Leftists and Right-wingers Conspire Against Constitutional Government

hypocrite_fish

I am a bit disappointed in the both the Left and the Right; no-one seems to know how to declare victory and move on, or realize the futility of their actions and let go.

There is a certain similarity to those who are gravitated toward the amassing of political power; for the most part their agenda is not the one they publically serve, instead it is one of ego and power, narcissism and insecurity.  The occasional sincere and talented leader that comes along is a happy accident in the purposeful insanity in pursuit of power we call politics.

On the Right we have people who do not seem to be able to accept that  how a person dresses or wears their hair, what books or films they enjoy, which adult they fall in love with, what kind of music they listen to, or which particular chemicals they choose to soothe themselves with against outrageous fortune matters little compared to issues that breaks their leg or picks their pockets.

This is principally because a conservative mindset supports the status quo against disruption from “outside; it is hard to tell who is not “one of us” if we fail to look alike and act alike.

On the Left we have those folks who simply cannot let go of the rush of having been on the side of “Truth and Light” against the monolithic “Man; if some group quacks like victims of “oppression” the Left immediately labels it a duck, turning a blind eye to any “regretful but vital temporary irregularities” committed in the pursuit of “social justice.”

Today it seem that to the new breed of “liberal” any traditional or overly familiar group is automatically suspected of evil intent and attacked; meanwhile any foreign, unfamiliar or new ideology is seen as persecuted, helpless, and in need of protection; they are not shy about shaming others into “doing the right thing“; even if they would call their actions evil if perpetrated by a non-Leftist.

The sign that makes this cognitive-dissonance the most obvious to me is the seeming inability of anyone belonging to a partisan group to see their own leaders engaging in hypocrisy or toxically self-serving politics.

Case in point Left:

Three distinguished ‘sociologists‘ having a panel discussion at a prestigious, elite university on the cumulative emotional/political scars of the “Palestinian people” who never even mention the existence of the PA, PLO, Fatah or any non-Israeli leadership, organisation or government!

Case in point Right:

Every bill that is passed by a conservative state legislature regarding abortion or the first amendment that they know will be thrown out by the Supreme Court on a “No Duh” basis; not to mention voting against humane laws only because the law might, possibly, in theory, in a Blue Moon and with a tail wind undermine their goal of passing other laws designed to eliminate the right to any abortions.

Case in point Left:

The partisan Leftie will bend their brain into a pretzel to justify and declare natural and normal any deviant behavior practiced by consenting adult homosexuals while at the same time denigrating the “un-naturally” traditional sexual tastes of more conservative folk, most of whom are not interested in regulating the homosexuals’ lifestyle beyond the usual restrictions on anyone committing rape, pedophilia or other criminal activity.

Case in point Right:

The partisan Rightie will get their panties in a twist contemplating all the heinous and disgusting sexual crimes a homosexual “could” be prone to while ignoring rampant child abuse in the home, or a culture of rape in an institution; that homosexuals in reality have a lower violent crime rate than straights seems to totally escape them.

Case in point Left:

Lefties just hate women who like the idea of having babies and being a homemaker, they simply loathe it! When you pin them to the wall, as happened recently when someone said that Mitt Romney’s wife who raised five sons and battled a deadly illness had never worked a day in her life, they mostly admit that there is nothing wrong and much that is admirable, about a “non-working” home-maker. Then a few days later they will once again say something that denigrates mothers.

Case in point Right:

Statistics show that the highest divorce rates, the highest teen STD rates and the highest teen pregnancy rates all occur in precisely the same areas where the most conservative sex-ed is the norm and sex is only supposed to happen after a person gets married. But, the lowest rates for divorce etc. are found amongst agnostics and secular Jews! I will leave as an exercise for the student the contemplation of reasons why two people with no clue whether they are socially compatible in the long term, or if they are sexually compatible at all, might be a bad risk for marrying; living together first is a  statistically proven better strategy!

Both sides seem to feel that all the worlds problems are sourced in the opposition’s intentionally perverse and stubborn need to fuck everything up for the other guy; I have more faith in my fellow man than that, but the partisanship has got to go!

