Take a deep breath and think about it.

I used to call myself "little Miss Cranky-Pants". Over the last few years, I've change my outlook on life and am happier than before, but still working on my issues (aren't we all?) This is where I display and comment on the views of today, funny posts and constant chronicles of my annoying weight loss.

Tuesday, August 19, 2008

Careful, my uterus has potential.

I got this in an email, so of course I must respond:

"It seems unbelievable, but the Bush Administration is quietly trying to redefine "abortion" to include birth control. The Houston Chronicle says this could wipe out dozens of state laws that protect women's reproductive
freedom and protect rape victims. And this proposed "rule change" doesn't need congressional approval.


I just signed a message to Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt, whose department is considering this rule change, telling him: "Contraception is NOT abortion." Can you add your voice to this cause?
Click here to sign the message: http://pol.moveon.org/contraception/?r_by=-8264398-_vvyVxx&rc=paste "




Since Pro-Life defines abortion as murder, I make this statement: killing a spider in your shower as being murder is less absurd than contraception.



When a man is forced to keep a pregnancy, even after being raped, only then he can even voice his thoughts about having these rights taken away. Men can have sex all they want to and not worry about getting pregnant, so these rules don't even apply to them. This sounds more like a tactic to keep women celibate to avoid getting pregnant, while men sleep with anyone they want. Did I miss something? Is this Iraq? Are you going to castrate us women next so sex isn't even enjoyable? Where does this stop?

This is from a pro-life website: http://www.alysion.org/truelife/index.html

"Evidently, as we now know, there is no "moment of conception." The ovum is just as alive before it is fertilized as it is after, and who could deny that sperm are alive and behave purposefully? Does not the ripe, gravid ovum, coursing its way down the fallopian tube, actively emitting chemical signals in the hope of attracting sperm, have a potential for becoming human? Does not the sperm, in their multitudes, swimming vigorously by the hour in their quest to impregnate an ovum, also have a potential to become human?"

"We assert, therefore, that both egg and sperm live and behave purposefully. Each is endowed with a will to live as each seeks out the other in a life and death bid to become human. Together they have the potential for becoming a human being, and that which has the potential to become human must be accorded the right to life.


"We hold that every ovum has a right to life, a right to be fertilized, and every sperm has the right to at least have a chance to fulfill its quest to unite with an ovum. We do, of course, recognize that certain changes in our laws and customs must be made. The necessary changes may seem strange at first, but the dictates of morality demand them to be made."

"Among the changes:
- For all women during periods of infertility, sexual intercourse (involving ejaculation) is to be avoided and should at other times be concidered obligatory (unless artificial insemination is prefered).
- For all fertile men, all acts of extravagnial emission must be prohibited (unless a sperm donation is being made).
- All forms of post-gametogenic birth control are to be banned.
- Menstrual exudate, which must be presumed to contain an ovum, whether fertilized or not, must be collected and given full funeral rights."


Sh'what?? I am supposed to BURY MY PERIOD? Little tampons in a shoe box? Are you KIDDING?? This is the rambling of sheer lunatics.

Where the hell do these bureaucratic men and over zealous religious crazies get off deciding what I do with my body? Don't force your morals on me, I'm not doing it to you! I'm not going to make a law saying you MUST get abortions! I can legally stretch my skin, cut, brand, tattoo and pierce myself...but I can't use birth control? Preventing a pregnancy from even happening is NOT ABORTION. Nothing was even fertilized! The "potential to make a baby" argument is ridiculous. I have the potential to be a mass murderer, but I'm not. My desk has the potential to catch fire, but without a flame, I'm willing to bet that won't happen. If this is the definition, that means no condoms guys; have fun with that.



So, the big plan is to never have sex until you are both tested and married. This won't happen. Never has, never will. Sex is fun, that's one of the reasons people do it! Protection not only for pregnancy, but diseases too. If that is taken away people will still have sex, just unprotected. So, Aids and STDs will run rampant through our country; and this "potential for life" will kill the people already alive.


I'm moving to Europe where elected officials aren't completely insane or actively trying to kill their own (living) population.

9 Comments:

  • At 10:25 PM, Blogger Mamaclsn said…

    I don't know all the info on this, but I would agree that banning contraception is not wise, and there is no reason for it. However, with regard to the "men can have sex all they want without fear of getting pregnant", they do have to be in fear of losing their unborn children without their consent. Is that okay?

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/07/25/politics/main516284.shtml

     
  • At 10:28 PM, Blogger Mamaclsn said…

    Here is that link again

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/

    2002/07/25/politics/main516284.shtml

     
  • At 11:25 AM, Blogger Gibulet said…

    In all fairness, not all pro-life advocates are this over-the-top.

    About the man: If he had USED contraception, he wouldn't have the fear of losing the child. The only way I can see that being an issue is if they didn't use protection/birth control; something both of them are responsible for taking care of. No one should have sex with a person without knowing their sexual status anyway (if she is on the pill, they are both disease free). If the baby was planned, then the woman would have wanted it too, so she wouldn't be comtemplating the abortion. This would have to be an accident of poor planning on both partners part. Thing is, it is her that has to deal with the medical aspects. Even if he offered to take the child afterward; she is the one susceptible to complications, loss of work,possible illness and pain. She has another option, and its her body. He may not like that, but it is true. If men could force women to carry their babies, whats to stop a wanna-be father from tampering with his girlfriend's birth control? She may not want one, but he does so he removes her choice, because he can force her to have the baby. A rapist would have the right to keep a baby from being aborted from a victim, even if he is in jail, because he is the father.

