2008 Woodie Awards
Na've anti-choice moralizing denies rights of born people
By: Ola Switala
Issue date: 4/25/08 Section: Opinion
Last week another clueless dude sounded off on the intersection of ethics and freedom of choice. Clearly delineating that it is unethical to kill (read: abort) the unliving (read: the unborn), about halfway through the article I realized that many people take pleasure in the killing of the undead in all those zombie movies. Then I thought about making a splatter film pitting the unborn against the undead. I am troubled, for it seems that one man, Josh Schukman, firmly believes in freedom of choice for all, and certainly his own freedom to sermonize, but for Josh, ethics once again trumps freedom of choice as far as women are concerned.
Let us pay no heed to the fact that in America, women have long been laid with the task of being beacons morality and purity in an ugly world of manly violence and lust. Well, this woman is ready to unleash her cock in a swordfight to the finish. Here I go.
While arguing that no abortion is ethical, save for cases of rape or incest, wherein he "can't offer a solution," Schukman "articulates" that his only concern for women's health with regard to abortions is to stop "back alley abortions." Throughout the scope of his article, clean surgical tables, the site of medicalized abortions, are the hotbeds of America's human rights violations. Broodingly listing 2-timing abortionists and second trimester escape artists, Schukman avoids all research into pills that dissolve the embryo before it develops and never once mentions a condom. In white, evangelical America, where the embryo is king, and Plan B and abortion pills are like, totally inhumane.
Schukman's article sponsors that age-old naive belief in the supremacy of "unborn" peoples' rights over born peoples' rights. It seems that the loss of stable body image, loss of job, loss of marital happiness, and, let's face it, the loss of sanity that can result from unwanted pregnancies is paltry compared to the inalienable rights of a parasitic embryo to feed off of the lives of everyone around it.
Let us pay no heed to the fact that in America, women have long been laid with the task of being beacons morality and purity in an ugly world of manly violence and lust. Well, this woman is ready to unleash her cock in a swordfight to the finish. Here I go.
While arguing that no abortion is ethical, save for cases of rape or incest, wherein he "can't offer a solution," Schukman "articulates" that his only concern for women's health with regard to abortions is to stop "back alley abortions." Throughout the scope of his article, clean surgical tables, the site of medicalized abortions, are the hotbeds of America's human rights violations. Broodingly listing 2-timing abortionists and second trimester escape artists, Schukman avoids all research into pills that dissolve the embryo before it develops and never once mentions a condom. In white, evangelical America, where the embryo is king, and Plan B and abortion pills are like, totally inhumane.
Schukman's article sponsors that age-old naive belief in the supremacy of "unborn" peoples' rights over born peoples' rights. It seems that the loss of stable body image, loss of job, loss of marital happiness, and, let's face it, the loss of sanity that can result from unwanted pregnancies is paltry compared to the inalienable rights of a parasitic embryo to feed off of the lives of everyone around it.
Viewing Comments 1 - 4 of 7
Average Mac Student
posted 4/26/08 @ 2:59 PM CST
Another over-the-top reaction to someone who, god forbid, has an atypical "Macalester" opinion towards the topic of abortion. Is such an angry opinion piece suppose to change the number of abortions in this country, or the way people feel about the issue? Debates should be healthy forums for communication between two sides, not an intangible version of mob mentality. (Continued…)
Ola
posted 4/27/08 @ 1:24 PM CST
mob whut? She'll critique like she wanna critique cuz it's her paper, bra
thanks ola!
posted 4/27/08 @ 11:32 PM CST
as a mac guy who supports a woman's right to choose, i thought your article was right on.
i wanted to write a response article of my own, but your healthy critique was communicated much more tangibly than i could have done, so thanks for that-
Alum
posted 4/29/08 @ 10:27 AM CST
Just some interesting information to add to the conversation about "viability."
A new study just came out in the New England Journal of Medicine concerning treatment of preterm infants. (Continued…)
Post a Comment