The Website home of Karl Bullock

Ten Most Recent Posts Article Page Other Content

Artificial Intelligence - What Could Go Wrong?

The Case For Thursday


Bible Inferences

Conspiracy Is Natural

There's a War Coming!

73, K5YPV

Climate Change Liars Hall Of Fame

Necessary Evil

Daylight Savings Time

Mississippi's Proposition 26

September 24, 2011

Well, the war heats up. This November, Mississippi will become the first state in the nation to bring to a vote an amendment to our State Constitution which will define "personhood" as beginning at the moment of fertilization. It's only 21 words, but it's bringing out the wolves who savagely defend their gold mine of death - abortion. Here's the actual language for the proposed amendment:

"The term 'person' or 'persons' shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning, or the functional equivalent thereof."

That's it. Yet, the ACLU and Planned Parenthood through their shadow organization mis-named "Mississippians for Healthy Families" are waging multiple attacks, including the false assertion that this would end birth control and in-vitro fertilization, all in their effort to keep the money flowing at the expense of the innocent.

Other arguments include those concerning rape, incest, and life of the mother, including one that brings up a hypothetical about an expectant mother who's told by her physician that carrying a child full term 'might' result in 'potential' death. These are real issues and cause many concern, until you look at them in the proper light, at which time the answers are much easier, though the problems themselves are still hard. So, let's look at each of these.

First, life of the mother. This is a non-argument. Physicians have never been held accountable for the horrible decision they and a family must make in the extremely rare case where either the mother or the child is going to die, and a choice must be made. This is a medical decision, and is done in other areas all the time. Ever hear of "triage"? So, this argument is just made to confuse the issue, and can be completely discounted. When the choice is between the life of the mother or the life of the child, the family and the physician make a medically-necessary decision. That's it.

Rape and Incest. Look, actions/events have consequences, and you cannot legislate away some consequences. Currently, we just execute the only innocent person in the whole transaction, and the one with no ability to defend himself/herself. Since I find no amendments to the 6th Commandment, executing the child is the savage (literally) taking of an innocent life, and it's up to us to speak for that life when nobody else will. Another thing. While the event and its effects may last a lifetime, a resulting offspring is still the child of his/her mother, and you cannot sever that relationship. The arguments to be made, and one that many have testified to, is that the termination of that child's life adds even more trauma to an already tragic situation. The "quick fix" turns into a lifetime regret. So much for playing God. And remember, adoption is always a viable option, and many organization will arrange this for a new mother.

The so-called "morning after" pill. I'm amazed at the number of people who just a few years ago shook their heads at such a development are now using this as an argument against Prop 26. If this is their only argument, it's a weak one at best. While law resulting from the amendment would most likely relegate this method to the dust bin of history (as well it should be), it is important to remember that the use of the "morning after" pill is used in 99.9% of the time as a birth control for prevention of pregnancy due to consensual sex, not something as noble-sounding as pregnancy resulting from rape or incest.

Finally, it you were to concede all of the above issues (which I don't), you're looking at preserving execution-for-convenience in 99% of the cases for the possible 1% that fall into these categories. Is it more humane to execute 1,000,000 to make the lives of 10,000 more convenient? In all other areas of life, we opt for exactly the opposite. Why is this case different? Money and sex - that's it!

Many who call themselves pro-life have been duped into these arguments without thinking them through. I'm sorry, but if you fall for these arguments and oppose Proposition 26, you are the opposite of pro-life. You've just been duped into being pro-death. Is that what you really wanted?

Hard problems many times require hard, but simple, answers. Choose life. You will never regret that choice.



Blog Archives


Ham Radio

U.S. Debt Clock

Website content © 2023 Karl Bullock. All Rights reserved.