The Mangling of Logic pt. 6
A word or two on abortion, rape, religion and the morning after pill. This one's a doozy.
The situation, in a nutshell, is this; Some men exist who are sub-human. Because they exist and because they act, and because their actions prove them to be of a different genus, there exists rape. A brutal form of torture. Sub-man rapes woman. Woman fears becoming pregnant, and as a man I can't realistically conceive of what kind of nightmare that would be. Luckily for her, society has deemed her to be of equal status to men and to be the master of her own body and a drug exists which would prevent her from becoming pregnant. A drug which levels close to horizontal the balance of power between men and women and would eliminate the need for a likely abortion in the near future - eliminating the possibility that weeks later, she would endure another violent physical assault undertaken voluntarily as a consequence of the first. Possibly even more humiliating, and the antithesis to any sort of healing.
So, upon hearing of this drug, the woman decides to use it. But when she asks her doctor for a prescription, he refuses on the grounds of ignorance and religious belief. He refuses, because his religion tells him that he would be murdering an unborn baby. That he would be murdering a potential life, one conceived in a frenzy of rage and torture and humiliation and terror. One whose mother did not want. His religion forces him to curse this woman, who has come to him in desperation as her only hope. He denies her her right of equality. He humiliates her, and really rapes her a second time. Not physically, although one could count a future abortion as that, but mentally. He tells her that god, acting through him and the rapist, are her masters. What she believes and what society has deemed to be so don't matter.
Should one conclude that god is pro-rape? Or anti-woman? Should we surmise that doctors are the chosen deliverers of god's will unto humanity and we are obliged to obey? Perhaps women are simply too feeble, unable to fend for themselves, and require male domination in the name of a masculine god?
Or should we conclude that the refusing doctor is a criminal, or at the very least a sociopath, not too far removed from the rapist himself, and should be treated as such? And also, should we not conclude that the idea of god is ridiculous, invented to soothe our fears of death, and leads humanity down a path of self-hatred and destruction?
You can think about it for a while.
The morning after pill is available in Canada without a prescription (because there is no need for one) to any woman who asks for it.
Thank Zeus. Wait...make that Venus.
The situation, in a nutshell, is this; Some men exist who are sub-human. Because they exist and because they act, and because their actions prove them to be of a different genus, there exists rape. A brutal form of torture. Sub-man rapes woman. Woman fears becoming pregnant, and as a man I can't realistically conceive of what kind of nightmare that would be. Luckily for her, society has deemed her to be of equal status to men and to be the master of her own body and a drug exists which would prevent her from becoming pregnant. A drug which levels close to horizontal the balance of power between men and women and would eliminate the need for a likely abortion in the near future - eliminating the possibility that weeks later, she would endure another violent physical assault undertaken voluntarily as a consequence of the first. Possibly even more humiliating, and the antithesis to any sort of healing.
So, upon hearing of this drug, the woman decides to use it. But when she asks her doctor for a prescription, he refuses on the grounds of ignorance and religious belief. He refuses, because his religion tells him that he would be murdering an unborn baby. That he would be murdering a potential life, one conceived in a frenzy of rage and torture and humiliation and terror. One whose mother did not want. His religion forces him to curse this woman, who has come to him in desperation as her only hope. He denies her her right of equality. He humiliates her, and really rapes her a second time. Not physically, although one could count a future abortion as that, but mentally. He tells her that god, acting through him and the rapist, are her masters. What she believes and what society has deemed to be so don't matter.
Should one conclude that god is pro-rape? Or anti-woman? Should we surmise that doctors are the chosen deliverers of god's will unto humanity and we are obliged to obey? Perhaps women are simply too feeble, unable to fend for themselves, and require male domination in the name of a masculine god?
Or should we conclude that the refusing doctor is a criminal, or at the very least a sociopath, not too far removed from the rapist himself, and should be treated as such? And also, should we not conclude that the idea of god is ridiculous, invented to soothe our fears of death, and leads humanity down a path of self-hatred and destruction?
You can think about it for a while.
The morning after pill is available in Canada without a prescription (because there is no need for one) to any woman who asks for it.
Thank Zeus. Wait...make that Venus.
Labels: abortion, birth control, Mangled Logic, rape, religion
This entry was posted
on August 29, 2006 at 3:38 PM.
You can skip to the end and leave a response.
» Post a Comment