Because you can’t murder babies with scissors in America and get away with it. At least not forever.
We’re coming for you next, Planned Parenthood.
Justice has been served.
Abortion, Bioethics, Contraception, Culture of Death, euthanasia, Evangelization, Women's Health, Women's Rights
7 Quick Takes on the Decline of Western Civilization
May 3, 2013Hell of a week, y’all. Can’t say I’ve been particularly proud to be an American while reading/covering the news from home this week. Are you sick of seeing this on Facebook/Twitter/blogs yet? Well me too. But the truth must be revealed, even (and perhaps especially) when it’s ugly. Because the only way to defeat evil, ultimately, is to expose it to the Light.
Is the news morbid, depressing, and defeating at times? Hell yes it is. But you know what? You might assume that everyone is already aware of this or that depressing/horrifying/shocking/infuriating situation, but you’d be wrong. The reason things like Kermit Gosnell murdering hundreds of breathing, born human babies and getting paid for it in a licensed ‘medical’ facility continue to happen is because people aren’t aware, or if they are, their consciences aren’t sufficiently formed to feel horror at the scope of evil we’re dealing with.
And that’s where we come in. To bring the message of the Gospel, yes. But also to denounce the anti-Gospel. To stand up in a crowded room and identify something evil as exactly that: evil.
Does that word make you uncomfortable? It should. It is the antithesis of what it means to be fully human, an impoverishment of our God-given nature. And it’s real. And it’s destroying souls and families and nations today, just as it has for a thousand generations beforehand. But lately, it seems, we’ve become deaf and dumb to its existence. And suddenly every kind of depravity and attack on the dignity of the human person is re-branded and repackaged as a ‘lifestyle choice’, a ‘deeply personal decision,’ or the laudable evidence of ‘diversity.’
Lies. Calling something evil ‘good’ does not alter reality. And committing murder of human beings using surgical instruments doesn’t make it medicine.
So hold on to your butts, readers, because we’re going to pull back the curtain and look evil in the eye. And we’re going to spit in its face and expose it for the rest of the world to see.
1. The Gosnell Trial. Horrifying, mind-numbing, and completely over-saturated by media coverage, at least on my newsfeed. But I inhibit a particular little corner of the internet where I see a lot of coverage of all things bioethics-related. So I trust that there are still plenty of people out there who don’t know about the man who systematically murdered hundreds of unborn and born children at his filthy ‘medical’ facility over a period of decades, employing the assistance of unskilled and untrained staff members and disposing of the bodies (or keeping revolting trophies, as some serial killers are wont to do) in the most inhumane and gruesome manner. Vom now or vom later, the choice is yours.
2. Live Action President Lila Rose’s latest undercover video investigations, ‘#Inhuman’. She is a boss. She is in her early 20’s. And she is braver and more intimidating and effective than any single politician or investigative reporter on the planet. Live Action has dropped 3 shocking videos this week. None of them are shocking for what you’ll see. There are no gruesome pictures. All of them, however, are shocking for what you’ll hear:
3. The first details the willingness of late-term abortion facilities to murder accidentally-born babies should the procedure fail,
4. The second provides evidence that abortion ‘doctors’ routinely break federal law in order to deny medical aid or resuscitation to failed abortion victims,
5. The third includes a step-by-step description of how a baby is dismembered inside the uterus (or sometimes outside, after birth) and how the remains are sent out to funeral homes (even though they’re not human?) It also has some chilling footage from a Senate hearing in Florida of Planned Parenthood’s view of the human person, and of their own perception of their role in the abortion business.
6. Fox News’ correspondent on the O’Reilly factor didn’t seem to share my opinion of her. Though she didn’t seem able to form a coherent sentence, either. And had some weird facial tics going on, so I don’t know, maybe she was on something.
7. The FDA’s (and the President of the United States) endorsement of statutory rape. The Morning After abortion pill is now available OTC to children as young as 15. Who are, according to federal law and common decency, protected from sexual exploitation by statutory rape laws in every state in our nation. But just in case you get one of them pregnant, no worries, you can easily send her down to Walmart or CVS for a powerful dose of the dangerous and potent drug Levonorgestrel and bam, problem solved.
I find it deeply ironic and more than a little disturbing that the President is himself father to two teenage daughters. But remember, this is the same man who doesn’t want them ‘punished with a baby.’ Best make the Morning After pill available to teens then, to make certain the cycle of destructive behavior and precocious sexuality our young people are enslaved to continues to spiral out of control. Hell, why not officially endorse it?