Who is Right vs. What is Right: Finding Solutions Instead of Being Part of the Problem

Heretics Crusade by Guy DeWhitney

I actually see a sea change happening in the West regarding Islamic aggressions. It will most certainly still be a long and twisted road but, I do think that it is inevitable that the Western ways will prevail.

The total flip-flop of governmental concerns regarding potential violence from Islam and Christianity in the eyes of the law is utterly insane. It only makes sense to formulate an objective, constitutionally sound, policy/strategy for identifying and dealing with all ideologically driven extremist groups that might pose a threat to anyone’s life, limb or property.

Unless we wish to dispose of the First Amendment we must always forbid to the government the ability to say “This is a real religion but, that one is false” or we will quickly find that one denomination/trend in theology has become dominant. I for one would rather keep my freedoms, even if it is a harder road.

The best test I have ever seen for identifying worrisome religious groups is

‘THE Advanced ISAAC BONEWITS’ CULT DANGER EVALUATION FRAME’

I have edited it a bit for space and clarity…

In order to utilize the frame, assign each item a value from 1 to 10 points, with 1 being “Low” and 10 being “High“. Religions with total scores towards the high end of the scale are more than likely un-healthy groups for anyone.

1. Internal Control:
Amount of internal political and social power exercised by leader(s) over members; lack of clearly defined organizational rights for members.

2. External Control:
Amount of external political and social influence desired or obtained; emphasis on directing members’ external political and social behavior.

3. Wisdom/Knowledge Claimed by leader(s):
Amount of infallibility declared or implied about decisions or doctrinal/scriptural interpretations;…

4. Wisdom/Knowledge Credited to leader(s) by members:
Amount of trust in decisions or doctrinal/scriptural interpretations made by leader(s); amount of hostility by members towards internal or external critics and/or towards verification efforts.

5. Dogma:
Rigidity of reality concepts taught; amount of doctrinal inflexibility or “fundamentalism;” …

6. Recruiting:
Emphasis put on attracting new members; amount of proselytizing; requirement for all members to bring in new ones.

7. Front Groups:
Number of subsidiary groups using different names from that of main group, especially when connections are hidden.

8. Wealth:
Amount of money and/or property desired or obtained by group; emphasis on members’ donations; economic lifestyle of leader(s) compared to ordinary members.

9. Sexual Manipulation of members by leader(s):
Amount of control exercised over sexuality of members in terms of sexual orientation, behavior, and/or choice of partners.

10. Sexual Favoritism:
Advancement or preferential treatment dependent upon sexual activity with the leader(s).

11. Censorship:
Amount of control over members’ access to outside opinions on group, its doctrines or leader(s).

12. Isolation:
Amount of effort to keep members from communicating with non-members, including family, friends and lovers.

13. Dropout Control:
Intensity of efforts directed at preventing or returning dropouts.

14.Violence:
Amount of approval when used by or for the group, its doctrines or leader(s).

15. Paranoia:
Amount of fear concerning real or imagined enemies; exaggeration of perceived power of opponents; prevalence of conspiracy theories.

16. Grimness:
Amount of disapproval concerning jokes about the group, its doctrines or its leader(s).

17. Surrender of Will:
Amount of emphasis on members not having to be responsible for personal decisions; degree of individual disempowerment created by the group, its doctrines or its leader(s).

18. Hypocrisy:
amount of approval for actions which the group officially considers immoral or unethical, when done by or for the group, its doctrines or leader(s); willingness to violate the group’s declared principles for political, psychological, social, economic, military, or other gain.

From the Advanced Bonewits Cult Danger Evaluation Frame (or ABCDEF) v2.6 © 1979, 2001 by Isaac Bonewits

As near as I can tell, with the most generous of judgment possible, normative Islam. scores 140!

With an objective test such as this it is possible for law enforcement to merely point to a high score when asked about why a certain religious community is being monitored for actual criminal activity; it worked it Ireland, the key is to enforce it strictly and enforce it strictly across the board!

http://hereticscrusade.com
Ideas instead of Ideologies!

