Pro-Choice? Pro-Life? America is a Culture of Death

There is probably no issue in America that inflames passions more than the abortion issue.  With nary a peep from the media on the horrifying Gosnell abortuary, most of which was taxpayer subsidized butchery, liberals and progressive just casually dubbed Gosnell's baby murder factory nothing more than 'reproductive healthcare'.  Really?  Butchering babies born alive and butchering late term fetuses is reproductive healthcare?

On the pro-life side, most of those folks are rabid warmongering neocons who advocate for our murderous wars that kill entire Muslim families including pregnant women, mothers, children and babies.  That's hardly pro-life.

The hypocrisy on both sides is loud and deafening. The real truth is that America really is a culture of death and the American people, regardless of political beliefs, abandoned a culture of life decades ago when they embraced the state and all its evil.  A gazillion years ago when I was young and pondering the Vietnam War, I would ask folks about the war that was slaughtering millions of southeast Asians.  The reply was always the same: so what, they are only gooks.  Indeed! Fast forward to today and it's so what, they are only Muslims.  Any nation that is so morally depraved that it labels genocide and mass murder a noble endeavor and patriotic act is a nation that is doomed by its own evil.  The pro-life Republicans who endorse US foreign policy may carry a Bible but these folks are anything but moral or Christ-like as they blindly worship the military has become their favorite Golden Calf.

I don't like abortion and never will.  Still, I've reluctantly supported legal early abortion while opposing late term abortions except in extraordinary circumstances when the life of the mother is at stake.  A freshly fertilized egg is scientifically deemed a zygote that transforms itself to a blastocyst, then an embryo and ultimately a fetus.  Defining precisely what constitutes a human life has always been an issue of dispute.  Some folks believe that a freshly fertilized egg is a human being that should have full constitutional protections.  These radical pro-lifers lead what is known as the Personhood Amendment movement as they seek to confer full constitutional rights and protections upon a zygote.  Others view a zygote as a form of life that has the potential to grow into a human being but at what point is quite contentious.

Many within the radical religious right absolutely support arresting, trying and executing women who had abortion as well as they physicians.  As one who opposes the death penalty because I abhor the right of the state to kill anybody, America's religious right would like nothing better than having the legal right to round up women and their abortionist physicians and kill them.

Although the abortion debate and precisely what constitutes a human life is nothing new, what is irrefutable on the abortion issue is that at some point the zygote/blastocyst/embryo/fetus is in fact an unborn human being and terminating its life is not 'reproductive healthcare' but outright murder of an unborn human being.  I read a lot from the left and the right on the abortion issue and many liberals  have morally conceded in so many words that "hey, at some point we really are dealing with an unborn human being and murdering it is outright inhumane and barbarous".

The Personhood movement comes with grave consequences and unique legal problems that no human society has ever dealt with.  If a person driving a vehicle accidentally rear ends the vehicle of a pregnant female and she loses the zygote/blastocyst/embryo/fetus, that person is guilty of some form of murder, minimally involuntary homocide or even a felony requiring prison time.  Moreover, many in the Personhood movement even oppose the birth control pill because they believe that the pill can either spontaneously terminate an unborn life or it interferes with the will of God who is creating a new human being.  If God is the perfect omnipotent creator of the universe, He is infallible and makes no mistakes according to believers.

But not all pregnancies result in a healthy bouncy baby.  God's mistake?  The woman's mistake? I saw a TV documentary a few years back about a pro-life couple who wanted a family.  Their first child was so severely deformed as a result of a congenital defect that it was bed ridden, couldn't walk, grow, talk or even feed itself.  The parents were unaware that they carried a rare gene that created a deformed child.  Although they wanted more children, they postponed the decision until a genetic test was available to ascertain if the unborn life was afflicted with the defect.  They conceived, had the test and the 2nd child was normal but they were prepared to abort despite being strongly pro-life.

The critical point here is this: Should voters, society or legislative bodies make such decisions?  Hell no!  No one should have the right to make such a decision except the parents and I can't imagine a worse decision for a pro-life couple than making the decision to terminate a deformed form of life that will never be remotely normal or ever have any meaningful quality of life.

If Americans want a better quality of life and a culture of life, they had better start with some morality jarring soul searching.

