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.
He said Myth, 2: Until Roe v. Wade, back-alley procedures killed countless women, and that risk would return if abortion were outlawed.
“TRUTH (?): This has to be the most tired of all myths of abortion and Roe. And since the author used Guttmacher, which is an offshoot of PLANNED PARENTHOOD, I would call their findings rather partial to the abortion agenda. However, in regard to illegal back alley abortions, I would say correctly that the Kermitt Gosnell trial is just the tip of the iceberg of other illegal abortion practitioners that practice in plain sight all over the United States.
Our understanding of what Roe is will justly show that this act of law is just exactly that, an act of law that has an agenda (What law isn’t based on a agenda?). Making abortion illegal will not stop abortions, just like drugs being illegal will not stop drug activity, manufacturing, distribution or deaths. HOWEVER, abortion always kills a living person and should never be legal for any reason (Guns kill people, thus should never be legal either). Making the argument that less WOMEN will die because it’s legal is IGNORANT (because writing in ALL CAPS definitely smites the ignorance-doers) ; the death of an immigrant woman at Gosnell’s facility should tip you off; again, just the tip of the abortion iceberg. Many women have died or have been injured from the abortion procedure SINCE ROE. (More have died due to complications during pregnancy – abortion is safer than giving birth.) Again, what the author does not report is what happens during an abortion procedure: THE UNBORN BABY DIES AND WAS THE INTENDED VICTIM. MYTH EXPOSED(I won’t actually address what the article is arguing, but I will project all of the forced birth rhetoric I can to the point incomprehensibility).”
The article actually says this:
Abortion rights advocates have argued that Roe shields women from “back-alley butchers.” But that is a consumer-protection argument, not an argument about what rights women have over their bodies. Before legalization, laws against abortion endangered women, keeping them from making fundamental decisions about their lives.
Seems like a reasonable claim no?
He said Myth, 3: Roe led to a huge increase in the number of abortions.
TRUTH(?): The author’s intent is to move you to see what an affiliated numbers cruncher, Guttmacher Institute, says about abortion statistics. The author remarks that Guttmacher reports at least 1 million abortions occurred per year prior to Roe. Interesting that there are real numbers regarding an illegal act…much like expecting the mafia to call in their activity so that we can study the statistics of organized crime. Guttmacher = Planned Parenthood, the largest provider of abortions in the United States, funded by your tax dollars to lobby, fund and endorse liberal democrat politicians for election and reelection to extend and moralize abortion. MYTH EXPOSED.
See the pattern here? *argle-bargle* baby killers, *argle-bargle* liberal politicians, *argle-bargle*… The article actually says this:
Roe didn’t mark the beginning of an abortion era — it legalized an already widespread practice.
The “author” should have skipped referring to an outside source, as I imagine the arguments put forth make much more sense in the distorted house of mirrors that pro-life reasoning is. Pro-Tip: Referencing reality with regards to your fatuous arguments, presents an uncharitable juxtaposition of your stance. Practice in avoiding reality isn’t that hard for the religious, but I’m thinking in terms of the frothy corpulent blather you’re spewing on the rest of us that could be avoided.
He said Myth, 4: Women who end their pregnancies tend to suffer various psychological and physical illnesses.
TRUTH(?): I’ve heard it all…there is no connection to psychosis or disorder, “it’s all in your head”, every liberal university in the entire world has ruled out Post Abortion Stress Syndrome…I have to wonder at their criteria and who they actually ask (Maybe you should take your deluded self righteous ponderings, shove them your ass with the rest of your intellect and instead, go look at the study,and for once in your life make a decision based on evidence).
I have made the case for Planned Parenthood weeding out the proabort post abortive they ‘serviced’ to claim there is no after effect…..but I’m here to tell you that I do know about Post Abortion Stress Syndrome since I am post abortive( because your experience is the experience of all women). There is help and I can tell you that after MANY years of guilt, regret and shame that there is healing after abortion. I initially sought healing through alcohol, like many other post abortive women do (citation needed). Then one day God sat me down, told me I was a sinner that need Salvation (As mentioned previously, if Beings no one else can see is talking to you and giving advice, seek psychological help). The godless says it’s all in your head (citation needed), but THE GOD says He will heal you, if you only ask( Oh you mean if I turn off my brain and hope for lolly-pops and unicorns all will be well? I so in!!11!!) . MYTH EXPOSED (I’m thinking MYTH EXPOSED is similar to Checkmate Atheists!, but without the satire.)
He said Myth, 5: “Choice” guarantees woman the opportunity to decide whether to become a mother.
