I’m sure my philosophical opposites think I’m a “nutter,” to borrow the British phrase, with my loony-tunes insistence on the sacredness of human life.
But, I hope they can be kind enough to recognize that there is some logic to my position. To wit, if one holds that human life begins at conception and is worthy of legal protection from that moment to natural death, then naturally one cannot be for abortion, euthanasia, or any usurpation of the parents’ rights to protect and uphold their children’s lives.
But for the life of me I can’t figure out the logic of my opponents sometimes.
The NY Times, that paragon of journalistic objectivity (clear throat), recently celebrated the Irish vote to remove the constitutional ban on abortion and said that doing so swept “aside generations of conservative patriarchy.” Hmm.
Do they not realize that the prime beneficiaries of abortion are MEN, not women? After all, not only does abortion allow for unbridled promiscuity, but it removes from men the responsibility to use birth control or even ask about it at that romantic moment when they use a woman for their own sexual satisfaction.
It is a well-documented fact that many abortions are done under the (sometimes abusive) duress of the male partner who uses abortion as a way to ensure they have no legal responsibility for their offspring, the woman’s well-being be damned.
And from a strictly monetary standpoint, men benefit from abortion in so far as 57 percent of abortion doctors are men.
That all sounds rather “patriarchal” to me.
However, if one of the principles of a patriarchal culture is that it protects the life of the unborn, I’d have to say #patriarchalandproud!
Peachtree City, Ga.