Friday, September 02, 2011

Of Abortion, and Women as the Ultimate Source of Evil

As I've said here many times before, no one that I know writing today is making the kinds of profound connections that Arthur Silber makes, year after year: drawing out the deeper implications of the operations of power on every level of our lives, from the global scope of high politics to the still, dark night of the individual psyche.- Chris Floyd

In terms of the political theory involved, the basic question is a stark and simple one: if you cannot control your own body, what other rights can you possibly have? If your body is not yours, what does it matter if you can freely express your political and religious convictions? The principle involved is similarly simple: as long as you are not violating anyone else's rights, your right to control your own body is absolute. Period. Arthur Silber

Of Abortion, and Women as the Ultimate Source of Evil
by Arthur Silber
August 09, 2007

There are a great many aspects of today's world that are variously horrifying, ghastly, destructive and appalling -- and among the very worst is an idea that appears to be rapidly gaining support: the noxious notion that all questions relating to abortion rights should be returned to the states. For many reasons, only a few of which are discussed below, this idea is completely incoherent as a matter of political theory, and it undercuts any defense of individual rights on the most fundamental level. If you give a damn at all about the liberty of a single human being, you should oppose all such attempts to your last breath.

The human being to which I refer is not the developing fetus, but the woman who carries the child. I well understand that many people believe that the fetus is a human being long before birth, with all the rights that attend to that designation. In the political context, I consider all such beliefs irrelevant, no matter how sincerely and deeply held. Only one ultimate point matters here: whether you think the developing fetus is a human being or not, the fetus is contained in and supported by the woman's body. If the woman's body did not exist, neither would the fetus. Only the woman's existence makes that of the fetus possible.

The fetus only exists because of the woman's body -- not yours, not that of some possibly corrupt and stupid politician in Washington, and not the body of some possibly ignorant and venal politician in a state legislature. As I have watched this debate develop, and as I have considered with astonishment the increasingly byzantine efforts to " draw lines" about the point of viability, the time at which a full set of rights attaches to the fetus, and all the rest, I have become increasingly convinced that the right of the woman to control her own body when she is pregnant must be absolute up to the point of birth. All the attempts to craft legislation circumscribing that right prior to birth quickly become enmeshed in what are finally subjective claims that can be disputed into eternity, and impossible of proof in one direction or another.

Certainly, the woman's right to an abortion must be absolute in the first and second trimesters of pregnancy. And even in the third trimester, up to the time of birth, that right must be absolute, and the decision must be that of the woman in consultation with those medical personnel she chooses. Yes, a decision to abort late in pregnancy may be agonizingly difficult, just as it may be at an earlier time -- but whatever agony is involved is that of the woman, not a politician or bureaucrat who is unjustly empowered to make decisions that affect someone else on the most profound level. The responsibility and the consequences are the woman's, and no one else's. The choice is also hers, and no one else's.

In terms of the political theory involved, the basic question is a stark and simple one: if you cannot control your own body, what other rights can you possibly have? If your body is not yours, what does it matter if you can freely express your political and religious convictions? The principle involved is similarly simple: as long as you are not violating anyone else's rights, your right to control your own body is absolute. Period. For the reason indicated above, the fetus is not a person in the same sense the mother is: the fetus would not exist but for the woman who carries it. The woman's right to her own body must, in fact and in logic, take precedence over whatever rights you believe the fetus possesses, up to the time of birth.

I must note that the same principle makes any kind of military draft or mandatory national service equally invalid, and equally destructive of individual rights. If the government can take control of your body for two or four years, and possibly even send you to your death, what does it matter if you have the right of free speech, or any other right? Liberals in particular ought to note that the argument is the same with regard to abortion and in connection with a draft or national service. If they want to engage in blatant contradictions, and support abortion rights and simultaneously advocate a draft or national service, they surrender any claim to intellectual coherence and consistency, and they will get precisely what they deserve. Tragically, many women and many other citizens will also suffer the consequences. more


Anonymous said...

Arthur Silber's article is the model of feminism, but since I'm under a delusion that I don't do Isms I call it common sense. M

Anonymous said...

Himself said...

They're all the same Maren, if they had half the preoccupation for the welfare of kids once they are out of the womb, as they do for the ''pre-born person,'' I might understand it a bit more.

They're all the same and they're all batshit.

But for the really batshit, try South Carolina and their "Foetus for Jesus" monument.

And they won't be happy until a state like this exists.

And all this from a nation that has murdered millions around the world. And continues to do so.

Anonymous said...

Himself said...

Interesting thank you.

But in all such cases what can we thank?

Religion and a male dominated society.

Anonymous said...