 

Islamists in Egypt seek to Terrorize Women into Silence

Egyptian-army-soldiers-be-007

It seems to me that the Islamist factions in the Egyptian election seek to couch everything in terms of a referendum between Mubarak-era corruption, foreign servitude and autocracy, and decent traditional “Egyptian” ways “somehow” involving the harmonizing political influence of Islamic morality and probity. This black and white, and ultimately false, view serves the Islamist parties well by tarring with a very broad brush virtually all political factions that support a secular Egypt; they all were at the least comfortable under Mubarak as compared to the Islamists who innocently sought to install a theocratic regime by any means necessary.

In reality this election will decide whether Egypt remains with its face turned toward Western Civilization or abandon that path to return to the “traditional” tribal mentality of millennia past.

Recently the Islamist factions have been organizing riots against anyone with a pro-Western, secular agenda by labeling them as Mubarak supporters. This trend reaches its ugly peak with the story below; take notice of the carefully neutral and anonymous description of the attacking men – imagine a group of Hassidic Jews or Radical Mormons staging a mass assault on a Gay rights parade never having their religion mentioned in the entire article; the victims are lumped in with all former cronies of the former dictator!

Mob attacks women at Egypt anti-sexual harassment rally

From AP

Alarming assaults on women in Egypt’s Tahrir

A mob of hundreds of men have assaulted women holding a march demanding an end to sexual harassment, with the attackers overwhelming the male guardians and groping and molesting several of the female marchers in Cairo’s Tahrir Square.

From the ferocity of Friday’s assault, some of the victims said it appeared to have been an organised attempt to drive women out of demonstrations and trample on the pro-democracy protest movement.

The attack follows smaller scale assaults on women this week in Tahrir, the epicenter of the uprising that forced Hosni Mubarak to step down last year. Thousands have been gathering in the square this week in protests over a variety of issues — mainly over worries that presidential elections this month will secure the continued rule by elements of Mubarak’s regime backed by the ruling military.

Earlier in the week, an Associated Press reporter witnessed around 200 men assault a woman who eventually fainted before men trying to help could reach her.

Friday’s march was called to demand an end to sexual assaults. Around 50 women participated, surrounded by a larger group of male supporters who joined hands to form a protective ring around them. The protesters carried posters saying, “The people want to cut the hand of the sexual harasser,” and chanted, “The Egyptian girl says it loudly, harassment is barbaric.”

After the marchers entered a crowded corner of the square, a group of men waded into the group of women, heckling them and groping them. The male supporters tried to fend them off, and it turned into a melee involving a mob of hundreds.

The marchers tried to flee while the attackers chased them and male supporters tried to protect them. But the attackers persisted, cornering several women against a metal sidewalk railing, including an Associated Press reporter, shoving their hands down their clothes and trying to grab their bags. The male supporters fought back, swinging belts and fists and throwing water.
Eventually, the women were able to reach refuge in a nearby building with the mob still outside until they finally got out to safety.
“After what I saw and heard today. I am furious at so many things. Why beat a girl and strip her off? Why?” wrote Sally Zohney, one of the organisers of the event on Twitter.

The persistence of the attack raised the belief of many that it was intentional, though who orchestrated it was unclear.

Right Virginia, it was about as unclear as Maj. Hasan’s motive for committing “workplace Violence” at Fort Hood in 2009!

Mariam Abdel-Shahid, a 25 year-old cinema student who took part in the march, said “sexual harassment will only take us backward.”
“This is pressure on the woman to return home,” she said.

Of course, there are so many distinct factions in Egyptian society that are violently dedicated to returning women to their traditional roles that we will probably never be able to assign a culprit; oh well.

Hey, isn’t it horrible that Romney might have done something mean to someone that he might have thought was gay 40 years ago?

Ahmed Mansour, a 22 year-old male medical student who took part in the march, said there are “people here trying to abuse the large number of women protesters who feel safe and secure. Some people think it is targeted to make women hate coming here.”
I am here to take a position and to object to this obscene act in society,” he said.

