The Election WILL Be Close and It’s Not Guaranteed (or even that likely) that Obama Will Win

Barack Obama is a nice guy. He’s certainly easier to relate to than Rick “I Want to Barf But It’d Muss My Sweater Vest” Santorum, Mitt “I Judge Trees” Romney, Newt “Why Even Bother With a Nickname” Gingrich and Ron “The Second Coming” Paul. But I don’t think people who are optimistic about Obama’s victory have been paying much attention to reality.

Yes, Obama has been polling marginally better recently, but his approval rating is still pretty low (around 45% according to Gallup*, but I’ve heard anywhere from 27% on Rasmussen to 53% at Daily Kos). Setting aside for a moment that people who are likely to vote for President Obama are already unlikely to be voting at all, we’re still faced with a very tight race, if we assume that all of those poll respondents go out and vote the same way they did in these polls. And, yes, the approval rates of the prospective GOP candidates aren’t particularly thrilling, but we also have to remember that most people don’t pay attention to politics until around Halloween.

Young people and minorities aren’t nearly as excited about Barack Obama as they were in 2008 and many young people have defected to Ron Paul because they were too busy drawing boobs in history class to realize what a train wreck he would be (article to follow). Voter suppression is the new Black Codes, with red states passing laws to limit early voting, require IDs many people likely to vote Democrat do not have (after crowing for years that a national ID card like those in Europe is just onnnnne step away from the government implanting bugs in your fillings), reject forms of ID that people do have (like veterans’ cards) and changing the rules on voter drives. That goes without mentioning the literally limitless funds political candidates can get from corporations. President Obama’s reelection campaign has gotten $1,000,000 from Bill Maher (one of the only people I’ve seen not confident that Obama will win), but that pales in comparison with what corporations and special interest groups have been dumping on Santorum and Romney. Disenchanted special interests on the left are far more likely to punish Obama by nixing his allowance than those on the right.

Many people, including my best friend, assure me that when the General Election comes (it’s November 6th this year. Make sure you have all of your registration and IDs and whatever other hoodoo you need to do researched and submitted before August if at all possible), common sense will prevail and Obama will be reelected and he’ll stop being a compromiser and toughen up and all kinds of wonderful things. While I think it’s likely that Obama would be tougher in his second term (though not by much), that is only possible IF he is reelected. Common sense would dictate that we wouldn’t think that Barack Obama is a liberal, socialist, faggot-commie, hitlernazi, terrorist, islamist, abortionist jerkwad. Common sense would dictate that no one, no matter how much they disagreed with Barack Obama’s policies, would think that he literally wants to destroy the United States. Common sense would dictate that the Tea Party never would have made it off the ground and that Ronald Reagan could never have been electable and that the notion of teaching Sunday School in Rest of the Week School would be laughed out of the capitol. But here we are.

Simply put, my dear friends and a lot of people online seem to be forgetting how many people have been waiting for three and a half years to vote for Anyone But Obama. Mr. or Ms. Anyone But Obama has been the most popular presidential contender since November 5th 2008. He or she even received a glowing endorsement from Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell as far back as 2010. On Election Day, the swarming masses of up to 55% of the voting-capable population are going to run out and a scary number of them are going to vote for Anyone But Obama. Lately, this person has been going by the names Romney and Santorum, but lots of people have said that they would gladly write Ron Paul in and can join likeminded jackasses otherwise non-voters on Facebook.

While I was only a grudging Obama supporter in 2008 (I wanted Edwards.) and I actively acknowledge being incredibly pissed with Obama’s boundless tolerance for compromise, I cannot and will not in good conscience vote for anyone else in 2012. I encourage you all to get out and vote for Obama when the time comes. Not voting won’t “send him a message,” as we saw in 2010 when Democrats stayed home. Voting for a third party candidate like Roseanne Barr will hurt both Obama and your street cred now and in perpetuity. Please vote. Do not skip voting because you think that it “won’t matter.” Even if your state “always goes blue,” vote anyway. It won’t go blue if no one votes. Pay attention to politics and pay attention to local officials as well. Research the names on your ballot. Encourage your friends to vote. Do not, under any circumstances, assume that we have this election in the bag.

*Also according to Gallup, the average presidential approval rating has been 54% since 1938.


The “Religious Freedom” Question of the Birth Control “Mandate” is Irrelevant.

There’s been a lot of recent to-do about the recent birth control “mandate” President Obama passed down a few weeks ago. Many of the logical points have been covered: This is not the Catholic States of America; women have a right to choose their own individual morality; no one is forcing anyone to be sterilized, take birth control or wear a condom; churches don’t have to pay for contraception; other denominations have to pay for all kinds of things that violate their conscience, but no one ever complains about Quakers having to pay for wars; and on and on and on… This will not be a long post.

The we-hate-women side has been adamant that “This isn’t about contraception; it’s about religious liberty.” That’s great, because if it were about contraception, they’d lose the eventual vote. The population of the United States, overall, loves contraception and a sixty+ percent majority believes it should be covered by insurance, even by religious organizations.

However, they’ve done us all the favor, if only people would remember their history. The Supreme Court already decided, waaaaay back in 1982, that religious organizations don’t get to choose what their employees believe. In this court case, United States vs. Lee, an Amish employer failed to withhold Social Security monies from his non-Amish employees because he disagreed with Social Security as an institution. The Supreme Court ruled, in plain, simple English that:

“If for example, a religious adherent believes war is a sin, and if a certain percentage of the federal budget can be identified as devoted to war-related activities, such individuals would have a similarly valid claim to be exempt from paying that percentage of the income tax. The tax system could not function if denominations were allowed to challenge the tax system because tax payments were spent in a manner that violates their religious belief … because the broad public interest in maintaining a sound tax system is of such a high order, religious belief in conflict with the payment of taxes affords no basis for resisting the tax.”

Not only does this claim that all of the complaining the Extreme Right does about funding abortion is unconstitutional, it also settles the matter of religious liberty as it relates to birth control. The “broad public interested” is clearly on the side of free contraception.

In case that doesn’t convince the nay-sayers and those turned off by the idea that women might be able to control their bodies, the Court also said that:

“‎When followers of a particular sect enter into commercial activity as a matter of choice, the limits they accept on their own conduct as a matter of conscience and faith are not to be superimpos­ed on the statutory schemes that are binding on others in that activity.”

So there we go. No person entering into a commercial activity (meaning “any business meant to turn a profit”) can play God to his or her employees. This shatters the Blunt Amendment (which states that any employer can deny coverage for any treatment for any reason) and also provides a decent precedent for telling the other non-church-but-religious organizations that are still protesting where to get off.

This was not meant to be a long post (and, compared to my typical diatribes, I think I did quite well on it). It was meant as a post that I hope many people read and a few pass on. In reality, it will be a post that is long forgotten as the War on Women rages on. No, I am not hyperbolizing. Yes, I do fear for my right to bodily autonomy. Call me a feminazi, call me an alarmist. I’m not sorry and I’m not wrong.

Attention The Media: Can we just grow up a bit?

Dear The Media,

Yes, you. All of the media. Not just “The Liberal Media,” the monolithic existence of which I haven’t much evidence; but all of you. Fox news, Addicting Info, HuffPo, Palookaville Post.

Can we grow up? Please?

I don’t know if you know what I mean, but I think your subscribers may. At least, I hope we do. When you do things like this you’re embarrassing yourselves and insulting your readers:

Accompanied with headlines like “Michelle Bachmann: Do you want HER to be your president?”

Similar images of her husband have been going around with snide remarks from the left about “Hurr durr, he’s gay.” For the party that claims to be tolerant and pro-LGBTQ, that’s monstrously offensive. I highly recommend you cut it out at once. Other images include:

“Rick Perry Looks Like a Nazi! LOL!”

The Left aren’t the only petty ones. The Right is frequently both wrong and rude, with pettiness coming in mostly in the form of hypocrisy. However, we do periodically see these things:

“Obama Pouts When He Doesn’t Get His Way.”

My point is simple: No one looks good all the time. Most people don’t look good most of the time. It’s really hard to be “on” all the time, even when you know that you need to be on. With people hiding behind (almost literally) every bush and taking pictures of your every move, you’re bound to look stupid sometimes. Even a picture that would have been nice, if taken half a second too early, can make it a positively ridiculous-looking picture. For instance:

This was a picture taken of me at the Maryland Renaissance Festival. It probably would have been nice: I was with a friend (I edited her out because she looked fine and I didn’t want her to accidentally bring up the overall niceness of the picture while I was trying to make a point), my hair was washed, I was wearing a cute dress. However, I was saying something like “Hurry” and it got me mid-hurr. I’d imagine pundits would slap some donkey’s ears on it and send it around saying “Maryanna Price! The Braying Jackass We Knew She was!” Jackass though I may be, this picture doesn’t really do much to support the claim.

Other pictures the media likes to play around with are youthful fun-making. The picture most recently passed around has been of Mitt Romney and his pals playing with money:

As far as Republican candidates go, Romney is probably the most reasonable. I don’t really support him, but this picture didn’t make me like him any less. In fact, it made me like him a bit more. Sure, he’s a rich, entitled, corporate jerk, but this picture doesn’t make him any more of one. It made him seem more human to me, instead of the coifed Frankenstein I’m used to seeing. It’s him, with some friends, playing with money twenty five years ago. Here are some pictures of me playing with friends, along with some headlines I imagine could go with them:

“Maryanna Price’s Bizarre Sexual Pact”

“Self-Proclaimed Feminist Giving Herself to Men”

“Hiding Your Face Won’t Erase the Past, Ms. Price”

“Price Wanton Tree Hugger (And Maybe MORE)”

“From Bra Burning to Brazen Boobies: Why the Feminist Movement are Whores and Hypocrites”

“Two in the Bush”

“Alcohol-Fueled Mistakes of Ms. Price’s Past”

“Price’s Cult Baptismal”

“Don’t Look So Shocked, Mrs. Dr. President.”

They’re unflattering, but they were fun. They weren’t dark or dastardly and, frankly, if I had been a rich, young buck like Romney with business buds, I probably would have taken a picture like that, too. Lord knows I’ve played around with a “fat wad” of cash with my friends.

Here’s a derpy picture of me that was taken when I wasn’t paying attention at matriculation:

Was I licking my lips? Was I sticking my tongue out at someone? Do I just look like that as a sort of ‘screen saver’ when my mind is blank? I have no idea. I’m still tagged in that photo on Facebook and when people come banging at my door in twenty years calling me the herpiest derp to ever derp, I probably won’t care. We saw dozens of these pictures of George Bush Jr. when he was president:

I didn’t like Bush and his presidency was one of the things that catapulted me into a life of dry, political blogging. However, this picture? It doesn’t define him as a leader. I found it by typing “George Bush dumb face” into Google. Yes, it’s a silly-looking face but, honestly, it looks like he’s holding back tears. The picture didn’t come with an article that was readily available, but it seems that he’s at some sort of veterans’ event and that he’s truly moved. Others included him making “monkey” faces (the same face everone makes any time they say something with an “u” sound in it) and a few of him with a great, big grin on his face:

It looks remarkably similar to any number of pictures I have that look exactly the same:

You may be saying “Oh, but Maryanna, we should be able to have our leaders be dignified people who are held to scrutiny and standards.”

I agree. I completely, totally, unabashedly agree. But this isn’t holding them up to standards of scrutiny. This is being the petty middle schoolers you complained about in high school. Despite what we may want to believe, politicians are people. Bush was elected on a wave of “I could have a beer with him.” It may not be what I want in a president, but I do agree that a president should not be a lifeless automaton with his or her finger on the button (metaphorical or real).

I’ve seen this picture used to make Obama look good (“He’s a human!”) and bad (“Sure, Mr. President, THAT’ll create a lot of jobs.”), but what it really makes him is human:

He’s a guy who can still have fun, in addition to being president of the United States. Do I want to have a beer with him? No. Beer is gross and I think that Obama would be a rather boring guy to talk to. He would probably think that I talk funny and that I’m either too political or too goofy. He seems like a nice human and I wouldn’t mind meeting him, but I’m content just seeing him able to have fun in his own time.

This is one of my favorite pictures of George Bush Jr. It shows him as very humbly human and a man who can laugh at himself:

That is the face of a man who knows he made a rather silly mistake, a minor faux pas, who’s making a face of light-hearted self deprecation. I think that takes character. He’s also a quick dodge.

Unflattering photos of all sorts are fine for the vapid paparazzi, but please stop pretending that they’re news.

OMG, a forty year-old woman with two kids has a BELLY! And she has the audacity to say that vegetables should be easily accessible! How DARE she have a milk shake on vacation?!