So there you have it. Depressing, disgusting, and oh-so-necessary to share until there is no filthy, darkened corner for this madness to hide in. Mother Teresa, who surely saw more filth and depravity in a day than the average human being could stomach in a lifetime, tells us we must ‘be the change we wish to see in the world.’ And so we must.
If you’re still reading, good on you, solider. Head over the Jen’s to have some peace restored.
Abortion, Bioethics, Culture of Death, Women's Health, Women's Rights
Safe, Legal, and (medium) Rare
April 28, 2013Kermit Gosnell, the late term abortionist and murderer standing trial in Philadelphia is, unfortunately, not the exception to the rule of abortion in America today.
This is hard to watch, but not because it’s filled with gruesome images or graphic photos. It’s hard to watch because it’s filled with gruesome philosophy embraced by an impoverished humanity. It’s hard to watch because it perfectly illustrates how the linguistic decay of a civilization allows for the destruction of its people in a very literal sense.
It’s hard to watch because in so doing, it becomes very clear that when the side of Good has lost the battle for our common language, hearts and minds are won to the side of the enemy, where they can hide behind euphemisms and anachronisms and catch phrases. They can even hide from themselves, behind these sterilized terms and turns of phrase.
Watch, and listen. Be mindful of the necessity of Evil to hide behind vagaries and imprecise definitions and generalizations. It can’t suffer the truth, because the truth sets free. Evil seeks only to hide, to cover up, and to imprison.
Listen for terms like ‘termination,’ ‘procedure,’ ‘solution,’ ‘killing the heartbeat,’ ‘stopping the procedure from continuing,’ ‘it,’ ‘parts,’ and ‘instruments.’
Words are everything. And sometimes, words fail.
Happy Earth Day, readers!
Surprised to hear that from yours truly? Well, let the record state that while I remain miserably apathetic about recycling (because it’s stupid and it uses more energy to break down and refashion the original materials than it saves), I am totally and 110% crunchy when it comes to avoiding – and helping my family avoid – hormonal pollution.
On a practical level, that means we make careful choices with our dairy and meat purchases, we don’t drink the appalling tap water available to us here in bella Roma, and I don’t use hormonal contraception. Now, I have one or two other reasons for refusing to pop the Pill, but for the sake of this post, let’s focus on the simple fact that it’s bad for you.
Like very, very bad. And also pretty terrible for the environment and surrounding inhabitants, e.g. your neighbors. Human and animal alike.
So without further explanation, I offer to you (and I will permanently link this on the header bar at the top of the blog) my semi-infamous ‘Green Sex’ talk.
When I was a FOCUS missionary and way back even before that when I was a grad student at good ‘ol Steubie U, I began to draft and then revise this talk, giving it every couple of months or so to varying crowds of (mostly) college-aged audiences at conferences and at colleges around the country. While I’ve been off the speaking circuit for a good long while now, popping out babies and moving overseas and whatnot, the content is still relevant – perhaps more so with all the HHS nonsense still brewing at home – and so I want to share it with you here.
Green Sex
Green sex is the concept of sex ‘au natural,’ as God – or nature – intended. Sex without props, potions or procedures. One man, one woman, no equipment necessary. It’s cost effective, has a carbon footprint of essentially zero, and is a basic proven predictor of marital longevity. In laymen terms: it’s free, cheap and easy.
Green sex is also the idea that contraceptive use – or the deliberate destruction or suppression of the reproductive functions – is in fact seriously deleterious to the environment and may indeed be harmful to the human person – physically, psychologically and relationally.
So why aren’t we hearing more about it? It seems like the green thing to do – in light of mounting evidence of the effects of chemical contraception on the natural environment, would be to cease and desist all chemical contraceptive use at once. Or else. But… that doesn’t seem to be on anybody’s political agenda these days.
Because the idea of “green sex,” for all it’s shock value and buzz-worthy appeal, isn’t exactly catching on like wildfire. Cosmo hasn’t run any features exposing the rampant estrogenic pollution of our streams and waterways resultant from the disposal of human sewage laden with prolific amounts of artificial hormones.
The White House hasn’t introduced any sweeping initiatives to enact protective measures for transgendered trout whose sexuality has been swayed by human interference…
But the consequences of contraceptive use on the environment – both externally, in nature, and internally, within the human body – are staggering.
