Murder of the Seed

‘Sperm Is Life And We’ve Gotta Legislate That Sh*t’ – Sarah Silverman

Sarah Silverman Thinks Male Masturbation Should Be Legislated Like Abortion, Because Equality


Republican legislators all over the country are obsessed with legislating women’s innards – specifically, reproductive innards. Whether it’s forcing doctors to perform unnecessary transvaginal ultrasound probes (government mandated rape) before legal abortions, the Republican war on contraception, or forcing women to carry a dead fetus to term, the GOP has proven their real agenda is controlling women; and they’re getting away with it by calling it religious freedom.

Sarah Silverman came up with a brilliant idea after she learned that sperm cells have a sense of smell. As reported in the Huffington Post, Silverman was delivering a stand-up routine at the Brooklyn Academy of Music in New York City recently, and she posed a pertinent question – she suggested that since we defend the right to enact laws that makes it difficult for women to terminate unwanted pregnancies, shouldn’t we also legislate male masturbation?

“Here’s something that I learned that is fascinating, and it’s this: Scientists have found that sperms cells smell,” Silverman said. “Like I know sperm smells, but sperm cells have the sense of smell, and you know what that means: Sperm is life. And you know what that means: We’ve gotta legislate that shit.”

Here’s a sad reality: While abortion became legal on a federal level in 1973, access to it remains highly restricted due to anti-choice legislation in states across the country. Mandated waiting periods, state-directed counseling meant to mislead and discourage women, 20-week bans, and unnecessary requirements that can force abortion clinics to shut down are all ways laws still control women’s bodies, and beyond voting and protesting, there isn’t much we can do to stop the war on choice. However, there might just be a way to make the playing field equal, and, according to comedian Sarah Silverman, it’s legislating male masturbation. What? I like it already. It’s Sarah Silverman; let’s hear her out.

Silverman described how it would work:

““What we’ll do is — it’s a real simple procedure. We take a really long needle – like basically (a) GoPro camera and we put it down your penis hole, urethra … then down into your testicular sack. We’re going to show you the ultrasound, so you can see the life in your balls.”

She explained the procedure would help save some of those innocent sperm from the men who recklessly murder them with their bare hands, and added “You would not believe the amount of men that do not want to jerk off after that.”

In a stand-up routine Silverman performed last weekend at the Brooklyn Academy of Music, Silverman blessed audience members with both her inspiration for the potential bill, and her conniving plan to execute it.

“Here’s something that I learned that is fascinating, and it’s this: Scientists have found that sperm cells smell. Sperm cells have the sense of smell, and you know what that means: Sperm is life,” Silverman said, and, getting in touch with her inner-lunatic, anti-abortion lawmaker, added, “And you know what that means: We’ve gotta legislate that shit.”

Studies published as early as 1992 have confirmed that sperm do, indeed, have a sense of smell which helps them to find an egg. While it remains up for debate whether or not this means sperm cells are alive, in the same vein, doesn’t the whole debate about abortion center around answering the question of whether or not an unborn embryo/fetus constitutes a human life?

The difference here is that we give men the benefit the doubt and not women. And since Silverman understands it’s frankly wishful thinking to hope misogynistic lawmakers will modify their shitty treatment of women, maybe, just maybe, they’ll adhere to the 14th amendment’s provisions for equal treatment under the law and, well, give men equal treatment?

Alas, how would this be executed? Not forgetting the crucial step in anti-choice lawmakers’ pursuit of their interpretations of justice, Silverman determined an appropriate way to shame men for murdering their innocent sperm: “We’re going to show [them] the ultrasound, so [they] can see the life in [their] balls.”

“What we’ll do is — it’s a real simple procedure. We take a really long needle-like basically GoPro camera and we put it down your penis hole, urethra… then down into your testicular sack,” Silverman elaborated.

Alas, it’s unlikely Silverman’s brilliant plan will ever see the light of day in a Congress (literally) dominated by old white Christian men. And while sperm cells can smell in controlled environments, they lose that sense of smell in the outside world. This more or less weakens the case for sperm cells being considered alive, but, hey, to scientists and even the Constitution, the case for a fetus counting as a human life isn’t that strong either.

Following the Constitution, only born babies are American citizens/living human beings with rights, and it’s generally agreed within the scientific community that a fetus only becomes viable and able to survive outside of the mother at or past 22 weeks gestation. Just throwing those facts out there, because why not, they can’t really be said enough.

At any rate, I hope Silverman is able to run her plan by her boy Bernie before the Democratic National Convention. I’d frankly love to hear his thoughts on it.

Comment: Sarah Silverman is right. Masturbation leading to ejaculation comes closer to abortion than masturbation leading to clitoral orgasm. Judith Reisman also made the case that masturbation is linked to pedophilia in her book Kinsey: Crimes and Consequences. Again I stress than ANY avoidance of reproduction, even celibate chastity, can only be allowed if euthanasia is allowed as well. Hell is eternal, hell is eternal, hell is eternal…


Reproductive Justice

The ProChoice
Movement Has a White Supremacy Problem – And AntiChoice
Advocates Are Using It to Their Advantage — Everyday Feminism

Like many other outcast teenaged white girls of the
90s, my initial identity as a feminist was super
influenced by the Riot Grrrl movement.
I came out as a dyke, joined a punk band, and began
building community with other radical, like-minded
grrrls and womyn. We ran zine libraries, organized
political actions, toured the country playing music,
and had endless conversations about SmashingThePatriarchy.
The more I learned about misogyny, the angrier I got. The angrier I got, the more important
it felt to integrate feminist activism into my daily life.
So aside from growing out my armpit hair, listening to Bikini Kill, and obsessively memorizing
bell hooks passages, I also got involved with the reproductive rights movement.
I have now been a medical assistant and clinical abortion advocate for almost ten years, but
when I first started doing this work, I felt as though it was my feminist duty to align myself
with the pro-choice movement as an “ally” of sorts.
In my early twenties, I was under the staunch and arrogant belief that I, myself, would never be
in need of an abortion. After all, I didn’t even have sex with people who could even get me