This isn’t news; it’s gossip, at best.

An unflattering picture of a person does not make them bad, stupid, wicked, foolish, gay, slutty, or even particularly deserving of ridicule. We have plenty of reasons to be cynical over politics and the people who get into them, but attempts to make change for the better (whatever your definition of “better” may be) will not make any headway until we start focusing on the issues rather than the images. This should not be a partisan plea.

If you find a picture of a politician holding a gun to a child’s head, make a headline out of that. If you happen to see a politician buying cocaine in an alley and get a camera phone picture of it, make a headline of that. If you see a politician chewing food, don’t bother. No one looks good chewing. No one can look good chewing. Soulless monsters or not, they have to eat and make their political points using their mouths. Not every picture is going to be one for the album. Get over it and grow up.

I only just yesterday saw Sucker Punch. Holy Shit, this movie is offensive. (Guest post by Felix Anderson)

In what world is it okay for a story about battered women to be marketed and delivered as badass T&A eye candy?

You all saw the trailers, right? The movie was marketed as a sexy fantasy action-fest. Swords swinging, bare thighs soaring trough the air. Let me start by saying that there’s nothing inherently wrong with this. Lots of movies exist for the purpose of action sexiness, and I’ll never say that that function shouldn’t exist.

But this movie is not that. Here’s the movie that was at the other end of all that tits and swordplay marketing:

A girl gets committed to a women’s mental institute after accidentally shooting her little sister while trying to defend her sister from her abusive stepfather.

In an expositional scene, Babydoll (we never hear another name), her father, and a man that I’ll call the Warden of the asylum walk into a room called the theater.

Warden >So the girls use this place to be social. Dr. Gorski, she uses it to help them deal with their issues. Polish therapy. Hmhmm (light chuckle). It’s really quite a show watching them act out who touched them or beat them or whatever. Dr. Gorski seems to think it helps them. I’m not so sure, but whether it does or doesn’t won’t matter much to you because once we take care of a little bit of business, there won’t be any of that or this one.
Father >Good
W >She’ll be in paradise, if you know what I mean. [It’s soon made clear that he’s referring to lobotomy.] And all of your troubles will be over. Right? Now, I know we said fourteen hundred, on the phone, *sigh* I’m taking a really big risk here. So it’s gonna have to be two grand even.
F >What the hell are you talking about? Don’t try and cheat me. We had a deal.
W >Listen. Father. I’m not gonna tell you what to do. Clearly you’re a man that can take care of himself. I don’t know what you did to this girl, and frankly I don’t wanna know. But what are you gonna tell the detectives when they come snooping around? I’m sure they’re gonna love to get her side of the story.
F >Yeah. [nods, hands money]
W >Okay.

So we’re informed here that virtually all of the inmates have been physically and/or sexually abused in their pasts, and that this trauma is exploited to the amusement of asylum staff. There are also multiple scenes in which one of the staff intends to rape an inmate (once by the cook, and once by the warden.) This place is an abusive hellhole.

In five days, the lobotomy doctor is going to arrive and lobotomize her.

For some reason, most of the movie takes place in a fantasy version of reality, which I’ll call metaphoric reality. In metaphoric reality, the mental institute is now a club for erotic dancing and prostitution (inmates are dancers/prostitutes), headed by the warden whose name is now Blue. In five days the High Roller (lobotomy doctor) will come and Babydoll’s virginity will be sold to him. Dr. Gorski is now dance instructor and caretaker Madame Gorski.

It’s soon revealed that Babydoll has a special ability of sorts, that consists of a super-erotic dance that mesmerizes its audience without fail. (By the way, this is metaphoric reality. It’s never shown what action this dance corresponds to in literal reality.) But the movie audience never sees the dance; instead, whenever she dances, it’s represented by the action sequences we saw in the trailers. In the first such scene, Babydoll receives vision-quest-like guidance for a mission to escape.

Guide >You will need five items for this journey. The first is a map. Then fire, a knife, and a key.
Babydoll >You said five things.
G >The fifth thing is a mystery. It is the reason. It is the goal. It will be a deep sacrifice and a perfect victory. Only you can find it. And if you do, it will set you free.

From there, Babydoll forms a plan to acquire these items by dancing for a man that has each of these respective things, and having one of the other girls pickpocket it from him. Every action segment is a symbolic stand in for Babydoll dancing.

It’s supposed to be empowering. These girls are fighting against their abusive, oppressive prison, and this is symbolized by fantasy badassery. But even in their empowered fantasy, they’re still just performing a sexy service for men! These are the scenes that got people into the theaters. They wear high heels (ridiculous for an action hero), one of them sucks on a lollipop, they all have plenty of breast and thigh showing. The girls’ fantasy relief from being sex slaves for Blue is to instead be sex objects for the movie audience.

This reminds me of a vital media archetype, the Empowerful Woman, articulated by feminist blogger Twisty:
She may only earn 3/4 of what a man earns, but she damn well has the empower to look sexy doing it in her cheapcrap push-up bra from Victoria’s Secret. She has the empower to demand pink products from manufacturers. She has the empower to cry out ‘I did it for me!’ when she gets her boob job; maybe she even has the empower to believe it. The empowerful woman is saucy, yet feminine. Clever, yet feminine. In her early thirties, yet feminine. Heterosexual, yet feminine. Stays in shape eating Lean Cuisine and sweating blue Gatorade while kickboxing in slow motion, yet feminine. Yes, the empowerful woman is many things. Too bad powerful isn’t one of them. That’s because feminine is all of them.

It gets worse.

Climax of the movie is nearing. Of the girls trying to escape, only Babydoll and Sweet Pea are still alive. They get to the outside of the compound, but there are people looking for them, and they’re going to be trapped. Remember the mysterious fifth thing?

The fifth thing is a mystery. It is the reason. It is the goal. It will be a deep sacrifice and a perfect victory. Only you can find it. And if you do, it will set you free.

Well, now Babydoll has the epiphany that the fifth thing is herself. She distracts the people searching for her, knowing that now she’ll have to face the High Roller, so that Sweet Pea can escape.
That’s right. Babydoll’s most mysterious, essential, potent resource is herself. But not in a you-can-rely-on-yourself way, but in a the-only-way-you-can-succeed-in-your-mission-is-to-sacrifice-your-body-to-rape kind of way.

Aaaaaand for the most offensive moment in the movie, this is a scene from the extended cut. The scene with the High Roller.

All I require from you is a sliver of a moment. To have you not by force, but simply as man and a woman. To see in your eyes, that simple truth that you give yourself to me freely. Not because you have to, but… because you want to. Now, of course, for such a gem, I will give as well. I’m willing to give you freedom. Pure and total freedom. freedom from the drudgery or everyday life, freedom as abstract ideal, freedom from pain, freedom from responsibility, freedom from guilt, from regret, freedom from sadness, freedom from loss, freedom to be happy.
Don’t close your eyes. I want you to look at me.
Freedom to love.
Um… What about the fact that there’s nothing free whatsoever about the way she’s giving herself? Also, how is it that metaphoric Stockholm Syndrome-d rape is freedom? The message seems to be that you can experience perfect bliss and freedom, even in the face of abuse, if you just let go and accept your abuse.

In both the original version and extended cut, we snap back to the real world, where the doctor has just performed the lobotomy, and he comments that she had a strange look in her eyes, “like she wanted me to do it.”

The movie is supposed to be about empowered women fighting for their life while using fantasy to escape the harsh reality of their circumstances. But it ends up delivering the message that a woman’s greatest and only weapon is her body, whether it be by dancing seductively or by actually sacrificing herself to her enemies. And, as a cherry on the misogyny sundae, when she finally gets raped/lobotomized, “she wanted it.”


It’s time for another “What Happened Tonight” multiple choice quiz! Listen to the following dialogue and pick what happened next!

Friend: Hello.
Man: Hi, there. Have we met?
Friend: Yes, you felt me up last time.

What happened next?

A. Man: Oh, I’m so very sorry. I really hope I didn’t offend you.

B. Man: What? Are you sure?

If you picked B, you’re correct! Let’s play on.

Man: What? Are you sure?
Friend: Yes, you were wearing a green t-shirt.

What happened next?

A. Man: God, I was so drunk. I know that that’s no excuse, but please accept my apologies.

B. Man: Well, I mean… Like, neither of you is a feminist, right?

B again it is, my fellow readers! Let’s watch what happened next.