First, a little background on who is “using:” From a report by the Guttmacher Institute (the research arm of Planned Parenthood), issued in January of 2008, we have the following statistics:
• 62 million U.S. women are in their childbearing years (or fall in the age range of 15–44)
• Of these 62 million women, 43 million, or 7 in 10, are sexually active and do not want to become pregnant, but could become pregnant if they or their partners fail to use a contraceptive method.
• Millions of these women are teenagers. Of the 3.1 million teenage women who use contraceptives, 53% of them—more than 1.5 million teens—rely on the pill.
• The typical U.S. woman wants only 2 children. To achieve this goal, she must faithfully use contraceptives for roughly 3 decades, beginning in her teen years and continuing well into her forties.
Good to know. Let’s build upon this information with some facts from the front line, taken from
the drug info packet of Ortho Tricyclen – the number one prescribed oral contraceptive in the United States:
“Taking the Pill at a younger age may increase your risk of being diagnosed with breast cancer. Particularly if taken for five consecutive years prior to a woman’s first pregnancy”
Let’s break that down. According to the drug manufacturer’s own warning label,
Taking the Pill:
1. “may increase your risk of being diagnosed with breast cancer”
Which, could also be loosely translated to “might give you cancer.” Sounds a little more ominous that way, no?
Taking the Pill:
2. “…at a younger age.”
Let’s examine this one. The average age of onset for hormonal contraceptive use in the U.S. is between 15 and 22 years of age.
Let’s say a 17 year-old, high school junior obtains a prescription from her general care practitioner and remains on the Pill for the remainder of high school and then continues through college and grad school. Assuming she finishes her MA at age 25. She’s now been on the Pill for 7 years… Hmmmm….
Taking the Pill:
3. “prior to a woman’s first pregnancy”
Let’s presume the young lady in our above example marries around age 28 (early average, by today’s standards) and waits 12-14 months to conceive baby number one (again, pretty quick by today’s standards.) She has now been on the Pill for more than a dozen years prior to her first pregnancy…
So, transgendered trout aside, it would seem that there are plenty of humanereasons to think before popping those little pink Pills – humane in the fullest sense of the word.
But seriously, does the phrase “Green Sex” do a number on your psyche? Make your stomach feel a little… off?
Mine too.
But I haven’t thought of a more fitting name for it yet, so “green sex” it is.
Some food for thought:
Why aren’t we hearing more buzz about “greening” our sex lives? Why hasn’t there been public outcry over the massive amounts of environmental pollution produced by hormonal contraceptive use? And perhaps most disturbing of all, why aren’t women up in arms about the ramifications that even short-term contraceptive use has on their health?
Because going green – in the bedroom – is not the most convenient option. Because we don’t really care what we’re doing to our bodies, as long as our bodies are performing exactly as we tell them to.
It’s funny though, because for a society so infatuated with the practice of lessening consumerist tendencies, it’s awfully fishy that no body’s pointed a finger at Merck or Wyeth or one of the pharmaceutical companies’ other big players, asking the tough questions about energy output and the environmental ramifications of pumping billions of gallons of estrogen-enhanced waste through our waterways – not to mention through our bloodstreams.
It sure gets you thinking…
Maybe – just maybe – contraception is bad for the environment. Maybe it’s bad for our own internal environments, too. Maybe, in spite of everything we’ve been told about “responsible” family planning and good stewardship, we’re actually doing more harm than good in our misguided attempts to outwit our own biology.
Need proof? We could try calculating the carbon footprint produced by the laboratory production, packaging, marketing, shipping, stocking and consumption of Ortho-Tricyclen in the United States alone, and you have an energy output far outpacing that of other more popularly-critiqued industries that have come under recent heavy media fire for failing to properly steward their resources and reduce their footprint.
In an era where incredible emphasis is placed upon social-responsibility, and where those whose endanger the natural world are condemned unanimously… why hasn’t anyone taken up the standard against the toxic wastefulness of artificial – and specifically chemical – contraception?
Let’s back up and begin with the basics; those three fundamental claims made in favor of contraceptive use, the “Big Three” for Big Pharma.
They’ve been ingrained into the minds of women (and men) over the course of years of careful public health campaigns in public schools and marketing efforts in medical offices and pharmacies, and they are as follows:
1. Contraception is convenient
2. Contraception is responsible
3. Contraception is liberating
Myth # 1: Contraception is convenient:
Truth: Contraception as a convenient means of manipulating or “controlling” one’s biology has perhaps become the single biggest selling point for the product. In a culture which praises immediacy and action, there is nothing more appealing to the consumer than the “quick fix.”
We see it in the marketing of diet pills and supplements, in the advertisements for internet service providers, and in the never-ending quest for quicker service at the pump or in the drive through. We are a people obsessed by productivity – or the promise of it – and who will sacrifice almost anything to shave a few minutes off our times.
Let’s examine the promise of convenience as it relates to the proper use of hormonal contraceptives:
1. You must take your Pill at the same time, every day. If you miss a dose, its efficacy is dramatically lowered.
Check out Planned Parenthood’s instructions for missed doses: (read this fast for best effect)
- If you miss 1 pill, take it as soon as you remember.
- Take your regular pill at the usual time, even if it means taking 2 pills in one day.
- Continue taking your pills, but use another effective method of birth control (in addition to your pill) for 10 days, even if you begin a new pill pack or have your period.
- If you miss 2 pills, take two pills at once, then 2 pills the next day.
- Continue taking your pills, but use another method of birth control for 10 days.
- If you miss 2 or more pills at the start of a new pack of pills and have had sex, you are at risk for pregnancy.
o Take your pill at the same time every day. This keeps hormone level steady and prevents ovulation.
o If you ever vomit within two hours after taking your pill, take another pill
o If you take your pill late, you may have spotting (bleeding). The best time to take the pill is after a meal.
Sounds rather complicated. But what if you are taking your dose on time? Read on:
· Begin your first pack of pills by taking the first pill on the first Sunday after your nextmenstrual period starts.
· You will always start each new pack of pills on a Sunday.
· If you are using a 28-day pack, begin a new pack immediately. Skip no days between packages. Your period will come sometime during the last 7 days.
· If you are using a 21-day pack, you will take no pills for 7 days and then start your new pack.
So by convenient, I suppose the manufacturers mean mind-numbingly complex. If Tylenol had such stringent dosing practices, I wonder whether it’d be the number one painkiller on the market.
Myth # 2: Contraception is responsible:
Facts: Billions of dollars are spent on the research, development, production, advertisement, packaging and distribution of contraceptives – from pill packs to condoms, and everything in between.
Our waterways are becoming saturated with astronomical levels of estrogen, decimating animal populations in the surrounding ecosystems. Case in point: Boulder Creek – (yeah, this town gets a lot of weird press) is now home to a bizarre, mutated kind of “transgendered trout.”
“They [EPA-funded scientists at the University of Colorado] studied the fish and decided the main culprits were estrogens and other steroid hormones from birth control pills and patches, excreted in urine into the city’s sewage system and then into the creek. Randomly netting 123 trout and other fish downstream from the city’s sewer plant, they found that 101 were female, 12 were male, and 10 were strange “intersex” fish with male and female features.” National Catholic Register, July 2007
These are not the chemicals leaking downstream from a steel mill or a pharmaceutical factory, which would surely have local activists up in arms. These are chemicals being excreted in human waste; read: they are coming out of our bodies and causing genetic alteration – mutation in some cases- in local wildlife.
Curt Cunningham, water quality issues chairman for the Rocky Mountain Chapter of Sierra Club International, worked tirelessly last year on a ballot measure that would force the City of Boulder to remove fluoride from drinking water, because some believe it has negative effects on health and the environment that outweigh its benefits.
Cunningham said he would never consider asking women to curtail use of birth control pills and patches— despite what effect these synthetics have on rivers, streams and drinking water:
“I suspect people would not take kindly to that,” Cunningham said. “For many people it’s an economic necessity. It’s also a personal freedom issue.”
And all the while, we’re being told in firm, sensible tones: do your part. We only have one earth. Switch to high efficiency lightbulbs…
Boulder, Colorado is turning a blind eye to one to the mutation of one of their beloved indigenous animal species for the sake of … convenience? A strange phenomenon for a city known to be infatuated with all things animalia… but then, stranger things have happened in Boulder.
But would anyone consider making the switch from synthetic hormonal contraceptives to something a little, well, greener? Something with zero impact on the environment and a significantly positive effect on the sociological state of affairs? Has anyone stopped to consider the very real ramifications of literally millions of couples eschewing sex “au natural” in favor of a more controlled and convenient conjugal collaboration?