I was a capital “L” Lesbian — a naive and self-righteous baby-dyke who still associated
gender with anatomy and had yet to understand the complexities of her own queer desires.
I think it’s fair to say that I initially became involved with the pro-choice movement from a “charity-based” mindset as opposed to a “solidarity-based” one.
I saw myself as a responsible, civic-minded Lesbian selflessly investing her time and energy helping “poor straight women” escape the unfortunate consequences of their sex lives.
This all changed when, at the age of 25, I accidentally got pregnant.
Once I realized that anatomy and gender had nothing to do with each other — or with my
sexual orientation — it was open season! I learned that some of my dates did have the potential to get me pregnant because – lightbulb! – some women have penises and produce sperm!
Identifying as a Queer instead of a Lesbian finally began to make much more sense to me.
It suddenly dawned on me that, though I’d chosen to ignore it, there had always been a myriad
of ways I could have accidentally become pregnant before this — that as someone living in a patriarchal society with the kind of reproductive anatomy I have, I was just as vulnerable to the possibility of accruing an unwanted pregnancy as the patients I supported every day.
Finally I understood that that the fight to keep abortion safe and legal wasn’t only relevant to cisgender, heterosexual women – it was necessary the entire well-being of—well—humanity.
There were queer women in my community who are in the sex industry and occasionally came in for abortions because they’d been with some asshole john who’d poked holes in their condoms out of spite.
There were queer couples who planned to have children together, inseminated, and then
broken up, leaving one partner to choose between abortion and single parenthood.
Furthermore, due to the obscenely high incidents of rape in our culture some of us become
pregnant without ever having consented to having sex in the first place. As a survivor of sexual assault, how could I have ever overlooked this fact?
Once this “Us verses Them” mentality was finally dismantled, my heart was reinvested in
the reproductive justice movement in more genuine and holistic way.
Over the years I’ve continued to gain a more nuanced understanding of what it means to not only be a queer woman working in this realm of healthcare, but also what it means to be a feminist, able-bodied, cisgended white woman in the world and doing this sort of work.
But more about that later…
Infamous Anti-Choice Terror Tactics
Working at various clinics across California over the years has made me a witness to the ways in which US reproductive rights debates play out at the literal sites of confrontation.
In earlier days, I remember dealing with protesters whose tactics were of an aggressive,
sometimes violent nature.
These folks would form impenetrable picket lines to block patients from being able enter the clinic. They would schedule fake appointments in order to gain access into the building, and then stage theatrical, shame-inducing sermons in the waiting rooms. They’d take over the clinic parking lot and vandalize staff cars with blood-red, acrylic paint.
It was even common for protesters to stand on the sidewalk dressed in Grim Reaper costumes disemboweling toy dolls and chucking little plastic limbs at patients as they approached the clinic.
They’d call in bomb threats, hold up banners with graphic images of stillborn infants on them (WTF?), and pass out pamphlets filled with misinformation meant to traumatize people out of having abortion procedures.
On a national level, affiliates of Operation Rescue and other anti-choice spin-off groups were known for stalking and murdering abortion providers, as well as for firebombing reproductive health clinics all over the country.
As volatile as that generation of anti-abortion activists were, they did a pretty good job of
making themselves look like nothing more than a crew of malicious hecklers.
Average members of society who stood on the opposing side of the pro-choice debate often hesitated to call themselves “pro-life” for fear of being associated with these extremest groups or the harmful, violent tactics they implored.
What Has Changed? While there are still clinic bombers and doctor hunters out there, there have been major shiftsin the tactics used by the mainstream pro-life movement.
They have radically transformed their public persona, approaching the abortion debate with thoughtful, compelling arguments meant to engage members of various disenfranchised communities – communities we all know the right wing has never been invested in serving prior to this.
Instead of using shock and shame tactics, anti-choice activists have reframed the “pro-life” debate around issues of a failing system, gendered oppression, and both historical and contemporary forms of institutionalized racism.
They have taken advantage of the pro-choice movement’s general failure to address or
confront the violence waged against people of color, folks with disabilities, and working
class/poor folks throughout history.
The right wing is successfully exploiting the fact that mainstream feminists often focus on
single-issue struggles instead of addressing the overarching and intersecting forms of
oppression (like race, class, gender, and ability) that are constantly at play.
As much as it pains me to admit, the protesters outside our clinic doors today are actually
distributing some pretty accurate historical information about the racist, ableist motives that the reproductive rights movement was founded upon – legacies that, for the most part, the mainstream pro-choice movement likes to sweep under the rug.
Quick Feminist History Lesson: The Pro-Choice Movement’s Epic
In the early 1900s, Margaret Sanger (reproductive rights activist and founder of the first
contraceptive health clinics in the US), publicly aligned herself with the eugenics movement. The eugenics movement sought to cultivate a nation of “genetically superior” citizens by advocating that folks of color, folks with physical and mental disabilities, folks in low income brackets, and many others, be eradicated from the gene pool by way of compulsory sterilization, forced abortions, euthanasia, and the government sanctioned use birth control.
Sound familiar?
Let’s flip through our rolodex of international genocide campaigns for some similar examples, shall we?
What was that pesky World War II era campaign in Germany? Oh yes, the Third Reich.
Eugenicist ideologies were at the center of Hitler’s Nazi crusade – its national goal being to
exterminate “all lives [Hitler deemed] unworthy of life” in order to the cultivate (what Hitler deemed) a “supreme master race.”
Margaret Sanger herself argued that birth control and abortion should be legalized in the
US not only because women should have the right to determine their own reproductive
destinies, but also because she believed that “birth control would lead ultimately to a
cleaner race.”
She went on record saying things like “We mean to exterminate the black race” and “More
children from the fit, less from the unfit – that is the chief issue in birth control.”
Practitioners went on to implement her suggestions in a variety of ways, including the widely accepted practice of sterilizing low income women who came into hospitals to give birth if they had already had two or more children, to incentive-based coercion for women on welfare to use Norplant (taken off the market in 2002 due to its dangerous side effects) – a doctorcontrolled contraceptive method implanted in the arm that couldn’t be removed without a surgical procedure.
The pro-choice movement has never officially acknowledged its historical affiliation with the eugenics movement, nor has it held itself accountable for the racist medical practices it condoned.
Instead, the reproductive rights movement has upheld Margaret Sanger as an early feminist hero who fought for women’s access to safe, legal contraception. Period.
So here’s the thing:
When patients enter a clinic with pamphlets full of racist Margaret Sanger quotes given to them by the protesters outside, and there is literally a giant homage portrait of her affixed to the lobby wall meant to valorize and celebrate her work, it makes perfect sense that people would lose trust, feel angry, or even feel downright unsafe.
When patients come into a waiting room and see information packets about doctor-controlled birth control methods (IUDs, implants, the Depo Injection, tubal ligation, and vasectomies) only available in Spanish, while patient-controlled methods (the pill, the patch, the ring, barrier methods, and so on) are in English with attractive, responsible-looking white women on the covers, these racist legacies are being reproduced right before our eyes.
Who’s Dropping the Truth Bombs?
Though contemporary anti-choice propaganda is clearly a sham in its pretense to care about social justice, in the absence of feminist action or accountability, their arguments have become
particularly effective.

