I just realized something
I'm pro-life.
Like, seriously pro-life.
Yep, that's right. Me, the dirty hippie who only flushes the toilet when, well, you know.
I realized this just now when I was thinking about why I don't like guns. IT'S BECAUSE THEY'RE FOR KILLING THINGS. Killing = bad <==> Life = good.
I don't like wars either. Hate 'em. Lots of people die in wars. Really, that's kind of the point, isn't it?
Taking this premise even further (many would say too far) I stopped eating meat awhile back, not because I don't like the taste (love the taste), but because I didn't like it when things died. Hell, I don't even like to kill plants if I don't have to. Like, last week, we were cooking and a field pea fell on the floor. I could have washed it off and added it back into the mix, but I had an even better idea. You should have seen how fast I raced it out to the garden and planted it. So it would grow, you know?
A day later or so I realized that it probably won't grow. See, it had been cooked already. Yeah. But I think you still see my point.
My pro-lifeness does have its limits. I do kill bugs that get into the house, or encourage the cat to kill them, especially if they're the bitey kind. I know there are some of you out there who strive valiantly to rescue the centipedes, the bats, possibly even mosquitoes already bursting at the seams with your own blood. And to you, I say - wow, you are PRO-life!
I also guess I focus more on some issues than others. For instance, I am against the death penalty, but don't spend a ton of time thinking about it. I am against it not because I don't think serial killers should die (reallly they'd might as well), but because I've seen documentaries about how many people on death row for years are now being cleared by DNA evidence. In a lot of cases, it seems as though these individuals are just random black guys with no history of violence who were picked up because the police needed someone to arrest and they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
On the other hand, I don't get as worked up about the death penalty as I do about unnecessary wars because the latter leads to WAY more loss of life, not to mention horrendous quality of life for those wounded or traumatized or those who lose someone.
Abortion is similar, I think. I guess how much life vs. potential life is lost really does depend on where you think life begins, hence all the controversy. Potential life being lost does not seem like a big deal, since you could argue that potential life is lost every time someone chooses abstinence, or chooses to abstain that particular day. It's just a lot harder (for me) to get worked up about a choice to terminate one's own barely-existent pregnancy than a choice to train and send young people with lives and families to do things that will kill and maim other people with lives and families and may lead to their own killing or maiming. And then to pretend they don't exist when they come back killed and/or maimed.
I'm not saying that any of this is new or non-obvious. I remember thinking this as a college freshman. It is obvious, to lots of people. To lots of pro-life people.
My point is, if this is so obvious, then how was the anti-abortion crusade allowed to make this phrase their own? I suppose they just thought of it first, but why didn't those of us who feel that _we_ are actually the ones who are pro-life take it back before it got out of control? Why don't we ever call them on these things?
Are we such pussies that we can't even point it out when the emperors who claim to be decked out in pro-lifeness, blue-collar family values, and small government (and straining under the yoke of liberal media bias) are actually just naked, bare butt-naked? Is it too late to point that out now?
Like, seriously pro-life.
Yep, that's right. Me, the dirty hippie who only flushes the toilet when, well, you know.
I realized this just now when I was thinking about why I don't like guns. IT'S BECAUSE THEY'RE FOR KILLING THINGS. Killing = bad <==> Life = good.
I don't like wars either. Hate 'em. Lots of people die in wars. Really, that's kind of the point, isn't it?
Taking this premise even further (many would say too far) I stopped eating meat awhile back, not because I don't like the taste (love the taste), but because I didn't like it when things died. Hell, I don't even like to kill plants if I don't have to. Like, last week, we were cooking and a field pea fell on the floor. I could have washed it off and added it back into the mix, but I had an even better idea. You should have seen how fast I raced it out to the garden and planted it. So it would grow, you know?
A day later or so I realized that it probably won't grow. See, it had been cooked already. Yeah. But I think you still see my point.
My pro-lifeness does have its limits. I do kill bugs that get into the house, or encourage the cat to kill them, especially if they're the bitey kind. I know there are some of you out there who strive valiantly to rescue the centipedes, the bats, possibly even mosquitoes already bursting at the seams with your own blood. And to you, I say - wow, you are PRO-life!
I also guess I focus more on some issues than others. For instance, I am against the death penalty, but don't spend a ton of time thinking about it. I am against it not because I don't think serial killers should die (reallly they'd might as well), but because I've seen documentaries about how many people on death row for years are now being cleared by DNA evidence. In a lot of cases, it seems as though these individuals are just random black guys with no history of violence who were picked up because the police needed someone to arrest and they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
On the other hand, I don't get as worked up about the death penalty as I do about unnecessary wars because the latter leads to WAY more loss of life, not to mention horrendous quality of life for those wounded or traumatized or those who lose someone.
Abortion is similar, I think. I guess how much life vs. potential life is lost really does depend on where you think life begins, hence all the controversy. Potential life being lost does not seem like a big deal, since you could argue that potential life is lost every time someone chooses abstinence, or chooses to abstain that particular day. It's just a lot harder (for me) to get worked up about a choice to terminate one's own barely-existent pregnancy than a choice to train and send young people with lives and families to do things that will kill and maim other people with lives and families and may lead to their own killing or maiming. And then to pretend they don't exist when they come back killed and/or maimed.
I'm not saying that any of this is new or non-obvious. I remember thinking this as a college freshman. It is obvious, to lots of people. To lots of pro-life people.
My point is, if this is so obvious, then how was the anti-abortion crusade allowed to make this phrase their own? I suppose they just thought of it first, but why didn't those of us who feel that _we_ are actually the ones who are pro-life take it back before it got out of control? Why don't we ever call them on these things?
Are we such pussies that we can't even point it out when the emperors who claim to be decked out in pro-lifeness, blue-collar family values, and small government (and straining under the yoke of liberal media bias) are actually just naked, bare butt-naked? Is it too late to point that out now?