Man: Well, I mean… Neither of you is a feminist, right?
Friend: No, I’m not, but you did feel me up.
Maryanna Fuckin’ Price: I am.
Man: *uncomfortable stare* Well… I mean, I do own a green shirt… Can you prove it?

And then?

A. Everyone laughs it off and the Man offers to buy us a pint.
B. Maryanna makes threatening small talk.
C. He feels Friend up again.

The answer is ALWAYS B, folks.

Maryanna: Yeah, I was there that night. Y’know, it’s the darndest thing. My friend here was really begging me not to hurt you. Ha! Funny thing, that. Fun-ny thing. I don’t think *we’ve* met. My name’s Maryanna. *extends hand to shake*
Man: My name is [Man]. *offers a limp fish to shake; looks surprised and hurt when give a proper handshake* You know, my GIRLFRIEND just moved in from [country]. So, you know, it’s sort of weird to have my GIRLFRIEND living here.
Maryanna: Right, yeah. What do you study, [Man.]
Man: [Nondescript, one-word answer] I’m gonna be heading off, then.

That’s all, folks! This concludes tonight’s quiz. Join us next post for more inexcusable privilege!

September 20th: Very Few Likely to Ask or Tell

Today marks the ‘death’ of the military’s 18 year-old “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy and, despite the whining of a few select people, this should be a proud day in our history. Since 1993, more than 10,000 people have been discharged under DADT, many of whom were in vital positions, such as Arabic and Farsi interpreters. The military has said it would allow those still in good standing to come back. That number is surprisingly large, showing a tenacity in dedication that would surprise many gay-bashers.

While many groups had repeal parties last night, today is expected to be business as usual domestically and, abroad, where it’s been September 20th for several more hours.

Despite the eager fervor the GOP had had about all of the awesome gay orgies that would be exploding in bases around the world, people actually in the military expect things to be pretty tame. It has widely been reported that only 30% of those serving in the military have said they would have a problem working alongside gays. Lucky for them, reason says that they probably still won’t know who among them is gay.


Because, of those people who choose to tell, few are likely to be telling everyone they see. Some may, and that’s fine, but the vast majority of gays are not as flamboyant as Fox would have you believe. Besides, if they’ve managed to hang around being gay without anyone noticing before, chances are they won’t change overnight.

Because there are very few circumstances in a given workday when “I got those copies you asked for, Bill…on the way to make out with my boyfriend” is going to be uttered.

Because, sadly, discrimination being wrong on paper doesn’t actually keep people from being jerks. The military also says that women shouldn’t be raped by their fellow members and we all know how well that’s going. Coming to work in a pink tutu and rainbow wig (which gays do in every other profession from Monday through Friday, obviously) would probably result in beatings.

Because coming to work in a pink tutu and rainbow wig is still against the dress code, no matter who you’re going home with or to.

Because these men and women have a job to do.

I have plenty of reasons to say mean things about the military, but today, I’m proud of them for coming around.


So, hear that they’re gonna start letting nancy boys (and Bruces and Lances and Trevors) into the military and worried you won’t know how to cope? Here are a few tips to help you navigate those uneasy first couple days.

1. You have to be tolerant past just September 20th. Your gay friend may not come out to you until the 21st. Or Christmas, St. Patrick’s Day or ever. Do not pressure them and don’t act too shocked when/if they tell you. They may do it casually (sneaky twink bastards), for instance using a same-gendered pronoun when talking about their date. When this happens, it’s best not to draw attention to it (“Whoa, whoa, whoa. HER?!”)

2. Don’t be a tattletale. Gay service men and women will tell who they want in their own time. They don’t need your help getting the word out. Furthermore, just because you can’t be mean to gays anymore doesn’t mean you should replace it with other tattling (“Private Johnson didn’t wash the coffee pot!” “Lieutenant Smash
was on the phone with his wife for six whole minutes when he was supposed to be filing paperwork to get the Officers new chairs!”).

3. Asking is rude. Contrary to popular belief, gays have feelings about on par with normal people. They are neither feelingless automatons driven only be their love of “The Cock,” nor blubbering sissies who let a mud puddle ruin their week. Having you breath down their neck and whisper hotly into their ear “Are you a Gay?” will not go over well.

