Follow by Email

What is it about nice people that attract total idiots?Nice people are martyrs. Idiots are evangelists.

SOCK IT TO ME BABY!!!

Friday, August 31, 2012

Getting the rest of my thoughts in

It began with agreement, it really did...

A fellow blogger I follow went off on the meatheaded would be congressman Todd Akin, who thinks that woman can shut off incoming sperm at will.  Apparently he never bothered to look into things past what he heard in some 6th grade locker room.  In the course of many posts, though, this blogger said something that made me decide I had to speak up- basically, she'd never vote for any man who told her what she HAD to do with her body.

In a way of getting the other side out, I sent in an unfortunately long winded comment.  Among the the things I brought up:

- That BOTH times my ex and I made a child, we knew it immediately.  I won't pretend it happens to everyone, but I know for a fact that we weren't alone in this.  She said "That is insane" but admitted she neither had children nor wanted any.  Which is a better response than the ones I get from atheists about what I believe, but would have been nice to not have been looked at as nuts for an experience I had and she did not.

-That, given that I personally believe that life comes at conception, I find it a bit selfish for this to be all about the woman and nothing about the child.  She has a different mindset and disagrees, no harm no foul.

-That I don't think the fight over it would be near the proportion it is except that Planned Parenthood is not an honest broker in this, nor are any other clinics.  They make a profit on the procedure- a bigger one than they get from counseling- and thus have been exposed many times in pushing abortions without recourse, counselling, or parental notification.  I suggested that all abortions should be government paid- but paid only to the break-even-point on the procedure, so that money leaves the equation and counselling, other options, education based on responsibility and ramifications, and birth control could be equal partners in their work.  I think we "basically" can see agreement there, but from her response I think she believes that any control of abortion leads to unwanted kids, handicapped kids with no one to support them, and other such cases by the ton.  Which pretty much makes my point, which is that as long as money is in the equation, both sides will take extreme positions and refuse to compromise.

- None of which was but a set up to my real problem with the post- that I do not believe that ANYONE who has one, make-or-break issue is a fit voter.  Voting should be done with the best interests of the nation as a whole, or not done at all.  If you can say, for example," It doesn't matter how bad the economy sucks, I'm voting for Obama because he'll let me have an abortion"- OR "I don't care if he is a heartless corporate monster, I'm voting for Mitt because he'll let my church's hospital run things according to conscience", it's one easy step to," I'm voting for Hitler, because he's giving us everything we want- who cares what he does with the Jews?"  To her credit, she explained that the statement was just made over the issue being discussed, and didn't mean she was actually a one-trick-pony voter.  But if it's in your mind, perhaps it needs to be examined.  It doesn't do much good to vote for the guy standing up for woman's reproductive rights if his economic plans put all the women you are defending out of work.

Okay, all of that is what has gone before.  But there are a couple of things I wanted to hit and didn't particularly want to turn it into a whole thing on her site.  I know she doesn't read here, but some of her other readers do.  If you'd like to pass this on to her, your business, public forum.  I'm not doing this to berate her, or talk behind her back, and she is certainly entitled to her opinions.  Like I said, I agreed with 90% of the original post, for pete's sake.  So rather than trash her blog and her day, I thought I'd finish up here.

One thing, she states that she believes "a baby's rights begin at birth".  Okay, but what about its life?  Carry one for 10 months and see where you set that marker at.  Not trying to be snarky, but there is a fundamental difference between "rights" and "life", and you can't just rationalize that away.

Another thing, it was brought to my attention that I would feel differently if I was being forced to have a vasectomy at a certain age.  Actually, I wouldn't since I had one after Shenan, but anyway it's apples and oranges.  Maybe not if you take the baby in the womb as a living thing out of the equation, but you are comparing the prevention of the CREATION of future lives with the taking of one THAT IS ONGOING.  Not the same thing at any level.

And the sad thing is that the true, overarching issue is being ignored.  Perhaps it would be easier to see a fetus as a life rather than "A rice grain sized thing inside me" if we saw sex as the loving union of one man and one woman rather than a recreational pursuit.  Not judging anyone in particular, I think all of us get hit by that stone.  Lord, I know I do.

Finally, I was told I'd feel different if I had woman parts rather than man parts.  I really don't think that's true- the only change, sadly enough, would be the level of responsibility I would feel (sadly, because it's the level I should have felt all along).

10 comments:

  1. I'm not really going to way in here, simply because I am Pro Choice. Period. While it is not an option I would use myself, I feel it is arrogant and irresponsible of me to blanket my beliefs on every woman in the country.

    However, I would like to make mention of one famous Pro Life outwardly Republican family, the Duggars (of 19 kids and counting) who have admittedly, with no shame, saying that ALL their health care for the family comes from the free clinic.

    The same free clinic that our tax dollars pay for.

    The same ones that Romney says he'll stop funding (Planned parenthood is just a portion of that free clinic).

    And while I never needed to use a free clinic in my younger years, I am one of the women who need birth control solely to regulate my body so that cancerous cells will not develop. Had I been not able to receive that medical care at the age of 17, I might not be sitting here typing this today.

    There are a lot of sides to this for sure. Just none that I think ANYONE can firmly stand on.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And see, I have no problem with that. The sore spot to me is abortion alone, and that because of it being pushed solely because it makes them money. If Planned Parenthood wasn't so obvious in their desire to keep the cash cow going, they'd likely be left alone. But when you're KNOWN for actively encouraging abortion over any other option, and when you champion crap like partial birth abortion, the single most barbaric act mankind ever devised, you become a target.

