?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Vasaris, the Fuzzy Dragon
vasaris
.:: ..::. .::..:...... .::

March 2014
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31

Vasaris, the Fuzzy Dragon [userpic]
There are no words

There are morons in Wisconsin who think that making contraceptives illegal is the way to go about making abortion illegal.

Apparently they don't get that given no other choice, women will use abortion as a form of contraception. It's pretty much a given. So... by making contraceptives illegal they will automatically boost the number of abortions in their state.

This. Is. Stupid.

I've ranted about pharmasists refusing to fill contraceptive prescriptions before -- it makes me incredibly angry. Many, many women take 'the pill' for medical reasons having nothing to do with the contraceptive aspect, that is merely a bonus.

But this simply doesn't matter, apparently. Everything must be done to protect a potential fetus, even when it isn't a fetus yet.

Dear Representative LeMahieu;

I can and do deny that 'life' begins with conception, because spermatozoa are 'alive' and eggs are 'alive' and the cells of my stomach lining are 'alive' too. Far as I'm concerned, if it can't survive outside of my body, it isn't alive. That's MY definition. Hell, Adam isn't alive until God gives him his first breath, so why should I consider a fetus unable to breathe alive by biblical definition? Is your semen so much more powerful than God that it can bestow the vigor of life before his does? How powerful that must make you and how disappointing that you are unable to rearrange reality to suit your deity-like power.

Bitch, please.

I am pro-Choice. I want you to understand exactly what this means.

I choose, as a matter of course, abstinence. Some choose, as a matter of course, contraception and possibly, in extremis abortion. And some choose, as a matter of course, to litter the landscape with their offspring. Me, I would never get in the way of a person's right to choose any of these outcomes. I think a woman has a right to choose any of them.

Note, these things are individual choices. The woman who chooses contraception does not, necessarily, walk around telling women who choose to become pregnant that they've got to down massive doses of contraceptives or abortificants to rid themselves of their children. They do not ask you to live by their standards of not currently having children. They do not force packets of pills into the hands of other women saying "You must take these because I said so, because I believe that no one should get pregnant, ever, for any reason whatsoever." Many, in fact, have either had children and do not wish to have more, or intend to have children when they actually can afford to do so, emotionally and financially. Indeed, many women take the pill for medical reasons that have nothing to do with their sexual activity or lack thereof.

All these women are asking of you is to understand that just as they don't force their belief that life doesn't begin at the moment of conception on you, that you not force your belief that it does on them. Grieve, if you must, for undifferentiated clumps of cells that bear as much resemblance to cancer as they do to anything else, when they fail to implant. Rack yourself with pain over failed ovulations that mean that a new Einstien, Pasteur, Machiavelli, Bundy, or Dahmer was not conceived... but don't force your religious convictions on other people.

I have the right to believe differently than you do. I have a right to act on those convictions, be they religious or secular. My rights are protected under the Constitution of my country, and I revere it as much as I do my own religious texts.

You don't have to like it. You do have to get over it.

Absolutely no love, and a lingering despair for your IQ,
Me

P. S. You do realize that by forcing more pregnancies you will also cause the abortion rate to skyrocket? As well as such lovely things like infanticide and child abuse for those who cannot bring themselves to abort? I hope that this allows you to sleep peacefully at night, with dreams filled with bleeding, viscera spouting cherubs.

sotto voce DUMBASS

Current Mood: irritatedirritated
Comments
WTF?

This is the same charming bastard who decided that making each state pay for its citizens to have a national ID card by the year 2010 at the latest would be a good thing. His punishment for anyone who refuses? Why, don't let them take any sort of public transportation at all if they don't have an ID card, of course! He attached the bill as a rider to needed disaster funds which passed, thus, making his stupid idiotic bill something that'll need to be discussed once the other idiots currently running this country figure out what he's done. Ironically, according to their religious texts, doing something like this would play into the idea of their mythos which says that all those who are persecuted will have refused the mark of the beast and not be allowed to buy or sell... yada yada yada... What a fucking ass!

Re: WTF?

I will admit to liking the idea of a national ID card (don't hit me) mostly because it would eliminate the irritation of IDing people from out of State when they buy cigarettes or alcohol. I do thing the whole national security thing is fucked up, though.

The man is definitely an asstarded fuckwit, though.

(Anonymous)

Yeah, but feminist say,"Don't force me to have a kid!" when nobody forced them to have sex. It's the "don't force me" line that bugs me.

Having sex != having to be pregnant

How novel. I think that's the first anonymous comment I've seen on my personal journal. *marks day in calendar, feeling vaguely surprised*

If I understand your point, it's that if a woman has sex she's accepting responsibility for becoming pregnant and bringing the child to term, whether or not she is in a position to care for the child.

There's something to be said for that, particularly if you take particularly stringent Judeo-Christian dogma which would, indeed, require that sex only happen with the intent to create children.

Not a scenario likely to win hearts and minds across the fair USA, you must admit. For some reason people like recreational sex.

In a perfect world, no child would be conceived unwanted, and thus no woman would be 'forced' to carry an unwanted child to term. As it is unlikely people are going to abstain from sex unless they desire children, the only reasonable alternative is effective contraception.

I think that you misuderstand what "Don't force me to have a kid!" means. For centuries women very often *did not* have a choice in childbearing. They were property that had to submit to the will of their husbands. In demanding the right to control our reproductive rights, women demanded that they not be treated as object or property without a say in their own lives and how their bodies were used. *shrugs*

I am a realist. When it comes down to it, abortions will happen. That being the case, I would rather it be done by a doctor than by a wire hanger.

People will try and find ways to have sex without creating babies, no matter what. I would far rather see contraception pushed -- for science to find a way to set people at "infertile" without assistance -- so that the decision to have a child rests on the two people desiring to make one.