Abortion is Evil: A Rant

I have grown increasingly less tolerant of so-called "Pro-Choice" individuals--those who advocate abortion either through their voice or their silence; their votes or their seemingly inconsequential social media posts. I have grown tired of their same-old, recycled rhetoric: "It's not a person," "I could never have an abortion myself, but I could also never tell someone else not to," "Women should have the right to choose not to be pregnant," "Population control!," "It's better that one should never be born than to be born into a life of unwantedness and contempt," blahblahblah. So for those of you who turn a blind eye to the horrors of abortion and justify it through any or all of these feeble, hollow arguments: it is my whole-hearted belief that YOU are the manifestation of evil in this world. 

Don't agree? Tell me what ISN'T evil about injecting a hypertonic saline solution into the amniotic fluid (in some cases, directly into the embryo/fetus), which BURNS the embryo/fetus inside and out (keep in mind that that "non-person" [to use the words of you Pro-Choicers] can feel pain at 9 weeks from conception--typically around the time that a woman has learned she is pregnant and looks to procure an abortion), thus "disrupting the natural process of pregnancy," or in other words, KILLING the developing human being?

What ISN'T evil about suctioning a fetus out of the womb, either whole or in pieces--and in the latter case, then scraping any remaining pieces out of the womb? And, again, a Suction Curettage Abortion is typically performed around 9 weeks.

What ISN'T evil about dismembering a fetus with forceps? Clamping onto anything one can grab with said forceps, and pulling HARD, tearing limbs and body parts from the uterus piece by piece? Decapitating the fetus, and then CRUSHING the skull, spilling the fetus's developing brain everywhere and then picking out pieces of skull from the uterus? Does any of that NOT sound evil to you?

Tell me what is NOT evil about severing with scissors the spine of a baby who has been born alive. Tell me what is NOT evil about leaving a baby who has survived an abortion to die in either the trash or a toilet. 

Tell me what is NOT evil about abortion facilities selling baby body parts for profit. 

Tell me what is NOT evil about supporting ANY politician who supports any of the above.

Tell me what is NOT evil about allowing/advocating any of this?

The past few weeks, there has been a lot of outrage by conservative women over the Left's continual attempts to belittle women by reducing women to one or two social issues. I am not among those outraged women, because I AM a one-issue voter. To me, support for abortion reveals an inherent moral depravity that cannot be justified or reconciled. If one is content with slaughtering millions of innocents, there is probably no end to one's malevolence; and I will not trust one to run my country, nor be my friend. Period.

SINCE YOU BROUGHT UP ROE V WADE

Let us just for a moment forget about that pesky little detail that the "Champion of Abortion," the plaintiff in the ground-breaking case, Roe v Wade, Jane Roe (aka Norma McCorvey), is now a Pro-Life Activist; and let us also for a moment forget about the scientific, moral, and philosophical arguments against abortion (Live Action has a great series making each of these arguments); and instead let us just focus on legal theory.

Granted, I have only a rudimentary legal education, but it is my ardent belief that the longer one stays in higher education, the stupider one becomes.

The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution guarantee us "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness/Property" Not "Property, Liberty, Life," or "Liberty, Life, Property," et cetera. The Founding Fathers ordered it "LIFE, Liberty, Happiness/Property" for a reason. It is in order of importance. Because you cannot have Happiness/Property unless you first have Liberty and you cannot have Liberty unless you first have LIFE. Therefore, by this standard, LIFE trumps liberty and property/happiness. For example, it makes some happy to kidnap other people. But this is illegal because it violates the kidnapee's liberty. Others feel it is within their liberty to kill people. But this is illegal and wrong because it violates the LIFE of those killed. In all matters, the issue of someone's LIFE is supposed to trump the exercise of another's liberty and happiness/property.

I am going to assume that many abortion advocates, and even many Pro-Lifers, have not actually read the Justices' opinions of Roe v Wade and its precedent (though I think you can hardly call it that since Blackmun released it mere hours before RvW), Doe v Bolton. Justice Blackmun's Majority Opinion is the single most erroneous and fallacious Supreme Court opinion I have ever had the displeasure of reading in my short study of the law. Give it a read sometime. You will wonder if Blackmun is really educated at all.

Anyway, Blackmun states right in the opinion that it is not the role of the Court to decide when life begins, nor CAN the Court decide when life begins. And then Blackmun goes right ahead and says that the Court has decided that life begins at viability, even though the Court does not know when that begins.

Yet, what Blackmun is completely disregarding in all of this is that in matters of uncertainty, it is the role of the law to proceed with the utmost caution. This is why the standard in American courts is "innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt (or by the preponderance of evidence for civil suits)." Blackmun states that he is uncertain of when life begins, but that some hold that it is at the moment of conception; so if Blackmun were to follow the standard of the court that was set decades before his time, he would have ruled RvW in favor of the defendant. But he was an activist judge with an agenda who decided to completely ignore the standard of the court and throw out hundreds of years worth of common law (customs of the people) that had been built upon by many different nations and cultures, and now abortion is among the top causes of death in America (and the number one cause of death within the black community).

A+, America.

(Note: For further evidence of Blackmun's stupidity, look to the fact that in Blackmun's RvW opinion, he cited Griswold v Connecticut [the ground-breaking case that legalized contraceptives] for the "Right to Privacy" that is "found" in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Even though Justice Douglas, in his majority opinion for GvC, specifically states that the "Right to Privacy" can be found virtually everywhere in the Constitution BUT the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause.)

