Bligbi » anti-choice

On pregnancy as a consequence

Karen — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 18:44:45 +0000

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.

Hmph.

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?

Possibly Related Posts

NARAL’s such a bully!

Karen — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 17:44:40 +0000

One day I’m going to figure out how I get on some of the email lists I’m on, but today is not that day. Today is snort at the faux feminists who go by the name of Feminists for Life.

They appear to be upset that NARAL has referred to their deceptive group as being anti-choice.

The truth really does hurt apparently because that’s exactly what Feminists for Life(FFL) is – anti-choice. They do not support a woman’s choice to terminate a pregnancy for any reason.

From the Q&A section of their site concerning abortions due to the welfare of the woman:

…Situations in which the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother are extremely rare. Late-term abortions are never medically necessary. Emergency C-sections are often the medically appropriate response to save both mother and child. !

…, there are issues related to mental health. While pregnancy can be a stressful experience and sometimes bring on or exacerbate depression, psychological stress should not be “treated” by abortion. Psychiatrists and psychologists need to treat mental health issues directly.

FFL also opposes women seeking abortions due to rape and incest. In the same section under “what if she just doesn’t want it” Serrin Foster puts FFL position on abortion rather bluntly:

We oppose abortion in all cases because violence is a violation of basic feminist principles.

You simply cannot be “pro-choice” when it comes to reproductive issues and simultaneously oppose the choice to terminate a pregnancy. End of discussion.

Possibly Related Posts

Mississippi swears it will protect women from themselves unless they’re raped

Karen — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 16:41:58 +0000

Mississippi is still doing it’s part in destroying the rights of women, but this time they’ve decided to amuse the rest of us by contradicting themselves without realizing it because HB 220 (PDF) contains this gem:

A pregnant mother possesses certain inherent rights that are natural intrinsic rights which enjoy affirmative protection under the Constitution of the United States, and under the laws or Constitution of the State of Mississippi; that among these rights are the fundamental rights of the pregnant mother to her relationship with her child; her fundamental right to make decisions that insure the well-being of her child; and her interest in her own health and bodily integrity.

Something doesn’t belong in that paragraph. Can you guess what it is? No? Let me help. It would be the part about the woman’s interest in her own health and bodily integrity. Declaring that “pregnant mothers” will remain “pregnant mothers” unless they get permission from the state to not be “pregnant mothers” is an assault against the woman’s body integrity.

Of course, the bill is just a bunch of fear mongering as it based upon the idea of roving bands of abortionists forcing women to terminate pregnancies they didn’t want to terminate in the first place.

Amusingly enough, it still allows for the “murder” of unborn “children” who’s only crime is having a criminal for a “father”:

No person may knowingly use or employ any instrument or procedure upon a pregnant woman with the specific intent of causing or abetting the termination of the life of an unborn human being except in the case of a reported rape or incest; or the abortion is necessary to save the life of the 136 pregnant woman; or if there exists the presence of a life-threatening medical condition in the mother that would be 138 worsened by continuing the pregnancy.

I know Mississippi is about as religious as they come and their bible says rape and incest are capital offenses in some situations, but didn’t their savior nail himself to a cross so they could get past the “make the kids pays for daddy’s crimes” bit?

Anti-choice activists. They’re going to beat their god at hypocrisy one day, eh?

Possibly Related Posts

Who Lies about Abortion

Karen — Thu, 20 Jul 2006 20:23:48 +0000

A recent commenter implied that the behaviour of the CPC’s in a recent report by Rep. Waxman doesn’t reflect the truthfulness of the rest of them. So, using the profiles of 15 of the leading anti-choice groups provided by Planned Parenthood here’s what I found from looking at their respective sites:

American Life League (www.all.org) is based in Virginia and operates crisis pregnancy centers (henceforth referred to as CPCs). It lists breast cancer as having a “dramatic relationship” with abortion and ‘acute’ depression as a risk of abortion.

Americans for Life (www.unitedforlife.org) is based in Illinois and though it does not operate CPCs, it does promote a strong relationship between breast cancer and abortion.

Concerned Women for America (www.cwfa.org) is based in Washington DC and operates CPCs. It also makes a strong connection between breast cancer and abortion as well as the existence of Post Abortion Syndrome.

Eagle Forum (www.eagleforum.org) is based in Illinois and though it does not operate CPCs, it has made a link between between breast cancer and abortion in its lawsuits regarding reproductive choice.

Feminists for Life (www.feministsforlife.org) is based out of Washington DC and operates CPCs. It promotes a connection between breast cancer and abortion as well as ‘severe’ mental problems.

Focus on the Family (www.family.org) is based Colorado and operates CPCs. It promotes a connection between breast cancer and abortion.

Human Life International (www.hli.org) is based in Virginia and while it does not appear to deal directly with CPCs, it does promote the idea that there is a connection between breast cancer and abortion, a connection between future fertility and abortion as well as mental illness.

Life Dynamics (www.ldi.org) is based here in Texas but doesn’t appear to be linked to CPCs. It does appear to be behind several other sites that do promote the breast cancer link as well as mental and future fertility problems.

Missionaries to the Preborn (www.missionariestopreborn.com) is based in Wisconsin and promotes the idea that female contraceptions are abortificants that cause infertility, cervical and breast cancer.
National Right to Life Committee (www.nrlc.org) is based in Washington, DC and does not appear to be directly connected to CPCs. It does, however, promote abortion as an extremely dangerous procedure that interferes with future fertility and a connection between it and breast cancer as well as several mental problems.

Operation Rescue/Save America (www.operationsaveamerica.org) is also based here in Texas. It has no direct connection to CPCs but does connect abortion with breast cancer, suicide and depression.

Pro-Life Action League (www.prolifeaction.org) is based in Illinois and operates CPCs. It promotes the idea that the various forms of contraceptions are abortificants, that abortion causes breast cancer and severe mental problems.

These are just the biggest dogs in the pack. And they’re all lieing about abortion. How can one possibly say their lies do not reflect upon the supposed “rest”?

Blogged with Flock