    I've heard more about men WANTING women to get abortions, because they don't want to be responsible for the child. Those stories never make it into the news because it happens all the time.The reason this story got into the news is because it is not the norm, as much as it may suck for that man. I would also think that as these two were having [unprotected] sex they might have discussed how they each feel about having children and abortion, and then made sure they used enough prevention so this situation didn't happen.

     
  • At 3:57 PM, Blogger Mamaclsn said…

    Even using contraceptives, conception happens. Competent adults entering into a sexual relationship ought to realize this. You have heard about men wanting women to get abortions... and they are vilified, even though a woman may chose abortion and be praised. A man asks that his child not be murdered, even volunteers to take custody, and he is vilified for daring to impose himself on a woman (who should have realized that pregnancy could always be a possibility, even with contraceptives). Seems to me like everyone loses.. .except the women who expect to have whatever they want, whenever they want, no matter who else it hurts. Sad.

     
  • At 4:05 PM, Blogger Mamaclsn said…

    Also: this is HIS responsibility?

    "About the man: If he had USED contraception, he wouldn't have the fear of losing the child."

    Not to mention the fact that we don't know the circumstances. They very well could have wanted a child together, and now she doesn't because they aren't together.

    And we violate father's rights and unborn children's rights so this woman doesn't have to be inconvenienced for a VERY SHORT time?

    "Thing is, it is her that has to deal with the medical aspects. Even if he offered to take the child afterward; she is the one susceptible to complications, loss of work,possible illness and pain."

    Abortion is the SINGLE most selfish act of malice.

     
  • At 1:46 AM, Blogger Gibulet said…

    Ok, it is obvious that not everyone vilified this man. I didn't hear anything about it, and I belong to a few pro-choice groups. I never saw it in my normal morning news perusing either. Never, EVER have a heard of a woman being PRAISED for having an abortion. It's not like she graduated college; she doesn't deserve a medal. She made what was probably the most difficult decision of her life...but it was HER DECISION. No church, preacher or politician made it for her.

    Also, I mentioned four times in my statement that the responsiblity for protection was BOTH parties(they):

    "...use protection/birth control; something both of them are responsible for taking care of...No one should have sex with a person without knowing their sexual status anyway...these two were having [unprotected] sex they might have discussed how they each feel about having children and abortion...then made sure they used enough prevention so this situation didn't happen."


    To clarify:

    malice:

    1: desire to cause pain, injury, or distress to another

    2: intent to commit an unlawful act or cause harm without legal justification or excuse

    I draw your attention to the fact that in the current eyes of the law, the fetus at the certain allowed stages is not a living person, so that leaves out #1. It is also legal, so that negates #2.

    "I believe abortion is the single most selfish act of malice" sounds a lot less like you are telling me something that is definitively true, and more like you are expressing your opinion; which you are doing and that's just fine. I have no problem agreeing to disagree.

    Women don't get to have whatever they want, whenever they want it...but until men can grow and nurture a fetus to full term child inside their own bodies, yes, the buck stops at the woman. Yes, sucks to be a guy. Blame mother nature. No one is going to tell me I have no choice in having a baby that I might not be able to feed, clothe or take care of; not to mention the wretched state of adoption/child welfare in this country.

    This blog was intended to show one of the newer, more ridiculous reasons that some pro-life organizations use to try and justify taking away any choice at all, and that is all pro-choice is: the right to a CHOICE! A woman can choose not to have an abortion! No one is forcing anyone to do anything. With pro-life, there is only one choice and the woman doesn't get to make it. That is my issue.

    It is all in all an unpleasant and touchy subject; not to mention complicated. They fact that the reasons for having an abortion are so varied is the reason it is left to individual woman's choice.

    I have never considered what I might believe to be the greatest act of malice, but I will give it some thought.

     
  • At 7:25 PM, Blogger Joy said…

    This comment has been removed by the author.

     
  • At 7:47 PM, Blogger Joy said…

    From the American Pregnancy Association:

    "Spontaneous abortion (SAB), or miscarriage, is the term used for a pregnancy that ends on it's own, within the first 20 weeks of gestation. The medical name spontaneous abortion (SAB) gives many women a negative feeling, so throughout this article we will refer to any type of spontaneous abortion or pregnancy loss under 20 weeks as miscarriage.

    Miscarriage is the most common type of pregnancy loss, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Studies reveal that anywhere from 10-25% of all clinically recognized pregnancies will end in miscarriage."


    It would seem to me that those who believe in god would have to reconcile with the fact that he spends a fair amount of time inducing what Jen believes to be "the single most selfish act of malice".

    Just a thought.

     
  • At 6:40 PM, Blogger Dann Rafferty said…

    That's a very good point, Babe.

    You're so clever. ;)


    For once, I don't have as much to say on this.

    I pretty much agree with Lib, and Joy's observation was amazing. There are many things (rape, pillage, murder, abortion, etc.) that are normally looked upon as horrific, yet they are caused by God rather frequently in the Bible.

    On the subject of abortion, Lib hit it right on the nose. Saying that the disposal of an unfertilized egg is murder is quite ridiculous. Otherwise, you have to stop eating eggs.

    ...and before any comments arise, that's NOT why I don't eat eggs. The Vegan aspect follows the ideal of not "stealing from the chicken", as it were. Taking an unfertilized chicken egg is not murder, but it IS thievery.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home