Assaults on women Tahrir have been a demoralising turn for Egypt’s protest movement.

…women have also been targeted, both by mobs and by military and security forces in crackdowns, a practice commonly used by Mubarak security against protesters. Lara Logan, a US correspondent for CBS television, was sexually assaulted by a frenzied mob in Tahrir on the day Mubarak stepped down, when hundreds of thousands of Egyptians came to the square to celebrate.

Sexual harassment of women, including against those who wear the Islamic headscarf or even cover their face, is common in the streets of Cairo. A 2008 report by the Egyptian Centre for Women’s Rights says two-thirds of women in Egypt experienced sexual harassment on a daily basis. A string of mass assaults on women in 2006 during the Muslim feast following the holy month of Ramadan prompted police to increase the number of patrols to combat it but legislation providing punishment was never passed.

After Friday’s attack, many were already calling for another, much larger stand in the square against such assaults.

Another participant in Friday’s march, Ahmed Hawary, said a close female friend of his was attacked by a mob of men in Tahrir Square in January. She was rushed off in an ambulance, which was the only way to get her out, he said. After suffering from a nervous breakdown, she left Cairo altogether to work elsewhere in Egypt.

Women activists are at the core of the revolution,” Hawary said. “They are the courage of this movement. If you break them, you break the spirit of the revolution.”

Read it all… 

Stepping into the Void; Guy DeWhitney on Abortion, Abortion Rights and the Right to Life

This is a new update and expansion of a post originally posted on Heretics Crusade in March of 2009.
Stepping into the void; the Head Heretic on Abortion, Abortion Rights and the Right to Life

DSCN2412

I am so tired of this idiocy!!!
I just read another article about the abortion/pro-choice issue. Both sides in this debate defend the indefensible though in this article was the rabidly anti-abortion Texas GOP pushing, get this:

“…a bill that would require women to sit through an ultrasound before an abortion, described in detail by the doctor, and (wait for it) require they listen to the fetal heartbeat. Oh, and if that’s not enough, they must sit idly while a doctor lectures them with some good old-fashioned anti-abortion literature.

This idiocy is best summed up by the same article (interpolation added):

The legislators who crafted this bill have no knowledge of a woman’s mental or physical health when she walks into an abortion clinic. They have no idea whether she’s been raped, had a condom break, gotten pregnant the day before her husband took off. But they are cocksure that listening to the heartbeat is going to change her mind; [and is worthwhile if it does not], no matter the pain it inflicts.

Of course the other side stands on indefensible ground as well:

Troy Newman’s Rebuttal: According to Health Department statistics in Kansas, where the majority of post-viability abortions took place, none were ever done to save the life of the mother. Post-viability abortions are never medically necessary. If the mother’s life or health are so endangered that delivery is necessary, that can be done without killing the baby. Aborting a viable baby is simply done, not for the mother’s life or health, but because that baby is inconvenient, either to the mother or to a referring physician who does not want to be bothered caring for a woman with a complicated pregnancy. Killing the inconvenient is a hallmark of an unbalanced and unhealthy society, not an enlightened one. Troy Newman’s Rebuttal: According to Health Department statistics in Kansas, where the majority of post-viability abortions took place, none were ever done to save the life of the mother. Post-viability abortions are never medically necessary. If the mother’s life or health are so endangered that delivery is necessary, that can be done without killing the baby. Aborting a viable baby is simply done, not for the mother’s life or health, but because that baby is inconvenient, either to the mother or to a referring physician who does not want to be bothered caring for a woman with a complicated pregnancy. Killing the inconvenient is a hallmark of an unbalanced and unhealthy society, not an enlightened one. Troy Newman’s Rebuttal: According to Health Department statistics in Kansas, where the majority of post-viability abortions took place, none were ever done to save the life of the mother. Post-viability abortions are never medically necessary. If the mother’s life or health are so endangered that delivery is necessary, that can be done without killing the baby. Aborting a viable baby is simply done, not for the mother’s life or health, but because that baby is inconvenient, either to the mother or to a referring physician who does not want to be bothered caring for a woman with a complicated pregnancy. Killing the inconvenient is a hallmark of an unbalanced and unhealthy society, not an enlightened one. Troy Newman’s Rebuttal: According to Health Department statistics in Kansas, where the majority of post-viability abortions took place, none were ever done to save the life of the mother. Post-viability abortions are never medically necessary. If the mother’s life or health are so endangered that delivery is necessary, that can be done without killing the baby. Aborting a viable baby is simply done, not for the mother’s life or health, but because that baby is inconvenient, either to the mother or to a referring physician who does not want to be bothered caring for a woman with a complicated pregnancy. Killing the inconvenient is a hallmark of an unbalanced and unhealthy society, not an enlightened one. Troy Newman’s Rebuttal: According to Health Department statistics in Kansas, where the majority of post-viability abortions took place, none were ever done to save the life of the mother. Post-viability abortions are never medically necessary. If the mother’s life or health are so endangered that delivery is necessary, that can be done without killing the baby. Aborting a viable baby is simply done, not for the mother’s life or health, but because that baby is inconvenient, either to the mother or to a referring physician who does not want to be bothered caring for a woman with a complicated pregnancy. Killing the inconvenient is a hallmark of an unbalanced and unhealthy society, not an enlightened one.Troy Newman’s Rebuttal: According to Health Department statistics in Kansas, where the majority of post-viability abortions took place, none were ever done to save the life of the mother. Post-viability abortions are never medically necessary. If the mother’s life or health are so endangered that delivery is necessary, that can be done without killing the baby. Aborting a viable baby is simply done, not for the mother’s life or health, but because that baby is inconvenient, either to the mother or to a referring physician who does not want to be bothered caring for a woman with a complicated pregnancy. Killing the inconvenient is a hallmark of an unbalanced and unhealthy society, not an enlightened one.”

The two sides just can’t seem to THINK for a moment lest they agree on ANYTHING that the other side believes. One might come to believe that both sides are idiots whose agendas obscure reason, compassion and religion!
On one side we have Pro-Lifers™ have a promulgated an ancient and traditional, yet previously unknown credo that they have just written. It goes something like this:

“One victorious spermatozoa out of millions wins out over its brothers, the egg wall thickens to keep out the defeated and, to give God a place to insert a newly rinsed soul; a new PERSON now exists!!

Now, you might see that there is a small problem with this credo, ancient or not; nowhere in history will you find ANY society that believed such a thing! In fact, those of the fertilization faith need to explain why, if God felt, and feels, that we are fully human right at the moment of fertilization why there had been NO WAY FOR HUMANS TO TELL WHEN THIS EVENT OCCURRED until the last hundred years? On top of that, until the precursors to the “rabbit test” were developed a hundred years ago the most reliable method any woman had for knowing she was “with child” was her waistband getting too tight, coupled with a missed period or two. Pregnancy tests have only become reliable in the last 20 years. In addition to being inaccurate, virtually all of the older home tests required a wait of up to two weeks AFTER a missed period!

Did God intend all women of childbearing years to perpetually conduct themselves as though there might be a little citizen hiding inside their tummy?

According to medical science up to half of all fertilized human eggs miscarry or do not implant before there are enough changes to the human body to detect pregnancy at all!!!

It seems to this seeker after wisdom and truth that all this would seem to show that if God decided that humanity begins with fertilization He has no problem with aborting human souls in the early stages of “personhood” with no discernible rhyme or reason.
As if that is not bad enough for the Sensible Citizens caught in the middle we have in this corner, weighing in at 98 pounds soaking wet, with a mouth full of honey, a heart of marshmallow coated marble and eyes colder than the shine on a diamond lying at the feet of Dante’s Devil…The Pro-Choicers™.