      I honestly think if women would look at the whole picture, they would see that PP does them as big a disservice as its opponants do. Or, as a wise lady once told me, there isn't a firm side to stand on.

      Delete
  2. Hey, Pssst...if you check your subscribers...I do read here. :D I have been for a LONG time. Goofy. I am glad that you took a chance to respond in a post of your own though and would have had no problems with you calling me out by name.

    The only reason I referenced a forced vasectomy (which by the way is NOT the same as you voluntarily getting one) is because you can't grow a baby so the closest you can come to that is providing what we need to complete the process. The principle is the same. It's the government telling you what you HAVE to do with your body.

    I see your point but for me, not wanting children (Ever) and not wanting to get married (also EVER)...for me sex is a fun thing. To be done in a loving relationship, ideally sure, but not always. This isn't a problem for me. I'm not an atheist. I'm a Christian...I just chose to enjoy sex and not deny myself connections with people no matter how shallow some people may find them. I enjoy it.

    I suppose in your Utopian world only men and women marry and every child is a blessing from God. Well, that's not the way the world works. Not every child is wanted. I'm not saying this is wrong or right because it isn't for ME to judge...that's not my place. As I see it judgment isn't my place it is God's.

    No, not every unwanted pregnancy involves incest, rape, risk to mother's health, or disabled children. I just can't see how people can't bend enough to allow abortion in these cases. How can you not see how unfair it is to make a rape victim carry proof and reminder of her horrible ordeal for 9 months against her will? Talk about selfish now.

    I can see where you are coming from on the "one strong belief" and voting for the good of all the nation. Honestly, I could do this, have done this, BUT when an issue like this comes along...something that makes you stand up, discuss, and engage on a topic you swore you would avoid...well that topic deserves your full attention and dedication. For me that is MY right as a woman and NOT letting men tell me what I can do with it. The fact that I have neither needed to have an abortion, am careful about sex, and never plan on needing one is irrelevant.

    I REALLY appreciate you taking the time to write this and for your comment on my blog which was neither unfortunate or too long. I loved it! I'll tell you why. You felt comfortable enough there to tell me how you really felt. You engaged in a discussion. You didn't shy away from being honest with me. I value that...A LOT! I respect you for it. As I stated before at my place. I read your blog, I respect you and your view...I just happen to not agree. I think it is beautiful we can still support one another regardless. :D The joys of internet relationships and freedom of speech...right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. First, let me apologize for that unfortunate and goofy error... ran out of fingers and toes 33 followers ago, and brain cells about 20 years ago. Theres a good reason my music is stuck in the seventies.

      If you check my response to Juli, you'll see I don't want to deny the legitimate to anyone. I want to deny the right to push abortions as a cash cow to Planned Parenthood. Everyone else, like Juli said, has their own tightly held views. I'm not trying to legislate morality- I just want a world where a child has a chance to live without a group using some peoples conviction as a cover to make money in a highly unconscionable way. As a woman, I would think that your rights being trampled by PP NOT giving you all the options would be just as bad as "men" telling you what to do (Sorry, feel it is a Gov't vs. people thing, not a man vs. woman).

      On the voting thing, I cannot claim to be quite the honest broker, but on my favor, I have a WIDE variety of reasons not to vote Obama. I wish we could get back to the days where the party's beliefs were hammered out at the convention and not three months before. That made for honest debate WITHIN the parties and not the all or nothing crap that divides us all.

      I thank you for the kind remarks in the last paragraph. On topics like this, people tend to get fired up and it's hard sometimes to get honest feelings about stuff out without adding a dose of "Flaming Rhetoric." (I try to save that for FB lol)I really don't think that, when each position is analyzed, we disagree that much on the micro- although we have a big perspective difference on the macro that keeps the discussion "muddied up." It has certainly, as I said before, been a joy to have an honest and respectful discussion, unlike the ones I hold with atheists (who state their points, call you deluded, and then begin the insults.)

      And all of which got off of the original point of your post way back when! I saw Al's comment today and he was spot on. I know that some conservatives say, "Oh, it was just one mistake, look at the big picture." But like you said, it was more than a mistake, it was a fundemental failure at his profession.

      Thanks for stopping by! Don't mind the length, consider it a "guest post".

      (She actually reads this thing? Crap, I'll have to pitch that draft about "dirty stay-outs"...)

      Delete
  3. lol wow...who wrote a long winded comment now? sorry about that. *blush*

    ReplyDelete
  4. Damn. Now I have to go back and read jewels post. I've been so bad at keeping up lately...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Nicely put here, Chris. It's a tough discussion all the way around, one i think no one takes lightly, be it man or woman. I love your points on voting and completely concur. And the fact you called Akin a 'meathead' makes you a hero in my book!

    ReplyDelete
  6. CWM:
    Bravo...!
    That has got to be one of the best thought out explanations of truth, conviction and...substance I've heard in quite some time.
    (and coincidently, I feel much the same way)
    Kudos to you.
    ANd yes, I think people should have to pass a "voter's test" of sorts...to see IF they're qualified to make ONE GOOD DECISION (because they sure do make a whole lot of BAD ones along the way.,..and never seemt to learn from them).

    Stay safe out there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, as well... maybe you can iron the kinks outta my voter's testing plan..

      Delete