As you know by now I have a serious problem with the ultra conservative pro-lifers who insist on imposing their narrow world view onto everyone else. If their agenda was to eliminate abortion through realistic, effective means while still respecting the bodies and rights of women then I would be right beside them. However, eliminating abortion is not their true goal. It’s just propaganda used to get small minded people to join in their crusade against freedom and women’s rights.
Now, I know many of you are going to read this and immediately get defensive and attack me for saying that you don’t care about unborn children or whatever. I’m not. I believe that the vast majority of pro-lifers really do want to end abortion. Sadly they are too uncaring, or too shallow, or too dimwitted to see that the policies advocated by the pro-life establishment are completely opposite of your supposed goal. These same policies that you fight for in the name of ending abortion and “saving babies” directly cause an increase in abortions, increase in infant mortality, increase in unwanted pregnancy, increase in abandoned babies, and an overall decrease in the quality of life for women and their children.
This morning I read that Mike Huckabee is supporting the “Egg as Life” Human Life Amendment recently proposed in Colorado. This amendment will define human life as starting at the moment that the egg is fertilized. The Denver Post quotes Mike Huckabee as saying that “This proposed constitutional amendment will define a person as a human being from the moment life begins at conception,”. Of course, this is just another attempt at making abortions illegal, which is shown to have no effect at reducing abortions and only serves to make them more dangerous. This is exactly the kind of policy that is proposed by the pro-lifers, yet will leave horrible negative effects rippling across the entire state, while at the same time accomplishing nothing to reduce abortion.
Seriously, in a sane world where reality was a factor in government and policy this type of resolution would never even see the light of day. The obvious results are not at all in line with the supposed goal of the group proposing the change, yet luckily for them their followers are too blind to notice or don’t care. I am out of time to write this morning but as luck would have it George Monboit is also writing on the pro-lifers policy effects in his column for The Guardian today. I highly suggest you read it. If you like you can also read the story at his blog which contains references.
Please pro-lifers, wake up to the actual harmful effects of your policies. Stop fighting against those whose actions are actually exceptionally more effective at reaching both our supposed goals of reducing abortions than your own ever will be. If you drop out the controlling women and restricting freedom part of your agenda we may be able to find some middle ground. Of course that’s not really possible since that is your agenda. The pro-life part is just the whitewash.
William Ludwig
WWJV4.com
Add Comment![[Digg]](../../../wp-includes/images/digg.gif){kind=small}
![[Technorati]](../../../wp-includes/images/technorati.gif){kind=small}
![[del.icio.us]](./../../wp-includes/images/delicious.gif){kind=small}
![[Reddit]](./../../wp-includes/images/reddit.gif){kind=small}
![[StumbleUpon]](./../../wp-includes/images/stumbleupon.gif){kind=small}
![[Furl]](./../../wp-includes/images/furl.gif){kind=small}
![[Blinklist]](./../../wp-includes/images/blinklist.gif){kind=small}
![[Newsvine]](./../../wp-includes/images/newsvine.gif){kind=small}
2008-02-26 22:01:18
23+23=1
2008-02-27 23:44:19
Good for him. I am Pro-Life and it’s good that he supports the protection of the innocent that can’t speak for their selves.
But I supported him in the Kansas caucuses for reasons much more important to me and that is simply economics. He is the best candidate when it comes to the economic issues. What I disagree with him on is not as important as my pocketbook.
2008-02-28 08:09:50
This comment perfectly illustrate my point. Pro-lifers are lining up to support a policy that would actually increase the number of unwanted pregnancies (the vast majority of birth control prevents fertilized “people” from attaching to the uterus) and would therefore increase the number of abortions (legal or not) and abandoned children.
2008-02-28 10:01:09
murder is not an answer. First off, there is an answer, it’s called waiting until one is married to have sex. There will be far less headaches, if people would wait. I wish I had waited, but like many I thought I knew better.
Women, Men, boys and girls need to learn to take personal responsibility for their actions instead of killing the innocent. It is not the innocent child’s fault that s/he was conceived because the parents refused to take responsibility for their choices.
2008-02-28 10:19:15
If you insist on commenting please try to make rational intelligent arguments that are grounded in reality. Birth control is no more murder than masturbation or ovulation is murder. Abstinence has NEVER in the history of man worked, and no laws will ever change that.
There are things that do work to prevent unwanted pregnancy, but for some reason the pro-lifers oppose all of them. Don’t you find that odd? Rational intelligent people tend to promote causes that have effects that are desirable to them. Why do you think that conservative Christians so often promote causes that produce undesirable results?
Personally I chalk that up to stupidity and arrogance on an unbelievably monumental scale. Thanks for posting comments that back up my theory. I look forward to your next one.
2008-02-29 20:35:25
Oh geez, I have a life and don’t sit in front of the computer awaiting your reply and I have “shut up?”
Actually, I make an intelligent argument and you can’t come with a reply so you resort to name calling. Typical liberal. You refuse to say what things work to prevent unwanted pregnancy. Showing you don’t know what you are talking about. condoms break or fail 20% of the time. Other forms of birth control do nothing to prevent sexual disease, and in their own right fail often times, as well.
So what things are you talking about. And Abstinence works EVERY time it is used. It only fails when it ISN’T used. If people abstain then no one gets pregnant or an STD.
2008-02-29 21:33:22
I hope you aren’t referring to abstinence as your intelligent reality based argument. Abstinence is a fantasy of self righteous bigots and control freaks. It is absolutely not based on reality, but instead on the notion that you have the right to force your own morality and sexual hang ups onto others through fear and guilt.
