Friday, November 03, 2006

Oklahoma Pro-Choice Gains; Pro-Life Diminishes

A recent poll by Survey USA looked at each state's views on the abortion issue. According to this poll, Oklahoma is fairly evenly divided on this issue, 48% pro-life to 47% pro-choice, with pro-life trending down and pro-choice trending up. But if any politician comes out in favor of a woman's right to determine what happens to her body, the fundamentalists immediately attack by labeling them baby killers.

This post is my effort to look at the fundies claims of "abortion is murder" and everything it implies.

Let's take the murder argument seriously. In Oklahoma, a staunchly law and order state, we execute murderers. Especially premeditated ones, where someone was paid to do the hit, doubly so if it involves innocent babies. Never before could anyone deny a more open and shut case. Receipts and cancelled checks are involved, as well as medical records.

Do the fundies advocate the death penalties for these murders? If not, why not?

Some laws, which deny women self-determination of their own bodies, include a rape and incest provision. Sounds reasonable, but is it? Are these politicians advocating the death of innocent babies only if the innocent babies are the victims of a crime?

If the fundamentalists are successful and the deed to a woman's womb is removed from her possession and handed over to the old white guy Talibangelical Crowd of Falwell, Dobson and Robertson, abortions will not stop. They will simply become "back alley" operations and women will die. Perhaps that is the price they should pay for committing the sin of sex.

The entire pro-life ideology breaks down when the facts are present. Pro-life, they are not; pro-coat hanger they are.

Oklahomans need to step up, and not allow zealotry of any kind to cloud their judgement. The outrages demonstrated by the publishing of cartoons of the prophet Muhammad prevented others from publishing them, thereby obeying the dictum's of Islam.

Moral outrage is fine, but imposing one groups morality on another, through legislation, diminishes us all. A woman's body belongs to her. Fundamentalist hysterectomy through legislative means is just plain wrong.


Anonymous said...

stomper you fail to see the err of your own arguement in light of recent scientific findings human life is distinguishable in the first couple of weeks of conception which invalidates the arguement used by the pro-choicers. the woman is not harming herself by terminating the pregnancy theirfor she is destroying a seperate life one completely defenseless and totally dependant upon her for survival which makes it even more discusting. by the way since libs like to keep death tally there have been more than 7 million killed since the war started in iraq, all of these were abortions im sure all the womens lives were at risk

Red Stater said...

THis is not the 1940's or 1950's where there were only a few forms of birth control available.

Babies are not an airborne virus:

You are arguing that today with several thousand methods of birth control including a morning after pill (All provided free of charge to women who cannot afford it) women can't figure out and prevent getting pregnant, so if we don't pay for a doctor to kill their baby, miliions of women will just use a coathanger in some alley?

Sorry, that 1950's argument doesn't hold water today.... but it is a nice scare tactic.

But that a society doesn't have a single question for a woman who decides after 4 or 5 months that she suddenly just doesn't want to be a mommy anymore and therefore wants to kill her unborn baby... is wrong.

Look if you support baby killing, just say so. But thats what it is.

So, You support baby killing because he/she is still inside the womb.... at least partially, and that makes it okay.

pathetic is what it is.

Oilfieldguy said...

so you are an advocate for the unborn child. How wonderful that the unborn has a voice in you!

If the mother chooses not to deliver, and terminate the pregnancy, is this murder? Do you advocate the death penalty for murder?

One so concerned as yourself to speak for the unborn must certainly advocate the death penalty for murder. If you do not stand firmly upon your beliefs of advocating the death penalty for such a heinous act, then you sir, are a hypocrite.

Oilfieldguy said...

red state,
You advocate a war on fucking. Dirty, amoral women who neglect birth control (she's the only one involved, right) should be forced to carry to birth.

And rape?

Some rapist breaks into her house and ties her husband up, forcing him to watch, and to increase the jollies of the rapist he slits the bound husbnds throat during culmination of the act, you would insist she have this baby?


Red Stater said...

You guys love to bring up rape as if it is the main reason a woman gets an abortion.
It isn't.

A woman gets an abortion because she (and the father) were
A: too lazy to spend .50cents for a condom
B: too lazy to use a condom they can get for FREE
C: too lazy to get FREE birth control pills (if they can't afford it)
D: too stupid to know what causes pregnancy
E: too lazy to go get a "morning after pill"for FREE (if she can't afford it)
E: for any other reason since no reason is required, and the abortion is free if she can't afford it.

Oilfield, in case you haven't figured it out yet, everyone is a hypocrit... including you.

The question isn't left or right, it's right or wrong.

Because there might be certain cases for abortion (like health of the mother) doesn't mean we should have open season on the unborn.

Liberals get outraged over a guy killing a puppy but applaud when a baby gets slaughtered by her mother for mere convenience.
Thats way beyond hypocricy.

Anonymous said...

what did i say that led you to think the death penalty would not apply? not only for the female but the individual performing the procedure whether in an alley or office.