4. Gays don’t melt when water is poured on them. Please do not employ this tactic, better known as “Shock and Awwwww, what a world!”

5. There is no way to tell who is gay and who isn’t just by looking at them. Sure, their hair may be nicer and they may smell better, but that’s just a meaningless correlation.

6. Don’t forget! They went through Basic, too. They know plenty of ways to lay the hurt on you that don’t involve sodomy.

Abortion in the Bible (Warning: Walls of Biblical Text of Jerichoan magnitude)

A few month ago, a friend of mine posted a picture on Facebook with a sign that said “Slavey still exists” as part of an anti-trafficking campaign. Someone thought it was about the forced birth movement’s insistence on systematically stripping women of their human dignity. I argue against the false notion that the Biblical is a “pro-life” document, citing the Bible. The following is a copy/paste of the Facebook exchange. All names have been changed except for mine. All contributors have given their consent for this to be posted, except for Person 4 and Antagonist, who could not be reached. If they read this and take any exception, they may contact me at

Please forgive the formatting; I copy/pasted it the best I could. I have deleted the “likes” and the “posted X hours ago” marks. The extra spaces in Antagonist’s first Biblical rant are his original emphasis (read: the formatting disruptions from when he copy/pasted the first anti-woman website he found into a Facebook comment). In order to best present his intended meaning, I have preserved as best as WordPress can render them.

Person 1 what slavery are you referring to ?

Poster well the campaign is mostly about sex slavery. It’s actually a really big issue in America. It’s different than prostitution because the women and children are forced to do it, but at the same time alot of “prostitutes” actually are slaves.
I read a news article that it is actually a problem at the Superbowl, people will secretly sell young girls to the drunken men at the game.

Person 1 ooo yeah thats shitty. i was also thinking more about how the catholic church forces woman to have babies or forces them to keep the child even if the circumstances mean they might both die etc etc. there is all kinds of slavery in the world still.

Antagonist Person 1, ccatholic church aside, abortion is murder. If a man kills a pregnant woman, he is not only charged with the death of the woman, but the death of the unborn child, hence, he is charged with murdering the unborn child. Abortion is murder. Women should have self respect, not give themselves to just any guy out there, but if they are irresponsible and get pregnant, then they should have to have the child, live up to thier responsibility, not kill the child so they dont have to deal with it and take the easy way out. And no I am not catholic.

Person 2 ‎”I believe strongly in taking responsibilities for one’s actions. I believe that people should practice safe sex or abstinence. And I believe that the consequences of an unwanted pregnancy can be worse than the “benefits” of having irresponsible sex. However, in some cases, I believe that abortion IS taking responsibility. Bringing an unwanted child into the world is irresponsible. I am not pro-abortion. I am pro-choice. I believe that every woman should decide what to do with her own body without restrictions placed on her by a strongly religious government that ironically preaches the 200 year old doctrine of the separation of church and state”

Antagonist Right. So in other words, you are for killing children. There is absolutely no difference between a child being in the womb and outside of it. It is still a human being and a life. And what about the father? What if the father wants the child? A woman should be allowed to kill a mans child? You pro choice people are sick.

Person 2 I was just stating my opinion.

Antagonist Which is your right. However, opinions are opinions. I do not choose to live by opinions, but in facts.

Person 3 this is a long one. bear with me. a group of cells in the womb is not a child. it is a group of cells. i know you said you are not catholic but the only reason we find abortion to be so abhorred now is because of the catholic church. when as a matter of fact the church until 1869 did not believe that the soul was present until 90 days after becoming pregnant and “he is not a murderer who brings about abortion before the soul is in the body.” not till pope Pius XI was there any such law banning abortion. and even after that “therapeutic abortion” was considered to be acceptable.

but to put a fine point on it, i am a woman and i personally would never have an abortion but i’ll be damned if someone is going to tell me i can not. this is my body and no matter what someone might tell me it is my right to say what happens to it. and as saint Anselm of Canterbury said ” no human intellect accepts the view that an infant has the rational soul from the moment of conception.” i have a soul and a mind and a body and bills. there are plenty of men who are pro-choice. and if you hate pro-choice so much does that mean that you are anti-choice? why should your beliefs make me and other women suffer? you are not a woman. you have never been the 16 year old victim of rape.

and yes this is my opinion, i respect that you think the way you do because you mean well, but at the same time are hindering the rights of women and their bodies, why should you be able to tell us we have to have children if we don’t want to? is it not the same as telling us that we can not have them? and taking them from us when we do want them?