On the progressive left they celebrate the right to murder the unborn with an orgiastic fury.  Then the orgiastic fury grips the Warvangelicals as they celebrate endless wars and the killing of their perceived religious enemies.

When it comes to human life and protecting it, hardly anybody in America holds the moral high ground.

According to the polls, Americans consistently support the right to an early abortion but overwhelmingly oppose late term abortion.  But this won't satisfy the radical pro-choice or pro-life groups.

As for me, I'll never like or celebrate abortion although I would never vote to take the right to an early abortion away from any women.  I haven't lived her life or walked in her shoes and as far as I'm concerned the issue is between the woman and God.  I'm not God and playing God is morally repugnant to me.  God will be a far better judge of human actions and choices than me and that's how it ought to be.

Meanwhile, the moral cesspool that is American will continue to rupture and destroy our once great nation, its backbone and its moral fiber.

When Americans want to take about the 100 million plus folks that our foreign policy and military industrial complex has killed for defense contractor profits, I just might revisit the abortion issue.  But so long as folks on the left and right defend the right of the state to murder and commit genocide, why even raise the issue of the sacredness of a human life?

If all human life isn't sacred then no human life can be sacred.  

I Haven't Killed Any Babies

One of the nasty things about politics is that it causes ruptures in friendships. Having suffered through a painful fight with an Evangelical establishment Republican friend, I had been very careful not to discuss inflammatory issues with this individual. However, during the Todd Adkin 'legitimate rape' fiasco, here, I fired off an e-mail to the Republican friend and advised him that such highly publicized social issue positions will not bode well for the GOP at the ballot box.

To my utter astonishment, he fired back with a nasty comment accusing me of being a baby killer because of my opposition to Akin as well as my refusal to defend him.

Well, my temper flared and I accused him of advocating for the murder and genocide of babies, children, women and men because of his defense of US foreign policy. The e-mail exchange got very ugly very quickly and it was so disturbing that I refused to read the last e-mail I got from him and simply filed it away for another day.

But here's my burning question. How can a person defend human life while simultaneously advocating for mass murder of innocent civilians, including babies, who really did nothing to the US? The moral hypocrisy of America's warmongering religious right is morally incomprehensible as well as thoroughly repugnant.   Whenever you directly confront such folks on their glaring moral hypocrisy, they explode with anger because deep down they know that they can't defend their position on life when the carnage of America's wars and foreign policy are factored in.

Who is the real baby killer here?

I don't like abortion and never will. In fact, I wish the abortion rate was zero. However, I would never vote to take that right away from another woman. It's between her and God, I haven't lived her life, I haven't walked in her shoes, I refuse to judge her and I definitely oppose forcing every pregnant woman to give birth at the point of a gun.

Personally, I see no hope whatsoever for any kind of reconciliation between the constitutional liberty activists and the religious right within the Republican Party.  However, I do believe that the Evangelicals have reached their pinnacle of power and influence and that they are on the decline.  The younger liberty activists who embrace social tolerance and peace will eventually succeed in taking over the Republican Party.

Religion vs. Obamacare: Obamacare on ‘Fast Track’ Back to Supreme Court on Religious Grounds

Obamacare is being challenged on religious grounds.

Obamacare on ‘Fast Track’ Back to Supreme Court

The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the individual mandate within the Obama health-care law seemed to be the last word in a fierce legal fight.

But on Monday, the Supreme Court ordered the Justice Department to respond to a suit filed by Liberty Counsel on behalf of Liberty University. The school contends both the individual and employer mandates are unconstitutional on the grounds that they infringe upon the freedom of religious expression.

The case was filed in March of 2010 on the very same day President Obama signed the bill into law. It’s been stalled because a federal appeals court ruled that the suit could not proceed because no one had been penalized or taxed yet through the mandates. The recent Supreme Court decision essentially struck down that ruling.

Liberty Counsel Chairman Mathew Staver says no court has ever ruled on the constitutionality of the employer mandate or the religious freedom concerns. Abortion funding is at the heart of the contention that the mandates violate the right to religious expression — something Staver says he saw right away but others didn’t notice until the new government rules on mandatory contraception coverage.

Is a religious exemption the only way around Obamacare?  More to the point, Obamacare includes damn few religious exemptions.

If The Amish Are Exempt From Obamacare Tax, Why Isn't My Religion?