Myth # 3: Contraception is liberating
Truth: Contraception is anything but freeing. Need we revisit the tedious litany of instructions for proper use of the Pill?
The truth is, contraceptives have made women less free, not more. Because for every claim of convenience –
· “No risk of pregnancy!”
· “Casual, consequence-free sex!”
· “Guilt-less hook-ups!”
There is an equal and opposing consequence – take the following three examples:
1. Use of the Pill increasesthe risk for sexually transmitted infections based upon increased sexual activity:
“The morning-after pill is also having a damaging social effect by lulling young women into a false sense of security, encouraging a more casual attitude to sex, and exposing them to increased risk of sexually transmitted infections.” London Daily Mail, May 2009
2. Use of the Pill encourages promiscuity: take the following statement from one of the inventors of the birth control pill, Dr. Robert Kistner of Harvard:
“For years, I thought the pill would not lead to promiscuity, would not cultivate dangerous sexual behavior… but I’ve changed my mind. I think it probably has.”
Nobel-prize winning economist and professor at the University of California at Berkley, George Akerlof, agrees. He found that:
“Instead of freeing women, birth control obligated them to have sex before marriage in order to compete in the “relationship market.”
And finally:
3. Use of the Pill gives women – especially younger women – a false sense of security and safety. According to the Guttmacher Institute in a 1996 study:
“A teenage girl who has unprotected sex just one time has a 1% risk of contracting HIV, a 30% risk of contracting genital herpes, and a 50% chance of contracting gonorrhea.”
What it’s really about, this acceptance of contraception as a necessary and indeed essential component of modern life is convenience at any cost. At all cost. For some, the cost will be greater.
Take the following story from the Australian News Service published April, 2009:
“Tanya Hayes, a student from Croydon in Melbourne, Australia, died Monday, hours after collapsing in her car.
Hayes had been taking Yasmin, an oral contraceptive recommended for patients using the acne medication Accutane, for about four months.
Hayes had ignored symptoms of a pulmonary embolism for about two weeks, including “breathlessness” and “a nasty, hard cough,” according to her family.
She collapsed outside a restaurant late Sunday night and was rushed to Angliss Hospital in Melbourne, Australia.
Hayes died less than five hours later after a pulmonary embolism, or blood clotting, occurred in her lungs.”
Tanya may have paid the ultimate price for her use of contraceptives, but every one of us is paying something.
And while it would seem that while there most certainly are individuals and companies who are benefitting from the tremendous sales of contraceptive products, we – the women who use them and the environment in which we live – are not making out so well.
Perhaps the biggest myth enshrouding the practice of contra-ception, Latin for against the beginning (of life) is the unshakable claim that somehow those little pink pill packs have made us, as women, free.
To read much of recent modern feminist literature, one might very easily assume that the entire achievements of equality enjoyed by the fairer sex in the past century were accomplished thanks to the invention of the Pill.
Truth be told, the assumption that any woman could be, potentially, ‘protected’ from the dangers of an unwanted pregnancy and available for sex sans consequence has led to the expectation that every woman is exactly that: available.
A girlfriend of mine was recently dating a guy – very casually – and they ended up back at her apartment one evening after dinner, chatting on her couch. After a few minutes of small talk this ‘nice guy’ got down to business, asking if they were, you know, ‘safe’ to hook up.
“So are you like, on something? I mean, are we safe?”
“Are we safe?” she wondered incredulously..
He turned red (to his miniscule credit) and elaborated “You know, are you like, on the pill?”
“Um, no, I’m not. And is that seriously how you just asked me to sleep with you?”
The conversation – and the brief relationship – ended about 3 minutes later.
The point was, the assumption, the entire burden of ‘responsibility’ was on her shoulders. Only difference between this guy and a million other dudes on campus was that he had the crass to say it out loud.
And neither a condom nor a chemical contraceptive can guarantee ‘protection,’ whether from deadly disease, unwanted pregnancy or no-strings-attached sex. Despite what you may have heard in health class, or down at the campus health center (which very conveniently stocks loads of free samples from dozens of pharmaceutical companies hawking product and brochures from Planned Parenthood hawking, you guessed it, product).
According to a 2010 economic analysis of contraception by economist Timothy Reichert entitled ‘Bitter Pill,’ “Contraception creates a demand for abortion.” He likens contraception and abortion to complementary forms of insurance that resemble primary insurance and reinsurance. “If contraception fails, abortion is there as a fail-safe.”