TRUTH(Wha? Oh I see what you did there): That is truth. Choice has many guarantees besides being a parent or not; it also guarantees your own right to life to be less than it was 40 years ago (what?). It may guarantee your family’s right to exterminate you when you’re too sick and old to make your own choice for life (Euthanasia! Abortion! Death Penalty! – No nuance involved with any of theses issues.) . Your choice to abort has made the choice to annihilate the generations that could have been born and had their own families (because under population is completely a problem…).
Your choice has made other laws to demoralize (do consult a dictionary, because this doesn’t mean what you think it means) unborn human life by the sex of the baby or perceived illness the baby may have . Your choice has demonized the right to teach our own children about how God hates abortion (As soon as they start teaching Islam in schools you can start teaching your particularly shitty excuse for a an Abrahamic religion). Exercising your right to choose is much like the addict’s right to shoot up; the addict thinks they are only hurting themselves but the reality is that it affects an entire family.
Choosing to abort takes your family’s right away from being a grandparent, aunt or uncle, sister or brother, friend and neighbor (Is there anyone else who should have presidence over my uterus, I think you missed the paper-boy and the gardener. They have no right to anything that goes in my body, and what your adocating is nothing less than slavery for women, you may now frack -off at your leisure.). Your choice can affect hundreds of people…so all of this just being about you???(When grandma can take a turn incubating the fetus, then we can talk.) MYTH EXPOSED.
If you are pregnant, God (? ,Put up or shut up, there is no evidence for God, so god can’t chose anyone, but apparently he can serve as a great vehicle for intimidating people to believe your particularly odious point of view) chose YOU, no matter the circumstances, to be a parent to that child. Choose LIFE, not a life of regret. (To each person, their own choice, it is not for you to make)
To conclude from the article, the sad reality of the situation:
As states pass laws making abortion practice untenable for doctors, a growing number of women live somewhere without an abortion provider. Fewer than half of states mandate sex education, and 26 give preference to “abstinence only” sex education, limiting what teenagers can learn about pregnancy prevention.
Women who lack the resources to limit reproduction — and, after giving birth, have no access to paid family leave or to quality day care — have been stigmatized by politicians. Rather than providing dignity and safety for all women, “choice” is often an economic privilege.
18 comments
May 1, 2013 at 6:44 am
john zande
Nicely done. i’m saving this one for future reference.
LikeLike
May 1, 2013 at 8:41 am
The Intransigent One
Why can’t I get the awesome voices that agree with me and tell me only what I want to hear?
LikeLike
May 1, 2013 at 10:41 am
The Arbourist
@JZ
Thanks. It’s just round “n” in my battle against the white hot supernovae of stupid that exists on the internet. :)
LikeLike
May 1, 2013 at 10:42 am
The Arbourist
@TIO
I do my best dear, but even I can’t compensate for your particular version of the crazy fun house with mirrors reality.. :)
LikeLike
May 1, 2013 at 10:43 am
john zande
Did you ever read my two cents on the matter?
http://thesuperstitiousnakedape.wordpress.com/2013/04/08/listen-up-christians-i-gonna-learn-ya-somethin-bout-personhood-hood/
LikeLike
May 1, 2013 at 10:54 am
The Arbourist
@JZ
Good read.
It’s almost like we should make a compendium of some sort so when the inane drive by with their spoor we can just say, “Oh! see page 3 as to how wrong you are.” :)
LikeLike
May 1, 2013 at 10:58 am
john zande
It’d make dismissing these lunatics a tad easier…
LikeLike
May 1, 2013 at 5:33 pm
bleatmop
Love the wing nut picture. It brings me back to one of my first liberal blog hangouts, Unrepentant Old Hippie. I miss JJ and hope she is doing well. She hasn’t even tweeted in like forever last time I checked.
Also, I found this article a little bit confusing until I read the original sourced article. Once I realized you were responding to someone who was responding to someone else, things got a lot more clear. Anyway, I always like your RPOJ articles.
LikeLike
May 3, 2013 at 7:54 am
john zande
Morning Arb…. I’m involved in a maddening abortion debate with a Christian. If you want to join in…
http://robertnielsen21.wordpress.com/2013/05/02/a-small-step-forward/
LikeLike
May 3, 2013 at 8:36 am
The Arbourist
@JZ
You like getting me riled up and then letting me loose on a thread, don’t you John?
That dude likes to wank on ‘philosophically’ about how women should be incubators and that stirs my tea the wrong way from his very first premise.
LikeLike
May 3, 2013 at 8:38 am
john zande
Jump on in! I’ve danced with Prayson before and he can be infuriating….
LikeLike
May 3, 2013 at 8:40 am
The Arbourist
@JZ
I haven’t commented on Robert N’s blog yet, thus my comment remains in moderation.
*grrr*
I tend not to let the focus be on the fetus because all sorts of fapping can go on about fetal personhood etc. and it takes away from the idea that woman is an autonomous being that is in full control of her body. Fetus worship, in its many flavours is BS from the get go, it is pseudo-scientific patriarchal moralizing on what women *should* be doing with their bodies, and I will have none of it.
