This is Not a Difficult Concept!

[sheshe2]

“Life begins at conception”: Reducing complex reality to a slogan actually minimizes the personhood of women

[url=http://postimage.org/][img][/img][/url]
[url=http://postimage.org/]image hosting sites[/url]

In the end, when you hear the phrase “life begins at conception,” remember the implications. In debating the “personhood” of eggs, embryos, and fetuses prior to viability, we are also implicitly and explicity debating the personhood of women. Because if you have no choice and control over your body, you are less than an actual person in the eyes of the law. If the right is so worried about abortion the closer a pregnancy gets to viability, then anti-choicers would be making sure both contraception and early, safe abortion were widely available. That really is not their actual concern.

The development of a potential human life requires conception as a first step. But that is not the same as either pregnancy or personhood. You can’t reduce complex reality to a slogan, and when you try to do so, you actually minimize the personhood of women.
http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2012/11/25/life-begins-at-conception-reducing-complex-reality-to-a-slogan-actually-minimizes-the-personhood-of-women/

[niyad]

1. excellent post. the reality is that every anti-choice argument has, at its heart, a deep and

profound hatred for women, not just debating their personhood.

[sheshe2]

7. Thank You

Excellent signature line you have! Fitting.

[vlyons]

31. women are only vessels for male "seed"

Until modern science gave us genetic theory, humans believed for thousands of years that women were just vessels, going back to the days when people did not understand the actual "mechanics" of human sexuality. Oh, people knew that sex intercourse was how babies were made, but they had no understanding that sperm determined the sex of children and that the number of available eggs determined whether a woman carried only one child or twins, triplets.

The church even taught that women were inherently evil, lustful, sinful and merely vessels for men's progeny. Women were blamed for bearing girls, rather than boys. Women were shut away, "protected" because men thought that was the only way to be certain that they were the biologic fathers. Patrimony is all about power and accumulating wealth.

We will never have a better world until women are respected and our status raised educationally, economically, and politically.

[patrice]

2. Oh! I do like your first sentence very much!! It shows how "Pro-Lifers" DON'T respect life.

They reduce the life of the mother to their artificial abstraction, because they do not respect individual women's lives, ONLY fetuses.

To me, that lack of respect, proves that they are not Pro-Life at all. The lack of respect for life, including the real lives of real women, is PRO-DEATH.

[sheshe2]

14. As witnessed in the death of the young mother

in Ireland last week!

I am sure you read that one here.Tried to find the link.

Found it!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/14/ireland-woman-dies-after-abortion-refusal

[sheshe2]

26. Thanks however I am not the author of it....

it was the headline of the article...

[WillyT]

3. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

[patrice]

4. "That reality is not their actual concern." Their concern is power; this means that they're fascists

[sheshe2]

6. +1000

You are correct, Patrice!

It is definitely about Power!

[freshwest]

15. +1,000 to what you said.

Last edited Mon Nov 26, 2012, 02:56 AM - Edit history (1)

And those who go along with it need to face what they are doing to others, that, truth to be told, they don't give a flying flip about and will never meet.

It is the height of arrogance for them to indulge themselves with the frivolous luxury of ordering the lives of others they will never comprehend nor be responsible for.

[sheshe2]

17. How about "Personhood" rights for Sperm!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/02/wilmington-city-council-sperm-egg-personhood_n_1316924.html?utm_hp_ref=email_share

The Wilmington City Council has a message for men -- sperm are people, too.

[freshwest]

21. Well, some men do deserve a hearing on the matter:

[sheshe2]

23. Snort!

[LeftInTX]

22. LOL - What's next?

[Honeycombe8]

5. It's all in the way you view things. I think your pics actually would convince some

that personhood DOES begin at conception.

But you confused two different statements. You said "life begins at contraception" and "this is not a person." Those are two different things entirely.

There is no scientific argument against the fact that an embryo is life. It is. A simple amoeba is life. But there is disagreement on whether it is A HUMAN BEING. That's what those personhood laws are all about...that it's a PERSON.

LIFE:
1.The condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional...
2.Living things and their activity: "some sort of life existed on Mars".