One of the main groups distributing this kind of information outside our modern day clinics, is the Radiance Foundation – a group that associates abortion clinics that provide services to communities of color with state-sponsored genocide.
Another group of anti-choice protesters called Feminists for Life deliver compelling critiques of the US social welfare system and its classist, sexist deprioritization of motherhood (and women in general). They argue that the activism that needs to be done is not only rooted in saving the lives of unborn fetuses, but also in “envisioning a better world in which no woman is driven by desperation to abortion.”
And lets be honest: Both groups are right on a lot of levels.
We do live in a white supremacist culture that values certain lives over others and that
perpetuates racist ideologies in not only the realm of medicine, but in most of its
Due to the fact that our society has not prioritized building an infrastructure that supports low income parenthood, many women don’t actually get to make a “choice” when it comes to deciding whether or not to continue a pregnancy.
What’s important to keep in mind though, is that neither of these facts negates a person’s right to exercise control over their own reproductive destiny, whether that means preventing pregnancy, ending a pregnancy, or choosing to give birth — which is what the right wing is ultimately fighting against.
In the face of these tactics, we need to stay clear about the fact that the goals of the antichoice movement are not to eradicate white supremacy or increase family planning options for low income folks – it is to reinstate governmental control over the bodies and lives of women.
What’s Next?
The pro-choice movement will continue to lose credibility and strength unless white feminists start recognizing the legacies of unaddressed racism that still exist in the mainstream feminist movement.
White feminists need to remember that we come to the reproductive rights debate with
dozens of valid reasons for our motives to be untrusted.
The contemporary pro-choice movement not only needs to be accountable and transparent about its history, it needs to assess the ways in which eugenics-based ideologies have likely been transmitted into our current medical and cultural practices.
We need to stop centering reproductive rights discussions around the sole issue of keeping
abortion legal, and instead, fight for reproductive justice.
Reproductive Justice means having broader conversations about white supremacy,
heteropatriarchy, ableism, and capitalism. Fighting for reproductive justice means confronting medical establishments and pharmaceutical companies about the targeting of populations with contraceptive advertisements based on race, class, age, and ability demographics.
It means recognizing the ways in which systems of oppression are inherently linked to one
It means leaving nobody out of the struggle.

Annah Anti-Palindrome is a bay-area based writer, musician and queer/femme antagonist who hails from the working-class craters at the base of the Sierra Foothills. For more info on her work, see To contact, message her via her facebook fan page!

If there is one thing the book is clearly against, it is sexual abuse.

Toronto sex educator Cory Silverberg, who almost single-handledly brought the annual Oregon Adolescent Sexuality Conference to an end after 30 years with last year’s presentation on the latest sex technology, has come out with a book for pre-teens on sex, fetchingly titled,Sex is a Funny Word: A Book about Bodies, Feelings and You.

The 160-page book is heavily and brightly illustrated by artist Fiona Smyth with pictures of children in far more colours than the rainbow contains, conveying what CBC Radio show “Q” fulsomely describes as Silverberg’s “radically inclusive, diverse and open” approach.

Significantly, the CBC said nothing about Silverberg’s 2014 presentation on advances in sexual technology, with 11-year-old Oregonians and young teens in his audience, titled  “From Texting to Teledildonics: Is Technology Changing Sex?” This provoked such intense news media attention and alarm among parents and school boards that this year’s event was cancelled.

In fact, the CBC did consider supplementing their piece on Silverberg’s new book with criticism from conservative parents associated with the popular resistance to Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne’s pansexual sex education curriculum. But when the designated conservative spokesman, Jack Fonseca of the Campaign Life Coalition, told CBC about Silverberg’s Oregon debacle, the publicly-owned broadcaster dropped him like a hot potato.

When Fonseca asked CBC Radio producer Tyrone Callender when the agreed-on interview would take place, Callender replied late on Wednesday, with, “Got the articles. Sorry I wasn’t able to follow up with you earlier but I was working on several other segments today. Thank you for reaching out to offer your perspective on this issue.”

Thank you but no thank you. By Thursday the sympathetic interview with Silverberg was on air without conservative criticism. Instead, the host served up parental opponents to the Ontario Sex Education Curriculum as straw men for Silverberg to knock down. Their hostility to Wynne’s agenda was not only un-Canadian, he obligingly offered, but based on “fear” and ignorance – “a problem of parents reacting without knowing what’s going into the curriculum.”

His book is engagingly written for children raised on comic books with many of its messages delivered as cartoon balloons coming from the purple, green and orange heads of the small group of pre- and early-teens being treated to an imaginary tour of “sex” by their teacher. In keeping with Silverberg’s insistence that “it’s not my place… to tell kids that sexting is good or bad or that masturbation is a bad thing,” every kind of relationship is treated approvingly, regardless of how far it deviates from the normal. Reproduction via sexual intercourse, for example, “is [only] one way grown-ups make babies.”

Friendship, crushes, the different kinds of love, genitalia and different ways to touch others and oneself. While the genitals are explicitly depicted, masturbation is handled more delicately, with the clear message this needs to be done privately but not secretly.

If there is one thing the book is clearly against, it is sexual abuse. And a child can be sure there is something wrong going on when the other person insists on keeping it secret. Do the opposite, says Silverberg, and tell someone you trust, or better, tell several people.

While Silverberg told CBC Radio the book could be used by religious parents, there is little doubt that explicit illustrations of breasts, nipples and genitals would be deemed age-inappropriate at best, and immodest and offensive by conservative Christians, Jews, and Muslims. As for the encouragement of masturbation, this would not so much lead to discussion as to argument with religious parents. Finally, the trivialization of the traditional heterosexual marriage would alarm the same Ontarians that are protesting Premier Wynne’s radical sex curriculum.

If Silverberg seems tone-deaf to conservative Ontario, he is more like a visitor from another planet to the citizens of Oregon. In his keynote address to Oregon parents, educators, and ‘tweens as young as 11, he gave how-to, on-screen lessons on a virtual, interactive sex site called VirtualFem, on how make an avatar for Internet interactions, and on how to use “teledildonics,” which are genital stimulators that can be operated reciprocally by sexual partners in remote locations.

Silverberg begins, however, with a grotesquely botched history lesson revealing the field of sexology’s inherent bias against religion in general and Christianity in particular. He tells how St. Bernard of Clairvaux, “who kind of ruled everything,” wanted to “destroy all the mills” because these highly productive and progressive innovations, powered by wind and water, were places where classes mingled and sexual acts happened.

“So this would be tantamount to threatening to destroying the Internet, or destroying all cars and the knowledge to build them,” said Silverberg. While this comparison may be true, the rest is not. St. Bernard advised a single abbot whose mill brought prostitutes together with friar-millers to either kick out the women, replace the friars with civilians, or abandon the mill. Christian monasteries didn’t destroy mills, they famously built them and spread their use across Europe to the general enrichment of the population, along with other agricultural innovations.

All this has been explained by historian Rodney Stark in a series of books, such asThe Victory of Reason: How Christianity Led to Freedom and Capitalism, and Western Success.

Silverberg is not the only sex educator to spread glaring falsehoods about the Catholic Church. Colorado Springs sex therapist David Snarch for many years told seminar-takers how the Church stood in Columbus’ way because it didn’t want its teaching that the world was flat to be refuted. In fact, educated Europe had known since before the time of Christ that the world was round.

