Daily Archive

The vast amount of shit the forced brith advocates spew into the interwebs lends new meaning to the word grotesque. Our anti-choice friends have been faffing on long and hard about Dr. Kermit Gosnell conveniently forgetting about Savita Halappanavar’s terminal experience with their fetid dogma .

Let me spell it out, you antediluvian, dim-witted, anti-choice bastion of  fuckwitttery.

Cases like Dr.Gosnell’s are exactly what happens when you limit women’s access to abortion.  His practice was under-regulated and in clear violation of any sort of reasonable set of medical expectations.  We need less of what Dr.Gosnell did, not more.  Yet, you cro-magnon bible thumping gits harass and scare away ethical doctors and practices – you know places where women can get safe medical care – and leave them with the back ally option offered by Dr.Gosnell. This case is squarely on your heads my forced-birth friends, now and forever as your insipid campaign against women and their autonomy creaks along.

We now get a closer look at the hollow arguments you put forth in your crusade against women with a helpful deconstruction to show exactly how wrong you are.

If a choice of any kind supersedes a right to life, then the choice is not only wrong but unthinkable. (Oh completely, because being forced to give birth is fucking freedom loving fun.) In 1973, a handful of people dressed in black robes (A.K.A The Supreme Court – You know, one of the bastions of a free secular society that is holding the religious theocracy your are pining for at bay.) told the United States that life will not impede law.

(ed. Adding paragraph break to mitigate the crazy.)

While it is broadly known that abortion has been happening since ancient times, it was not blatantly lauded as a personal right to save your own life from the burden of being a mother or father (Yes, because you know what is best for each and every woman in the world, the view must be positively rosy from your religious high-horse.). Abortion was not an assumed option for married couples, but it was and continues to be for adulterers and those who are sexual active before marriage (Your constitution guarantees freedom of religion and freedom from religion – follow your founding documents Theocrat and stop forcing your dogmatic shite down peoples throats). If you are prepared to have sex either before or outside of marriage, then be prepared for parenthood. (Yes, because all sex should be only for procreation…*facepalm forever*.) Sacrificing a child’s life for your own is the highest form of narcissism (Oh completely,because women need to be forced to give birth, mandatory pregnancy will only make family life and child-rearing easier.  Why? Because god said so…)

But I love these idiot articles (I do as well, it makes showing how full of fecal matter Forced Birth Advocates are) ; it makes me thankful that I know THE God (Embracing mythology and fairy-tales to prove how right you are is prima-facie example of intellectual-assholery.)  that knows the right answers (*ring-ring* It’s unsupported claims office, they want their statement back), that gives LIFE and loves us spite of us.

I’m smart enough(?) to know I don’t speak for God – He speaks for Himself while the prochoice rhetoric tries to speak for everyone despite our right to say no, which we have. (So, the god that happens to share your exact opinions is the only one allowed to speak, convenient that.) The only person that speaks for me is God (If you are hearing voices, you should consult a psychiatrist.) not some flippy idiot dressed in a ‘lady parts’ costume or a death-defying God hater (Kinda sounds like a superhero persona – The Masked Death Defying God Hater; it may have some mileage to it :).)

“He said MYTH, 1: Laws against abortion have always been based on concern about unborn life.”

The unborn have always been forefront in every illustration, every example and every instance of the Prolife Movement. The statement that abortion was not about the unborn is just plain ASININE: If it weren’t for the unborn victims and dead or injured women, there would not be an argument: MYTH EXPOSED.

    The utter lack of reading comprehension on display is amazing. This is what the article said:    (editorial note:  I quote here from the original article being thoughtlessly dissected  by the idjit of the day)

“Abortion was generally legal in the United States until the mid-19th century. At that time, physicians eager to professionalize obstetrics pressed state legislatures to outlaw midwifery and abortion while granting doctors sole authority over pregnancy and childbearing. State anti-abortion statutes were primarily justified on the grounds that women needed to be saved from uneducated folk practitioners, infections, future infertility and other physical risks.

In the courtroom, prosecutors rarely discussed the unborn, instead accusing abortion providers of preventing women from fulfilling their destiny: motherhood. When early feminists such as Susan B. Anthony opposed abortion, they argued that the disconnect between sexual intercourse and maternity endangered women’s chastity — at the time considered their main basis for moral standing and personal dignity.”

So arguing against the veracity of the provided historical context is one thing, but coming up with a statement like this is nothing more than mere confabulating: “The statement that abortion was not about the unborn is just plain ASININE”.  I hate to break it to you, but there is only one asinine person in the room cupcake, and it happens to be you. 

Read the rest of this entry »