An Anti-Feminist's Feminist Rant

Honestly, I'm rather embarrassed that this has fallen to me. How can this be my responsibility to call out this blatant degradation of women? Where is Rebecca Walker? Shira Tarrant? Elizabeth Wurtzel? Nancy Pelosi? Hillary Clinton? I really do not want to be the one to do this. Over one hundred years of Feminism in the United States, but it has somehow fallen to an Anti-Feminist to indict a company that is harming women? Well, if I must...

Dove chocolate degrades women and insults our intelligence with their stupid wrappers. This is a company that specifically targets women, taking advantage of our virtually universal love of chocolate and then assuming we need and will enjoy their little "inspirational" remarks printed on the wrappers. Such as, "Be Free. Be Happy. Be you." Oh, and here's a good one: "Love is a Flower, a Friendship, and a Sheltering Tree." Like I really needed a chocolate wrapper to tell me to be myself. And the latter one isn't even consistent. If you're going to relate a metaphysical ideal to three limited images, at least make sure they're all in the same genre.

I'm sure there are plenty of women who find the sayings on Dove wrappers "cute" and "fun." These women are what I like to call "stupid."

Yeah, I don't need to purchase Dove chocolate. Of course, I don't have to read the wrappers. But hasn't society progressed enough to make the condescension of women a thing of the past? 

Oh, except in the workplace where men are still paid higher salaries than their female counterparts, despite the nearly 50-year-old efforts of NOW. And in government where we have yet to elect a female president and the only viable contender the Left has produced is less feminine than Miss J Alexander, and any viable contender on the Right is maliciously attacked and unmercifully misrepresented by the media (because that isn't at all sexist/chauvinistic/misogynistic, right?)

But, hey, we’re still liberated, right? We can vote. We can dress like whores and have SlutWalks. We can be promiscuous. We can readily divorce our husbands. We can kill our children. Ah, equality. Rights. Freedom.

And yet insulting and condescending comments are still permissible under the guise of cute and fun inspiration?

Things just are not adding up. I would think that the liberated and respected women of a society would never be perceived by a corporation to need nonsensical remarks thrown at them.

Or perhaps we are not as liberated and respected as we think we are.

Maybe, just maybe, through our efforts to free ourselves from the shackles of an antiquated patriarchal society and distance ourselves from what Nature dictates a woman should be, we have actually degraded ourselves.

You know that saying, “What is last in execution is first in intention,” or something like that? Well please allow me to be all Bible-y for a moment:

“Then the Lord God said, ‘It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.’ So out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them . . . . The man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for the man there was not found a helper fit for him. So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh; and the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said,

‘This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman because she was taken out of man.’” Genesis 2:18-23

It was not until God had created Woman that he had finished creating altogether. We were it. The last thing God brought into being. But the first thing God intended to be. The “Crown of Creation,” to quote Dr. Bergsma.

So what happened? Are not crowns worn on the top of heads of royalty and kept on pedestals in museums? Are not they carefully crafted, cared for and demand respect?

I demand to be treated like a Crown of Creation, dammit. But I’m not holding my breath in this culture.

Even though women’s rights were severely limited back in 1910 when Feminism first came onto the scene in America, at least women were still respected. It would have never been socially acceptable in Victorian society for a man to refer to the woman he was courting as his “bitch” or “hoe.” Never would it have been tolerated for a young lady to degrade herself through promiscuity. There was a time in American society when women were held up on a pedestal.

And it was because all women were either mothers or potential mothers. And everybody in every culture of every society in every country knows not to disrespect someone’s mother.

But because Feminists successfully separated sex from childbearing, women are no longer viewed as mothers or potential mothers, and therefore do not demand respect from society as a whole.

By “freeing our sexuality from reproduction,” or rather, acting contrary to Nature, we have lost all respect for ourselves, for our role in Nature, and for sex itself. And men and society have merely followed along.

And for what? Obviously, Feminism has yielded irreplaceable advances for women, but what are we really getting out of all of this?

We still do not make as much money as men, but we have the right to kill our children.

We asked society for equality and freedom, and they handed us a dead baby. And pieces of chocolate wrapped in foil printed with stupid, condescending remarks that are supposed to make us feel better about what we’ve done to ourselves.

To echo the general rhetoric of my favorite (and most despised) revolutionary, Malcolm X: that’s not liberation! That’s TOKEN liberation!

Sorry, but I believe women deserve better than that.

I’ll let the real Feminists take it from here.

The Inspiration

On this day, the start of Women's History Month and the death of conservative activist, Andrew Breitbart, I have finally been inspired to start my own blog. I've considered blogging for quite a while, but always waved it away due to my inept technological capabilities, and the fact that I always had more important things to do (ie: college, touring Europe, getting married, writing my senior thesis, catching up on all seasons of "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia," ensuring the continuance of humanity through procreation, et cetera). But today, a tweet composed by someone I do not follow, but instead just came across in passing, which said, "Something 2 remember, @AndrewBreitbart had the same # of hours in his day that you do. He chose 2 use them 2 fight 4 America. How about you?" and this amazing blog were my inspirations.

A natural cynic, I in no way fancy myself to ever have such an important impact on society that the Liberal media would celebrate my death; I mean, it took me seven months to get 43 followers on Twitter. I am a nobody, this I know. But I can pretend and I can dream. I can throw my rants out into the cyber universe and see what happens, if anything. So watch out world (or not), I have a blog.