Posts Tagged ‘pro-life’

And worser…

There are some things that, in the 21st century, there’s just no fucking excuse for anyone to die of any more.

One of these things is a miscarriage which is prolonged for days, by medical experts who have all the necessary treatment and care and resources available to solve the problem, but elect not to do so for religious reasons.

The details of Savita Halappanavar’s case, and the reasons why it should be sparking all the outrage it has and more, are already all over the place. If you need someone to catch you up, I can recommend starting with Nelson Jones, Sarah Ditum, and Jennifer Keane.

In short: When you have repressive anti-abortion laws on the books, and insist on hoops that women must jump through before they can be permitted necessary medical procedures, then it’s a matter of when, not if, the “pro-life” position ends up killing people, and being “a Catholic country” means endorsing manslaughter.

Also, this shit’s still happening.

I’ll write about something cheerier soon, human condition permitting.

Read Full Post »

It’s difficult, being an obnoxious, hateful, anti-abortion campaigner.

Not everyone who’s anti-choice fits this description, of course. But the ones who really commit to it? They have a tough time.

Case in point, this particular crowd who met one woman outside an abortion clinic, and didn’t get the reaction they might have expected.

…she told them her baby was already dead

She told them, through sobs, that she carried one baby til it was born dead and she couldn’t do that again.

Now, your anti-choice campaigner has a tough decision to make here. They’ve already taken it way further than most people take their philosophical commitments. They’re out on the streets, with placards or whatever, shouting at women, calling them murderers, making them feel as guilty as is necessary to “save a life”, through their own uninformed notion of what a “life” is. This isn’t something you do casually. These are people who have dug themselves in and identify strongly with what they’re doing now.

And the option that presents itself to them, in a case like this, is to admit that they’ve been shouting horrible, damning, guilt-inducing things at a totally innocent woman whose substantial trauma is only being made worse by their own actions.

The option they have is to accept that, in at least this one instance, they were wrong about this woman, they misjudged and mischaracterised her, her motivations weren’t at all what they’d assumed, they’ve been incredibly unfair and unkind to her, she’s gone through something horrible and they’ve become part of the reason she’s sobbing uncontrollably right now.

After taking up the position they have, that’s what they find themselves presented with.

So do they take reality up on the deal?


Instead, they continued to tell her not to kill her already dead baby.

It shouldn’t be surprising. It’d be astonishing to see someone spontaneously break away from a picket line and address the chanting crowd of which they were until recently another homologous part, and say “Hey guys, I’ve just realised, we’re completely awful.” That’s not generally how people’s minds change. Maybe some of them will have had their confidence shaken by it. Maybe some of them slept fitfully that night, and didn’t feel quite so certain over breakfast the next morning that they were doing the right thing. I hope so.

It’s no surprise to see unkindness doubling down like this, when caught in the spotlight. It doesn’t take anything particularly monstrous or inhuman to seem so hateful. But it’s sad.

(h/t Antichristian Phenomenon)

Read Full Post »

– Odd how there’s always an argument from somewhere that we should be taking less money away from rich people, on the grounds that they’ll end up giving more back to us that way somehow anyway.

Pro-life love, from another angle.

– Oh look, something I can agree with Obama on. Assuming Santorum’s not just talking gibberish again.

– Burzynski still hasn’t provided any data that his treatments can actually do anything to fight cancer. But thanks to his overly trusting patients’ continued generosity, the guy’s doing alright for himself.

Read Full Post »

Pro-choice people sometimes object to being referred to as “pro-abortion”, by those who think any artificial termination of a pregnancy is an offence against the sanctity of life.

They’re not in favour of abortion, they’ll say; they just think women have the right to choose how to treat their own bodies, particularly with regard to a fetus in the very early stages of development. It should be available as an option, but it’s less preferable than, say, forms of contraception that would have prevented the pregnancy from even occurring. But nobody’s actively pro-abortion.

Well, that’s where you’re wrong.

There’s a whole series of pro-abortion posts promised to follow this one, and I’m going to hold off any further judgment on “antinatalism” until at least a few of those have appeared. The author has an inconsistent history, of being sometimes excellent and sometimes deeply problematic.

My initial reaction, for what it’s worth, is that it undoubtedly deserves more careful consideration than it’ll likely be very widely given, and there are some sound ideas among those which motivate it. I have my doubts that all the problems which spring to mind will be satisfactorily resolved in this series of posts, but I’m going to keep reading and see if I’m won over.

It’s a staple of trite comedy routines to note that, despite the battery of background checks, personal assessments, and countless probing questions which await anyone who wants to adopt a child – or even a cat – there’s nothing stopping anyone from getting drunk and creating an entirely new life on a whim, which legally can and must become the sole responsibility of these unwilling, possibly incapable parents. Can that really be right? And if we can get past the instinctive gut reaction most people tend to have against the idea of a “parenting test”, where we insist people meet some arbitrary standard of intelligence (or whatever) before being permitted even to bear their own children… mightn’t there be some way of improving the current system?

Pro-lifers often talk about the unborn children’s rights. Antinatalism, as I understand it, questions whether we aren’t most egregiously violating these beings’ rights by bringing them into existence in the first place, given the inevitable suffering it will entail for them.

The pro-abortion posts linked to above don’t represent my own view. Like I say, I’m just going to be interested to see where they go, how persuasive I find them, and how the balance of provocative/wacky plays out.

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: