Monday, 13 of February of 2012

Irregular Times Diaries: Unfit Discussion

In a time of the spring, old paths are obscured and new growth begins.

• About
• Ask for Help
• FAQ
• Posting a Diary
• Report Abusive Behavior
• Rules of the Road

Print

Where Are You, O Compliant and Fecund Conservative Christian Women?

A long time ago now, back in the summer of 2006, I wrote about the need for 425,000 mommies to put those poor little frozen blastocysts in their uteruses, adopt them and raise them as their own precious snowflake babies. I said I would hook people up with some of those cute blastocysts, if only they would leave a comment with their contact information. H-e-double-toothpicks, I’d just take your e-mail address! I said I was sure that all the good conservative Christian mommies with intact uteruses would be sure to offer their services. After all, we’re talking about saving a human life here! Those blastocysts are babies! And who wouldn’t save a baby???

It has been nearly a full year now. But nobody has volunteered.

Why? I hear all the time that these little snowflake blastocysts are just as much little human babies as a full-term baby. So where are the compliant and fecund conservative Christian women to save these little babies’ lives?

---

Date: May 27, 2007

Author:

Categories: Outrages, Perversion

Tags:

(588 votes, average: 3.83 out of 5)

 Loading ...

Leave a comment

Comments RSS TrackBack 7 comments

• 

  J. Smith

  in March 16th, 2008 @ 02:38

  Already knocked up?

  ---

• 

  Hippo

  in August 1st, 2008 @ 02:29

  Learning about Abstinence-only sex-ed?

  ---

• 

  Ralph

  in August 1st, 2008 @ 22:02

  Abstinence-only sex education.

  Is that like don’t-get-into-the-water-only swimming lessons?

  It’s an oxymoron!

  ---

• 

  Anonymousse

  in August 7th, 2008 @ 03:03

  It’s like no-mouth eating or no-oxygen breathing.

  ---

• 

  Ralph

  in August 7th, 2008 @ 20:41

  It’s like take-the-bus-only driver education.

  ---

• 

  Dota

  in October 12th, 2008 @ 10:23

  Lovely metaphors above. Isn’t this a matter of choice? It is the choice that you put your kids in an abstinence only sex-ed. It is also your choice to tell your kids condom=complete safety side of the coin. Everybody has one. Leave the other folks to theirs no matter how irrational it may seem in your world view and be on your merry way.

  ---

• 

  Ralph

  in October 16th, 2008 @ 17:48

  No. This is not a matter of choice.

  Nobody here is objecting to the freedom of churches to conduct their own anti-sex non-education programs in their church basements, where parents have the choice to put their kids or not put their kids. Even if it harms teenagers by rendering them helpless in the face of unplanned pregnancies and STDs–we value the First Amendment enough to let young people suffer, because within the walls of a church people attend voluntarily freedom of speech and religion should be absolute.

  However, a line is crossed when churches take an active role in blocking the teaching of potentially life-saving health information in public schools, where attendance is not a matter of choice.

  Your dichotomy between “abstinence-only sex ed” and “condom = complete safety” is a false one. I am unaware of any sex ed curriculum that teaches that condoms make sex “completely safe”; and if such a thing exists let us know and we will assuredly make fun of it here with every bit as much gusto as we mock the junk science and junk health education foisted on our public schools by religious fundamentalists. Condoms do significantly REDUCE the risk of pregnancy and many STDs, and this is a fact that teenagers should know. (Yes, I know the counter-argument: Teenagers are cognitively incapable of processing the semantic dichotomy between “reduced risk” and “completely safe”; it is specious.)

  ---

Irregular Times Diaries: Unfit Discussion uses WordPress as content manager.