One youth in Oregon recorded Silverberg’s talk and leaked it to KOIN6 TV, which launched a series of investigative reports that brought down a storm of criticism on the 30-year-old conference, including threats from the local sheriff to shut it down. This year the state-wide consortium of “progressive” educators decided to avoid the furore and cancelled the event several months ahead of time.

Campaign Life Coalition’s Jack Fonseca told LifeSiteNews, “Shame on the CBC for promoting a man who is on record having promoted a pornographic website and remote- control sex toys to children as young as 11 years old.  Such a person should never be given honours and accolades. This shows that CBC Radio has no integrity whatsoever, going even so far as to bury hard evidence. It’s ironic, isn’t it, that ‘Q’ is the same program that Jian Ghomeshi, the alleged abuser of women, used to host?”

Comment: Yeah, and this is problematic?

Only a low population can remain

Dratzo! We come this time with more good news! Our liaisons report that our allies are preparing to release the prosperity shortly. At present, the various tests of this new system are proceeding. The holidays have somewhat slowed this procedure. Yet the basic intent continues — namely, to successfully distribute your various blessings! The dark cabal is now unable to stop this movement. This process is presently aimed at completion by the early spring. Until then, expect to see events, which seem to hint at no immediate change. The dark knows what is truly happening and sees that there is no way out of their current predicament. Our ambassadors are presently setting up when and how new governance is to manifest. All of this wonderful news means that we are moving at a good pace toward disclosure. Our Agarthan allies and your Ascended Masters are therefore preparing a number of lessons, which are essential to this cause. Our fleet continues to limit how the exotic weaponry of the dark is used. We have limited it to a very small set of minor cases.

   Gaia is as well increasing the speed by which she prepares for the massive changes to her surface. Our liaisons are monitoring this and daily conferring with her Spiritual Hierarchy and your Agarthan cousins. When the time comes, you are to be moved quickly to your Agarthan homes. Before this, of course, you are to be instructed by your mentors on the qualities of full consciousness and how to alter yourselves to be ready for your final transformation. All of this requires that we carry out the program put forth to us by the divine plan. Hence, we are now proceeding with a number of vital prerequisites. The landings have been somewhat altered by the Agarthans and us. These things we are to discuss with you at length in some succeeding messages. The most important items are your move to Agartha and your role in aiding Gaia to slough off everything that pollutes her land, water and air. In these matters, we fully intend to help you. Yet, you have all the technology needed to accomplish this great task. This technology is to be given you by your new governance!

   As you rise in consciousness, you become more aware of the fragile relationship between nature and yourself. This process permits you to see that your global chain of settlements needs to be changed. Previously you ignored nature and now you can see how vital this fragile relationship truly is. Every aspect of this relationship was deleterious to nature. Currently, you can see how this belief is causing nature to break down. The surface of any inhabited planet is sacred to it. Once you have learned this, you can see how only a low population can remain at any one time on the surface. Your great cities need to be abandoned (returned) to nature while you retreat to the beauty that is the hollow world of Earth’s interior. Here, you can create a new form of beauty and live a truly marvelous life. For untold millennia, we have put the major part of our society in a series of inner crystal cities. We constantly send special groups to gravitational nodes on the planet’s surface to insure that her ecosystems are properly cared for and provided with a healthy world to reside upon.

   Thus, we care daily for our world and the overall health of the star nation. We hold meetings where special representatives of each world meet and prepare a report read and commented on by every member of our star nation. We are in divine service to maintain our home worlds. We take this task quite seriously. In fact, we interact daily with our various home worlds. These actions are part of what we do to ready ourselves for contact. We feel connected to our home and to each of you. This fleet dearly wishes for the rise in your ability to become fully involved in manifesting a new reality. The key phrase here is “taking responsibility” for your home world. At present, this surface realm is on the verge of serious events that threaten your survivability. We have watched your dark cabal work hard to gain “maximum profits” from this environment. These terms and actions are truly irresponsible. We have kept these madmen from courses of actions that are morally reprehensible. Nevertheless, ultimately these vile scalawags are your concern.

   Blessings! We are your Ascended Masters! Bless you on this good day! A new conscious realm is forming! To those who have aided our cause we say thanks to you and ask that the Lord’s graciousness surround you! Over the past few decades, the Light has given us a blessing of its growth. Now, this Light grows even stronger! The Heavens have given us the joy of a wonderful eclipse and a way to secure the way of Light in this formerly dark reality. Let us raise our hands in happiness and joy! This new burst of blessings from on high paves the way for our coming transition. Long ago, we began a journey to bring this sacred Light to all. To lift up humanity and praise the good deeds of Heaven! Today we are that much closer to transformation and divine redemption. Tell each one that you are ready to rise and to obey the sacred. We sing as well and praise all who give us a growing strength. A momentous time as Easter and Passover together descend upon us and add their blessing to the whole.

   We stand at the very edge of our blessings. Let each of you feel this inside your precious Soul! Gaia waits for us to get our freedom and use this to bring her great comfort. As your consciousness raises it becomes more aware of what we speak about. Rest and clear your distresses. Use this time to look inward and pray. This wondrous land is not to die, but instead to live in the glories of your divine deeds and actions. We are here, Dear Hearts, to guide and assist. Be ready to call on us and ready yourselves for what this new realm is to look like. This time is to be a watershed and a moment when you can see that Heaven is behind you and you are not alone! Thus, be grateful and gracious for many things are now happening on your behalf. Let it play out as wondrously as possible. It is to take its time and use its power to bring you a new life.

   Be graceful and spread your Love to the Heavens and to each other. There is a grace descending from on high. It dearly intends to alter this realm and prepare the way in joy for your final transformation. Be aware of this and be ready to be thoroughly accepting of a number of grand gifts. We are preparing lessons to explain all and to ready you for the arrival of our space family. The Creator’s divine plan is to manifest! It is to transform darkness into Light! Much of this you do not know. As you reach toward the Light of your Soul, be ever cognizant of how you are to interact with those who once detested you. They now seek Love and understanding. Know this in your heart. We are to guide now in the reality you are to lead. This star nation is to blossom and, in ease, teach much to those who were once so dark. This galaxy is to shine and give this growing radiance to the universe! Hallelujah! Hallelujah!

   Today, these messages of ours continued! We require your participation. What is set upon this land is a new responsibility. Use it wisely to make each of you great Beings of Light! Transform physicality and use wisdom to know just how to best complete this task. We leave for now in full knowledge of whom you truly are! Know, dear Ones, that the countless Supply and never-ending Prosperity of Heaven are indeed yours! So Be It! Selamat Gajun! Selamat Ja! (Sirian for Be One! and Be in Joy!)