I am a Christian Scientist. I do not take medicine, get regular check-ups, or go to the emergency room. When it comes to medical concerns, I rely solely on prayer for treatment.

When a particular case is challenging and requires advanced help, Christian Scientist’s utilize Christian Science practitioners. Practitioners are employed in the full time practice of Christian Science prayer and are available for Christian Scientist’s by phone or appointment for prayerful work.

When I seek out practitioner work, I pay out-of-pocket. The government mandating that I pay a tax for something I don’t use and is direct violation of my religious creed is an over-extension in their “limited” power.....

I don’t pay for OR use health insurance. If the Amish are exempt from this , why can’t I be?

I believe the greater issue here that supports why the Liberty Counsel's lawsuit will probably lose in a court of law is that the pro-life religious right is attempting to use the first amendment to selectively support government healthcare. America's religious right has never come out against entitlements or government healthcare, just the use of public money to fund abortion.

While I absolutely agree that taxpayers should not be compelled to fund abortion because it's not an appropriate use of public money, it's also my personal view that no taxpayer should be compelled to fund wars and the murders of foreign men, women and children and babies.

Meanwhile, America's religious right remains one of the biggest proponents of US foreign policy. They hardly have the moral high ground on issues of life.

Pro-Choice, Pro-Life, Personhood Amendments and Me

Comedian George Carlin famously quipped:

Once you leave the womb, conservatives don’t care about you until you reach military age. Then you’re just what they’re looking for. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. 

Of all the issues that are emotionally charged on the political war front, there is no issue that is more emotionally charged than the issue of abortion as the pro-life and pro-choice camps lock horns in seemingly mortal combat. The abortion issue and debate is nothing new and has been intense for as long as I can remember. Decades ago, I had to write a term paper on "Is a Fetus Human" for a philosophy course.

That's the core of the debate.  Is unborn life in the mothers womb a human being?

From a zygote to a blastocyst to an embryo to a fetus, the current debate evolves around two central theories 1. a human being is created at the precise moment of conception and 2. the unborn are not human beings until they are expelled from the womb.  There are other theories as well, including the theory that once a fetus can survive outside the womb, it's a human being.  Human science is incapable of defining what an in utero form of life is and it's not likely that the issue will ever be resolved.

Still, the abortion issues remains a supercharged political issue.  The politics of abortion generally evolve around radicals at both ends of the spectrum and involve religion and ideology.  The radical pro-choice camp endorses abortion up to the moment of birth.  In other words, a full term and fully evolved fetus should be expendable at the will of the mother.  While partial birth abortion has been outlawed and upheld by the Supreme Court, late term abortion is perfectly legal.  Late term abortions methods are known to be gruesome and have included driving a spike into the skull of a full term fetus and spilling its brains.  The same radical liberal camp that asserts that capital punishment by lethal injection is cruel and inhumane punishment have no moral qualms whatsoever when it comes to inflicting cruel and painful punishment on an unborn fetus.

On the religious right side, the prevalent belief is that a human being is created at the precise moment of conception and, therefore, is a human being who is endowed with fully vested constitutional rights.  The 'human life begins at conception' folks are also heavily involved in the Personhood movement that is lobbying for state and federal constitutional amendments to define human life as beginning at the precise moment of conception.  Personhood constitutional amendments have actually made it on the ballot on several states, including Colorado where twice it was defeated by a huge margin and in Mississippi, a strong religious right state where it also went down at the ballot box.  A Personhood Amendment, if passed, would immediately classify anyone who had an abortion as a murderer.  In fact, a Personhood Amendment could even result in outlawing birth control because some birth control methods allegedly but spontaneously can abort a freshly fertilized egg.

What the 'human life begins as conception' folks really want is a federal constitutional amendment defining life as beginning at conception.  Such a federal constitutional amendment stands no chance of passing in Congress or even being ratified by 75% of the states.  Blue states wouldn't ratify such an amendment and it's quite possible that many red states wouldn't ratify it either.  But that won't stop Republicans from putting it in the Republican Platform.

First on CNN: GOP prepares tough anti-abortion platform

The Republican Party is once again set to enshrine into its official platform support for "a human life amendment" to the Constitution that would outlaw abortion without making explicit exemptions for rape or incest, according to draft language of the platform obtained exclusively by CNN late Monday. 

