For the last time, there is zero difference between God's mercy and His Law!!! Anybody who says different is selling timeshares in Hell. Anybody. -- Me

Featured Posts


Creative Minority Reader

Science Confirms Pope Was Right on Contraception/Abortion Link

Hey, remember when Pope Benedict XVI said that contraception usage doesn't lead to lower abortion rates and everyone freaked out on him. Turns out he's right. We knew it all along but a new study is finally showing it.

And you know how certain "pro-life Democrats" say things like Barack Obama is "pro-life" because by increasing contraception use he will decrease the number of abortions. Turns out they're wrong. And science is proving it.

LifeSiteNews reports:

A new study from Russia has revealed that, contrary to the claims of abortion advocates, Russia continues to have one of the world’s highest abortion rates despite higher contraception rates.

Researchers at Moscow State University studied changes in birth control practices in Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine, and correlated the prevalence of “modern methods” of contraceptive use to trends in abortion.

They found that while Russian women have the highest rate of contraceptive use compared to those in Belarus and Ukraine, they also have the highest abortion rate.

Researchers were perplexed by this, calling the findings “contradictory,” “unexpected,” and “paradoxical.”
Weird, huh? If you convince people they have consequenceless sex which turns out to be not without consequence they will seek to rid themselves of that consequence.

This study will, of course, be ignored by those who claim to embrace science. and reason. Sheesh. It's almost like they're more interested in pushing an agenda than facts. Almost.

The thing is, they know that contraception leads to abortion. Think about who the biggest pushers of contraception are - Planned Parenthood, which makes millions performing abortions. Hmmm...

*subhead*CMR=Embracing Science.*subhead*

Your Ad Here

54 comments:

bill bannon said...

But let's remain logical. If all these people who commit abortion voluntarily sterilized themselves, though it is against Church teaching, it would drastically reduce abortions to near nothing except for the first six months after the operation on the male's side. Ergo they would be moving from murder to sterilization...from a worse sin that involves a third person to a lesser sin between two people.

Lynda said...

Contraception necessarily involves a certain wrong attitude to sex. It generally means greater promiscuity and more casual sex, which means there is more pregnancies in situations where a baby is rejected, and therefore more abortions are carried out. Contraception has mushroomed since the sixties, and abortion alongside. They go hand-in-hand. Why do abortion mills promote contraception? - certainly not to put themselves out of business.

bill bannon said...

ps...an example: A robber holds you and your wife up in a parking lot with a 44 magnum pistol. You urge him, " Just take all our money and the car but spare our lives.". You've urged him from a worse mortal sin to a lesser mortal sin.

Anonymous said...

But when you take the essentials of what sex is meant to be about, which is a higher purpose of the creation of life through expression of love that is pleasurable, then what does sex become- just pleasurable and focused inwards on the two involved, with no higher purpose. It becomes inwards and meaningless. So there are actually deeper repercussions to becoming sterilized. These repercussions are no different to the abortion agenda- closed to life and selfish. The mentality is no different. That's what Pope Benedict meant when he referred to an anti-life mentality that is found in Contraception, Sterilization and abortion.

bill bannon said...

Anon,
I stated it was sin. What would you object to in the robbery scenario? Augustine and Aquinas allowed for the legality of prostitution in order to prevent worse...adultery and rape. They saw all as causing damnation but saw the least as preferable to the worst.

Charles said...

bill bannon,
Until their rejection of love leads them to sin more and more. Sin doesn't protect. Sin attracts more sin.

bill bannon said...

Charles,
The Church permitted religious rites which she saw as detrimental to salvation in her lands like the Old Testament rites of the Jews. That is the context in which Aquinas permits governments to tolerate prostitution which he gives as a like example to the Church tolerating the wrong religious rites in her lands:


Summa Theologica: Part II of book II, question 10, article 11

I answer that, Human government is derived from the Divine government, and should imitate it. Now although God is all-powerful and supremely good, nevertheless He allows certain evils to take place in the universe, which He might prevent, lest, without them, greater goods might be forfeited, or greater evils ensue. Accordingly in human government also, those who are in authority, rightly tolerate certain evils, lest certain goods be lost, or certain greater evils be incurred: thus Augustine says (De Ordine ii, 4): "If you do away with harlots, the world will be convulsed with lust." Hence, though unbelievers sin in their rites, they may be tolerated, either on account of some good that ensues therefrom, or because of some evil avoided. "
..............................................................................................................................
Likewise how can we seem to really care about millions of deaths if we are unwilling to permit a sinful alternative that is a lesser mortal sin and which prevents millions of deaths that we say we lament? We may come across as clever debaters but not as those who would stop the deaths by permitting sterilization in the same way that Catholic lands permitted Jewish religious rites and permitted prostitution to prevent that which was worse than prostitution.

