It is my fervent belief that all the people who strive to control human sexual behavior in the name of God are demeaning the very God they claim to worship.
It is extremely difficult to follow the logic of the typical conservative’s conclusions about reproductive liberty. If I am ever going to get my own mind organized well-enough to refute the beliefs of people like Rick Santorum, I must reduce this presentation to the lowest comprehension level I can, and, against all the evidence to the contrary, pray the people who parrot Santorum’s prescriptions for female conduct are at least moderately capable of following along.
Santorum believes/says contraception is against God’s law
So does the Catholic Church, which is one of the reasons I am a baptized, confirmed and purposely non-practicing member. For the sake of fairness, let’s assume it is true that there is a God; that contrary to the scientists’ theories, God created everything and everybody, from the beginning of earthly time.
Paleontologists who discovered the headless skeleton of “Lucy” in Ethiopia estimated the age of her bones at around 3.2 million years. As far as I can tell, Ethiopia was and still is a part of Earth.
That means that:
- God’s humanoid creation was wandering around for millions of years before the Bible was written by human men.
- God’s creation included all the parts necessary to have sex, including the parts that registered pleasure in their brains, however primitive those brains might have been. The pleasure part was not a mistake made by God, but a major element of the reproductive process.
- Since reading and writing were invented by humans eons later in around 3200 B.C., God made no rules that prevented purely recreational sexual intercourse among his first creations.
Santorum, et. al. believe/preach that abortion is a sin against God and cites the Bible as the source of that knowledge; the same Bible mentioned above…the one written by God’s creation: human males. To them, every sperm that makes the long, hot swim to penetrate the surface of an ovum has an intrinsic right to proceed through the 9-month gestation and to produce a new human. That right, they claim, outweighs every right of either donor of the egg and sperm to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; including, in Santorum’s case anyway, the health of the mother and the eventual circumstances into which the fetus is delivered.
Again for the sake of argument, let’s say Santorum & Company are correct about that. And let’s pretend (I know, it will be a stretch) that every human in history, including today, honored that so-called right of the sperm and egg.
According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), 50 million pregnancies have been legally terminated since 1973, the year abortion was legal in every state. That, of course, does not include any illegal terminations that would likely drive that number up significantly.
That’s a lot of people-- a potential U.S. population more than 15% larger than it is currently. Not only that. Since these pregnancies would have otherwise been terminated if termination were an option, many or most of these potential people would have special medical, social and financial needs. Who would provide those resources?
Santorum, Gingrich, Romney and Paul think it shouldn’t be government. The burden for such resources must be placed on the parents and those parents should get jobs so they can provide them. What’s that you say? There are no jobs? These people who have children irresponsibly should have thought about that before they laid down and got themselves pregnant.
What’s that? What about rape? Well, the National Center for Biotechnology Information conducted a study about that. Here’s what they learned:
RESULTS:
The national rape-related pregnancy rate is 5.0% per rape among victims of reproductive age (aged 12 to 45); among adult women an estimated 32,101 pregnancies result from rape each year. Among 34 cases of rape-related pregnancy, the majority occurred among adolescents and resulted from assault by a known, often related perpetrator. Only 11.7% of these victims received immediate medical attention after the assault, and 47.1% received no medical attention related to the rape. A total 32.4% of these victims did not discover they were pregnant until they had already entered the second trimester; 32.2% opted to keep the infant whereas 50% underwent abortion and 5.9% placed the infant for adoption; an additional 11.8% had spontaneous abortion.
If any one of the Republican candidates for President defeats Barack Obama, there will likely be an immediate attempt to overturn Roe vs. Wade, making abortion illegal. That would mean that 17 of the 34 victims of rape who became pregnant would have been forced, by law, to have their babies.
Now imagine what life would be like for those 17 children.
The policies of the Catholic Church and the politicians who share a belief in its teachings against both birth control and abortion are behaving irresponsibly in a 2012 world that is over-populated and straining under the burden to its natural resources. Their religious arguments to the contrary are simple-minded and based entirely in myth. Are we really going to allow these people to aid and abet the imminent destruction of our country?