LikeLike
May 3, 2013 at 8:53 am
The Arbourist
@Bleatmop
Thanks for the input Bleat, you’re right it can be confusing. I added an editorial note as to where the text in blockquotes was coming from. Quoting the text from the original was a hard decision to make as it greatly increased the length of this post and as you pointed out decreased the clarity of the piece.
I miss JJ’s regular postings as well, she is a strong voice for women in Canada.
LikeLike
May 6, 2013 at 6:19 pm
Mera
Regarding this, from The Arbourist’s post:
“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.””
——————————-
I would like to recommend this book:
http://books.google.ca/books/about/Pregnancy_And_Power.html?id=NQzVhWYYO9sC&redir_esc=y
Pregnancy And Power:
A Short History of Reproductive Politics in America
A sweeping chronicle of women’s battles for reproductive freedom throughout American history, Pregnancy and Power explores the many forces—social, racial, economic, and political—that have shaped women’s reproductive lives in the United States.
Leading historian Rickie Solinger argues that a woman’s control over her body involves much more than the right to choose an abortion. Reproductive politics were at play when slaveholders devised breeding schemes, when the U.S. government took Indian children from their families in the nineteenth century, and when doctors pressed Latina women to be sterilized in the 1970s. Tracing the diverse plot lines of women’s reproductive lives throughout American history, Solinger redefines the idea of reproductive freedom, putting race and class at the center of the effort to control sex and pregnancy in America over time.
Solinger asks which women have how many children under what circumstances, and shows how reproductive experiences have been encouraged or coerced, rewarded or punished, honored or exploited over the last 250 years. Viewed in this way, the debate over reproductive rights raises questions about access to sex education and prenatal care, about housing laws, about access to citizenship, and about which women lose children to adoption and foster care.
Pregnancy and Power shows that a complete understanding of reproductive politics must take into account the many players shaping public policy—lawmakers, educators, employers, clergy, physicians—as well as the consequences for women who obey and resist these policies. Tracing the diverse plotlines of women’s reproductive lives throughout American history, Solinger redefines the idea of reproductive freedom, putting race and class at the center of the struggle to control sex and pregnancy in America.
——————————-
If you have noticed, in the USA especially, but even here in Canada, that a lot of anti-choice rhetoric is focused on ‘population growth’ specifically in regards to WHITE BABIES. There is a fear that the non-whites, and ‘immigrants’ will become the dominant ethnicities, and that our proud white christian countries will ‘cease to exist.’ This book gives a good history on the how and why these attitudes came to be!
A must read – and if you cannot afford the book, you can read the bulk of it on google books.
LikeLike
May 7, 2013 at 10:40 am
The Arbourist
@Mera
Welcome to the blog. :)
Thank you for the recommendation, I will have to acquire it in one form or another as it sounds like seminal reading on the topic. Have you read Against our Will by Susan Brownmiller? It is another very important, must read book.
LikeLike
June 16, 2013 at 6:04 am
The DWR Sunday Disservice – Not My Law! – Sanctimonious Christiains and Their Codswallop. | Dead Wild Roses
[…] Boom! Abortion is immoral! Most people when making a moral case tend to state a few premises first, but oh no and Oh Ho!!! Mroldguyvirgin(MOGV) has no need for the pale frippery of cogent argumentation. No sir! We skip the whole ‘premise thing’ and instead magnificently conclude, planting the confused flag of religious certainty, that Abortion is Immoral. Say no more. […]
LikeLike
January 4, 2014 at 10:58 am
The Silverman
You have not debunked anything, you are using your philosophical belief system as logic and that is fallacious.
Unless you can refuse the logic below with another line of logic and evidence, then you have nothing but your belief system, and you belief system has no place in the logic of the law.
1. Murder of human individuals is illegal — Legal Fact
2. Forcibly ending the life of a human individual against their will qualifies as murder—Literal Fact
3. If the child qualifies as a human individual then killing it is murder —True/Strong
The relevant evidence will be nothing other than objective, scientific, literal, and legal facts.
—The Silverman
LikeLike
January 4, 2014 at 11:19 am
The Arbourist
@Silverman
Let look at your assertions.
1. Murder of human individuals is illegal — Legal Fact – A fetus is not an separate individual, and thus does not qualify as an individual or as a full human being, a more accurate description would be potential human being, that as a legal fact have no status under the law.
2. The fetus, not being sentient for much of the gestational period (particularly when most pregnancies are terminated), thus not having will, does not have say in the matter. So, no murder happening here.
3.If the child qualifies as a human individual then killing it is murder – Yes, children once born have all the qualities you’d like to assign to the fetus.
So, that wasn’t hard now was it? :)
LikeLike