“The Only Moral Abortion is My Abortion”

“The Only Moral Abortion is My Abortion”

When the Anti-Choice Choose

By Joyce Arthur

Copyright © September, 2000

** A supporter has translated this article into Belorussian: click here to read the translation**

Abortion is a highly personal decision that many women are sure they’ll never have to think about until they’re suddenly faced with an unexpected pregnancy. But this can happen to anyone, including women who are strongly anti-choice. So what does an anti-choice woman do when she experiences an unwanted pregnancy herself? Often, she will grin and bear it, so to speak, but frequently, she opts for the solution she would deny to other women — abortion.

In the spring of 2000, I collected the following anecdotes directly from abortion doctors and other clinic staff in North America, Australia, and Europe. The stories are presented in the providers’ own words, with minor editing for grammar, clarity, and brevity. Names have been omitted to protect privacy.

“I have done several abortions on women who have regularly picketed my clinics, including a 16 year old schoolgirl who came back to picket the day after her abortion, about three years ago. During her whole stay at the clinic, we felt that she was not quite right, but there were no real warning bells. She insisted that the abortion was her idea and assured us that all was OK. She went through the procedure very smoothly and was discharged with no problems. A quite routine operation. Next morning she was with her mother and several school mates in front of the clinic with the usual anti posters and chants. It appears that she got the abortion she needed and still displayed the appropriate anti views expected of her by her parents, teachers, and peers.” (Physician, Australia)

“I’ve had several cases over the years in which the anti-abortion patient had rationalized in one way or another that her case was the only exception, but the one that really made an impression was the college senior who was the president of her campus Right-to-Life organization, meaning that she had worked very hard in that organization for several years. As I was completing her procedure, I asked what she planned to do about her high office in the RTL organization. Her response was a wide-eyed, ‘You’re not going to tell them, are you!?’ When assured that I was not, she breathed a sigh of relief, explaining how important that position was to her and how she wouldn’t want this to interfere with it.” (Physician, Texas)

“In 1990, in the Boston area, Operation Rescue and other groups were regularly blockading the clinics, and many of us went every Saturday morning for months to help women and staff get in. As a result, we knew many of the ‘antis’ by face. One morning, a woman who had been a regular ‘sidewalk counselor’ went into the clinic with a young woman who looked like she was 16-17, and obviously her daughter. When the mother came out about an hour later, I had to go up and ask her if her daughter’s situation had caused her to change her mind. ‘I don’t expect you to understand my daughter’s situation!’ she angrily replied. The following Saturday, she was back, pleading with women entering the clinic not to ‘murder their babies.'” (Clinic escort, Massachusetts)

“We too have seen our share of anti-choice women, ones the counselors usually grit their teeth over. Just last week a woman announced loudly enough for all to hear in the recovery room, that she thought abortion should be illegal. Amazingly, this was her second abortion within the last few months, having gotten pregnant again within a month of the first abortion. The nurse handled it by talking about all the carnage that went on before abortion was legalized and how fortunate she was to be receiving safe, professional care. However, this young woman continued to insist it was wrong and should be made illegal. Finally the nurse said, ‘Well, I guess we won’t be seeing you here again, not that you’re not welcome.’ Later on, another patient who had overheard this exchange thanked the nurse for her remarks.” (Clinic Administrator, Alberta)

“We saw a woman recently who after four attempts and many hours of counseling both at the hospital and our clinic, finally, calmly and uneventfully, had her abortion. Four months later, she called me on Christmas Eve to tell me that she was not and never was pro-choice and that we failed to recognize that she was clinically depressed at the time of her abortion. The purpose of her call was to chastise me for not sending her off to the psych unit instead of the procedure room.” (Clinic Administrator, Alberta)

“Recently, we had a patient who had given a history of being a ‘pro-life’ activist, but who had decided to have an abortion. She was pleasant to me and our initial discussion was mutually respectful. Later, she told someone on my staff that she thought abortion is murder, that she is a murderer, and that she is murdering her baby. So before doing her procedure, I asked her if she thought abortion is murder — the answer was yes. I asked her if she thought I am a murderer, and if she thought I would be murdering her baby, and she said yes. But murder is a crime, and murderers are executed. Is this a crime? Well, it should be, she said. At that point, she became angry and hostile, and the summary of the conversation was that she regarded me as an abortion-dispensing machine, and how dare I ask her what she thinks. After explaining to her that I do not perform abortions for people who think I am a murderer or people who are angry at me, I declined to provide her with medical care. I do not know whether she found someone else to do her abortion.” (Physician, Colorado)

“In 1973, after Roe v. Wade, abortion became legal but had to be performed in a hospital. That of course was changed later. For the first ‘legal abortion day’ I had scheduled five procedures. While scrubbing between cases, I was accosted by the Chief of the OB/Gyn service. He asked me, ‘How many children are you going to kill today?’ My response, out of anger, was a familiar vulgar retort. About three months later, this born-again Christian called me to explain that he was against abortion but his daughter was only a junior in high school and was too young to have a baby and he was also afraid that if she did have a baby she would not want to put it up for adoption. I told him he did not need to explain the situation to me. ‘All I need to know’, I said, ‘is that SHE wants an abortion.’ Two years later I performed a second abortion on her during her college break. She thanked me and pleaded, ‘Please don’t tell my dad, he is still anti-abortion.'” (Physician, Washington State)

“The sister of a Dutch bishop in Limburg once visited the abortion clinic in Beek where I used to work in the seventies. After entering the full waiting room she said to me, ‘My dear Lord, what are all those young girls doing here?’ ‘Same as you’, I replied. ‘Dirty little dames,’ she said.” (Physician, The Netherlands)

“I had a patient about ten years ago who traveled up to New York City from South Carolina for an abortion. I asked her why she went such a long way to get the procedure. Her answer was that she was a member of a church group that didn’t believe in abortion and she didn’t want anyone to know she was having one. She planned to return to the group when she went back to South Carolina.” (Physician, New York)

“I once had a German client who greatly thanked me at the door, leaving after a difficult 22-week abortion. With a gleaming smile, she added: ‘Und doch sind Sie ein Mörderer.’ (‘And you’re still a murderer.’)” (Physician, The Netherlands)

“My first encounter with this phenomenon came when I was doing a 2-week follow-up at a family planning clinic. The woman’s anti-choice values spoke indirectly through her expression and body language. She told me that she had been offended by the other women in the abortion clinic waiting room because they were using abortion as a form of birth control, but her condom had broken so she had no choice! I had real difficulty not pointing out that she did have a choice, and she had made it! Just like the other women in the waiting room.”(Physician, Ontario)

“A 21 year old woman and her mother drove three hours to come to their appointment for an abortion. They were surprised to find the clinic a ‘nice’ place with friendly, personable staff. While going over contraceptive options, they shared that they were Pro-Life and disagreed with abortion, but that the patient could not afford to raise a child right now. Also, she wouldn’t need contraception since she wasn’t going to have sex until she got married, because of her religious beliefs. Rather than argue with them, I saw this as an opportunity for dialogue, and in the end, my hope was that I had planted a ‘healing seed’ to help resolve the conflict between their beliefs and their realities.” (Physician, Washington State)

