Abortion As Social Injustice

Conservative groups begin highlighting one of Barack Obama's more extreme positions: his views on abortion. CBN reports this from the Christian Defense Coalition:

"Senator Obama talks about bringing hope, faith and change to American politics. We now see this is all just political 'doublespeak.' One of his top priorities as President would be protecting abortion rights and even expanding them. If elected, Senator Obama would become 'The Abortion President,' with the most extremist policies on abortion of any President in history.

"Senator Obama's views on abortion are so radical that he even wants American citizens to pay for them. This would include Catholics, Evangelicals and all people of faith. He would also expand abortion rights through his passionate support of The Freedom of Choice Act.

David Brody says:

This is Obama’s challenge with Evangelicals. He can talk about the social justice issues all he wants and yes, it resonates to a certain extent but unless he moves on abortion (not likely) he’ll have a problem. If he shows some support for parental notification laws or the annual fetal pain bill that moves through Congress then that will help insulate him to a degree on the extremist abortion tag.

Abortion as social injustice undermines a key Democratic tenet that matter to conservative Christians: taking care of the poor and neediest and being a voice for those who don't have one. All sorts of individuals find a home in the Democrat party because together, they have more power. But still, these people have voices and often loud mouths--which, in itself, calls into question how oppressed they truly are when everyone knows exactly what they think feel.

Still, Christians believe their mission includes clothing the poor, feeding the needy, tending the sick, visiting the imprisoned, caring for the widows and orphans, and on it goes. Jesus told his followers that "whatever you do to serve the least of these, you've done for me." To a conservative Christian, it doesn't get more "least" than a helpless unborn child.

Hope and changeyness sounds wonderful--even to evangelical ears, but upon closer inspection, it rings hollow. Democrats will find their social justice messages a tough sell when the greatest social injustice, abortion, is a central plank of their social platform. Their only hope is to try to deceive conservatives into believing that Obama really is against abortion. Which, of course, he isn't.

Cross posted at Right Wing News and Melissa Clouthier.com

Picking Perfect Babies

A British family chose IVF and screened embryos that had a breast cancer gene:

By screening out embryos carrying the gene, called BRCA-1, the couple, from London, will eliminate the hereditary disease from their lineage.

About 5% of the 44,000 cases of breast cancer diagnosed in Britain each year are estimated to be caused by the BRCA-1 and BRCA-2 genes, both of which can be detected in embryos.

Doctors say thousands of cases of breast cancer could be avoided by screening embryos using the technique called preimplantation diagnosis (PGD).

Eleven embryos were created. Six had the bad gene. Six were destroyed. Two were implanted. One malfunctioned. Two were frozen for "future use".

As a doctor, I find the notion of avoiding the future pain of such a disastrous disease--55-85% of those with this gene end up with the cancer--exciting and hopeful. But I shudder, too, at the implications and the callous actions taken. Creating eleven lives, destroying six, so that one ostensibly healthy one is created..... It's the destruction that is so problematic. No one would dream of having eleven children, and then dumping six overboard because they had a 50-85% chance of suffering down the road.

Doctors and parents choosing this procedure view embryos as specimens not life. With time, genetic markers will identify everything from depression to homosexuality to heart disease. Given the rationale used in genetic selection, there will be no ethical reason to prevent its use for nearly any dysfunction.

Destroying embryos is okay in order to have a healthy baby:
	Agree
	Disagree
pollcode.com free polls

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Thank God Abortion Is Legal

I mean, if it were illegal, people would prey on women and women would be harmed by untrained people posing as medical personnel:

The owner of a clinic has been charged with posing as a doctor to perform abortions, some of them unsuccessful or resulting in severe complications and hospitalization, prosecutors said Friday.

Bertha Pinedo Bugarin, 48, was arrested Thursday after a yearlong investigation, San Diego County district attorney spokesman Paul Levikow said.
She was charged with 10 felony counts, including performing medical procedures without a license and grand theft, he said. She faces more than nine years in prison if convicted.

Bugarin, who was being held on $500,000 bail, was scheduled to be arraigned July 2. An call to her attorney Peter Hughes after business hours Friday was not immediately returned.

Prosecutors said Bugarin at one time operated six clinics in Southern California that provided abortions. For her clinic in Chula Vista, near the Mexican border, she advertised her service on Spanish-language television and charged $500 for an abortion.

Wow, America dodged a bullet. Legal abortion makes everyone safe.

Pro-Life Pharmacies

It might be legal, but is it right? In answering the question for themselves, some pharmacists have refused to fill prescriptions of birth control pills or morning after pills. I am really torn about this whole thing, actually. While I'm all for people not violating their consciences, I just think there are better ways to deal with this than refusing service. For a pharmacist who doesn't want to fill a morning after pill prescription, why can't he just have his co-worker do it? Why the need to lecture the woman?

This whole issue brings to mind the Muslim taxi drivers refusing to pick up someone who has been drinking, is drinking, or carrying alcohol or others not taking seeing eye dogs. It's legal. If they don't like to pick up all people, even those they disagree with, pick another freaking profession. My sentiments go the same direction about persnickity pharmacists.

However, it seems to me that an Ob/Gyn is well within his or her rights to refuse to perform an abortion. In fact, few people get the specialized training for them, so forcing a doctor to do this procedure could, in fact, be harmful to the woman wanting one.

The free market has a solution--pro-life pharmacies:

When DMC Pharmacy opens this summer on Route 50 in Chantilly, the shelves will be stocked with allergy remedies, pain relievers, antiseptic ointments and almost everything else sold in any drugstore. But anyone who wants condoms, birth control pills or the Plan B emergency contraceptive will be turned away.

That's because the drugstore, located in a typical shopping plaza featuring a Ruby Tuesday, a Papa John's and a Kmart, will be a "pro-life pharmacy" -- meaning, among other things, that it will eschew all contraceptives.