Mari said...

People today have an almost superstitious faith in the efficacy of contraceptives. Here is the big news no one will tell you : Contraceptives, including the pill, have a significant failure rate. And ,no, it isn't just stupid people who get pregnant while on the pill. It really does fail all on its very own. There is nothing created by man on this earth that is perfect , and that includes contraceptives.
It's very simple, The more sex you have, the more likely you are to get pregnant, with or without contraception. (Unless you have done so many things to yourself that you have compromised your ability to have children . Which also happens a lot.) But I guess we needed a "scientific study" to prove the obvious.

Mari said...

Just for clarification, I don't think people who get pregnant while using the pill or anything else are stupid because they " must not have been following the instructions" etc... I was quoting something I heard said ad nauseum back in my college days and early days of marriage whenever i tried to point out that contraceptives don't always "work".
I am just saying that young people, young women, are led astray by the myth that there is such a thing a "safe sex" which encourages them to imperil their souls and the lives of their little babies.

xsosdid said...

Bill Bannon,
So the Church should stop teaching the moral good and allow the lesser of two evils in order to produce less net evil? This is silliness! By your reasoning it follows that a greater evil could come along that would make having abortions the prefferable path...?
So as Catholics we show more concern for the unborn by allowing less of them to be conceived...?
Maybe the Church should give out illicit drugs, too, in order to quiet the drug violence...?
Maybe the Church should encourage masterbation to porn as an alternative to the sex act - that, too, would show a serious commitment to lowering abortions, would it not?

Sophia's Favorite said...

@Bill Bannon: You are completely misreading Aquinas. He did not say prostitution should be permitted. He said stamping it out completely would require measures that would be worse in their effects than it was—so only worry about it when it makes itself noticeable. Which is the attitude most civilized societies take toward it.

In the case of contraception, the Church could only gain full obedience by a full-blown inquisition. That certainly doesn't mean it should change its teachings, nor that it should cease to censure those who publicly flout them.

xsosdid said...

Bill Bannon,
Your argument for contraception should be named after the Scrouge, as he said, when he was told about the many needy: "Are there no prisons?"
Scrouge's argument is, like yours, a "lesser of two evils" fallacy. That the poor should be imprisoned rather than die sounds like a solution, but it is, in fact, the thin edge of a wedge allowing us to accept an evil in itself, and thus we, ourselves promote evil and call it good

bill bannon said...

xsosdid,
Now compare your idea with Augustine's quote within Aquinas' treatise:

" Augustine says (De Ordine ii, 4): "If you do away with harlots, the world will be convulsed with lust."

Augustine wants it unsuppressed regardless of the effects of suppressing measures. Augustine sees an ongoing prevention of greater evil by the non suppression of prostitution.

bill bannon said...

ps...that should have been addressed to Sophia's favorite not xsosdid.

xsosdid said...

Bill Bannon, I think I understand the quote well enough. I don't see how it changes the issue, though, since you have not addressed my objection to it: that the notion that we have to appease immorality with a lesser immorality is a disastrous approach and is impractical in the extreme. It has no bounds. We all know that what is "moral" to many was immoral only a few years ago. So what we will have to accept as a "lesser evil" in thirty or a hundred years may in fact be something appalling by today's standards. So, in my opinion, with this kind of moral appeasement strategy, you have given away the game and might as well go home.
And yes, I might even have to admit that I disagree with Sts Augustin and Aquinas.
....who knew?

bill bannon said...

xsosdid,
But you are not dealing with the reality that if all abortion prone persons steriilized themselves, the millions of abortion murders would cease. In terms of God's judgement of such persons, believing in sterilization as moral is far more plausible as a sincere erroneous conscience....than killing a pre born. Past Popes had sincere erroneous consciences on matters like burning heretics ( Pope Innocent IV and Pope Leo X) and other Popes had sincere erroneous consciences on affirming the castrati system in the papal choirs from 1585 til 1878 when Pope Leo XIII stopped it even though his 29 predecessors saw it as moral. Now we all see it as immoral but it, as a papal instance of sincere erroneous conscience, shows that it is quite plausible for non Catholics right now to see sterilization as moral but, as to judgement by God, seeing abortion as moral is less likely susceptible of a sincere erroneous conscience. In short, they seem to have a better chance of avoiding damnation through the lesser evil of sterilization.

bill bannon said...

ps....what I am suggesting is similar to Pope Benedict's condom statement regarding AIDS infected male prostitutes. Benedict was not teaching that condoms were a good but that in context, they were a lesser evil than infecting someone lethally.

xsosdid said...

