Hi friends. I am sick. It sucks.
We are getting lots of new volunteers, which is awesome. It seems like every week another escort is starting. Kudos to my existing volunteers for their recruiting skills.
Of course, the other side is no slacker when it comes to recruiting - there was a new protester out this week, a middle-aged woman with a sign ("How much does abortion cost? One life") and an attitude. I caught a glimpse of Peter Ryan out there too. I guess the Life Chain was this past weekend (was it? I haven't seen any media) but I didn't catch it, as I had a JAM PACKED Saturday (for real, I bought a hat).
I was at one of the candidates' debates last night, which is always fun. As always, the best (worst?) part is questions from the floor. I have to tell you about this one amazing dude who asked a question. Fair warning, I'm paraphrasing (I don't remember exactly what was said), so amazing dude, if you feel misrepresented, let me know.
Question dude: My name is [something something] and I live in Fredericton. First of all, can I ask a question with an "a" part and a "b" part?
Moderator: Well, we have a lot of people, and limited time...
QD: Other people have done it!
[at this point everyone could already tell he was a beligerent asshole]
Moderator: Sir, there are a lot of other people with questions -
QD: Look, [self-important puffery]
Mod: Ok, ok, if it's succinct. No preamble.
QD: Ok. [Proceeds to give a lengthy preamble, the gist of which was that the candidates were to represent themselves in their answers, and not the party or the party leader.] Part "A" - if your party was in power, and you found your party supported a policy that allowed the torture of Canadian citizens, would you go against party lines to oppose that policy?
[Pause while everyone waits for the part "b", which is not forthcoming]
Mary Lou Babineau: I need to hear the second part.
QD: Well, just answer that part first.
[general outcry and rolling of eyes]
Mod: Sir, you're obviously trying to set them up. Give them the second part.
QD: Fine, you asked for it. Part "b" - describe what you think happens during an abortion procedure.
Brilliant, right? Hahaha. At this point there was some booing from the audience, and some guy yelled out "it's a closed issue, jerk!". I probably would have booed or yelled myself, except that I was sitting there with my jaw on the floor. I mean, really! I just love how these people make themselves look crazy so we don't have to.
Mary Lou opted to answer the question, and stated that she was pro-choice, the Green party is pro-choice, and that she would "fight tooth and nail to defend that right". The Canadian Action Party candidate said about the same thing, and the Liberal and Conservative candidates both stated simply that they would not reopen the debate. Jesse Travis from the NDP said he was pro-choice, but went on a little side rant about the Christian community (he's Baptist) needing to provide better choices.
Afterwards the question dude was still up there, and said that his question had not been answered. You could tell the moderator wanted to throttle him, but instead asked him to sit down. The whole thing was fantastic. I hope that dude is at the Thursday debate.
Sounds fun. Wish I was there to enjoy.
why is it that you seldom find normal women on the pro-choice front lines.
"Normal" = "not pro-choice"?
Normal Women = A Women who is happy being a Women and not despising every she's not. A Man.A Women who loves life, and is more than happy to bring new life into the world regardless of the circumstances.A Women who truly loves children and would never do anything to harm them especially their own.A women who doesn't spend her life trying to brow beat the rest of the world into believing in the Radical Feminist agenda.A Women who is happy to be a mother.You know a normal women,Pro-life,Pro family,Pro children,Pro-Motherhood,Pro-Community,Pro-Love not Pro-Sex(and I'll screw anybody I want and nobody's going to tell me different).Pro-Marriage,Pro-Man Pro-Religion,just about any Pro you can think of except PRO-DEATH!
Well, let me see. I am pro-life (though probably not in the sense that you understand it), pro-family, pro-motherhood, pro-child, pro-community, pro-love AND pro-sex, I'm not pro-marriage but I am pro-the choice to get married if that's what you want, pro-man and pro-religious freedom. So I guess maybe I do fit your definition of "normal"?
However, if "normal" means having babies just because I'm a woman, not because I want them, or if it means denying other women the choice to reproduce or not, then I'm abnormal, and proud of it.
Oh and I don't know how one can be pro- or anti-death. Death is a part of life. Accept it.
'anonymous' You're pro-crazy! Also, spaces belong after periods, and commas.
-Thank you the grammar police.
Anonymous has the same writing style as Ear Piece Charlie. Could they be the same person?
Apparently not wanting to be a baby machine makes a woman abnormal.
"Pro-crazy" just made me burst out laughing. Well played.
Oh I love those pro-silly people...
Oh and I don't know how one can pro-or anti-death.Death is a part of life .Accept it.
I do accept death but only when it comes naturaly.Not when it's forced on the weak by the strong
"However, if "normal" means having babies just because I'm a woman, not because I want them, or if it means denying other women the choice to reproduce or not, then I'm abnormal, and proud of it"
who said you have to have babies just because your a woman? abstain from sex if your not open to the natural consequence of sex. The natural consequence of sexual relations is the possibility of creating a human life. If you are not ready for motherhood, then don't involve yourself in an act that possibly creates life an is its natural end. That solves your dilemma before you have to make the "choice" to let your unborn child live or die.
Logic fail! Consent to sex does not equal consent to pregnancy. I can have sex if I want, thanks, and it doesn't mean I have to be a mother...EVER. That's called bodily autonomy.
"Logic fail! Consent to sex does not equal consent to pregnancy."
Logic doesn't fail! The possibility of pregnancy is the natural end of the sex act. Natural law dictates this and is not a creation of my imagination. The natural consequence of sex is the possibility of creating a new life. Go and have sex in a natural fashion multiple times and you'll probably see this if you need further proof. So, if the natural consequence of consenting to sexual relations is possible pregnancy, then my logic stands that consent to sex is consent to pregnancy.
If you consent to driving a car, you do not consent to getting in an accident and dying. If I consent to sex, it DOES NOT MEAN I am consenting to pregnancy, STDs, etc. etc.
If someone comes into the doctor with an STD, should the doc refuse treatment because that person consented to sex? See the parallel with abortion?
Post a Comment