So, pharmacists who work here can work with a free conscience. Hmmmm..... I seem to remember Catholic hospitals being forced to dispense certain drugs and perform certain procedures, including abortions. In fact, a Catholic hospital in Colorado was sued by a "transgender" woman for not allowing the surgery and the hospital eventually relented. That just happened in March. This seems to violate the separation of church and state, but then, the hospital isn't a church, per se. It's a charity.

A pharmacy is a private business so they can do whatever they want, right? Substitute people seeking birth control drugs, for say, HIV drugs. Say the pharmacy decides to not sell cholesterol lowering drugs because fat people aren't "honoring the temple". Really, many medications are needed because of some stupid lifestyle choice. Stopping at the sexual vices seems rather limiting.

What do you think?

Pharmacies should be able to withhold medication they find objectionable:
	Agree
	Disagree
pollcode.com free polls

The Abortion Business: I Want The Choice To Not Be An Investor

Abortion is a business. It is a big business. Huge. Michelle Malkin reports:

In April, the annual report of Planned Parenthood Federation of America revealed that the abortion giant had a total income of $1.02 billion—with reported profits of nearly $115 million. Taxpayers kick in more than $336 million worth of government grants and contracts at both the state and federal levels. That’s a third of Planned Parenthood’s budget.

And what market-distorting results do we get for those government incentives? 289,650 abortions in 2006.

This industry trades on other's misfortune and stupidity. The industry also violates the medical principle of "first, do no harm". Harming one living organism for the convenience of another strikes some as morally wrong, but the fact is, abortion is legal. Legal doesn't mean right.

Still, what's really galling is that people who believe it is morally wrong are forced to support the procedures. Where is my choice as a tax payer? Since feminists are all about choice, I'd like to exercise mine and not have my money subsidize what I consider a repugnant medical procedure.

If another doctor wants to sell killing and make money at it, so long as it's legal, that's his choice. As long as a consumer wants to buy the killing to escape her irresponsibility and it's legal, that's her choice. I want to exert my choice as a taxpayer and not be forced to support their disgusting commerce.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

"Science is a wonderful servant and a terrible master."

Dan Collins said it well. Technology and science gallops without bit, without restraint. Restraint used to come in the form of Christian ethics, but as society becomes increasingly secular, restraint is being cast off. So what force will guide the horse?

I have written before how science is so politicized, and I'm not talking about by crazed right-wingers intent on stopping the march of progress. No, the politicization of science is at the hands of leftists intent on forcing outcomes that are politically correct. Here is the essence:

Levin summarizes the liberal promise this way: “The past was rooted in error and prejudice while the future would have at its disposal a new oracle of genuine truth.”

Science as "genuine truth". Color me terrified.

Let me tell you some things that were accepted as "genuine truth" in the field of medical science and have since been debunked:

Frontal Lobotomies: A personal story here. And look at what intellectuals bought into it.
Sensory Deprivation for Autism: A personal view here.
Hormone Replacement Therapy for menopausal women. Oops! Causes cancer.
Arthroscopic Knee Surgery: Uh oh, it's just a placebo.

The list is long. I'm sure you could come up with more. I could, I just decided to stop. My point is that science is evolving. What is scientific "truth" today is tomorrow's discarded notion.

Christianity, on the other hand, has fixed principles that form the foundation of ethical behavior. I am taking, as a premise, that what we view as modern day ethics are Christian ethics. That's an easy one to prove--substitute Muslim ethics or Hindu ethics. They'd be a wee bit different, no? But I'm not going to get into that right now.

What the liberals hope for is ideological purity and science can form the foundation for that purity. That's why the Global Warming zealots are so zealous. They bring the same fervor to idealizing modern science that the zealous bring to worshiping The Ideal. It's a tad disturbing. Science will change tomorrow. A new notion of truth will come along because new science will reveal a more complete picture. But the liberal zealots assume that the picture they currently see is the only one that will ever exist and make decisions based on today's knowledge. It's the height of vanity.

Unrestrained by overarching principles, science can go anywhere and will. Some will embrace this, but science unrestrained by ethics takes mankind to dark places as Michael Gerson notes:

These arguments are seriously made, but they are not to be taken seriously. Does anyone really believe in a science without moral and legal limits? In harvesting organs from prisoners? In systematically getting rid of the disabled?

This last question, alas, does not answer itself. In America, the lives of about nine of 10 children with Down syndrome are ended before birth. In Europe, about 40 percent of unborn children with major congenital disorders are aborted.

All of which highlights a real conflict, a war within liberalism between the idea of unrestricted science in the cause of health and the principle that all men are created equal -- between humanitarianism and egalitarianism.

Already, decisions are made in the name of science, but are they ethical? And what are the implications for the future of those who don't measure up or those who refuse the scientific ideal?

There are questions science can't answer. The modern American's unwillingness to make these decisions is a decision. That leaves the decisions left in the hands of the scientists. There's a reason for the mad scientist cliché. We should all be paying more attention.

Interesting Things You Should Know

I'm going to start on a spiritual note. What is it like to be spiritually abused? A Christian talks about how her ten years in spiritual darkness.

"Did Wright matter?" Yes. Wright will matter in the general. And Gaius writes about the failure of the press in dealing with Obama. As an aside, BlueCrabBoulevard has such a pleasing layout. And I really like the date next to each post. The whole website is restful. Obama is omniscient. Aren't all saviors? Oh, and MKH highlights the press bias with photographic proof (via Cassy at Wizbang) . Amazing that the MSM can do what they do with a straight face. Give me a break.

Something more to worry about if you're so inclined: Geomagnetic storms.

I love Firefly. You know this. Nerd alert: So does Rachel. Shiny! (For what it's worth, I'm a Mal girl, myself, but I do so, so love Kaylee. She is just yummy!) And I'd like to remind Firefly lovers why Mal is hotter than Jayne. When Jayne sold out his crew Mal nearly blew Jayne out the hatch. Captain Malcolm Reynolds showed Jayne who was boss. Yes, sir!