“I had a 37 year old woman just yesterday who was 13 weeks. She said she and her husband had been discussing this pregnancy for 2-3 months. She was strongly opposed to abortion, ‘but my husband is forcing me to do it.’ Naturally, I told her that no one could force her into an abortion, and that she had to choose whether the pregnancy or her husband were more important. I told her I only wanted what was best for her, and I would not do the abortion unless she agreed that it was in her best interest. Once she was faced with actually having to voice her own choice, she said ‘Well, I made the appointment and I came here, so go ahead and do it. It’s what’s best.’ At last I think she came to grips with the fact that it really was her decision after all.” (Physician, Nevada)

“We have anti-choice women in for abortions all the time. Many of them are just naive and ignorant until they find themselves with an unwanted pregnancy. Many of them are not malicious. They just haven’t given it the proper amount of thought until it completely affects them. They can be judgmental about their friends, family, and other women. Then suddenly they become pregnant. Suddenly they see the truth. That it should only be their own choice. Unfortunately, many also think that somehow they are different than everyone else and they deserve to have an abortion, while no one else does.” (Physician, Washington State)

Although few studies have been made of this phenomenon, a study done in 1981 (1) found that 24% of women who had abortions considered the procedure morally wrong, and 7% of women who’d had abortions disagreed with the statement, “Any woman who wants an abortion should be permitted to obtain it legally.” A 1994/95 survey (2,3) of nearly 10,000 abortion patients showed 18% of women having abortions are born-again or Evangelical Christians. Many of these women are likely anti-choice. The survey also showed that Catholic women have an abortion rate 29% higher than Protestant women. A Planned Parenthood handbook on abortion notes that nearly half of all abortions are for women who describe themselves as born-again Christian, Evangelical Christian, or Catholic. (4)

According to a 1987 article, Abortion Clinics’ Toughest Cases,(5) “Physicians and clinics frequently terminate pregnancies for women who believe abortion is ‘murder’ and ‘a sin’ but who are not anti-abortion activists. Demonstrators, organizers, and leaders in the [anti-abortion] movement are seen less frequently, ranging from perhaps once or twice a month to a few times in the course of a professional career.” The article contained the following anecdotes:

An administrator at a Missouri clinic recalled a woman blurting out in the recovery room, “It should be illegal.” The other women’s mouths fell open, said the administrator. “They couldn’t believe it.”

The medical director of an Indianapolis clinic recalled one prospective patient who phoned to ask whether the clinic had a back door. He said no. How, she asked, could she get inside without being seen by fellow picketers outside? Pointing out that two orthopedists practiced with him, the doctor told the woman “she could limp and say she was coming to see the orthopods.”

The medical director at a Dallas abortion clinic told this story: A white woman from an affluent north Dallas neighborhood brought her black maid in for an abortion and paid for it. While the maid was in a counseling session, a commotion was heard in the waiting room outside. The maid’s employer was handing out anti-abortion leaflets to other women waiting for abortions.

From a clinic director in a mid-western state: “One of the most remarkable cases was a woman who came [from another part of the state] and said she was the Right-to-Life president in her county. ‘But,’ she said, she ‘had become pregnant and had to have an abortion.'”

From a counselor in Virginia: “[The patient] was disturbed and upset and insisted she couldn’t carry the pregnancy to term. She opposed abortion — and in fact had picketed this very clinic — [but] felt the abortion was something she had to do.”

Many anti-choice women are convinced that their need for abortion is unique — not like those “other” women — even though they have abortions for the same sorts of reasons. Anti-choice women often expect special treatment from clinic staff. Some demand an abortion immediately, wanting to skip important preliminaries such as taking a history or waiting for blood test results. Frequently, anti-abortion women will refuse counseling (such women are generally turned away or referred to an outside counselor because counseling at clinics is mandatory). Some women insist on sneaking in the back door and hiding in a room away from other patients. Others refuse to sit in the waiting room with women they call “sluts” and “trash.” Or if they do, they get angry when other patients in the waiting room talk or laugh, because it proves to them that women get abortions casually, for “convenience”.

A few behave in a very hostile manner, such as calling clinic staff “murderers.” Years ago, a clinic counselor in British Columbia told me that one of her patients went into the procedure room apparently fine with her decision to have an abortion. During the abortion, at a stage when it was too late to stop the procedure, the woman started screaming “You murderers!” and other invectives at everyone in the room.

A few doctors actually refuse to provide abortions to anti-choice women for liability reasons. In the words of a Kansas physician:

“Early in my career, I thought I was obligated to provide an abortion for every woman who arrived at my doorstep requesting an abortion. My experience in general medicine, surgery, and abortion has led me to believe differently. Not inadvertently, women give either me or my staff an uneasy feeling about their ambivalence or their anxiety about the abortion process. Since I have never been sued for an abortion I did not perform, my policy is to acknowledge my gut feeling, which is more often right than wrong.”

A clinic counselor from Georgia stated:

“I have long felt that anti-abortionism is a psychological contraindication to the abortion procedure. And that we don’t have to give everyone who asks an abortion. An anti-abortion woman is likely to be uncooperative and will probably not follow post-op instructions or instructions on how to deal with complications. There is actually a case where an anti-abortion patient failed to go as directed to Emergency for an unrelated complication. She ended up dying, and her family sued the physician and badgered him publicly. Additionally, if you have a complication that day, it will be the anti-abortionist. I’m not talking about the patient who says, ‘I was against abortion until it happened to me’, or ‘I’m really against abortion, but I have to do this’. I’m talking about the picketer, the activist, the totally anti-creature who will come back to haunt us.”

In fact, an anti-abortion organization called Life Dynamics Inc., of Denton Texas, specializes in malpractice suits against abortion providers. They advertise for and exploit women who regret their abortion decision or who had complications, and try and persuade them to file suit against the doctor or clinic. Many of these women are vulnerable and suffer from emotional problems, but others are anti-abortion, or at least very ambivalent about their decision to have an abortion. The message that abortion is murder has had a profound influence on them, and it may leave them with a legacy of guilt and shame after their abortion, too often borne alone and in silence. When these women find themselves unable to cope with their abortions, they may look for somebody else to blame, and doctors become a convenient scapegoat.

