Excerpts from book The Fear of Being Challenged
Back during the presidential debates of 2008, the question over where life begins was posed to both of the candidates, Barack Obama felt that it was beyond his pay grade to make such a decision, while John McCain said exactly what his party wanted him to say, not because it was factual, but because it was an easy, pandering fix; a band-aid on a much larger problem. McCain simply fell in line with the universal, conservative ideology that believes life begins at the moment of conception. So, what is the answer? Does anyone actually know, and can anyone ever figure it out?
You can always see loons on television professing their unshakable belief in life at conception. Some even claim their support for this issue is so strong that they would die or kill for it, but that still does not mean that they are correct on the issue. It just means that they are dangerous fanatics! I find the suggestion that a willingness to die or kill for a cause can somehow make one’s stand on that cause more credible to be foolish and arrogantly shortsighted.
If you have ever found yourself searching for a good reason to continue your support of the Separation of Church and State argument, look no further than the Jonestown-like dynamics of Mississippi’s Initiative 26 proposal, better known as the ‘personhood amendment,’ that was thankfully voted down in Mississippi’s most recent election. If it had passed, it would have granted full rights of personhood to a fertilized egg starting at the moment of fertilization. Now it is virtually impossible to know the exact moment where life actually begins, and the only realistic way for a woman to find out if her egg has even been fertilized is after-the-fact, which would render any further actions taken by a woman to terminate the progression of the fertilized egg a homicide in the great state of Mississippi based on the personhood agenda.
This is precisely what progressives consider to be the Jekyll and Hyde phenomenon of the conservative ideology. The Jekyll side of conservatism is totally obsessed with boot-licking the top 1% and trying to eliminate the footing of the federal government through the heavy debt factor, while the Hyde version of conservatism spends the bulk of its time trying to discredit the Separation of Church and State and trying to overturn Roe vs. Wade in hopes of making all abortions illegal in the United States.
So basically, Hyde will usher in the new, pro-life children, only to have Jekyll lobbying to cut the very programs that the new children will inevitably need assistance from. So hopefully all of the new, pro-life children will be able to one day hear this message about their future, because there is a Black, pizza mogul impersonating a minority Scrooge who has a sobering message for them when many of them find themselves unemployed and on the outside of the top 1% looking in and looking up. And that message is, blame yourselves! Now with frosty, conservative rhetoric like that, the pro-life kids might be better off staying in the womb where they’d still be eligible for conservative support!
The crusade to end abortions in this country has been a permanent fixture on the conservative map for eons, and since the religious zealots and the conservative wankers have been unsuccessful in their theological attempts to scale the heights of Roe vs. Wade to overturn it at the federal level, a couple of good, old boys from the Deputy Dawg convention probably got together with a few Tea Baggers and brainstormed until they came up with the bright idea of a backdoor policy to try and repeal Roe vs. Wade through the all-important state’s rights platform that the Rick Perry’s, the Ron Paul’s, and the Michele Bachmann’s continuously clamor for, as is the case with Mississippi’s failed personhood initiative.
Would you like to know why so many conservatives and religious zealots are so bitter towards the power of the federal government? Well, the mere fact that Roe vs. Wade is still standing the test of time as the law of the land should make the answer to that question crystal clear. The federal government often finds itself playing the role of cock blocker/penis blocker to the right wing erection that is almost always pointed directly at the rear entry point of American freedom and American equality, especially when it comes to the undeclared War on Women. And if that doesn’t work, the conservative and religious brands will simply try to attain entry through the legislative backdoor through measures like Initiative 26/the personhood amendment. It’s like the old saying goes about backdoor loving—it’s a lot sloppier and a little nastier, but the satisfaction is just as good, especially when the raped means are used to justify the orgasmic ends!
The Bottom line to all of this is easy, because no matter how one chooses to look at the personhood amendment, from rational eyes it was an all-around, bad piece of legislation that was far more about enforcing a sectional agenda than it was ever about saving the babies, and luckily cooler heads prevailed in Mississippi. After all, the enormous grey area revolving around the ever elusive moment of conception argument is a lot harder to pin down than it often appears to be.
For example, let’s say that the personhood amendment was passed in Mississippi or some other state giving a fertilized egg the rights of a person. That would mean that instead of being born on a date like October 3rd my actual birthdate would be approximately somewhere near the end of January or possibly the beginning of February; making me about nine months older. And in certain cases, it would also change some people’s birth year as well.
And furthermore, what happens when other states follow Mississippi’s lead by passing their version of the personhood amendment? Who would be in charge of having to sort out that philosophical circus—the evil empire known to conservatives as big government? The idea of having a personhood state over here and a non-personhood state over there is dysfunctionalism personified. It’s so stupid that a caveman wouldn’t even do it!
Now if a personhood state tried to weasel its way around all of this by only acknowledging the traditional, outside-of-the-womb birthday for the fertilized egg, that would also represent a dead end, because it would defeat the sole purpose of giving the fertilized egg personhood to begin with. You can’t give a fertilized egg the complete access to personhood on fertilization day and then do an about-face and deny that same egg personhood by forcing it to wait nine more months for a birthday to be recognized with a birth certificate. You can either recognize life in the womb, or you can recognize life out of the womb, but you can’t dilly-dally around the edges trying to do both for the sake of your poorly thought out agenda.
Nevertheless, by the personhood standards, in some states you might be nine months older, and in other states you would actually be your normally accepted birth age, which would be the equivalent of the old, Confederate money vs. U.S. currency issues of the Civil War era, where Confederate currency was only good in areas or states that were willing to accept the currency of the Confederacy, which only added to the uncertainty. When Abraham Lincoln said: “A house divided against itself cannot stand,” he was right on. He knew it, and the Founding Fathers also knew it, and this is why we have a federal government. Because without it, this entire scenario would be just like ‘The Old Woman Who Lived in an American Shoe,’ who had too many states in charge and none of them knew exactly what to do!
There is a good reason why a house divided will not stand, and that reason is the need for the consistency and stability of uniformity, which can only be guided along by a lead dog, and that lead dog is the federal government. One day, maybe all of these so-called patriots of the right wing will accept the Founding Father’s structural ideology instead of the modernized, conservative handling of that ideology put forth by them.
This is why we don’t need multiple currencies or multiple definitions of personhood in America. Some things are just too important to be allowed to fluctuate based on what’s realistically rational versus what’s theologically rational. A person in one state has to be recognized as that same person in every other state. That’s simply not debatable, unless you’re pro-life, pro-agenda, or just plain pro-stupid!