Data collected from 1960 to 2005 confirms his thesis that the practices of contraception and abortion should rise until equilibrium levels of sexual activity are reached – and indeed, the statistical evidence shows a strong correlation between the rise in legal abortions and the rising use of contraceptive technology.
But we are not simply a target demographic, potential customers and consumers. Women in particular have been gifted with a unique and complex sexuality which lends itself to long term investment in a lasting sexual relationship.
Because of the widespread availability of contraceptive technology, a woman is now compelled to enter the sex market at a younger age and ‘compete’ while she is a scarcer commodity, while at the same time driving the cost of abstinence for other women to an historical high.
Women who choose to delay their entrance into the sex market until they desire to marry find themselves at a profound disadvantage, both from the perspective of availability of potential mates and the stiffer competition from younger sexually active women who, by nature of their suppressed fertility, are available for consequence-free sex.
In plain terms, what this essentially means is that from a strictly economic perspective, the availability of contraception compels women to make themselves ‘sexually available’ in order to compete with their peers for a rightful share of the market.
It’s a rather grim way of looking at romantic relationships, but there’s evidence of it in every aspect of modern society. Sex has essentially become the currency and women the desirable product or service. Not an especially attractive scenario, from a feminist perspective. Which is why I would advocate that authentic feminism must embrace the whole person rather than reducing her to parts or performance ability.
Being a woman, having the capacity to conceive and nurture new human life, is not a design flaw. It doesn’t need to be sutured, suppressed or tied off in order to ‘protect’ men from the consequences of intimacy with us.
Similarly, we needn’t defend ourselves against the scourge of male fertility by means of barriers or chemical repellants. We are not at war with one another.
But we are making war on our own bodies, and on the environment in which we live.
As human beings we are entrusted with an awesome responsibility to till and keep the garden of the natural world. We are to be stewards and guardians, not polluters and consumers. Not of the environment, and not of each other.
So the next time somebody engages you on the topic of responsible environmental stewardship, ask them what they’ve done for the planet lately, and maybe think twice before popping your morning Pill.
Because you never know who’s downstream.
Found this little gem while hopping around from blog to blog following last Sunday’s link up, and it is one of the most concise and well-researched cases for the problem with hormonal contraceptives that I’ve seen.
Please read, please share with your friends and family, and please keep the conversation going. It’s 2012 – women shouldn’t be dying from medical ignorance.
Dear women of the United States of America,
(particularly those of the Democratic persuasion)
You are being had. Your Commander in Chief sees a sea of vaginas when he looks out at a predominantly female crowd, and if that doesn’t turn your stomach, I don’t know what will.
Some lovely tidbits from the White House’s corner of the internets this morning:
Oh, vote with my lady parts? Or just for them? Wait, did you actually want me to have my vagina drive me to the polls and let it do all the box-checking for me?
Oh, okay.
Or how about this one:
Kind of inspires mother/daughter warm fuzzies, huh?
My dear sisters, whatever your political affiliation in the past – or even at present – do you really believe that this man has your best interests at heart when he is clearly so preoccupied with your reproductive organs that he cannot see past a pair of breasts to the brain above them or the heart behind them?
I am sick.to.death. of the lies that women are being fed about being ’empowered’ and ‘heard’ and equipped with ‘choices’ by the Democratic party; it’s bullshit. The only thing these people care about is staying in power, and the only reason you’re getting any of their attention is because you (allegedly) comprise a coveted voting bloc.
If the man sitting in the Oval Office right now (or on a golf course in Vegas, let’s be real) really gave a damn about you and your family, he would be working to secure the financial and physical safety of our great nation, not flooding social networks with smutty e-cards trying to play the cheeky frat boy-come-Cosmo girl.
He is a disgrace. The campaign for the ‘woman’s vote’ via her vagina is a disgrace. And if you allow yourself to be taken in by this kind of patronizing chauvinism disguised as ‘progressive’ equality … then my dear sister, so too are you.
We have come further than this as a nation, as a civilization, as a sex.
Don’t let your person be reduced to the sum of your parts – lady or otherwise.
(update: the Obama campaign has pulled e-card numero uno without explanation. Funny.)
Abortion, Contraception, Culture of Death, Women's Health, Women's Rights
If they really cared about the good of the mother…
September 17, 2012So often the pro-abortion movement claims to operate from a place of concern for the life, mental well-being, ‘rights’ of the woman, etc.
