is worth, and how he always wanted more and more sex when he was losing money. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he was reinvesting the abortion profits into real estate, but that’s taking it easy on him. There was probably no money in it at all, just a carnal urge to desecrate a woman’s body and kill her unborn babies. Megyn Kelly has no clue how much that sicko hates women. He forced abortions out of us when we wanted to keep our babies. He’s not pro-choice or pro-life, he’s pro-death.”

Today’s secular world looks to science for truth and remembers the story of the persecution of Galileo to draw a false incompatibility between science and religion. We all know the story where Galileo agrees with the Copernican model placing the sun at the center of things and is, in some totally fraudulent accounts, put to death.

Copernicus was famously reluctant to publish his theories because he knew they were less good than the standard model of the day, and he also understood astronomy as an embarrassing and sinful grasping at mastery. He drew all his pay from the church and felt poetry was a more holy way to spend his creative efforts.

Galileo was unable to show his peers that the Copernican model was better than the standard of the day because it wasn’t. By correcting one aspect in the conventional model, its orientation, the result was more unwieldy and less accurate.

In one book written very late in life, Galileo drew on circumstantial evidence and arguments from scripture. We are told in many versions of the story that a stodgy traditionalism or dogmatism held back progress towards scientific truth, and that is true. But the Copernican model was a dead end, and the church was open enough to allow the publishing of idiosyncratic faulty theories as long as they were not presented as fact. The dogma that held back Galileo was peer review and the demand for predictable, reproducible results. These are the goods that science prides itself most in, but the common story transforms that same quality of the church into a murderous fault.

But it is also true that many Protestant versions of Christianity have, like Galileo, traded away the brick wall of robust proofs for a shiny mirror. These religions of the self became breeding grounds for willfully ignorant believers in fairytales. It is not a return to something ‘medieval’ but a recent creation out of self-seducing infantilisms extending even into secular thought and coinciding with industrialization in the mid 19th century as well as the creation of the Galileo murder myth. Impoverished of interpretation in the secular mode and missing discernment in the religious mode. ‘Uninterpreted’ — objective — facts determine government policies and faith flees and gouges out its eyes at the least uncertainty.

Galileo’s behavior was so bad he was shortly imprisoned in a luxury resort. He continued printing that one controversial book in Germany, where it could not be banned by the Catholic church. Everyone believes he invented the telescope because of ruthless campaigning, but that’s a lie too.