[sheshe2]

12. That was the headline of the article at Political Carnival

I believe what was meant by "Life begins at Conception"... is the slogan that so many pro-lifers use.With that slogan, they reduce the complex reality of the true nature in their move to make into law person hood for the fetus...therefore minimizing the person hood of women.

Did that come out right? Tired after a long day at work.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

13. I'm not sure where you're going with this, but the following point is most important for PEOPLE:

The implication of so-called personhood laws is that an actual living woman is less a person than is a group of human cells.

My logic has always been towards reducing suffering.

By following the "life" argument, you could end up questioning whether a tumor has the right to life.

And in the end, such ideologies--Life or Personhood-- still value the life of a woman below the life of a cell.

[sheshe2]

16. Excellent response!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/14/ireland-woman-dies-after-abortion-refusal

[BlancheSplanchnik]

24. thanks sheshe. Suffering isn't an issue for a mass of cells.....

An embryo or even a fetus suffers little in comparison to a living woman (not to mention everyone connected with her) forced into reproduction against her will.


It's like an analogy I heard once; if you burst into a laboratory that's on fire in order to save the people inside, and you see a woman (or a little boy. Or a young woman. Or an older man. Etc.) and you also see an incubator of live human embryos, which do you save?

That's the problem with ideologues. They don't think about the real life consequences of their abstracted, reflexive beliefs.

[sheshe2]

28. Sadly, no, they do not believe in consequences.

The woman that is raped, faced to carrying her baby to term. Her spirit and sanity in jeopardy. How will that affect the child?

The woman that already carries the burden of poverty. Forced to bear a child that she will be unable to provide for.How will that affect the child.

What of cases of incest.Again how will that affect the child.

The consequences of all this...they will only care about a fetus. When the fetus becomes a child then they turn their collective backs on them.

School lunches, nope...healthcare nope... food stamps (lazy moochers)! Oh lest we forget...birth control for mother's that would prevent unwanted pregnancies (LOL)! However we will pay for Viagra For MEN! Is this hurting your head yet? It is hurting mine.

Thanks Blanche for your response.
She

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

30. This makes the point more clearly and concisely than anything I've heard before:

If you burst into a laboratory that's on fire in order to save the people inside, and you see a woman (or a little boy. Or a young woman. Or an older man. Etc.) and you also see an incubator of live human embryos, which do you save?

Thank you for posting.

[Cleita]

40. Funny, I made the tumor argument right here at DU years ago

and I was nearly run off the board. But I do think that any growth that has to rely on a host organism to survive is not a separate entity but part of the host and the host has the right to decides whether it wants to keep it or remove it. I believe an embryo that can't survive outside of the womb is not a separate being at that time and the mother has a right to remove that clump of cells if she so desires.

[Freddie]

8. Excellent

When four cells in my uterus have more rights than I do, that's making me less than a human being.
When the diseased secretions of a rapist have more rights than the woman, that's a slap in the face to every woman.

[safeinOhio]

9. When someone tells me they are pro-life

the first thing I ask is "how many babies have YOU adopted".

[AAO]

10. That last pic looks like cousin freddie!

[freshwest]

11. Beautiful in its simplicity and logic. Thanks, sheshe!

[sulphurdunn]

18. Life doesn't begin here anymore.

It began around 4 billion years ago and has been evolving along since.

[UtahLib]

19. Thank you so much.

You have given me the gift of being even better informed and more capable of presenting a logical response to idealogical nonsense.

[ErikJ]

20. Most tribes dont think its a person until the baby is named after birth

But the Bible says its a person upon thwe first breath.
We celebrate the Birthday-not the conceptionday.

[2naSalit]

25. and furthermore...

it's a control-freak issue. As is rape, it's about taking control away from women, in some cases males, but mostly it's women who are raped. And when that happens it's usually the woman who is blamed for being raped rather than the rapist. It's also quite true that the male has only a few minutes of investment in that conception and the woman who is making a lifetime of contribution as they are usually the ones made to be responsible for the being who is conceived and all that entails.