There are two issues here: what the Church teaches and what God judges. What the Church teaches must always be the moral truth, and not some compromise based upon society's various states, versus what God may judge based upon particular instances, about which we can only speculate.
Issues of the past seem to be a sticking point for you, as though they mitigate the truth, somehow. But why bring these up? Is it because the moral good fluctuates with the times? Is it relative? Or is it, rather that through experience the moral truth becomes more clear, more pronounced and, especially, more well defined?
I think, if anything, bringing up the past errors of people who profess the faith makes the need for clear and sure moral teaching more necessary, not less. I think your examples argue against you.
As for Aids infected male prostitutes, you really can't mean to use this as the wedge here, do you? For this is obvious, that given two terrible choices it is easy enough for one to pick the lesser evil, but that is nothing like recommending it as being a moral good...!? You are being no more charitable here to the Holy Father than the media who love (like the Pharisees) to find an issue with which to trip him up. If that is your purpose here than I am not interested in the conversation.

Anonymous said...

Theoretically having an abortion and having a tubal ligation are equally mortal sins. This is where intense Catholics lose everybody else.

The pro-lifers make the emotional appeal that abortion = murder, but then it turns out that for intense Catholics tubal ligation = abortion, and non-intense-Catholics start backing away. They are confused. Where is the wrong? Is abortion wrong because a life is ended? Well then, why is tubal ligation wrong? Why is contraception wrong? Wow, that's a whole different hurdle, isn't it?

Micha Elyi said...

Of course science agrees with the Pope. Catholic churchmen invented science.

Anonymous said...

Go Catholic prove Atheists wrong.

Friends Forever said...

Go Catholic Prove Atheists Wrong...

https://twitter.com/Friends4Eva777

Sophia's Favorite said...

@Anonymous: A tubal ligation does not equal abortion, and no Catholic says it does, because contraception is not murder—not the taking of innocent life (to say "abortion is murder" is not an emotional appeal, by the way, but a statement of fact that follows from the definitions of "murder" and "human being"; maybe your ethical philosophy is based on emotion, but some of us have mastered the arcane craft of thinking).

However, not being physical cowards like you, Catholics are capable of grasping that things that are not violence, can be wrong. That, not some imaginary conflation of abortion with contraception—do you believe your strawman can talk back to you?—is what is meant by the idea that a tubal ligation is as wrong as abortion. It is less criminally wrong, not being a direct violation of civic peace, but law is not morals, the state does not define right and wrong.

Here's an idea, shortbus: when you argue with a person, argue with what they say, not with something you'd like to pretend they said.

bill bannon said...

xsosdid,
No where did I say sterilization should be proffered as a moral good yet two of your posts inferred that I did. I made the opposite clear. Actually slowly read the posters who offend you prior to answering. And use your real name and you'll put more work into the process...though I understand that many Catholics apparently do this to protect perhaps their workplace job? There's only two of us here with complete names. I'm done. I can't handle the anonymity overload.

Anonymous said...

I fail to see the real concern for the contraceptive practices of post conciliar people. This is not new information. Only 10% of the teachers in U S Bishop’s schools believe in the sound teachings of the Catholic Church in regards to the practice of birth controlling. A leading factor to the “satanic” practice of birth controlling is disobedience and silence of priests and bishops to remind the “people of God” these words by Archbishop Hayes December 14, 1921:“ …….To take life after its inception is a horrible crime; but to prevent human life that the Creator is about to bring into being, is satanic….” http://www.cfnews.org/Hayes-Christmas.htm

Anonymous said...

