If pregnancy is the best thing that could ever happen to a woman, why do the forces of the pro-forced pregnancy brigade constantly refer to pregnancy as a consequence?
Consequences are bad things. No one wants to suffer the consequences. Winning the highest jackpot in your state’s history is not a consequence of gambling. Getting evicted because you spent the last three months of rent money on lottery tickets trying to win that jackpot is a consequence of gambling.
Furthermore, when we talk about consequences we’re usually talking about things that happen when we choose to do things that are, in and of themselves, wrong.
For example, dropping dead of a heart attack at an age where death by a heart attack isn’t likely. The best way for a young person to drop dead of a heart attack [the consequence] is to make the decision to eat poorly and get inadequate exercise [the wrong choice]. On the other hand, a young person who drops dead of a heart attack because of a inherited heart problem, is merely tragic. No bad choices. No consequences.
Ergo, when it comes to pregnancy being a consequence, the idea that it is a consequence is based, wholly or partly, on the idea that sex is a bad thing. This also explains why people who will say that abortion is murder will permit victims of rape to abort their pregnancies. Those women did not make the decision to have sex and thus should not be forced to suffer the consequences of that decision.
And people say that religion’s positive influences, especially in the arts, outweighs, to some extent, the bad it’s done.
What piece of artwork, what statue, what song is so stunning in it’s beauty that it should compell us to conclude that maybe, just maybe, turning a normal human activity into a dirty despicable deed that one should suffer consequences for commiting isn’t so bad afterall?