keep clickin' crazy chickens... it actually helps!

I've noticed that the anti-abortion posters on the RH board have been more judgmental as of late (it is more likely that they've always been judgmental and it's just more irritating lately).

"The fact that selfish murderous people slaughter millions of young a year is no better than human sacrifice. Except it is even more selfish [emphasis mine] than paganistic practices. At least pagans sacrifice to gods in order to heal crops or something vaguely
'good'"

.
Wha? She's a-okay with human sacrifice if it is done in the name of God for something "vaguely good"... what a fruitballoon! Do these people even bother to read the drivel that they write? Here is an eloquent statement

"When you spread your legs and let someone crawl on top of
you, you are INVITING pregnancy. Sex is designed to procreate"

.
Isn't that lovely? Okay... I have several issues with that statement, first and foremost... what if I crawled on top? That aside, I have every intention of having sex as much as I want to without being open to even the slightest possibility of becoming pregnant or carrying a pregnancy to term. Sex is designed (for women as well as men) for pleasure. Granted, that last sentence is merely my opinion (based on a vast knowledge of pleasurable sex that my husband and I have had over the past 14 or so years... mostly PRE-MARITAL... AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH!) and D had a vasectomy years ago so the chances of an egg being fertilized are slim to none (she said with a prayer). We continue to have sex though... without the possibility of procreation... what sinners we are... wonder why God doesn't just "turn off" our sexuality or orgasms when we're done procreating if She's so keen on the whole "inviting pregnancy" thang. Freakin' crazies...

adjectives and qualifiers

So I was reading blogs on various social issues (I'm always interested in the point of view of those who see things differently than I do). I love reading opposing views particularly those that are introspective, thought-provoking and intelligent. I like how it challenges us to take a deeper look at our own opinions, beliefs and convictions. What I have a difficult time with are those people who insist upon using nonsensical ramblings (or "brain farts") which include not one bit of factual information to support the piffle they spew.

This example comes from a gal who undertakes to set herself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge... and we all know what happens when we do that! Anyhoo, she was writing of the horrible instances of crazy people who cut open women's abdomens and uterus' in order to take the nearly full term fetuses to pass of as their own. Way, way YIK and Evil. But here's what galled her:

"During the course of the show that focused on a few specific cases, some doctors and therapists and other experts were interviewed regarding the nature of these cases and the people who committed such horrible crimes. I was struck with how every "expert" referred to the unborn stolen children as Fetuses."

Here it appears to bother her that experts in the medical field use proper medical terminology when speaking of medical cases... go figure. These doctors could be completely anti-abortion, they may even be activists - simply because they use proper medical terms does not mean that they support abortion rights. Would she prefer that they had said something like "Well, they cut into her hoo-haw and sliced through the unborn receptacle thingymagiggy..."? Be serious. Then there is this:

It is pure hypocrisy to refer to unborn babies as fetuses and not refer to adults as homo sapiens and children as offspring.

Somebody doesn't understand the word "hypocrisy". No... if we're going to refer to a fetus as an "unborn baby" we should refer to adults as "undead corpses" otherwise she's comparing apples to orangutans. The truth is that a fetus is a fetus, a baby is a baby and a corpse is a corpse. And to be fair, one could be anti-abortion and accept proper medical terminology - a fetus has the potential to become a baby just as a fertilized egg has the potential to become a zygote and a zygote to become an embryo and an embryo to become a fetus (it's a bit tricky making it all that way as many studies reflect that anywhere from 30-70% of all fertilized eggs perish spontaneously). Why wouldn't one make the statement that one believes that killing a fetus (or zygote or embryo) is wrong? Why do they insist upon their cute little adjectives and qualifiers (like "unborn"baby and "preborn")? I'm guessing they believe that the use of emotionally charged words will grab the public ear better than truthful medical words. That was the explanation behind the Partial-Truth-Abortion-Ban... grabs ya a little more than Intact D&E or IDX, doesn't it?

Oh God... she goes on to say that the reason the term "fetus" is used is "...simply the pro-abortion community's influence at dehumanizing an unborn child." (there's that adjective again). Wow... I did not realize our reach went so far... YAY us!! So, I guess abortion will never be criminalized since the pro-choice community seems to have such an influence which surely reaches past the scientific realm and into other area's such as law, religion, philosophy and perhaps even thanatology.

This ended up being wa-hay longer than I thought so I will continue with my thoughts about a blog that I can respectfully disagree with next time...

Remember the Mothers...

Did you know...that the United States ranks behind at least 40 other nations in maternal mortality rates according to the World Health Organization. In 2004, the United States reported 15.1 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births, up from 7.5 per 100,000 in 1982.

Also worth noting is that no improvement has been made since 1982 in reducing the maternal mortality rate in the United States.

GLOBAL CALL TO ACTION!

Favorite Quotes...

"Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it."

~Andre Gide

********************************

A religion without a Goddess is
halfway to Atheism

~Dion Fortune

*******************************

Whoever Undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the Gods.

~Albert Einstein

stupid quote of the week

so i'm talking with this group of people about the presidential election and this guy comes into the conversation as we're all talking about the things we like about our candidates (go Obama!!!) and this jack-ass pops off with "but if Obama is elected president than the gays are gonna go around and marry anyone they want!" seriously...no shitting. i looked at him and said "that's the dumbest fucking thing i think i've ever heard anybody say in my entire life." he just stared at me blankly and i asked him how it would directly or indirectly effect him; he had no answer.

what a fuckin' moron!

The Concept of Personhood

This question seems to be popping up all over the place (not just that so-called "egg-as-persons" garbage in Colorado). It seems to be the anti-abortion folk's favorite tune these days (perhaps because every other tactic has failed to accomplish their ultimate goal of criminalizing abortion). First we need to establish exactly what we're attempting to define here when we are talking about the "personhood" of a fertilized egg. What does someone mean when they say "person" or "personhood" should apply to the zygote, embryo and the fetus? Do they mean an individual (existing as a distinct entity) human being? Or are they being more specific and speaking about the personality of a human being (as in "self")? Or maybe they are leaning more towards religiousness and are speaking of the unitary personality of Christ that unites the divine and human natures? Regardless of which definition is used, how can these possibly be applied to a fertilized egg?

So let us imagine (if you will) that these people are speaking of some philosophical ideal of "personhood", shall we? Considering that it is not plausible that people will put aside their personal belief systems in order to agree upon a philosophical definition of "personhood", it would appear to be illogical to argue from this perspective either.

I suppose next they'll be attempting to define the essential attributes of other concepts such as faith or love.

I find it ever so odd that these people not only wish to establish the egg-as-person but they loathe abortion so much so that they wish to give these eggs rights that a born person does not even have (more rights than any man, woman and/or child in this country). A child does not have the right to force it's parents to undergo any form of bodily invasion (including a blood test) without the parents consent. The law fully supports the right of a person to refuse to allow others to invade his or her bodily integrity.

These people can question the "personhood" of the zygote/embryo/fetus all they want... what they simply cannot do is question the "personhood" of a pregnant woman (regardless of whether or not her pregnancy is wanted).

It's stuck in my head...

I read this poem maybe two or three days ago and I cannot seem to get it out of my head. I'm not exactly certain what it is about these words but I love them and I've found myself thinking of them when I should be trying to fall asleep. Tell me what you take from these words:

“Out beyond ideas of wrong-doing
and right-doing, there is a field.

I'll meet you there.

When the soul lies down in that
grass, the world is too full to talk about.

Ideas, language, even the
phrase 'each other' doesn't make any sense."

~Jalalud’din Rumi 13th-century
Persian poet