Why is there no sympathy for Muslims claiming discrimination? Canadian Muslims cry foul and Mark Steyn defends himself and answers.

It is time to discuss the ugliness that are Crocs. They are fine for children. Although, they do leave kid's feet stinky in adult rugby player ways. Whew!

No freaking way! Al Gore is an opportunist? Nooooo..... It's perfectly fine to exploit the deaths of over 60,000 people to bring up your pet theory. Perfectly. Fine.

Is the middle class drowning in debt? No.

Cry a sartorial tear for Hillary. If you can muster the emotion.... No tears here.

Stephen King hates the military and he's a moron. Sorry, to family members who love him, or rather, love his freaky writing.

Be careful talking sexy on the internet. Don't say you haven't been warned.

The right to free speech is trumped by the right to an abortion. What?

You know the dude who imprisoned his daughter? Yeah, well he raped someone back in the day, was convicted and spent time in prison, but guess what? Stupid Austria doesn't keep that crime on the books after fifteen years so it's like it never happened. And when his daughter went missing, no one asked because no one had the info to ask. You have got to be kidding me.

60 years of Israel. Why weren't they named Jewland?

Just a reminder to hit the awesome blogs in my blog roll. They are there for a reason. I love them!

Stuff You Should Know

Did you know that if things don't change you'll be required to use fluorescent light bulbs? Did you know that because so much corn and other grains are being used in biofuels that people in third world countries are starving? There are consequences to "feel good" policies that are economically and ultimately, morally, stupid.

Remember Ollie Johnson, dead at 95. I do. He's the guy who poured his soul into my favorite Disney film: Jungle Book.

If, you're so inclined.....a round-up from last nights stupid Democratic debate. Okay, I had to come back to this. Harrumph. Ann Althouse said the only quotable thing I've read, here it is:

2. Obama has always had a blandness about him. When you're feeling good about him, you project your hopes onto that blandness and he seems wonderful. When you're anxious about him, you think he's effete and ennervated. He's always the same.

A reader chastised me for leaving Neo-Neocon off of my list of favorite bloggers with ovaries. Dude, I'm including a link here, but that kinda proves my point. There are lots of awesome female bloggers. Am I misogynist to forget her? And, by the way, I had forgotten that Neo was a girl. So there. I'm gender blind....or at least stupid.

I listened to the President's and the Pope's address yesterday and was profoundly moved by both. I considered blogging about it, but knew the Anchoress would do a better job and so I just lazily waited for her to get her posts up. Hell, I do the same thing with weather and Brendan Loy or Maxed Out Mama and economics (she says to hold the mass suicide) or Ann Althouse and law (the Supreme court considers the death penalty for child rapists). I know my limitations and they are myriad.

The Kos kids threaten a revolution if Obama doesn't get the nomination. They fatigue me.

I talked about abortion before and the topic just won't die. And, it shouldn't. This link goes to one of the most disturbing things I have read yet, about the subject. But you should know. Can you imagine a college girl inseminating herself over and over, inducing abortions and then using the dead embryos and fetal tissue in an art project? Guess the college....Yale. Money quote:

"I hope it inspires some sort of discourse," Shvarts said. "Sure, some people will be upset with the message and will not agree with it, but it's not the intention of the piece to scandalize anyone."

And on that happy note, I'll got teach my kiddos something rational. We're learning division.

Imagine A World With Few Abortions

Rachel Lucas wrote a treatise on abortion today. I don't know if she came over and read my reaction to Amanda Marcotte on the topic or not, but she did mention stupid comments, so I'm guessing she might have, because you people are still going strong. I admire your stamina even if the arguments seem tired at this point. I'll try to sum up Rachel's opinion in one (OK three) paragraph and this is tough to do, you need to go read her whole opinion:

But the second reason I see abortion as anathema to how I want to live my life shouldn’t surprise anyone who’s read this site for long: personal responsibility. To me, the vast majority of abortions (in the U.S., that’s all I’m talking about here) are a direct result of an utter failure to behave in a rational, responsible, thoughtful fashion.

If you don’t want to be pregnant, then don’t get pregnant.

Easy to say, right? Yep. It’s also pretty easy to DO, at least for me, because I fancy myself a sentient human being with a functioning brain, and as such, I enjoy making decisions that result in pleasant outcomes for me and everyone I care about. Failing to prevent pregnancy while knowing full well that I don’t want pregnancy would be an irrational behavior, not to mention fantastically immature and shortsighted.

Now, I indirectly alluded to personal responsibility myself when I discussed the issue of shame:

Society benefits that shame is associated with "the right to choose." Is there no shame anymore? Even with the shame, far too many people engage in sex without thought and consideration of the consequences that can result in another being paying the ultimate price for momentary pleasure. Removing the shame would simply increase the number of abortions and multiply the regret of many more people, who, stopped by their conscience, opt to have a child and make it work instead of choosing abortion.

What I didn't directly note is why someone should be ashamed, but Rachel covered the topic handily. It is embarrassing to be so stupid that you'll have unprotected sex resulting in a baby. I mean, how dumb can you be?

Let me use my own life as an example. Around November of last year, a new notion hit me like a ton of bricks. I suddenly, clearly realized that I did not want to have more children. Period. The maternal switch flipped, even though I had always imagined having four kids, and I was done. Finito. I simply did not want any more children. Period. Guess what I did? I took serious precautionary measures because I'm fertile Myrtle. I think "baby", my body throws an egg and starts looking for sperm hiding out in the folds of my fallopian tubes. Now, I know it doesn't work that way for most people, but I'm one of those ladies. My daughter was conceived two days after my period ended. The computer model said that the chances I was pregnant was O%. Um, right. My son was conceived days after I was supposed to have ovulated. And yet, here he sits, watching Little Bear. So, I take precautions. And I take them seriously.

