Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
March 07, 2006

Inconsequential Law

We, who convene here, you, like me, are of course pro abortion penalties. Like me you will be astound why the baby murder law adopted in South Dakota and signed by Governor Michael Rounds is so utterly inconsequential.

I have often criticized hypocrisy in American politics. But seldom have I come up to such a fraud like South Dakota State Senator Ben Napoli.

Mr. Napoli suggests a women, brutally raped, savaged, religious, planning on saving her virginity until she was married, brutalized and sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and, thanks to God's will, impregnated, should be allowed to kill God's child.

Mr. Napoli: "You are either with us, or against us." How often will the President (PBOH) have to repeat that sura before apostas like you get it?

After God has chosen her, be it for her sins or her holiness, it is HIS will for her to have a child. For our healing or condemnation. But then, exactly in the above case, where God's will is expressed with the uttermost holy rage, Mr. Napoli retracts to his liberal roots.

He would allow that women to murder a becoming angel, a new prophet, to kill a baby directly from the testicles of the Almighty. He would legally allow her to sneak away from the Almighty's will and does not even propose to penalize her to the uttermost degree.

As even some weirdos acknowledge, any abortion is by pure definition a first degree murder. No matter when, no matter where, no matter why.

But the South Dakota legislators do not even demand a penalty for the women committing the murder. They let the airline that ferries her to the satanic place of her dead get away for free. Even Mrs. Ph. D. Devil, celebrating in her joy of murder, would only get a wrist slap of some five years in prison. What a cruel, cruel, utter cruel joke!

Mr. Napoli should be put to court for supporting such outrageous behavior.

Let us look at another issues in this debate that confuse people like Mr. Napoli.

Some put forward this "burning lab" test. They ask you to imagine a burning lab where you can rescue a two year old baby or a petri dish holding fertilized eggs, babies. "What would you choose?" they ask.

To you, like me, that question is of course only rhetorical. No matter whether you can save ten lives or one life, HIS will will decide. There is of course no need to intervene at all. Who are we to intervene in HIS deliberation.

You, like me, will stay back in awestruck prayer and submit to HIS will. You, like me, will condemn any attempt to save the minority over the majority. You, like me, will protect The Mandate.

This, again, like it is taught to us by our Leader (PBOH). He who lets God's hand guide the forces of God's chosen country to free millions of yet unborn from the evil influence of the kaafirs.

But how much long will this country stay under God's special protection if we allow elected representatives like Mr. Napoli to pervert HIS will expressed through our Presidents (PBOH) guidance.

Let us now convene in prayer and collection to bolster the will of the South Dakota legislature, Mr. Napoli, the President (PBOH) and my bank account.

Thanks!

Posted by b on March 7, 2006 at 20:57 UTC | Permalink

Comments

Brilliant!

Posted by: a swedish kind of death | Mar 7 2006 23:02 utc | 1

Archie Bunker Lives!

The Archie Bunker syndrome, is the embodiment of America's love affair with racism and "traditional family values," including the right to hate the same people and ideals that Grandpa hated. That life doesn't exist anymore. But then, it never did. Ben Napoli, and people of his ilk/tribe want us all to be stuck in their Nostalgia Trap reality tunnel.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Mar 7 2006 23:16 utc | 2

More of the same tripe:
'I'd rather see my daughter die than have sex'
Moronic religious fundamentalist opposition to inoculating girls against the strain of human papilloma virus that causes cervical cancer.

I am forever amazed by the death cult worshippers of the necrophile nazarene.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Mar 7 2006 23:55 utc | 3

Abortion was legalized because the SYSTEM needed workers but in the process 40 000 000 possible Americans were destroyed. Now the SYSTEM finds itself with a population and laborer vacuum where foreigners drift but the foreigners threaten the cultural integrity of the nation. So the public opinion and what is more important the ruling class, a class that though having inmense economic interests nevertheless still belongs to a social body with given characteristics and feels threatened by their loss, this nation turns now around and finds abortion an economic and cultural drag so the process of its illegalization continues apace. Gross sarcasm, religious indecency, will not do anything to stop it. Rights and laws are superstructures, they can be built and demolished. Opinions are vain. Economic interests and national feelings are all. JLCG

Posted by: jlcg | Mar 8 2006 1:28 utc | 4

NeosG-d jus' outlaw dakin' poundin' t' pingping!?
Mo'bettah allatime e hele mai ana au, eh, brah?!

Posted by: Ping Ping | Mar 8 2006 1:59 utc | 5

Not sure I get the joke, Bernhard.