"Faithful to the 'self-evident' truths enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed," the draft platform declares. "We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment's protections apply to unborn children."

I personally do not believe that a freshly fertilized egg is a human being.  It's a zygote and a form of life that holds the potential to develop into a human being as it grows into a blastocyst, an embryo and ultimately a fetus.  However, neither do I subscribe to the position that a fetus isn't a human being until it's expelled by the birth mother.  At some point after the embryo stage, we've got an unborn human being.  Of course, it doesn't matter what I think because it's an issue for the voters.

Where are the majority of Americans on the abortion issue?  By an overwhelmingly majority, the American people support the right of a woman to terminate a pregnancy at the early stages (zygote, blastocyst and possibly embryo) or in cases of rape, incest and when the life of the mother comes into play .  The situation gets who whole lot fuzzier on the issue of late term abortion and many Americans do in fact oppose late term abortion without a very valid reason.

At the ballot box, the majority will prevail on the abortion issue, which is precisely why the social conservatives who are obsessed with Personhood Amendments will not only lose but will also drag down the Republican Party on the issue.

The Republican religious right is a total fraud that doesn't actually support human life.  In fact, Republican Warvangelicals are the strongest advocates for wars, murders, genocides and all the evil associated with the American Empire and it's endless campaign to murder folks all over the planet.  For the Republican Warvangelicals, the abortion issue isn't about protecting innocent human life.  Indeed, these psychopaths get off slaughtering innocent human life on a massive scale. For them, the abortion issue is all about control and forcing every pregnant woman to give birth at the point of a gun.

But these radical but murderous fake pro-lifers go even further.  Many have stated in no uncertain terms that women who have had abortions should be criminally prosecuted for premeditated murder, a capital crime that carries the death penalty in many states.    The American religious right strongly supports the death penalty and these folks cheered TX Gov. Rick Perry when he boasted of his execution record.  I totally 100% oppose the death penalty because I so loath the right of the state to kill anybody.  

It should also be noted that murder does not have a statute of limitations as do many other crimes.  It's entirely possible, even probable, that if the Personhood Amendment folks were to succeed, not likely or even close to probable, that they would indeed embark on a witch hunt to bring to justice as a murderer every woman who ever had an abortion.  This is not beyond the realm of possibility for these folks and I've personally heard them say it.

There are also profound legal problems with granting the unborn full constitutional rights.  Suppose you are driving down the road and accidentally rear end a vehicle with a pregnant driver/occupant?  Well, just just killed somebody and minimally, you can be imprisoned for the crime of vehicular homicide.  Heck, the same thing could happen pushing your grocery cart in the supermarket.  You could accidentally bump your cart into a pregnant woman, knock her down and if she loses the unborn life, you just killed somebody and will be legally subjected to the multitude of laws involving murder,  homicide, manslaughter etc.

Personhood Amendments are indeed legal nightmares with dire and horrifying consequences but that's precisely what the Republican religious right demands.

The outlawing of abortion will definitely not reduce the abortion rate.  It will merely drive the practice of abortion underground.  Rich women will be able to afford safe if illegal abortions but poor women will be driven back into the filthy backrooms of the dangerous abortions of yesteryear and coat  hangers.

I don't like abortion and never will but I would NEVER vote to take that right away from another woman.  I haven't walked in her shoes or lived her life.  I will not judge her decision because that's an issue that is between her and God and God is always the ultimate judge, not man and his laws.

If America truly wants lower abortion rates, we need to start by building a culture of life and that includes ending the worship of the state, the military industrial complex and its murderous wars.  Precisely because America no longer has the high moral ground on anything, Americans can hardly invoke moral superiority when it comes to abortion.

"Legitimate" Rape and the GOP Take Another Hit in Gender Politics, Courtesy of Rep. Todd Akin

The Republican Party has always suffered a deficit with the female vote but the situation just got a whole lot worse when Republic Representative Todd Akin, who is running against incumbent Democrat Senator Clare McCaskill, let loose with a wildly absurd comment about 'legitimate rape'. There is no such thing as legitimate rape. Rape is a violent crime. Period.

