I happened on a new (for me) blog and he had an extract from Camille Paglia a liberal, feminist writer. Interesting perspective on current political events. I followed the link and read the entire article, her take on Sarah Palin is frankly admiring and her position on abortion arresting. She writes :
“But the pro-life position, whether or not it is based on religious orthodoxy, is more ethically highly evolved than my own tenet of unconstrained access to abortion on demand. My argument (as in my first book, “Sexual Personae,”) has always been that nature has a master plan pushing every species toward procreation and that it is our right and even obligation as rational human beings to defy nature’s fascism. Nature herself is a mass murderer, making casual, cruel experiments and condemning 10,000 to die so that one more fit will live and thrive.
Hence I have always frankly admitted that abortion is murder, the extermination of the powerless by the powerful. Liberals for the most part have shrunk from facing the ethical consequences of their embrace of abortion, which results in the annihilation of concrete individuals and not just clumps of insensate tissue. The state in my view has no authority whatever to intervene in the biological processes of any woman’s body, which nature has implanted there before birth and hence before that woman’s entrance into society and citizenship.
On the other hand, I support the death penalty for atrocious crimes (such as rape-murder or the murder of children). I have never understood the standard Democratic combo of support for abortion and yet opposition to the death penalty. Surely it is the guilty rather than the innocent who deserve execution?”
Read full article here
Primo, caps off Ms Paglia, for the very first time i hear a person who favours abortion state clearly that abortion is murder and that we are dealing with human beings and not just a clump of cells. Someone should have had her advise Obama, it would have saved him that unfortunate pay grade comment.
Segundo, with this startling statement ‘surely it is the guilty rather than the innocent who deserve execution’ she admits the incongruity of vehemently campaigning for the freedom to snuff out innocent unborn lives at will whilst just as vehemently campaigning to save the lives of those guilty of heinous crimes. Are we so ideologically brainwashed that we cannot see the paradox inherent in this position?