When I was first married, I did NOT want kids right away. I had plans. So, I went to Planned Parenthood, got the pill and made my husband glove up. Yes, I'm obsessive. But you know what? I knew, like Rachel knows, that I would never have an abortion. And yes, I've had two scares, serious ones. Make that three scares. I have literally ran screaming into the bathroom and hosed myself off, knowing damn well if the deed was done, the only thing I succeeded in doing is make myself look ridiculous. I would have had a baby and I would have made it work and it would have complicated my life. But it would be my responsibility.

Abortion (except in cases of rape and the health of the mother, as Rachel notes consists of only 7% of abortions combined, oh hell, I'll just quote the stats too):

Before I go any further with this, please note:

Women with family incomes less than $15,000 obtain 28.7% of all abortions; Women with family incomes between $15,000 and $29,999 obtain 19.5%; Women with family incomes between $30,000 and $59,999 obtain 38.0%; Women with family incomes over $60,000 obtain 13.8%.

1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).

47% of all abortions are performed on women who have had at least one previous abortion.

Abortion is an admission to being short-sighted, frivolous and way too immature to be having sex. But the immaturity comes from all sorts of places. An acquaintance has a daughter who um, enjoys male companionship. A lot. Let's just leave it at that. She is of the religious persuasion that makes her find birth control problematic. The disconnect astonishes me. My advice was simple: Put the girl on something. You won't prevent STDs, but you might be lucky enough to avoid having to raise another baby or be faced with a more morally difficult situation like her deciding to abort a baby. I've talked before about parental denial--this came up when talking about Obama's blabbing about his daughters and not wanting them to be "punished with a baby". Parents need to remember their own drives and behavior.

And yet, with all this, I hold on to an ideal. To me, the ideal is to wait until you're married to have sex and to stay faithful to your mate. I object to abortion on a moral basis, not just the ethical one mentioned above. Life to me is a sacred gift. And the acceptance of abortion has moral implications for other stages of life. I have a child who survived at 24 weeks gestation. People abort at this point, still. He survived. I'm looking at him picking his nose right now, in fact. I have friends who could have been taken off life support, but someone held on for them and they lived.

Life is worth saving, because some day, should it come down to it, I want someone to want me to live. I've said it before, DO NOT PULL THE PLUG until all options are exhausted. Life is good and worth saving. And this goes to the cases of a woman being put in the position of deciding to abort to save her own life. I've known two women who had cancer and both were told to abort the baby. One chose to and the other induced around 26 weeks. Both ladies survived. It was the right choice for both of them. Obviously. So we can just throw that straw man out.

And then there is rape. I support life. And so, I support adoption. I also support the morning after pill in these cases. Absolutely. 100%. Why does abortion need to come into this equation either? Of course a woman should have the opportunity to create a hostile uterine environment so she doesn't have to carry a baby to term when she's been raped.

For the 93% of women having abortions, there's no excuse. Stupid is not an excuse. It's an explanation. And I don't understand why the feminists want to wear abortion like it's some badge of honor. What it is is a blaring trumpet of stupid. Who wants to be proud of unthinking?

Every day, there are 4,000 abortions. Every year, over one million babies are aborted. Since abortion became legal, 40 million abortions have occurred. Please don't tell me this is a good thing. These are elective, unnecessary procedures that could be wholly prevented. It's like the dude who smoked five packs a day and gets lung cancer. You feel bad for the guy, but his pain was entirely preventable. Abortion doesn't need to happen. It is a moment acknowledging regrettable limited intelligence, vision and wisdom.

Ultimately, abortion is a crying shame.

Abortion Is Great!

Amanda Marcotte is at it again, and by "it" I mean illustrating why feminists hurt themselves when it comes to abortion. Statements like this are so repulsive to the average person:

I appreciate the idea that visibility is critical to getting people to understand that women who get abortions or rape victims—two groups dehumanized and demonized in an effort to strip them of their rights—are human beings. I was in full support of the “I had an abortion” T-shirt, because to me, it’s not complicated. The anti-choice movement tries like hell to erase women’s existence, or at least our individuality, and the T-shirt undermines that. It also clarifies that abortion is nothing to be ashamed of. For me, “I had an abortion” should be as morally loaded as “I had a Pap smear”. The underpinnings of the moral angst about abortion—the idea that a woman has no right to pry loose a flag a man has planted in her (even if he agrees with her decision, as most men in this case do), or that she should be punished for having sex—offend me to the core, and that many women go through anguish over getting abortions depresses me. They shouldn’t feel bad for having sex or having autonomy. In fact, they should be proud of themselves for taking care of themselves despite all the misogynist messages out there that women don’t have a right to take care of ourselves. People balked at the idea that the “I had an abortion” T-shirts smacked of that mortal female sin of pride, but I applaud it. Women should be proud of doing right by themselves in a world where that’s socially disavowed.

Ann Althouse, who believes in abortion, says this:

The "abortion" shirt, on the other hand, admits that you've done something for yourself that involved sacrificing what many people believe is another human being. Why do you want to say that by T-shirt? In Marcotte's view, it's to show that you're proud of "taking care" of yourself "despite all the misogynist messages out there." I thought it was more to normalize abortion — to make it seem ordinary, widespread, and something that would be done without shame by nice, upstanding women.

I happen to believe that abortion is wrong. Period. However, I can understand a woman's claim to her own body. I can understand the fear of an unwanted pregnancy. Most women have had that fear at one time in their life. So, as much as I find abortion repugnant, I don't find those who feel trapped and make that decision repugnant. It can seem perfectly rational at the time. Still, I know only two women who haven't regretted their decision, and often the forced decision to abort a child.

Abortion is a tortured experience for a woman because it is a morally fraught decision. The same woman who aborts a "fetus" will call a wanted child her "baby" the instant she reports the joy of her pregnancy. Many women regret being moved by fear or helplessness. Many women resent the manipulation by boyfriends, husbands and family when she wants the baby. Many women would choose differently if given the choice again.