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Terry McKenna
Jacob Sugarman
Devi Hart
M.Stan Yow
Man Talk Now
Kim Gamble
Salon.com
Comments
r./
Thanks for a measured approach to exposing the wizard for the fake and opportunist that he is.
But I am sick of the voices of reason citing statistics and arguing with diplomatic ineffectiveness. It is time to show some strength and some armor.
Since the year 2000, the left and liberals have put out the most useless and weak rhetoric ever. We are more quick to attack our own than to attack the declared enemy.
What is wrong with people who find everything that they believe in clearly under attack, yet say things like "It's a little irritating"?
People like Rick Santorum can only be dealt with by exposing their own corruption and violations and showing them to the world. They live in glass houses and the glass needs to be broken. If he poses as a Christian, then he needs to be exposed as a liar who defaces the word of God.
Cite the excesses of past evil Christians and tie those excesses to what Santorum and his ilk are doing today.
Show that his behavior and ambitions are the problem. To stop him and his ilk requires getting personal and pointing out the wrong that comes from their personal dogma and belief sets.
Right now, where is Rick Santorum's plan for this nation? Where are his plans for jobs, the economy, international relations, wars, disease control and infrastructure repairs?
We need to start now and keep pounding and pounding on these nails, not talking about abortions and birth control.
If we do not take control of the dialogue, then the Rick Santorums of the world will tell us what to talk about and when to talk about it!
these idiots are a product of america's failure
at science education...
"every sperm that makes the long,
hot swim to penetrate the surface of an ovum
has an intrinsic right to proceed
through the 9-month gestation and to produce a new human."
false, i say. there are fifty five billion trillion of the little
things. why not let em all procreate/ ?
ha. absurd.
the sperm, a bit of genetical hopefulness,
that makes it, is just a fast swimmer.
that's all..
there are many nice ways to practice contraception
that dont involve these idiot sperms to get anywhere
near any egg.
(hush on that!)
outlaw sex. outlaw masturbation. ok. then you just gonna
get all out World War.
frustration, right?
Zuma: I feel like we are spinning out of control, undoing everything we fought so hard and long to achieve and powerless to fight it. Our leaders don’t represent us, not even a little bit. BTW, you never have to apologize for writing long comments…or short, ones either, for that matter.
James: I don’t know about you, but I had a solid science education, in spite of my “female aptitude.” What’s changed?
The "thought" behind the perverse views of the Church and Santorum are based on the notion of the biblical charge from God for men "to be fruitful and multiply". Leaving aside the rank paternalism of the OT, let us accept that God actually gave that charge 5,000 years or so ago. Does it still apply now that the earth's population exceeds 7 billion people?
Given the living hell men have made of a earth in the interim, under-population seem the least of God's worries at present. But if God has wisely changed his/her/its mind on the matter, how would we know? According to fundamentalists, God said all he/she/it cares to say about every matter 2,000 years ago. That seems more than a bit irresponsible to me -- irresponsible just like the Pope, Santorum and the rest of the Paternalists who keep trying to drag humankind every backward.
I hate to bring up a delicate subject, but there's the matter of masturbation. Surely that's for pleasure and not procreation -- tho I think God and the Church ought to make an exception for in vitro fertilization. I speak from very personal experience on that matter because that's how my son came into this world (sorry to let that "cat" out of the bag, so to speak, son).
I bring this up because I'd like someone to ask Righteous Rick if he ever masturbated or ever had sex with his wife during a time he knew she wasn't likely to be fertile. In short, Rick, have you ever enjoyed any form of sexual experience purely for pleasure?
I'd be curious as to his answer --"yes" renders him a first-class hypocrite and "no" renders him a first-class liar. I suspect he's both.
Re: masturbation. Didn't anybody every tell you would go blind at worst, or at least, grow hair on your palms? Auto-eroticism is also against the teachings of the Church, at least it was where I went to school.
I said this the other day on somebody's post -- it is just a matter of time before St. Dick..er.. I mean Rick will be next in line for election season castration. He has done something unsavory somewhere. I'll bet on another woman.