The U S Bishops' schools without exception place materials before the eyes of innocent youth that put their souls at risk and endanger all society. Sexualized catechetics is not only removing natural blush and shame, it is destroying sound principles of virtues and lead youth to be helplessly controlled by vices. In sexualized curriculums, the sound teachings of the Sacrament of Matrimony is absent. This sacrament is no longer taught to be primarily for the procreation and education of children. Even the new catechism gives new meaning contrary to what has been taught for centuries by Holy Mother the Church. Youth are led by sexualized curriculums to know the intimacies of their parents. These horrendous materials do not teach that conjugal loving is designed by God for the appropriately married spouses. See a description of the series "Growing In Love" with imprimatur. May this information provoke you enough to speak out. If not you the reader, than WHO?
http://www.motherswatch.net/content/view/12/6/ - Part 1
http://www.motherswatch.net/content/view/15/6/ - Part 2

xsosdid said...

Bill Bannon,
You suggested that the Church embrace an intrinsic moral evil, now you want to cavil about semantics. You answered none of the obvious problems with your argument. Instead you plowed ahead with more examples of the same nonsense.
Thanks for the lecture on careful reading.
As for my real namme, you have obviiously never been stalked by some of the cretins on line.

cy said...

God cares about saving souls over saving bodies. Sin is not permissible when it causes lost souls.

Scivias said...

The Pope is even right on what he says about Human Embryonic Stem cells- see:
http://www.fiamc.org/bioethics/are-human-embryonic-stem-cells-able-to-cure-neurological-disorders/

Dee Gray said...

Cy- respectfully, I suggest you open your Catechism to paragraph 362-368. It is important to understand what the Church teaches, but WHY.

Anonymous said...

Anon

unfortunately for the misogynist males who want to take away American females' basic rights, AMERICAN FEMALES DO HAVE A RIGHT TO DETERMINE FOR THEMSELVES WHAT THEY WILL/WILLNOT DO WITH THEIR OWN BODIES-- INCLUDING TERMINATING AN UNWANTED PREGNANCY.

Allan Wafkowski said...

Bill Bannon, come down from space and investigate sane theology. No, it is not a morally acceptable choice to sterilize all persons who might have an abortion. That leaves no room for God's grace in the equation. Call me craze, but if each person who might commit an act of abortion killed him or her self we could eliminate all sin from that person--excepting, of course, the irreversible sin of suicide. And further, if we killed all people on the planet, we could eliminate all sin--forever. Of course we could never really know if that would work because no one would be here to witness the mass reduction in sin. Does a tree fall if nobody hears it?
Billy, it's a wacky, wacky world. BTW, there's no chance of you becoming pope, is there?

Allan Wafkowski said...

Anon, there is one tiny problem with condemning "misogynist males" for their wild rush to take away a woman's right to do with her body what she wants. The fetus has a unique DNA code. If the baby WAS the mother it would have the same DNA. Wise second graders are quick to conclude that if the DNA is different, the person must be different. Not the mother, but different. Don't you feel silly?

Anonymous said...

HEY, ALLAN!

YET another MALE MISOGYNIST WHO BELIEVES THAT he HAS A RIGHT TO DICTATE TO AMERICAN FEMALES WHAT THEY CAN/CAN'T DO WITH THEIR OWN BODIES.
DO you BELIEVE THAT YOU AND/OR ANY OTHER MALE HAS A RIGHT TO RAPE AND/OR OTHERWISE COMMIT VIOLENT CRIMINAL ACTS AGAINST A FEMALE?
ACCORDING TO WHAT YOU HAVE WRITTEN, YOU obviously DO!

Anonymous said...

Hey, Allan!

Unfortunately for you and/or other male misogynists, WHEN YOU AND/OR OTHER MISOGYNISTS COMMIT CRIMINAL ACTS AGAINST AMERICAN FEMALES WHO DI, IN FACT, HAVE CONSTITUTIONAL/CIVIL/LEGAL RIGHTS OVER THEIR OWN BODIES-- YOU can LEGALLY BE PROSECUTED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT OF THE LAW!
UNFORTUNATELY FOR you AND/OR YOUR MISOGYNIST PEERS,THANKFULLY, THE ROMAN CHURCH does NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO DICTATE TO AMERICAN FEMALES WHAT TO BELIEVE/NOT BELIEVE.

xsosdid said...

Anonymous, did you spill your apple juice? Your caps lock seems to be stuck. It makes you sound angry

Sophia's Favorite said...

@Capslock-obsessed anonymous: You can call people who oppose a special right to murder "misogynists" if you like—ad hominem is plainly all you are capable of. I'm truly curious to know what school of ethics classes the kiri sute gomen as a "basic human right"; do you also consider the Meiji government's rescinding of that right to have been a step away from egalitarianism?

The fact, child, is that you believe that people should have special rights based on their sex—that women should have the right to commit murder. When you sit here and say—or rather bellow—that, you do understand that you lose the right to accuse other people of sexism?