The point of this article was how the pro-lifers support policies that if put into place would actually increase the demand for abortions. Your comments and insistence on the fantasy of abstinence only furthers my point. Thank you. If I feel like getting into a debate on the effectiveness of birth control methods I’ll start a post on that. For now here is a study that will educate you as you were wrong on condom failure rates.
2008-03-02 12:35:44
as I said 20% failure, well the study says 14% for condoms and at least 20% for other forms of birth control. And I don’t know where you get Christians are apposed to birth control. Mo`st are not, if they are used as they are suppose to be. In a loving committed (married) relationship. I guess the study proves what I said more then you. Thanks for helping prove me right, yet again.
What is your fascination with name calling? I have very little respect for anyone (on either side of the political spectrum) that resorts to such childish, juvenile tactics.
Abstinence is not a fantasy, except to those with an attitude of “I want it, and I want it now.”
2008-03-02 13:40:27
Birth control is “supposed” to be used for ANYONE wanting to prevent pregnancy. Being married is certainly not a prerequisite. You were wrong on your stats, it does not matter if you were close or not you were wrong. Some additional info on condoms can be found HERE
Abstinence is not reality for the majority of the population, nor should it be. Sex is a healthy part of life and should be enjoyed. In fact, it is one of our basic needs according to Maslow.
Please enlighten us on how defining a human as a fertilized egg will lessen abortion rates. That’s the issue we’re talking about here.
Thanks,
Summer
2008-03-02 12:40:53
If a plane had a 14%-20% failure rate, then it would be grounded. I certainly wouldn’t be flying on it.
2008-02-29 16:34:36
Isn’t it funny that asking for comments to be rational and intelligent always seems to shut up the pro-lifers? Guess I’m setting the bar too high.
2008-03-04 09:32:31
Kevin makes a good point about the condom failure problem. That sounds risky to me. Another problem I heard is that planned parenthood may in the past given low-dose contraceptives to teens. Which would have increased unwed pregnancies. I think they did this to get more repeat abortion business and thus make more money. I think your got it turned around on the results. It the abortion philosophy and free sex philosophy that results in more abortion deaths and more emotional suffering and more out-of-wedlock births and increased poverty.
2008-03-04 10:05:41
The failure rate of condoms, which Kevin got wrong, is a perfect example of how this policy will increase unwanted pregnancy and abortion. This policy will make virtually all forms of birth control illegal as the vast majority of birth control prevents a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterus. Therefore the only remaining forms of birth control will be the least effective types. Therefore unwanted pregnancies will increase, which will increase abortion rates.
As I said before this is not the place to discuss birth control effectiveness or the fantasy that people will suddenly accept abstinence. If someone would like to weigh in on how this policy (egg = life) will reduce abortion rates I would like to hear it. Remember that making abortions illegal has no effect on the number of abortions performed so that argument is not valid.
2008-03-04 14:31:46
We should define and codify into law the fertilzed egg is a human life, because that is the biological and theological reality. We want to do the right thing and we want to be consisent with the truth. The hard truth is that a fertilized egg is a human being. I was once a fertiled egg in mother’s womb, and you were once a fertilized egg in yours. Colleen Parro says - The facts are these: Human beings, you and I, have 46 chromosomes in every cell in our bodies, except for the cells capable of generating another human life - the male sperm and female ovum, each having 23 chromosomes.
When a 23 chromosome sperm penetrates a 23 chromosome ovum, a new, individual 46 chromosome single-cell human being comes into existence. No more egg. No more sperm.
I start with the truth that the fertilized egg is indeed human. Then we define culture and policy from that starting point.
2008-03-04 14:48:56
Again, you are missing the entire point. Regardless of your theology, how will doing this lower abortion rates? I know why no one has been able to answer this question. It’s because IT WON’T!
2008-03-04 14:55:07
Ok, your just repeating the talking points without answering the question. How will this accomplish the stated goal of reducing abortions? We have already established it will do the opposite as it will greatly increase unwanted pregnancy by eliminating most birth control methods.
2008-03-05 09:34:52
—–“Egg as Life” Human Life Amendment — This policy would not ban abortive birth control pills (abcp’s)and thereby increase unwanted births and in turn increase abortions as you might think. It could serve as a foundational step in 40 years or another generation and only after a cultural shift to chastity, to restrict or ban them. I think you are leaving out the cultural factor and it is a slow thing to change the hearts and minds of the people to different position such as that birth control pills aborting pre-born human beings. Look at the last 35 years from roe vs wade and you can see that change is slow. In summary I thougt about what you said and it is tempting to think that this amendment would immmediately lead to banning abcp’s and thus increasing births since abcp’s are so mainstreamed in the public use. But after thinking it through more thoroughly, I believe that realistically that such a policy would only come much later and only after the majority of the people of America accept that position. What do you think?
2008-04-19 17:42:41
How would pro-lifers benefit from “controlling women and restricting freedom”?
The issue for pro-lifers is to decrease the number (ideally, to zero) of lives destroyed. Abortion is the most obvious way this occurs, but many forms of artificial contraception are abortifacient; in fact, everything other than barrier methods has an abortifacient process to it, including the Pill.
Defining life at fertilization also prevents Embryonic Stem Cell Research, which pro-lifers see as destroying life in an attempt to help for those already born, similar to the Tuskegee experiment.
Have a great day!