I think often of my mother, who "officially" would hardly ever (I wouldn't say never, she wasn't a fool) took issue with the church on any issue, but never took seriously what they had to say about matters she deemed "private.," and that certainly meant contraception, abortion, marriage, divorce, and the "right" to die when one thinks it is their time.
But again, this is how change usually happens--one consciousness at a time with the mass slowly catching up as "conditions" dictate it. Most have no "intellectual" interests, but when it comes to having another child, for instance, when they know damn well they can't care properly for the ones they have it isn't an "intellectual" matter, it's moral and their own morality is what matters to them.
There, Righteous Rick, I've publicly confessed my sins. Now - - how about you coming clean -- so to speak -- regarding your acquaintance with the notorious Miss Rosie Palm?
Dennis: Everybody's daughters need to be very afraid and start howling like wolves. Thank you for your comment.
The problem is much bigger than these f**k-nut right wing candidates. There are Americans who live among us that BELIEVE this s**t. I try not to think about them because I feel so helpless. It is as if they are staging the End of Day. Excellent post, Lezlie. R
❤.•*`*•(¯`••´¯)
(¯`••´¯)°•.¸.•°❤•(¯`´¯)
.°•.¸.•°❤ PEACE ❤°•.¸.•° •.¸¸.•*`*•❤
Thoth: As far as I’m concerned, the Vatican is just another governmental seat with the same secret motives and political aspirations as any other government. The reality of the human condition is of no concern to them, which is decidedly un-Christian in my book.
Algis: Thanks!
Scanner: I know. I’m writing these things hoping to influence the fence-sitters, those independents who actually THINK about what they are doing at the polls. If nothing else, I can say I have tried.
Alysa: Thanks, dear. It worries me that so many people think these idiots cannot be elected. Didn’t many of us think the same way in the 2010 Congressional elections? Look what happened.
A prohibition on abortions, let alone birth control, is not the inevitable result of even a literal following of the Old Testament (to use the Christian term). Orthodox Judaism (which is absolutely literalist) does not hold that legal human life begins at conception, and the one thing I can promise you is that such a conclusion doesn't come from not looking closely enough.
Catholism doesn't actually prohibit sex for purposes other than reproduction. If that were true, sex wouldn't be permitted for people who knew they were sterile. Catholicism also approves the notoriously ineffective rhythm method as a strategem for "family planning." That in itself says the prohibition against birth control isn't absolute. There's a further question: If we know that abortions are a result of unwanted pregnancies and we consider abortion to be homicide, shouldn't measures that prevent unwanted pregnancies be encouraged for preempting homicides?
Sometimes it's better to throw a dilemma at someone than to simply attack them. Attacking them just makes them close ranks. Closing ranks is exactly what you don't want.
In the case of reproductive oppression, I am appealing, not to those for whom all arguments fall upon deaf ears, but rather for those who are truly on the fence about the matter and are truly among those we call independents. I am appealing to THINKERS rather than to FOLLOWERS of religious dogma.
Christians, by definition are generally most concerned about the New Testament and the teachings of Christ, I think. But I don't think they make a distinction when making references to the Bible in general.
I have been away from the Catholic Church and its interpretations for a long time, but I do know many devout Catholics who believe the only non-sinful kind of sex is that which is for the purpose of procreation. The sanctioned Rhythm Method you mention is actually nothing but selective abstinence -- no sexual act is involved, so no sin is committed. It is the interruption of conception by any means other than complete abstinence, including coitus interruptus, that is considered sinful.
Sex between MARRIED adults who are past reproductive ages is tolerated because the barrier to conception is natural. Sex between unmarried people of any age is technically fornication, a sin.
Here is a website I consulted: http://www.catholic.com/tracts/birth-control
It's beyond me to even understand what business the church and politics have in people's bedrooms and private lives.
Excellent post, Lezlie.
R♥
It's interesting to me, because Santorum got his surge as being more authentic than Romney, but his authenticity basically means people think he might actually mean what he says and that is a big minus when it comes to electability in November.
Romney may be the perfect candidate because there's a general perception that he doesn't mean a lot of what he says.