These tree-hugging cuties, starting from a time when abortion laws were Draconian to say the least the PCers (hey, that name fits them in other ways as well) have “defended women” to the point that we have seen a “family planner” cheerfully advise a pregnant woman on how to coerce a late-term abortion out of the welfare, medical and legal systems so she could abort any unwanted daughters so as to ensure a male first-born.

As far as I know they fail to highlight the point that one of the potential “downsides” can be to train the body to miscarry instead carrying a baby to full-term or close enough to it for the event to be a birth instead of a tragedy.

Do we even need to address the utter lack of morality seen in a “mother” who could even imagine nurturing a pregnancy dearly until she knows the sex; whereupon she flushes girl after girl to get her desired baby boy while knowingly circumventing the democratically established laws and committing a serious felony for such a late term fetus. Except in very special circumstances involving incest, rape, extreme defects or a threat to the life or long-term health of the mother the law normally would vigorously prosecute an abortions after the 20th week, which is the earliest solid date at which an ultra-sound can be sure to determine a child’s sex with complete certainty; are we to allow a five month fetus – only six weeks away from being viable – to be flushed down the toilet because the mother or someone with influence over her desires a boy instead of a girl?

The Left has managed to get into a position that requires the backing virtually all late-term abortions; simply because they refuse to back off one inch on the idea of a woman having total control of her body lest prudish, misogynistic Right-wingers swarm out of the churches and put all the women in hijabs covered in crucifixes and lock them in a purdah filled with Bible verses; a position for which I must admit that I feel some sympathy… but, only up to a sane limit; say just before the point where a person’s whims involve another viable but, helpless human being’s health, welfare or in this case their very existence.

Those of you on the left still standing firm let me ask you this, please think about how you might justify entering a woman’s womb, hacking what you find into piece, and then removing and disposing of the bloody remains of an “inconvenience” while bearing in mind that if the “Patient” (I refuse to call her a mother) had tripped on the steps to the abortion clinic, might have been a viable preemie!

The fact that the actual practice of late term abortions involves even more outrageous practices should truly make anyone condoning such practices ashamed for seeing an issue as black and white that has them supporting people who will commit vivisection on a pregnant woman’s whim.

Why don’t both sides get a clue and solve the problem? More and more leaders on both sides are seeing a middle ground.
Looking back through history we find that the first trimester (12 weeks) has been the most common point for societies to agree that “someone was home” in a woman’s womb. Twelve weeks, more or less, is the point when the fetus starts to look more like a potential person than a mutant frog with gland issues. Pre-Enlightenment it was commonly felt that a soul could not “hook in” to a body until there was something that at least looked like it might end up Human when it emerged into the light of day. Come the Age of Science and Lo! And Behold! It turns out that “the Quickening”, as it was known, is just about when the human central nervous system is coming alive and, the time when an embryo truly starts to become more than a lump of tissue; something like Man.

No society that I know of ever placed the moment for personhood earlier than three months or so after what we now know to be the time of fertilization due to the impossibility of their determining early pregnancy for certain.

So, Virginia, what was the most reliable pregnancy test for all but the last hundred years of human history? It is so easy a Cro-Magnon could do it! When you have missed one or two periods and your waist band is getting too tight you are pregnant; well almost certainly pregnant; at the least it is very probable that you are with child!

And that is why many societies waited well into the 3rd or fourth trimesters before getting excited about a “new person”; and some civilizations didn’t acknowledge a baby’s humanity until the child had been accepted and named after surviving a prescribed number of days, often 3 to 7.

And who were those so called civilized folks who would look at a too sickly new-born, shrug and walk away? Well Virginia, it seems they were Christians and Jews, as well as Pagans here and there; Oh My!

Yes, the same societies that produced the folks who wrote the Torah and Christian Bible didn’t consider a baby a person until a week after birth and the child had a name; the same books which the modern theocratic fools claim teach them the Holy Truth that the moment a spermatozoa “marries” an egg we get, instantly, a fully Human person deserving of full human and civil rights and robust governmental protection of said personhood.

For just a moment let us consider what enforcing a law such as this would mean.