This reality seems to be lost by those like Amanda Marcotte. In her absolutist world, there is no ambiguity around the topic. There is no such thing as regret or conflict. Women should wear their abortions with pride. It is a sign of self-affirmation.

And she actually touches on the heart of the problem. At it's heart, abortion is a selfish decision. A woman is choosing her own comfort over the discomfort and inconvenience of an unplanned for child (I am not touching on the anguish a raped woman feels in facing the future). And she feels women should wear this selfishness with pride. She does a disservice to the reproductive rights crowd and harms her own movement by being so cavalier about the implications of the decision to abort.

Society benefits that shame is associated with "the right to choose." Is there no shame anymore? Even with the shame, far too many people engage in sex without thought and consideration of the consequences that can result in another being paying the ultimate price for momentary pleasure. Removing the shame would simply increase the number of abortions and multiply the regret of many more people, who, stopped by their conscience, opt to have a child and make it work instead of choosing abortion.

The real shame is that feminists elevate selfishness and refuse to see the conflict inherent in the decision to abort. By doing so, they harm women they ostensibly desire to help.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News.

Update:

Well, my post ruffled the feathers of Ms. Marcotte. She says this as a conclusion:

There is only one thing to conclude from this.

Melissa Clouthier enjoys getting a Pap smear.

Honestly, if they were less anxious about sex, they could do it like normal people and quit having to find bizarre and frankly perverse ways to enjoy the touch of another human being.

Equating a Pap Smear with an Abortion is fascinating. So the embryonic cells forming a baby fall into the same category as atypical cells on the cervix related to genital warts (human papilloma virus--HPV causes cellular change and it the cause of cervical cancer). [UPDATE AGAIN: Please note that atypical cells can be caused by many things, not just HPV. For more information, go here. ] A pap smear has the same significance as an abortion in that they are both uncomfortable procedures? Or is it that both procedures are necessary because they come about due to enjoying sex?

And then, of course, people who are against abortions must hate sex and women. I happen to love both. No, I'm not a lesbian--don't get too excited. But is there a more lame stereotype? A Christian, married woman must be frigid, hate herself, hate women and hate sex. She's under the foot of the male patriarchy, dominated, and deluded.

The only way to prove my liberation is to believe in abortion.

Pregnant Men & More Deviance

It's TOTALLY normal to wear furry suits as an adult. It's totally normal to be a woman, get your breasts lopped off, take testosterone to be a man and get pregnant. Totally. Normal. And you can't tell me any different.

Oh, and abortion is good and not at all racist.

"I don't want them punished with a baby"

Oh boy, I heard that speech yesterday by Obama and a chill went up my spine. A baby as punishment for the crime of what? Being stupid? One little old mistake and then...... a lifetime in kid hell, HELL, I tell you.

Ann Althouse blogged about it, of course and here's what she says:

Obama is obviously talking about contraception education, but there is an implicit — albeit deniable — signal about abortion rights. Note that he says "I'm going to teach [my daughters] first of all about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby." If they make a mistake, doesn't that mean they failed to use contraception? It suggests that to a lot of people, but I think he took the position that it would be a mistake to have sex at all, and therefore he wants them to know to use contraception — that is, to make a mistake with less consequence.

I don't think the "implicit signal" is deniable. He meant what he said--a baby is a punishment for a "mistake". The mistake being having sex without contraception. Having unmarried sex is not a mistake. It's reality. At least that's how I took it. His expectation is that his teenage daughters will be sexually active. I mean, he's a "realist" and that if they screw up with contraception, he doesn't want them burdened with a baby. His view is entirely accurate for the way many parents feel--especially ones who believe in abortion. I mean, that's the point of abortion, right? Abortion is to avoid the "punishment" a child reeks on the life of a young mother. Right?

This is not my view, by the way. I'm one of those simpletons who believes every child is a gift from God, even the child of a rapist. Adoption is always an option. A child conceived deserves a chance. That's my philosophy.

But what about teens and sex? Church kids have sex. They know their parents think it's wrong. They want sex. Or they want the boyfriend or girlfriend. They have scars. They are hurt. But they're doing it anyway. Who doesn't want sex?

So, is the answer for parents to hold the ideal and allow their kids to sneak to Planned Parenthood, like Rachel Lucas says:

Think about it: if they’re going to Planned Parenthood secretly, they obviously have parents who don’t want them to have sex. Which clearly isn’t stopping them from having sex, so what good would it do to force them to have parental permission to get the pill? The only outcome from that would be that instead of having sex with contraception, they’ll have sex without it.

Who wins then? Not the parents; they may feel great about having control over their daughter’s use or lack thereof of protection even while they can never control whether or not she has sex, but they won’t feel so great the day she comes home to tell them she’s pregnant.

What should parents do?

Back From The Dead

Have you heard about this guy who was declared dead and then moved and says that he heard them declare him dead? Now, his family had approved of having his organs harvested. Do you wonder how many times people have been alive while presumed dead and had organs removed? How about people who are dead and are just alive and allowed to fade away? These are disturbing thoughts.

Christianity: The Life Affirming Religion

Is there any religion that beats Christianity for the inherent dedication to human rights, justice and respecting person and property? No. Is there any religion that frees women like Christianity?

Gina Cobb highlights more distressing news out of India regarding the treatment of females. Just to start....a newborn girl was buried alive, because she was....a girl.

HYDERABAD, India — A newborn baby girl was buried alive by her family in southern India on Thursday but was rescued when a farmer saw the baby's hand sticking out of the ground, officials said.

The two-day old baby, who had apparently never been fed, was recovering in a hospital in the Mahbubnagar district of Andhra Pradesh, said Charu Sinha, district superintendent of police.

I've written about India's female genocide and the long-term consequences, and the unwillingness of women's rights organizations to acknowledge that it is overwhelmingly the weak, disabled and female that get aborted. Abortion is used as a misogynist tool:

All I can conclude is that the women of NOW are as shortsighted as the unions. They will destroy themselves by clinging to an absolute and selfish ideal. Unwilling to admit that this glorious symbol of individual freedom--abortion--can be and often is used to manipulate and control women.