@jlcg,

Interesting [if depressing] meta-theory of how times change re abortion rights. You may be right.

The Feminist Majority Foundation's Eleanor Smeal has said "follow the money" in order to understand opposition to women's reproductive freedoms: it guarantees a plentiful and therefore cheap labor supply. As if illegal workers from Central America were not enough to suppress wages and incomes: How low can you go on wages? With the resurgence of state control over the means of REproduction, we are about to find out.

While illegals help to suppress wages in the domestic labor market, they are not meeting the cannon fodder requirements. The abortion issue and its next replacement, the contraception issue, is really a birthrate / military recruitment issue, and therefore it is a WAR issue.

Posted by: gylangirl | Mar 8 2006 3:19 utc | 6

Digby points to this video with interviews of anti-abortion picketers.

On the question of penalty they all skip away. Inconsequence.

Posted by: b | Mar 8 2006 7:09 utc | 7

It has been pointed out that the passages that define life as starting with coneption mean that South Dakota could start placing restraining orders on pregnant women to prevent them from leaving the state to get an abortion.

I would suggest that the women be fitted with ankle braces engraved with relevant verses of scripture and that women who have already had abortions be branded with a scarlet letter A.

Posted by: ralphieboy | Mar 8 2006 13:17 utc | 8

i was going to post this over on OT , maybe it's better suited for this thread.

Bush executive order creates faith-based community center at Homeland Security

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to help the Federal Government coordinate a national effort to expand opportunities for faith-based and other community organizations and to strengthen their capacity to better meet America's social and community needs, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Posted by: annie | Mar 8 2006 17:40 utc | 9

@annie -
Haven´t you heard this?

The transport security agency under homeland security will get the task of applying pregnancy tests to stop women escaping from states were abortion is illegal.

@gylangirl - there was no joke. Just words missing to express myself on this in other ways.

Posted by: b | Mar 8 2006 18:26 utc | 10

The anti-abortion position is not just designed to create cheap labor but to keep women, fathers, families desperate, concentrated on surviving and having no time to study, think, act, protest. Feeding those gaping mouthes in difficult conditions in a society that offers no support except empty Orwellian admiration will be tough. Parents will sink into the underclass if they can keep their children safe, it is well known.

The children themselves may be used as free labor, cannon fodder, drone workers, fresh flesh, or be left to rot if of no use. No matter. Time to see.

The middle and upper classes will always use contraception and be able to get abortions.

It is a kind of British 19th or 18th century thing.

Look at the low-IQ poor! So dirty, so many children, so many loose women, irrresponsible fathers, drunken grannies, poor hygiene, ugly homes (or none), poor speech, failing school scores.... Genetic defiencies! A quirk of nature...too sad.

Off to jail! Work! Debtors prison, the poor house, the new slavery! Be grateful for the crusts of moldy white bread!

Posted by: Noisette | Mar 8 2006 18:44 utc | 11

b, my biggest fear is the handmaid's tale. that why i placed the link in this thread. last night i had dinner at my neighbors and we were discussing this issue, and i said, you wait , next will be the law making it illegal to transport women across state lines for the purpose of abortion. my neighbor is pregnant, in her 40's , we were discussing a mutal friend who, waiting past her prime to concieve, after a couple years of trying, will be adopting from china.

i think one of the biggest factor for abortion control in these red states is the availability of white adoptees. people are freaked out about immigration and what they see as an imbalance in the race factor. the same twisted mind that would support forced sterilization for a certain group may desire a mandatory sentence of pregnancy for another. how can we insure during these uncertain times the supremecy of our white race when white women are waiting longer to have children, choosing to have less children, while infertility is on the rise?

Posted by: annie | Mar 8 2006 19:04 utc | 12

@noisette

The British class system was always bolstered by eugenetic theory. Even the school system was devised with the premise that middle class children were more intelligent than the working class brats. They backed this up with IQ tests (but that's another story).

Posted by: DM | Mar 8 2006 21:33 utc | 13

I'm so glad to read a blog that supports pro-life! I get so tired of reading only leftist blogs bashing anyone who supports the right to allow these babies a chance to live!

Posted by: Happy Bunny | Mar 9 2006 0:32 utc | 14

"anyone who supports the right to allow"

wow , thats a tricky mouthful

don't you mean supports the right to allow the embryos to live long enough to become a baby. call it embryo rights over a womans right. or a girls right. or a rape vistims right. or an incest victims rights.