At times, clinic staff understandably become frustrated and angry when they have to deal with abusive, hostile, or hypocritical patients. And it is rare for anti-choice women to express appreciation for the service they’ve received. But most clinics perform abortions on anti-abortion women because they feel it’s their obligation to help all women. They provide more thorough and specialized counseling to these women to ensure they take ownership of their decision, as far as possible. Here’s a couple of examples of counseling techniques:

“When a patient comes in with my ‘favorite’ sentiment: ‘The only moral abortion is my abortion,’ I try to expand her understanding that a few more of us have had and deserve a ‘moral’ abortion. When a woman expands her need for care beyond herself, you no longer have an ‘anti’.”(Clinic Administrator, Louisiana)

“Sometimes I say to patients who have that ‘I have no choice, I know I’ll regret it, just do me’ attitude: ‘You may not care, but we do. We only do abortions on women who want our services. We will not knowingly contribute to any possible trauma of any woman.’ They seem surprised that we care how we do our work, but they also accept it.” (Counselor, New York)

Some anti-choice women who have abortions do make peace with their decision and even become pro-choice, or at least more forgiving of other women seeking abortions. A Louisiana patient who was anti-choice before her abortion, wrote a warm and grateful thank-you letter to the clinic, admitting that she had been a hypocrite:

“I never dreamed, in my wildest nightmares, that there would ever be a situation where I personally would choose such an act. Of course, we would each like to think that our reasons for a termination are the exception to the rule. But the bottom line is that you people spend your lives, reputations, careers and energy fighting for, maintaining, and providing an option that I needed, while I spent my energy lambasting you. Yet you still allowed me to make use of your services even though I had been one of your enemies. You treated us as kindly and warmly as you did all of your patients and never once pointed an ‘I told you so’ finger in our direction. I got the impression that you cared equally about each woman in the facility and what each woman was going through, regardless of her reasons for choosing the procedure. I have never met a group of purely non-judgmental people like yourselves.”

On occasion, an abortion turns out to be a momentous, life-affirming experience for an anti-choice woman. A doctor from a north-western state shared the following personal story with me:

“I was born into a very Catholic family, and was politically pro-life during college. After dating my first real boyfriend for three years, we broke up, and the day my boyfriend moved out, I discovered I was pregnant. It was an agonizing decision, and something I never thought I would do, but I decided an abortion was the only realistic option. Thanks to Planned Parenthood counseling, I worked through some very tough conflicts within myself. I had to learn that my decision was a loving one. That ‘my god’ was actually a loving and supportive god. And that men don’t have to make this decision, only women do. That it is a very personal, individual decision. I had to own it. I became much more compassionate towards myself and others as a result of my experience. Two years later I began medical school. When it came time to choose a practice, an abortion clinic opportunity came up. In working there, I began to feel that this was my calling. Having been in my patients’ shoes, and coming from an unforgiving background, I could honestly say to patients, ‘I know how you feel.’ Deciding to have an abortion was THE hardest decision I’ve ever made in my life. Yet it has brought me the greatest transformation, fulfillment, and now joy. I am a more loving person because of it, and a better doctor for having experienced it. I love the work that I do, and the opportunity to support women seeking to end an unwanted pregnancy. My patients and my work are life’s gifts to me, and I think my compassion and support are my gifts in return.”

1. Henshaw, S.K. and G. Martire. 1982. Abortion and the Public Opinion Polls: 1. Morality and Legality. Family Planning Perspectives. 14:2, pp 53-60, March/April.

2. The Alan Guttmacher Institute. 1996. Abortion Common Among All Women, Even Those Thought to Oppose Abortion.

3. Henshaw, S.K. and K. Kost. 1996. Abortion Patients in 1994-1995: Characteristics and Contraceptive Use. Family Planning Perspectives. 28:4, July/August.

4. Planned Parenthood of America. Pro-Choice Debate Handbook.

5. Medical World News. 1987. Abortion Clinic’s Toughest Cases. pp 55-61. March 9.


Abortion as a soul-saving machine

A pneumatocentric view of life can logically result in the advocacy of abortion. The reason is that many creationists believe that fetuses and those who die in infancy go directly to heaven. For example, Louis T. Talbot (1889-1976), a former chancellor of Biola College, a creationist mecca, answers a question concerning the destiny of those who die in infancy as follows:

Yes, all infants, including stillborn babies, and young children who have not reached the age of accountability at death, go immediately into the presence of God. [33]

That would mean that abortion should result in a 100% salvation rate for fetuses who are aborted. Abortion would also eliminate completely the risk of sending aborted fetuses to an eternal torture in hell. So, by this logic, creationists should be for abortion, not against it.

In fact, Reuben A. Torrey (1856-1928), a famous creationist, nearly comes to this conclusion when explaining why killing Canaanite children was justified:

Even today I could almost wish that all the babies born into families of wicked influence might be slain in infancy, were it not for the hope that some concerned Christian will carry to them the saving gospel of the Son of God. [34]

Yet, even this wish is illogical if all dead infants go directly to heaven. Torrey substitutes a risky hope of salvation through the gospel for what is the certainty of salvation through abortion or infanticide.

If creationists object that it is murder to commit an abortion, then we need to understand that Exodus 21:22 does not seem to regard the value of a fetus as equal to that of an adult. If a fetus is lost by an accidental human action, only a fine is imposed, whereas adults killed accidentally may require life for life (Numbers 35:22-34).

Yet, let’s suppose that creationists do not support abortion to save souls because they deem it murder to perform abortions. But even if abortion be regarded as murder, the fact remains that one abortion doctor could send a thousand souls to heaven in his lifetime. One still would gain 1000 souls for every doctor lost because of performing abortions. Abortion would still be a better method of saving souls than what anti-abortionists favor now (let the children grow up and hope they convert). The economics of soul-saving favor abortion no matter how we calculate it.

By the same token, a materialist view of life may be somatocentric — a view in which the body is the only and most valuable part of a person. Such a view can lead logically to valuing human life. Evolutionist materialists may try to make the most of the life they have on earth rather than sacrifice their earthly life for an afterlife that cannot be verified to exist. Valuing genetic diversity can lead to valuing the preservation of life. Thus, it is religious pneumatocentrism, not evolutionary theory, that can lead to senseless sacrifices of human life.

Comment: And that is why I said about three years ago that totalitarian atheists like Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and possibly Hitler were more opposed to abortion than some religious people.

PLANNED PARENTHOOD: Mutilated is the New “Normal”

PLANNED PARENTHOOD: Mutilated is the New “Normal”

Yes! Different is normal!

So I just recently saw a video put out by Planned Parenthood, entitled “Different is Normal.”

It’s an interesting little video, obviously aimed towards teens, and it would probably be a very good message if it weren’t for one, tiny, detail.

Actually, no, it’s actually a rather large detail; it outright tries to call the circumcised penis “normal,” like any other part of the body we’re born with.

The video starts out with a good message…

“As a teenager, you worry about a lot of things: homework, acne, your profile picture. One thing you shouldn’t be worried about is whether or not your breasts, penis, or vulva are normal, but lots of kids do. So, are they normal? Will they be when you’re all grown up? Short answer: yes. Long answer: well, when it comes to our bodies, being different is normal.”

Well, there’s a slightly longer answer, but Planned Parenthood won’t be addressing it here. 

“You already know that our bodies are just like snowflakes, no two are alike. Our faces are all made of the same parts: eyes, ears, nose, mouth, but they all look completely different. If that goes for your face, then why not the rest of your body? The reality is that normal is different. It’s all over the place.”