Anonymous said...

Hey, XODODID--

What happened? Did a nice FEMINIST just take away YOUR ILLUSIONS that YOU and/or your fellow misogynists CAN VIOLATE FEMALE AMERICANS RIGHTS AT WILL!!!!!!!!!!
HURRAH for the feminist!

xsosdid said...

Not apple juice, then?

Anonymous said...

Hey, XSODID--

Maybe YOU could benefit from some HARD FOOD.... HARD, OF COURSE, FOR a TODDLER to chew..... AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW.... PLEASE, GO TALK TO mommie about YOUR problems with little girls......
duh.........

OF COURSE, MOST MALE PERVERTS HAVE had PROBLEMS WITH THEIR MOMMIES...........DO TELL!

Anonymous said...

Hey,Sophia!

YOU are truly A TRAITOR to YOUR SEX!

If, ON THE OTHER HAND, YOU BELIEVE THAT MALE PERPS WHO RAPE/ABUSE FEMALES/AND/OR INNOCENT CHILDREN HAVE not COMMITTED CRIMINAL ACTS AGAINST INNOCENT VICTIMS-- THEN you ARE as GUILTY as THEY ARE!
WHY do YOU believe that MALE CRIMINALS SHOULD BE ABLE TO RAPE WOMEN! WHY DO you BELIEVE THAT SAID CRIMINALS SHOULD not BE PROSECUTED FOR THEIR CRIMINAL ACTS....DO TELL!

xsosdid said...

Listen, I was having a little fun with you, ok? No ill intent on my part. I hope you will find some peace, really soon. Would you be insulted if I told you that right now I am saying a prayer for you?

Anonymous said...

OBVIOUSLY, the CHURCH supports MISOGYNISTS WHO refuse TO ACCEPT THE RIGHTS OF FEMALES OVER THEIR OWN BODIES..............WHAT ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF THE ABUSED CHILDREN----WHO WERE RAPED BY MALE CLERGY!

Anonymous said...

THANK you, XSODID

HOPEFULLY, the FEMALE AMERICANS WHO have BEEN RAPED AND/OR ENDURED other VIOLENT CRIMINAL ACTS PERFORMED AGAINST THEM BY MALE CRIMINALS can FIND IT THEIR HEARTS to FORGIVE the violent, criminal assaults on them AGAINST THEIR WILLS!

I PRAY FOR you-- THAT you--- and/or OTHER MALE MISOGYNISTS will BEGIN TO UNDERSTAND THE TERRIBLE results OF MALE- CAUSED CRIMINAL ACTIONS AGAINST FEMALES!

I PRAY that the MISOGYNIST INSTITUTION THAT SUPPORTS RAPE AND/OR OTHER VIOLENT MALE CAUSED CRIMINAL ACTIONS AGAINST FEMALES WILL openly REPENT FOR THEIR HATRED OF FEMALES!

Sophia's Favorite said...

@Anonymous: I am male. My name is Sophia's Favorite, not Sophia. Is the concept of genitive adjective difficult for you?

For the rest of it...you are perhaps aware that only Jews and Christians, in all the world, do not consider there to be a right to rape in any circumstances? All others believe men have a right to rape slaves and captives; only we do not.

But no, keep screeching at us about how we're so terrible...according to a set of ethics unique to us.

It's generally considered a social faux pas to display one's ignorance and ingratitude quite that ostentatiously, you stupid little girl. Kindly cease.

Anonymous said...

Of course PP knows that contraception is not 100% effective, therefore by pushing contraceptives they are in essence guaranteeing their future clientele. All PP cared about is making money, not helping women. And women are stupid enough to fall for their lies.

Anonymous said...

Hey, SOPHIA!

WHY DID you POST AS A FEMALE!!!!! DUHHHH!

CONSULT AN ATTORNEY, IDIOT! AMERICAN FEMALES DO HAVE A RIGHT TO DETERMINE FOR THEMSELVES WHETHER OR NOT TO PERFORM CERTAIN ACTIONS FOR THEMSELVES--WHICH includes GETTING RID OF UNWANTED PREGNANCIES THAT THEY didn't ASK FOR/DON'T WANT.....
WHY DO you AND/OR YOUR FELLOW MISOGYNIST PERVERTS BELIEVE THAT RAPE AND/OR OTHER MALE CRIMINAL ASSAULTS AGAINST FEMALES IS ACCEPTABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PLEASE, PLEASE CONSULT AN ATTORNEY WHO SPECIALIZES IN SAID CASES!