ALL women who could be pregnant (and we can hardly take the woman’s word as to whether she has had sex recently when protecting people’s lives now can we?) must act in a manner to “protect the civil rights” of any fetus she might be carrying. Everything she does, eats, drinks, smokes or willingly experiences (i.e. medical treatments required for full health that address problems other than life-threatening) would have to be safe (and legal) to share with an infant; unless a woman choose to be sterilized, and have the state take note of the fact, she would be required to conform to a lifestyle that would have bored Elsie Dinsmore to tears, and to adhere to this virtual prison from her first menses to her medically confirmed menopause.

To embrace the credo of the American theocrats is to accept the re-enslavement of half the human race during the course of a majority of their lives. Under such laws a woman who was two months pregnant would have to be charged with willful child endangerment if she jumped into a lake to save her drowning 5 year old. Take moment and let the ramifications resonate in your heart and mind.

The only way to embrace the fantastic theology the hard right proposes would be for us to start treating American women more like property than it is currently the norm in the Saudi Arabia!

Back in the Left’s corner we have the so-called “liberal” position. Good at abstractions the Leftist is ok with pretending the hidden baby is just a piece of tissue until it starts to breathe. The “morality” of standing between women and the very real oppression of them and their bodies that totalitarians seek blinds the Liberals to the reality they endorse at the behest of the Leftists. Just as Gay Rights has been used by a few homosexuals as a cover to “mainstream” unquestionably unhealthful activity “Pro-Choice” has been used to cover people not far different from the Eugenics and forced sterilization crowds and other proponents of soulless “solutions” to social ills.
Here is my proposal for regulating abortion and pregnancies:
First Trimester: abortion legal on demand. A woman does have a right to control her body and reproduction; certainly with regard to a neoplasm with delusions of grandeur.
Second Trimester: abortion may only occur with a doctor’s recommendation based in solidly established medical art for the sole purpose of avoiding unusual and irrevocable harm to the mothers health or mental well being. A court might well be needed to pass on these but, the process would have to be fast and objective due to the approaching target of infant viability.
Third Trimester: Now, Virginia this is the key; as we see constantly in the news eight, seven and even six month preemies are survive, growing up, and thriving; given that, how can any thinking person deny that we have long since ceased discussing the fate of a “piece of tissue”?

In the third trimester a baby should be legally a person. A fetus that would be a viable baby if the mother tripped on the steps of the abortion clinic should not murdered on a whim because of a legal fiction about it needing to breathe air on its own in order to be considered an “actual” human being. The mother should be viewed by the law as though she was holding a baby in her arms 24/7.

After all, if early abortion is legal and a woman keeps the child into the third trimester can she really have any excuse to go all retroactive on a viable infant? Using legal precedent long established If there is a threat to the mother’s health or life during this time the doctors would have to use the same criteria they use when dealing with conjoined twins in deciding who lives and who dies when that choice MUST be made.

What is wrong with this? It satisfies everybody who admits to reason and compassion.

But,it seems that the Pro-life™ sheep will not accept the idea that until the kid breathes it is just a piece of meat with no consequences, and neither can anyone of sense and humanity as far as I can see. But, they need to get over their obsession with concepts that are neither Biblical, historical, or scientific.

The Pro-choice™ crowd will never accept a return to women being chattel, which is the only way to control what they do with their bodies to the extent the Radical Right would need to enforce their credo. That is not surprising given that it is also a position that most reasonable people, Conservative or Liberal reject due to ingrained Western, Enlightenment-Liberal values.

So, why not use common sense, compassion and reality to settle things intelligently? Why do we have to use women’s and baby’s lives as ropes in a hateful tug of war promulgated by two irreconcilable foes; enemies who make it perfectly obvious, if you judge them by their fruit and not their words, that they care little for babies or women, or humanity itself for that matter? It is certain that neither band of partisan fantasists will allow mere lives to stand in the way of the self-imposed mind-fuck needed for their complete “victory”.

Total Victory or Die!!” both sides cry; meanwhile women’s lives are ruined over zygotes, and fetuses that should have the right to be babies die.

The Heretic Crusader