Posted by: annie | Mar 9 2006 1:05 utc | 15

the book handmaid's tale, yes, frightening warning.

The Orion movie Rain Without Thunder, set in the post-Roe year 2042 is equally chilling.

Posted by: gylangirl | Mar 9 2006 3:02 utc | 16

I think you guys are reading too much into the abortion issue. If there's one thing the decision-makers in this country don't do, it's assess the long term socio/economic effects of their decisions. So why on earth would decisions about abortion be make on anything resembling economic grounds?

I think the idea of race being a factor is slightly more likely, because, well, race is an underpinning of American politics just about everywhere. (and if you have checked out the Rude Pundit on this issue, he was at his finest - rudepundit.blogspot.com)

I see it more as a historical relic of the birth control arguments of the early 20th century. Once upon a time, it had connections to race and economy, perhaps, but now - it's simply an issue on its own, with intrinsic value.

Posted by: Rowan | Mar 9 2006 7:16 utc | 17

I didn´t know The Handmaid’s Tale. It' on my wishlist now. Thanks.

It is not that far off in history. The place I live in, some late 1900 building with quite big appartments, is typical in that it has a special room for the maid. Small, no outside window and hardly a private place.

There are lots of sad tales around such maids, though for some of them, growing up as the seventh child in a poor country side, it at least at first it looked like a step up the ladder. That was before that ladder broke.

Posted by: b | Mar 9 2006 7:35 utc | 18

i should have linked to it b. just assumed everyone knew the story. a must read.

Posted by: annie | Mar 9 2006 8:37 utc | 19

Yes, DM. Britain is the model here. It is also the only country that has made consistent efforts, ongoing today, to prove that the poor are dumber than the rich. The US has had its spates - based on racism, and sexism as well, though most have forgotten the latter today - but it has been rather distant, mild, hands off, and channeled through questionable ‘scientific’ concepts, thus creating a kind of distance and descending into trivilaity and convolutions (e.g. The Bell Curve, and IQ.) The issue has never gotten very much traction really, as ‘compensatory education’ or ‘equal opportunities’, ‘affirmative action’, etc. have been justified in a wide variety of ways; and 90% of Americans must continue to believe in a fair society, the rewards of hard work, equal starting blocks for all, and so on.

The US prides itself on being classless - that is an obfuscation of course, but public ideology and political correctness have taken their toll! Britain, by contrast, is the ultimate class society, in the Western World.

Rowan, the abortion issue was pushed on purpose to create divisions and difficulties. It is a ‘social’ issue that Joe Farmer and Marcia K. Publicist can get their minds around, have an opinion about, etc. Some, as we know, will be sent crazy by such issues. It permits the PTB to manipulate groups and distract attention away from far more important matters.

I believe this was quite deliberate, consciously thought out.

It worked.

Posted by: Noisette | Mar 9 2006 18:44 utc | 20

One reason the Democrats lost the last election was because they lost touch with "Middle American Values" and the Nascar dads.

But MAV's are not the same as fundamentalist values, and although most Nascar dads might not approve of abortion, they would still like to know that it is available in the event that their daughters do not live up their ideal moral standards. (And especially if they get raped.)

Posted by: ralphieboy | Mar 9 2006 18:52 utc | 21

The US has no willingness in the population control line. It is unconcerned about its birth rate, baby survial rate. High or low, no matter.

Nor does it desire or try to regulate, deliberately limit, or augment, immigration. (Pols will posture but nothing is ever done.)

It has no -absolutely no- public health or modern ‘eugenic’ critreria, such as aborting trisomy 21 foetuses before birth. It has no ‘good birth’ or ‘happy baby’ programs, except for the rich, who can pay for them, and don’t like being exposed to the medieaval bore of letting Nature take its course, and dealing with it after -- or being stopped from joining the glorious parent group when the decide they want that. It has no ‘regulation des naissances’ policy as we call it here (CH).

The US has no euthanasia policy, overt or covert. (That is why Schiavo can mobilise the press and distract endlessly.)

Its stance is quite clear. Let it be. Who cares. Freedom for all. Deal with it.

For that reason, abortion is a false issue, similar to discussing people having a false leg fitted or having an empty trouser leg and using a crutch, which is, all over the world, considered a matter of personal choice.

Getting people riled up about those kinds of personal choices, habits, actions, is a staight scam, political cheating, exactly the same as getting the Sunni and Shia to despise each other and commit murders.

Divide and conquer.

Posted by: Noisette | Mar 9 2006 19:10 utc | 22

The comments to this entry are closed.