As usual, the feminists have it exactly backwards. Here is a sample from Pseudo-Adrienne regarding South Dakota's quest to make abortion illegal:

It would be wonderful if a clinic opened on Fire Thunder's land, as the state legislature has no jurisdiction over them. Unfortunately I would also predict the misogynist, pro-forced-birth lawmakers of South Dakota would pass a law bringing back the racist and genocidal (and soon sexist and patriarchal) *Manifest Destiny* in order to stop it. Nevertheless, it's great to see that those who are outraged by SD's bullshit are standing up and taking these anti-reproductive-rights bastards to task.

I understand the concept of a woman's body, a woman's choice. It is difficult having to live through a nine month pregnancy to produce a child the woman doesn't want. And then she is in the embarrassing position of giving up the baby--so everyone knows she didn't want it. So abortion is often about covering embarrassment--having sex with the wrong guy, having sex without thinking, having sex with a man who doesn't want a child. But it is the baby who suffers the mortal embarrassment wound.

In the United States where the shame from unwed pregnancy is gone, where girls can drop off a baby at a hospital or church, no questions asked, and where a woman can easily give her baby up for adoption, the rationale that the baby is life-ruining no longer carries the weight it once did. The discomfort index has become more stringent as Pseudo Adrienne, herself, acknowledges: forced birth. A woman is no longer shamed into raising ten kids in the United States, but she may endure forced birth. That would be horrible. But I'm digressing....

India (Hindu) and China (Buddhist, Taoist, Communist, Islamic), and all near eastern Islamic countries repress women and one of the most useful tools to do so is abortion. Women are forced into unwanted abortions of little women--girls. In India, older women are ostracized and humiliated. The truly misogynist cultures have serious psycho-sexual dysfunction and abortion is just one part of it.

Dr. Pat Santy has written at length about the culture hatred towards women especially in Islam:

I continue to think that the treatment of women under Islam is not only the key to understanding the pathology of the culture, but also the key to developing an antidote to its most poisonous and toxic elements. Unveiling the women of Islam and eliminating their second-class status; empowering them in the oppressive Islamic countries where their individuality and self-expression has been crushed-- may cause a ripple effect that could eventually alter a family structure that encourages the development of generation after generation of dysfunctional and pathological men and women.

She continues:

Consider for a moment a culture that would prefer to let young girls die in a burning building than to risk having them run out of said building not clothed in properly modest dress; and tell me that such a society is less preoccupied with matters of sex than we are in the West.

Enormous effort goes into veiling women, dressing women modestly, silencing women, covering women's bodies, punishing women, controlling women, reviling women, humiliating women, beating women, subjugating women, avoiding the dishonor of women, keeping women uneducated, policing women, infantilizing women--in short, dehumanizing women in every way possible -- all under the guise of "protecting" and "honoring" them as they relegate them to animal-like status.

The women in this misogynistic Islam are brainwashed from birth into thinking that this cultural preoccupation somehow is necessary and that it "liberates" them in some bizarre manner.

And then there is Christianity where the rights of even the weakest count. It started with the Israelites under Pharaoh, where the midwives refused to kill the male babies and continues to Christ's example of letting the adulterous woman go free rather than stoning her. Christ through Paul made clear that women and men were equal before God. There is neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female, slave nor free.

Abandoning Christian tenets means abandoning life-affirming rights and freedoms. As referenced before, from The Brussels Journal:

I’ve stated that post-Christian ideologies, arguably even Marxism, have expropriated ideas derived from Christian cosmology. However, they have been highly selective in which elements to use and which to discard. Christians believe in right and wrong, good and evil, something which Multiculturalists do not, except perhaps racism and discrimination, which are the only sins and one for which there can be no forgiveness. They have rejected crucial components of Christianity. Likewise, Socialists tend to view criminals as misguided individuals, at best in need of proper ideological guidance by Leftist social engineers, at worst as victims of society that should get an apology from us. They don’t believe in evil, except perhaps in those who reject their ideological guidance and wisdom.

By discarding the moral strand of Christianity, the West threatens to discard life itself. Abortion is just symbolic of the willful suicide.

Primitive religions and cultures use abortion and infanticide against women. It is a crime against humanity because life and life-giving bodies are snuffed out. It is suicide.

That Western women deny the essential gift of womanhood--the womb--and willingly accept being neutered and claim it as a freedom is the greatest delusion. A society intent on murdering women of all ages, a society intent on denying reproductive vitality, is a society doomed to destruction. Christianity stands in stark opposition to these death impulses.

In him was life; and the life was the light of men.-- John 1:4

I am the way, the truth and the life. -- John 14:6

The best thing that could happen in India, China, Russia and every Islamic country is that they would be brought to understand Christ. Freedom and life would follow.

Scotland Loses A Classroom of Children A Day

Cardinal Keith O'Brien in Scotland:

The leader of the Church in Scotland detailed how the legalization of abortion has marred the country. “In those 40 years the loss of life has been staggering. Around 7 million lives have been ended as a consequence of that one piece of legislation…the scale of the killing is beyond our grasp. In Scotland we kill the equivalent of a classroom full of school children every day.”

The prelate also lamented the way that the 1967 law was presented. “We were told that backstreet abortions were killing women and had to be decriminalised. We were told abortion would only be used in extreme cases. We were told medical scrutiny would be rigorous. We were told a pack of lies and misinformation masquerading as compassion and truth.”

The Cardinal said that he is concerned not only with the lives that have been lost, but also with the lives being led by the members of his flock.

One day, people will look back at our medical practices with horror. They will see the decimation Western society wrought on itself and be ashamed. We have hardened our hearts against the weakest among us. We have hardened our hearts against all children--fulfilling material desires but leaving the spirit empty. We leave children fatherless and pretend there is no consequence.