I agree, it's about hatred of women, men have some kind of psychological problem about the fact that women have the ability to bear children and they have made a culture or cult of making the lives of women hellish because of it. And the fact that they can't seem to control their lustful imaginings and that women are supposed to acquiesce to the desires of men simply because they have them.

I think that all these politicians who use their ideology to dehumanize women need to get their politics out of women's private life choices or get the hell out of office. They don't want women to have any control over their lives because they are afraid of the nonviolent choices women make, like spending all the taxpayer funds on wars and the like. And separation of church and state is a mandate in the Constitution, there seems to be some conveniently selective amnesia about that among too many in office.

Several segments of Melissa Harris-Perry's show on Sunday addressed this and other key elements of the problems male politicos are creating for women... (Some segments include Dr. Anita Hill)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46979745/#__utma=34328804.2552372.1352052839.1352052839.1352052839.1&__utmb=34328804.2.10.1352052839&__utmc=34328804&__utmx=-&__utmz=34328804.1352052839.1.1.utmcsr=%28direct%29|utmccn=%28direct%29|utmcmd=%28none%29&__utmv=-&__utmk=89456153

[sheshe2]

27. Well we voters sure took a few of those ass-shats out this last election...

let's see how much more we can do in 2014!

Let's roll!

[niyad]

32. you are correct, it stems from women's ability to give birth--womb envy.

[snot]

29. Put another way: it's not a person, it's the POTENTIAL for a person.

Something with the I.Q. of a carrot is not a person.

[AlexSatan]

33. Question for vegans

If an egg (fertilized or not) is not an animal and no animals are harmed in "harvesting" them, are vegans ok with eating eggs?

Sorry, this graphic just made this question pop into my head.

[noamnety]

34. Sorry, but that's not logically relevant.

Vegans don't eat any animal products, including milk, butter, etc.

They are individuals, with individual reasons for not eating animal products, which can be health reasons, animal rights reasons, environmental impact, etc.

My vegan daughter for instance does not eat honey. She does not believe that honey is an animal.

[AlexSatan]

35. Fair enough

Personally, I don't understand things like not eating honey but to each his own.

[RebelOne]

41. I am a vegetarian, and I eat eggs, but do not eat chicken.

My reasoning is that no chicken had to be killed for the eggs.

[AlexSatan]

45. That is a consistent practice.

Thanks for your answer!

[yardwork]

36. The people pushing these laws don't believe that women are people.

Women are chattel to be controlled. That's the belief system of the people behind these laws. Men know best and have the God-given right to control the bodies and minds of women, who are lesser and can't be expected to make rational decisions on their own behalf. Children are also the property of the men. Women who understand this "Biblical family structure" and go along with it will be rewarded by men. Women who don't go along with it will be killed. That's the belief system in a nutshell.

[sheshe2]

38. Unless I have misconstrued your meaning...

It sounds to me that you believe the rights of the fetus are more important than a womans.

It is my belief that everyone has the right to freedom of speech.That said.

If you are anti-choice. Then you are on the wrong thread!

[Cleita]

39. By that logic life begins before conception.

The real question is when is human life able to exist outside the mother?

[2naSalit]

42. In one of the repressive states

they were trying to make that the law this past few months, AZ or MO or some scary state for women like that.

[Cleita]

43. Shouldn't this apply to men as well?

You know all that sperm they spill on various occasions for various reasons?

[2naSalit]

44. By all fairness

not that fairness is of any concern to these individuals, if life begins before conception then you would be correct and to take it to its logical origin, men could be considered in violation of that law as they produce new sperm on a daily basis... so where does that lead to? These frightening pogroms make soooo much sense, to those who can't figure out this simple biological fact that should've been clear had they been paying attention in school.

[sheshe2]

47. See post #17

Huff post piece!

[AlexSatan]

46. That changes as technology and knowledge grows

Eventually, I have no doubt a human womb will not be necessary.

[ProudProgressiveNow]

48. K&R nt

[sheshe2]

49. Thank You...

to whomever Alerted on Catch the Spit (eeeew what a Name! )