Human greed perhaps?

Himself said...

Inadequacy might be nearer the mark.

Anonymous said...

Yes, inadequacy is nearer the mark. I also need to do more homework, however ... x

Anonymous said...

Where's an iceberg when you need one?

Posted by Dawnia, Catholic woman

Himself said...

Mornin' m'darlin'

Just had a wander round the site.

I don't think I have ever seen so much ignorance, superstition and bitterness all in the one place.

These people are insane, just as my man is.

John Constitution
@JnConstitution follows you

Lord Jesus, I pray, make me transparent so that when people look at me, they see only You! #TeamJesus #UnashamedImpact #OneBigChurch

In my Master's presence ·

Anonymous said...

When medical science advances enough to make a 22-week foetus genuinely viable, it may make sense to lower the abortion limit. Until then, it’s not for Maria Miller to decide whether individual women will suffer more from having an abortion or from giving birth. If very modern feminism means anything, it is that ministers should trust women to take decisions for themselves.

Well said Mary Ann Sieghart.

Himself said...

I re-upped the Mosley post by the way.

Chilling Effects is in fact Blogger, and the search facility is there in order to find out why a blogger, me, has received a take-down notice

Anonymous said...

I originally came to the Lord in 1980 at a time in my life when I was addicted to drugs and alcohol and fast living, and was so depressed at the meaningless life I was living that I really didn't care if I lived or died.

When someone offered the opportunity to let Jesus into my life and let Him take over the life I'd messed up so badly, I jumped at the chance.

Now, Jesus is truly Lord of my life and I am doing my best to live for Him in all aspects of my life.

John Dulleck

In my opinion, it’s believing in something in order to survive. Nothing human is foreign to us. Too bad so many immoral people take advantage of these Jesus followers, the ignorants.

Failure of society?

Maybe there’s a meaningful task for atheists. Unfortunately, many, mainly American, atheists are still in the processing phase and reading various tweets I wonder if they ever get out of that situation.

One can only hope. M

Anonymous said...

At least there is some doubt, that’s to his credit in a certain way. He's not an asshole, just a hopeless case. The ability to be an atheist, is also a kind of luxury. Only my opinion of course darling. Mx

Himself said...

He's not an asshole, just a hopeless case.

Which in fact is why I'm polite to him. (Although I don't always feel that way}

Yes it is a luxury, not to be carting all that guilt and stuff and nonsense around with you.

Did you see my stunning use of your abortion boat link? Da da!

Although must be said, I didn't see his tweet. I was snoozing.

Taking Mama out tomorrow for the day, so I won't be around.

Are you on your travels again?

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your stunning use of the abortion link. Information is essential, but not always interesting/sensational enough I think. It’s difficult to give information in an engaging way, however I know one talented Englishman.

Yes, I’m on my travels again, it’s getting out of hand. Tomorrow I’ll put the situation into perspective.

Never knew a computer could be so intriguing, says she who dislikes computer or video games or whatever it is called.

I hope you have a wonderful day tomorrow. M

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

#IAmAnAtheistBecause myths are for kids. #atheism #religion #god

Can you get any dumber?

Himself said...

In a word, no.

They're just as bad as the jesoids, one monotonous tweet after the other.

I've unfollowed quite a few atheists for that reason, they're a bit like Pamela in that respect, every third tweet in my timeline is some wanker telling the world he/she is an atheist.

I only need informing once, not three hundred times a day.

Low IQ I guess.

I've been putting up my new lights and sorting out in general.

What next, a fertility festival?

They're a funny lot; the Japanese.

Himself said...

Gothic Club on Ardins …

I didn't bother translating it.

Anonymous said...

Low IQ or "It's all about me." in a nutshell:

One American woman, reviewing a photo of her friends posing with penis-candy-sucking Japanese, said, Oh my God. This one is so going on Facebook.

A giant tourist attraction anyway.

Anonymous said...

panem et circenses
And nobody says a word.
haha, said the clown

Anonymous said...

Connecting the dots.

( As can be seen in this google search. ) and more results from Only In America

Anonymous said...

Bread and Circuses

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

The case of the young girl, known only as Belén, has put a new spotlight on the issue and a new pressure to make a prompt change. News broke last Friday that the girl, only 11-years-old, the victim of repeated rape from her mother’s boyfriend, is 14-weeks-pregnant.

At the time her mother defended the man, who has admitted to the abuse, saying the relationship between him and her daughter was consensual. Under Chilean law no minor under the age of 14 can consent.

Belén’s grandmother came to the child’s defence, saying the mother needs to “open her eyes” to what has happened.

"her mother defended the man"