Serre said...

A Danish study that was recently published showed that women who had undergone at least one abortion saw an increase in maternal death rate of 45 percent.

The study, "Reproductive history patterns and long-term mortality rates: a Danish, population-based record linkage study," was published in the European Journal of Public Health and looked at the maternal death rates of women in Denmark, over a 25 year period, who had under gone an abortion or experienced a during pregnancy.

The study showed that a single induced abortion increased the chance of maternal death by 45 percent when compared to women who had never received and abortion.

The researched also highlighted an even higher death rate among women who had multiple abortions.
According to the study women who had two abortions were 114 percent more likely to die during the period examined and women with three or more abortions had a 192 percent increased chance of premature death.

Research also showed an increase in the death rates of women who had experienced miscarriages, ectopic pregnancies or other natural losses.

Women who did not have a history of loss during pregnancy were the least likely to die during the 25 years that were examined, while women who had never conceived had the highest mortality rate.

Read more at http://global.christianpost.com/news/abortion-increases-womens-mortality-rates-study-84721/#1O4pQyzJkSriIpYe.99

Anonymous said...

UNFORTUNATELY, FOR YOU, RAPING A WOMAN IS BOTH A STATE AND/OR FEDERAL CRIME. DUH...........!

YOU ARE THE IGNORANT ONE if you BELIEVE THAT A MALE RAPIST IS not a CRIMINAL WHO HAS VIOLATED A FEMALE AGAINST HER WILL. DUH.......... IDIOT!

A FEMALE WHO HAS ENDURED THE CRIMINAL ACTION OF BEING VIOLATED AGAINST HER WILL HAS every RIGHT TO JUST SAY NO! TO BEING LEGITIMATELY BEING forced TO BEAR THE THE FETUS OF THE MALE CRIMINAL/RAPIST. DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WHY IS IT not surprising THAT IDIOTS LIKE YOU SUPPORT RAPE AND/OR OTHER CRIMINAL ACTIONS AGAINST FEMALES!

Anonymous said...

WHY DOES THE ROMAN CHURCH SUPPORT MALE CRIMINALS WHO MOLEST/RAPE FEMALES AND/OR then TELL THE FEMALE VICTIMS THAT they ARE AH, GOING TO HELL if THEY CONTACT THE POLICE ABOUT THE ABUSE!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Hello, Serre.....

Did you intend to say that AMERICAN FEMALE CITIZENS WHO HAVE CHOSEN TO INVOKE THEIR RIGHTS not TO BEAR THE FETUSES OF MALE CRIMINALS/RAPISTS ARE MAKING A MISTAKE?
IF SO, HOW?
WHY DO YOU OPENLY SUPPORT MALE RAPISTS/CRIMINALS WHO ABUSE/COMMIT CRIMINAL ACTIONS AGAINST INNOCENT FEMALES......
PLEASE, PLEASE EXPLAIN THE THINKING BEHIND your SUPPORT OF MALE CRIMINALS!

WSquared said...

@ Anonymous who keeps typing in caps:

"AMERICAN FEMALES DO HAVE A RIGHT TO DETERMINE FOR THEMSELVES WHAT THEY WILL/WILLNOT DO WITH THEIR OWN BODIES."

Okay, let's see you (or anyone, for that matter) control when exactly you need to go to the bathroom. Your body, your choice, no? Try not going to the bathroom for two weeks, and then get back to us on your "bodily autonomy."

Sophia's Favorite said...

@Anonymous netiquette illiterate, I don't post as a female, you illiterate shortbus luggage. I post as the favorite of one, specifically the Greek goddess of wisdom—it's a pun on the etymology of philosopher. I am the noun (favorite), not the adjective (Sophia's). Do you address someone using the handle "Joey's Mom" as "Joey"? Are you actually that stupid?

Where are you getting "support for male criminals" from "you can't murder children"? The two ideas seem quite separate to me, but then again I also know how to sign my name and type in lowercase. I can almost guarantee that I favor harsher penalties for rape than you do. Kindly argue with statements actually present on the page where you post comments, not your hallucinations, you slackjawed puzzlewit.

I admit, though, you do make a powerful argument against the idea of universal human worth that is the foundation of opposition to abortion.

Allan Wafkowski said...

Anonymous, I believe you must be over 12 years of age to post here.

Post a Comment