There are consequences.

H/T Brussels Journal

What You Should Know Today

Do you know that there is a terrorist training camp in Upstate New York? My husband's family doesn't live too far from there. The locals are terrified. Not one on-the-record statement from a local. In America.

Do you know how good the commander in Iraq is? Do you know about Michael Yon, the great independent reporter in Iraq? He's a blogger, not some MSM hot-shot. He dodged an IED again this week while travelling with British soldiers. It's not all candy corn and sunshine in Iraq, but there's hope, too. Why is it that the media vascillates between certain doom, and paradise of Eden proportions (if only America would leave) when talking about Iraq?

Do you know that Planned Parenthood ignores the law when it inconveniently impedes abortions? You've suspected it, but how do you get proof, right? Well, here's some proof.

Do you know that Global Warming Zealots are for spreading the "word" and against scientific inquiry? It shouldn't be surprising, given that Global Warming can be classified as the new, "new age" religion. Meanwhile, "The Secret" causes some heartburn as new age nonsense. Small potatoes next to all the other nonsense being foisted as fact.

Do you know the biggest problem facing the music industry isn't suck-bag talent but poor college students down-loading 80s music for free? The best people in the world to sue are those who can't afford a defense, don't ya think? Where do they come up with a $3,000.00 number? Why not just charge the kid fair market value for each song?

Do you know that mothers pass on their cells to their babies and babies leave behind their cells in their mothers? And, do you know that aborted babies leave the most behind? Truly, a mother who has aborted her baby carries that memory and the babies cells with her, forever. The mother is permanently changed.

Do you know that you can launch your music career as a blogger? Yes, you can. This guy did. So stop making fun of me about my blogging, family! Not that I have music dreams, but I have other dreams and maybe the blogging will help...or maybe it's just a diversion.

Do you know all the stuff you can find in J.C. Penney's? Do you know that losing a job can be the beginning of the life you were Meant to Have?

Do you know about the teachers who faked a terrorist attack, terrorizing students unnecessarily? Can you say law and suit?

Do you know that we're in a recession? It seems to me that the recession is hitting some and not others. Since Texas continues to chug along, it makes me wonder how the northeast is doing. My family and friends seem to like it fine, but don't realize that the area is dead compared to the south. They're like boiled frogs.

Do you know that this will make the recession worse? When Wal-Mart is losing money, when GM's profits are off 90% (because of the mortgage market), when home sales are taking a dive, when sub-prime lenders are dying, and when all sorts of weather disturbances are causing economic hardships for bigger and bigger swaths of the populace, it's not good.

And for news I've missed that you shouldn't miss, go visit The Anchoress. I'm glad she's feeling better. She has a unique gift.

Aborting Inconvenience--UPDATED

LANGUAGE ALERT: Film clip contains profanity.

90% of all Down's Syndrome babies, whose mothers have prenatal testing, are aborted. And now, early testing for all sorts of genetic problems--especially the important ones like whether or not the baby is a boy will bring us to the same place.

India and China have their female genocide. Here's why:

Last year, 20 children were born to the women of Xicun. Sixteen were boys. The year before, 24 were born and 19 were boys. There is a reason for the preponderance of males: In 1999, the medical center that serves Xicun bought a cheap, Chinese-made ultrasound machine that allowed doctors to determine the sex of a fetus. Sex-selective abortions followed. And now the town, like hundreds of others in China, is facing a boom in boys.

Recent census figures show that 117 boys are born in China for every 100 girls. Boys are even more prevalent in rural areas, where they are needed to work and eventually inherit the land. (Stephen Shaver - AFP)

Sex-selective abortions, infanticide and significant differences in children's access to medical care are contributing to an increasingly skewed sex ratio in China's countryside, Western and Chinese researchers say. Figures released this year as part of China's census show there are 117 boys born for every 100 girls.

The West has the Down's Syndrome genocide. And the worst thing is, there are some who will say that is a good thing. Moral depravity is an abstract that doesn't apply in the reality of a person's life.

It's going to turn out that the women who don't believe in abortion will have more children and more "defected" children because they won't abort. And then there will be those who abort all but the "perfect" child--the one true second coming for that perfect little aged family.

This phenomenon reminds me of the movie Idiocracy except for the depiction of the "producers". See if you can spot the generaliztions about the "breeders". Yup, we an ign'ant bunch, ya'll. (CAUTION!!! Language Alert! You have been warned!)



Update: As an aside, the article was about parents of Down's kids who want to talk to people considering aborting their baby and encouraging them to keep the Down's baby. Doctors routinely recommend abortion over the challenging work of parenting a special child. I can think of one exception to the "end it" recommendation. When a child is born severely prematurely (22 to 26 weeks), with the likelihood of a difficult life that makes Down's seem easy by comparison, the doctors let it be the "parent's choice". They don't tend to be as opinionated as when there's Downs. Of course, with preemies, there is all the fun technology to save lives (for which I'm grateful--I have my son because of it) even though the outcomes are far more severe. But then Down's can't be ameliorated by medicine. It just is.

Sex and the Single Girl

While everyone in media land discuss how rappers portray images of women, the unspoken, worst part is that the videos seem to represent how young women now view themselves. Girls dress like whores, talk like whores and act like whores, but most interestingly, don't view themselves as whores. They have no shame.

Feminists applaud this development. A young woman isn't viewed as a slut because she gets around, or maybe she is viewed that way, but she doesn't view herself that way. She's just doing what everyone says girls do now. If she feels bad about her sluttiness, she surpresses it. She shouldn't feel bad, something must be wrong with her if she does.

I am absolutely dismayed right now. In fact, for three weeks I've been mulling the results of a survey I gave to 16 to 18 year old Christian girls at a Church Youth Conference. A little background: the church would be considered evangelical and fundamentalist in teaching with an open creed, but relatively conservative in practice. These are kids who have been taught that fornication is wrong. I'm not so naive to think that being taught it means practicing abstinance. Teens have been having sex since before rock-n-roll, but they knew full well they were playing with fire. Teens these days are just.....playing and suffering repeated burns.