Ignoring the biologic reality that removing a human life from within the mother’s body is a vile and treacherous attack on not only that fetus but on his or her mother, they advocate abortion as a kind of sacrament which purports to guarantee a woman’s freedom in our sick, sad culture.
Much like those aid organizations who pass out condoms instead of cornmeal and counsel for better birth control for a people without wells for clean drinking water, pro-abortion activists insist that the child is always either a symptom of the problem, or the problem itself.
Forget that mom might need a scrip for Prozac or a few hours a week of housekeeping help or even intensive outpatient therapy. It’s much easier to prescribe infanticide or sterilization.
And yet, so few women protest, at least externally. So many simply nod their heads and swallow the lie, that something is wrong with the way they’ve been created, that their female bodies betray them at every turn, and that doctors and mental health professionals don’t have to take them OR their conditions seriously because it can surely be fixed with a pill, a patch or a quick ‘procedure.’
May God give strength to women who are resisting this lie, and may He give light to a culture so steeped in darkness that many more accept without question.
I think not.
Lately I’ve been seeing more and more evidence that election season is indeed upon us, and on our cute little block of suburbia, a curious phenomenon is occurring. In every 5th window or so up and down our block, a little blue placard proclaiming ‘Women for Obama’ has popped up, and I’m just a leeetle bit confused and a lot concerned.
You see, I find the whole idea of being labelled a constituent of that oh-so-desirable demographic ‘the women’s vote’ a bit offensive. Yes, I’m a woman. But I’m also a unique and complex human person, and my chromosomal makeup sure doesn’t determine the way my politics swing. As if having breasts confines me to membership in a voting block that will or won’t cast a ballot dependent upon receiving freebies from Uncle Sam in the shape of little pink pill packs?
Hardly.
I find it deeply offensive that 1. the entire spectrum of women’s ‘health’ has been reduced down to two fundamental issues: abortion and contraception, and 2. that women are somehow perceived as being primarily concerned with their vaginas and related areas over, say, the economy, foreign policy, school quality, the poverty level, excruciating tax rates and other such worrisome issues of the day.
Are we to assume that those stuffy old issues are best dealt with by the menfolk, and we ought not to worry our pretty little heads about such big, serious matters, but just keep filling our prescriptions for birth control and the federal government will foot the bill? (Pat, pat, there, there, little lady.)
Hi, I’m a 21st century woman and I am offended.
And my sexual behavior? That’s my own responsibility, not the government’s, thank God. (For now, at least.) I don’t need the contraceptive equivalent of food stamps every month to help me ‘get by,’ and it sure as hell isn’t going to sway my vote this November if I can count on a federal kickback for toxic chemical ingestion.
Even for women who lean leftward in their politics and ideals, I cannot fathom how such an approach can be anything but deeply offensive to them on a primal level. Can’t they see the ironic, blatant anti-feminism behind such tired rhetoric?
Can’t they see that keeping women carefully, consistently sterilized and thereby ‘freed’ for economic contribution is so much of the same tired old system of repression and degradation that we are supposedly evolved beyond?
And don’t they expect more from a president than the condescending promise of free pills and continued government-funded access to the woman-hating mega-business Planned Parenthood?
I suppose if they are indeed members of that mythic ‘women’s vote,’ whose only apparent common thread is an ugly, rose-colored shade of apparent self-loathing, they don’t mind much at all.
I, for one, prefer to be seen as more than a sexually-active baby-maker. Because those are things that I do, they don’t solely define who I am.
Think I’m totally crazy? Remember this excerpt from Obama’s Planned Parenthood promo tour last time around. How’s that for a vote of confidence for the fairer sex?
I’m totally making a new sign for our front window this weekend:
Grown Ups for Romney.
Because there’s nothing new under the sun, here’s a different link to a completely unchanged article from 2 days ago. Except for the omission of the potentially questionable term ‘bi-otch.’
We classy.
And lazy.
In other news, just bought myself tickets to a 10 am matinee showing of the Hunger Games. Because while I’m 13-years-old-excited on the inside, I’m heavily pregnant and too lame for midnight showings on the outside.
May the odds be ever in your favor.
I’m being hosted by the lovely and talented Grace over at Camp Patton today, kicking off her fabulous series on the perils and joys of NFP. Little bit starstruck to be featured thusly – check it out!