Whatever message Rep. Akin intended to communicate, it was badly botched and set off a political fire storm. Akin is a typical establishment Republican who dwells in the social conservative camp that advocates for endless wars while claiming to be pro-life. His voting record would definitely not be pleasing to any fiscal conservative or liberty activist, here.  Moreover, Akin not only voted for NDAA and the indefinite detention of American citizens, he also voted NO on a measure to repeal the indefinite detention provision of NDAA.  Big spending militarist that he is, he also voted to increase the debt limit.  Pure and simple, Akins is the enemy of liberty and the Constitution.

Akin is not only pro-life and generally opposed to any abortion under any circumstances, his website states "I believe that life begins at conception...".  The folks who believe that human life begins at the precise moment of conception are largely committed to the 'personhood movement' that generally promotes state wide ballot initiatives to grant full constitutional rights to an unborn life.

What exactly did Akin say that got him in so much hot water that it could sink his prospects for the senate? Akins attempted to make the point that 'legitimate rape' rarely results in pregnancy and even if pregnancy did result from a rape, the life of the unborn must be protected..

Furor over Todd Akin's 'legitimate rape' comment

"First of all, from what I understand from doctors, (pregnancy from rape) is really rare," Akin told KTVI television in an interview widely distributed by Democrats. "If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down."

Akin then said that if a woman got pregnant after being raped, there should be consequences for the rapist, but not the unborn fetus.

Huh?

America is a nation where the overwhelming majority of the people support some level of legalized abortion.  That's not about to change anytime soon and campaigning on a message that abortion should be outlawed under just about every circumstance, including rape, is not only a ballot box poison but contrary to American views on abortion rights.

The fact that Akin attempted to distinguish legitimate rape from non-legitimate rape obviously resulted in severe blow back because he effectively marginalized rape, at least in the eyes of those who were grievously offended by his remarks.

How severe is the blow back? Election pundit Nate Silver, who is very good at what he does, actually had given the general election advantage to Akin, until his comment went viral.

Akin Comments Could Swing Missouri Senate Race

In my review of Senate races last week, I classified Representative Todd Akin of Missouri, who won the Republican primary earlier this month, as a very slight favorite over the Democratic incumbent in the state, Claire McCaskill.

Although some Democrats were pleased that Mr. Akin was the nominee, he nevertheless held a small lead over Ms. McCaskill in the polls, which averaged five percentage points across four surveys conducted in July and August.

But that was before Mr. Akin’s controversial remarks about rape in an interview with a St. Louis television station that was broadcast on Sunday morning. The comments, and Mr. Akin’s subsequent explanation of them, drew overwhelmingly negative sentiment at social networking platforms, including on Mr. Akin’s Facebook page.

Here we go again!  America can't have elections based on real issues like the wars, the economy, fiscal and monetary policy because the social issues dominate the election landscape.   However, when it comes to abortion rights, the Republicans always lose.  If Democrat McCaskill keeps her senate seat, the liberty movement will have lost nothing because Akin was just another warmongering, socially conservative big government statist.  

Appeals court allows Texas to exclude Planned Parenthood

The social issues are always difficult, especially abortion because the issue inflames passions on all sides. Reuters reports:

An appeals court ruled on Tuesday that the state of Texas can exclude Planned Parenthood from a state health program for low-income women because the organization performs abortions.

The ruling by 5th U.S. Circuit Judge Jerry Smith reversed a lower court ruling Monday in favor of the family planning organization.The emergency ruling on Tuesday means the state is free - for now - to enforce a new rule banning Planned Parenthood from the Women's Health Program, Texas officials said. The court requested a response from Planned Parenthood by Tuesday afternoon. "

At this point, Planned Parenthood is not an eligible provider in the Women's Health Program," Stephanie Goodman, a spokeswoman for the Texas Health and Human Services Commission, said on Tuesday.

The Women's Health Program, which is part of the federal-state Medicaid program, provides cancer screenings, birth control and other health services to more than 100,000 low-income women.

Read the rest here

Reuters

Texas already bans public funding for abortions so specifically targeting Planned Parenthood because it provides legal abortion while providing other services related to women's health is probably not going to survive a judicial test because it's punitive and discriminatory.

Personally, I don't believe that taxpayers dollars should ever fund abortion (and most everything else for that matter) but so long as abortion is legal the state of Texas is going to have a difficult time trying to outlaw abortion by targeting abortion providers who provide other heathcare services.

    

Judy Morris