Do you see where this is going?

They start with the penis.

“Here’s a flaccid, or soft, adult penis. All penises have the same parts: glans, shaft, urethra, and all have testicles hanging below. Here’s one that’s erect, or hard.”

Of course.

But, where’s the foreskin? Is that not a part of the penis? And why are they showing a picture of a circumcised penis, as if it were the way it appeared in nature? Where’s the scar?

They show a second slide:

Only THEN do they decide to add:

“Some have foreskins, some are circumcised and have no foreskin.”

Did the guy with a foreskin get some sort of body modification? Was he born with some sort of genetic variation? Why are penises assumed to be circumcised by default?

“Some are shorter, some are thicker, some are thinner, some curve when they’re erect.”
“All are normal.”

Well. At least they hope to convince insecure teens.

Let’s see how they treat the girls:

“Same goes for girls. Each vulva has an inner labia, outer labia, clitoris, 
pening to the vagina, urethra, and clitoral hood.”

What’s wrong with this picture?

They didn’t seem to forget the labia, nor the clitoral hood, nor the clitoris in this diagram. Furthermore, the girls are actually shown different diagrams of different other vulvas, complete with different shapes and sizes of the clitoris, as well as variations in the lengths of the labia.

A stark difference is that the boys don’t get to see different types of foreskins and/or glans. It appears the only variations among penises is circumcised and not… Absolutely no mention of the frenulum…

“Even with the same parts, each adult vulva looks completely different.
Some have bigger openings in the vagina, some have bigger clitorises that stick out…”
“…some have wide outer labia…”
“…some have bigger inner labia that stick out…”
“…and often the labia in the pair don’t match each other.”
“All are normal”

So much dedication and care for the female vulva. Where are all the variations of the male penis?  Where are all the large prominent glans? The long foreskins? The short foreskins? The uneven foreskins? Are those not “normal?”

But, more than this, where are all the circumcised vulvas? Where are the vulvas with no clitoris? Where are the vulvas that have been sewn up in infibulation? If they’re showing diagrams of circumcised penises, why aren’t they showing diagrams of female circumcision? Why does Planned Parenthood try to pass off the circumcised penis as just another variation of “normal?”

Would Planned Parent hood EVER dare to say that ANY of these things was normal?

Female genital cutting is “normal” for millions of girls in Africa, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Brunei and all over South East Asia.

But let’s not talk about THAT.

“So remember, when it comes to our faces, our hands, and yes, our genitals, different is normal. So you can officially stop worrying about your vulva, breasts, or penis.”

Do you hear that, boys? Do you hear that men? You can stop worrying about the fact that someone took a knife and sliced off part of your penis.

Muslim boy becoming “normal.”

This is perfectly “normal” and acceptable.

What about you girls who don’t have a clitoris? Who are missing your labia? Or who have been infibulated?

For millions of girls globally, this is “normal.”

Go sit in a corner and feel sorry for yourself.

Thanks, Planned Parenthood, but NO THANKS.

No, the circumcised penis is NOT normal.

It is a forced, contrived, artificial phenomenon.

It is a subversion of the normal, healthy penis.

No, penises in the world DON’T all have the same parts. (Neither do vulvas in the world for that matter…) Some are missing parts, and it’s because they were deliberately CUT OFF.

But let’s not get into that; this is a feel-good video for teens, right?

This video is pure self-serving GARBAGE.

Planned Parenthood ought to be ASHAMED for trying to normalize genital mutilation.

They ought to be ashamed that they are insulting the youth’s intelligence with this crap.

SHAME on you, Planned Parenthood, SHAME on you.

Bottom Line
The foreskin is not a birth defect. Neither is it a congenital deformity or genetic anomaly akin to a 6th finger or a cleft. Neither is it a medical condition like a ruptured appendix or diseased gall bladder. Neither is it a dead part of the body, like the umbilical cord, hair, or fingernails. The foreskin is normal, natural, healthy tissue with which all boys are born.

Unless there is a medical or clinical indication, the circumcision of healthy, non-consenting individuals is a deliberate wound; it is the destruction of normal, healthy tissue, the permanent disfigurement of normal, healthy organs, and by very definition, infant genital mutilation, and a violation of the most basic of human rights.

The presence of the foreskin is normal, and its absence abnormal.

Nay, it is a deliberate disfigurement.

Genital mutilation, whither it be wrapped in culture, religion or “research” is still genital mutilation.

The same video touting the same bullshit can be seen here in Spanish.

The New York Times has actually published a very informative article concerning female genital cutting as it occurs in South East Asia and can be accessed here.

Comment: Among many people, Planned Parenthood has a very shady reputation. Again, as I stressed many times, lowering the birthrate by whatever means requires the acceptance of euthanasia. Hell is eternal.

Ahead of Historic Sainthood Mass, Pope Francis Speaks Out Against Abortion

The big story this weekend was Pope Francis’ elevation of Popes John XXIII and John Paul II to sainthood. The “four-pope mass” was noteworthy not only because two popes (John XXIII and John Paul II) had never been canonized at the same time, but also because two living popes (Francis and the papal emeritus Benedict XVI)  had never been present for a canonization. They were joined by nearly a million other people in Vatican City.

In his homily, Pope Francis praised both 20th-century pontiffs effusively. The Holy See also sought to dispel the public curiosity about the canonization of two men who were considered to be dogmatically very different; the “liberal” Pope John XXIII and the “conservative” John Paul II.

“They were priests, bishops and popes of the 20th century. They lived through the tragic events of that century, but they were not overwhelmed by them. For them, God was more powerful; faith was more powerful.”

Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Father James Martin offered that the biographical differences between major figures in the history of the church are part of what made their spiritual quests compelling.

Consider how the personalities of some of the most notable men and women in the church led them to live out their calls. St. Ignatius of Loyola, the founder of the Jesuits, gave up a military career to follow God; St. Joan of Arc began one. Dorothy Day, the co-founder of the Catholic Worker movement, started a newspaper, while St. Bernadette Soubirous, the visionary of Lourdes, shrank in horror from the idea of her story ever being published. St. Thomas Aquinas spent his life surrounded by books, while St. Francis of Assisi instructed his friars not to own even one lest they become too proud.”

Ahead of the weekend’s event, Pope Francis showed glimpses of that complexity on Friday, when he made a seemingly rare statement to a group of African bishops in which he strongly condemned abortion.

Abortion compounds the grief of many women who now carry with them deep physical and spiritual wounds after succumbing to the pressures of a secular culture which devalues God’s gift of sexuality and the right to life of the unborn.”

Pope Francis has made a habit of focusing on poverty and social inequality rather than abortion, which remains a divisive issue both within and beyond the Catholic church. Two weeks before, he had called abortion “an unspeakable crime” during a speech to an Italian anti-abortion group.