These young women report this:

• 2/3 knew about the Girls Next Door
• 1/3 knew someone who had been raped or molested
• 1/3 didn't believe that oral sex was really sex (thanks Bill!)
• 1/2 had posted sexy pictures of themselves on their MySpace account
• nearly all knew someone who had had an abortion

It went on and on. One girl argued with me about oral sex being sex. She pressed her logic. I asked her if Jesus would consider her virginal on Judgement Day if she said that she "only had blowjobs and that's not sex."

While a lot of Christian girls pay lip service to "What would Jesus do?". In real life, the question is "What would Britney do?" Yes, Britney Spears. And Paris. And Lindsey. Young women who dress and act like the women portrayed in those rapper's videos. Exploiting themselves? They exploit their own sexuality and look like they're coming unhinged doing it. (Rehab and divorce. DUI and sex tape. Rehab. Who knows how many STDs, abortions and failed relationships between them.)

While the girls are being absolutely saturated with the self-sexploitation message, their parents are contributing to the problem. The internet and television and movies and music ooze soul killing bacteria that must be beaten back but many parents seem to be stuck in la-la land where bad things don't happen to or around their children. Essentially, they leave their children to navigate territory that they most likely never had to survive to reach adulthood and a healthy relationship. MTV started in the late 80's. I was not exposed to a music video until I was 16. It was shocking then. It would be snickered at now. Videos these days are soft-porn disguised as music. See the above link. Parents need to wake up.

It is impossible to ensure that children will avoid the images, words, lyrics and messages piped into their minds. If I bumbled across a porn site while looking for a certain kind of Scottish tartan plaid, kids are certainly accidently or on-purpose finding porn. Doubt the influence? How many young girls now shave their pubic region to resemble little girls? How many girls take pictures of themselves and send them to their boyfriend? How many girls undress in front of their webcam for their boyfriend? Technology makes these kind of actions routine.

A parent being ignorant of the popular culture and the dangers of the web is derelict in his or her duty. Parents must know and they must have conversations with their children about what it all means. They must get over their own embarrassment about their own premarital sex. What teens deal with today, is not the average sex before marriage--one or two partners. Teens have "friends with benefits", blow-jobs are not considered sex. Who, save the one girl who got it on with the whole football team (a very nice girl, actually, in my High School who ended up pregnant and another boy married her), gave out blow-jobs like candy? It's different today.

Parents lose their moral authority, though, if they are doing things they ought not do. Affairs, divorce, smoking pot, porn addiction, substance abuse, kids know and kids scorn a parent who opinionate while carrying on like this. Worse, a plague of sexual abuse afflicts girls. Especially, the youth pastor told me, in the hispanic community. No one wants to turn an uncle or father in for their crimes. Crimes. Besides destroying a woman's life-long sexuality by allowing the abuse to continue, the bigger crime is destroying her faith in all authority including God. It goes without saying that assaulting a child sexually is a sin. To condone and ignore the crime is a sin, too. Mothers who do this are aiding and abetting a criminal. This destroys the girl's image of women and the church.

I thought, I hoped, that what we saw in our practice was an aberration, not indicative of societal trends. I hoped that our patients were only indicative of the types of people who suffer with chronic pain or other health issues as adults. That still may be true. But to have so many young girls admit knowing someone who had been molested (and 80-90% occurs within the family) makes me think that the problem is worse than even the statistics portray.

The sex act has been stripped of any spiritual meaning today. That is, people act as if sex is a recreational sport with no losers. But what has resulted is hardened hearts. First their broken and then rebroken and then the scars build up and eventually, the girl doesn't think it matters anymore. At a Christian Youth Conference, I saw girls who had given up. Cynical about relationships in general and sex in particular--at 17.

Sex education programs teach a kid to put on a condom, give dry statistics about STDs, but how can they possibly counteract what kids are injesting and absorbing everywhere else? If parents refuse to see the dangerous, predator-infested waters their kids navigate and help them fight back, what chance will children have?

The church and families have become cowardly places where sin can't be named. Our children are paying the price. There is a reason why God commanded His people to remain chaste before marriage and it wasn't because He's an out of touch other-worldly Ogre. God knows how powerful sex is and what a force for good it can be in a relationship built to last forever. Outside the protective confines of marriage, sex causes untold grief. And then, when the people eventually marry, they bring all their grief to the one relationship they really want to succeed.

We need to stop acting like sex outside of marriage is no big deal.

Partial Birth Abortion Ban

Much gnashing of teeth ensued after the Supreme Court decision upholding the law to ban partial birth abortion. For the libertarians the fear ranged from personal rights infringement to intrusion on a method for a livelihood. For the leftists and feminists, all manner of fear and anger was expressed at a woman's rights being taken away.

In all this, I read nary an article about the barbarity of partial birth abortion and why we, as a civilized society, should find the "procedure" abhorrent.

Most people, given the opportunity to watch this procedure would find it abhorrent and do. Will the Left take this issue to the legislators or will they concede this issue in face of the public will?

Embryo Rights

A woman who had ovarian cancer and split with her partner will not be able to carry the stored embryos to term. They will be destroyed. Her ex doesn't want a child around. She wants to have a child--probably any child given that her ovaries don't work anymore.

This story has so many levels of wrongness, it's almost impossible to sort it out.

1. No marriage.
2. Fornication.
3. Creating embryos.
4. Abandonment. (Can't call it divorce, can you?)
5. Infertility secondary to cancer.
6. Single motherhood by choice.
   
7. Forced parenthood for the man (and ostensibly the financial responsibility as well).
8. Abortion.

This is science in absence of morals, ethics, and the God given law of love: Love your neighbor as yourself. In the above example it's all about me, me, me.