Person 4 the fact is you have no idea what you are talking about Antagonist, you obviously have been brain washed by fox news into believing that women have no rights when it comes to their own body. how could you say “what about the father’s right?”. What happens when a woman is brutally raped by some man and gets pregnant, huh? I bet your one of those ignorant douches who believe that it must be the girls fault if she got raped, as if she was asking for it. Why don’t you come back when you can think passed your own blinded faith, and you’ve grown up.

Person 4 lol, go 3. I was typing mine at the same time

Person 1 if i got pregnant tomorrow I would abort it. because i am not fully ready for a child. and if that makes me a murderer than so be it! because i refuse to bring another child into this world that would get a crappy life because the parents were not prepared for a child. you only care about creating and preserving “life”, you dont give a shit about what happens to that child once it is born. and I AM a Christian! a bunch of men in churches and government can not tell me what to do with my body and my responsibly to not bring a child into this world when i am not ready for one. untill you have the proper organs for child birth you can not understand.

Person 4 If you had any knowledge when it came to slavery or women forced into sexual slavery you would know the statistics Antagonist. Here’s a few for you: In 2007 27 million people are known to be in forced slavery around the world, and of those 27 million people 70% of all the women get forced into the sex trade. 800,000 people every year are trafficked across international borders, and 1 million children are forced into slavery every year. So lets just take a look at those 27 million people, even if just half were women that would be 13.5 million and 70% of that would be 9.45 million women that are forced to be sexual slaves. So, thats 9.45 million women being constantly raped and you think that they shouldn’t have the choice to abort when they get pregnant. good job

Antagonist Hey, Person 4, first of all idiot, I dont watch fox news. Secondly, to the both of you, Im not basing anything on reliigion. And I dont have to “be the victim of a rape” or whatever other liberal bullshit angel you two want to spin, to know that a Human life is not just a bunch of cells as you call it, but a human being. Abortiion is MURDER. Period. It is the deliberate termination of life. Hence murder. And as far as fathers rights, im not talkling obviously about rape victims. Im talking about a man and a woman who are in a relationship, and the father wann his child ann the woman does not. And ff the rest of you shitheads want to keep posting statistics or whatever else, I just spent the last 5 years as a Military Police Officer and have handled more cases concerning rape and such than all of you combined will HEAR of in your lives.

Being a man has nothing to do with understanding. The simple fact of the matter is that you women want to have unprotected sex, do whatever you want, and when you get pregnant, you dont want to deal with the responsiblities of child care and upbringing. And as far as that childs life, heres an idea, ADOPTION. There are hundreds of thousands of couples out there that do not or cannot have children who want to adopt babies and raise them as their own.

Claiming to be a christian and not living as one doesnt count.

And as for the “good job” asshole, I am responsible for the arrest and conviction of 2 sex slave operations when I was stationed in germany. Aside from running your ignorant liberally brainashed mouths to someone you dont know, what have any of you done to put a stop to “slavery” or sex trafficking? Absolutely nothing but act tough behind the safety of a computer screen.

Poster, I have other things to do than argue with these people who so clearly have their heads so far up their asses they cant breath. Out of respect for you, and because these idiots arent going to change, Im leaving the conversation.

Person 3 dude, chill the frack out. i called no names, i stated my opinion and even stated that i respected yours even though you disagreed. i have no beef with you personally, i believe what i believe because i am a woman and dont feel that someone should dictate to me whether i must have a child or not. i also am offended at your tone and use of the phrase “you women” like we are not people. if you want curses i can curse like a sailor at you but i was trying to explain my position without resorting to that. also in that situation no choice is easy. to give up a baby is a terrible thing to have to do. and the choice to abort is no easier. and i maintain that a group of cells are not a life. they do however have the potential for life.

Person 4 Wow, I can’t believe you just said “all you women who want to have unprotected sex” seriously, thats a good chauvinist way to say that all women are sluts. Obviously you have never read the packaging on condoms that say it isn’t 100% effective but I guess you would have to be able read something other than jarhead republican psycho babble bullshit to know that. I have known plenty of women who have been taken advantage of because of douche bags like you. And it’s people like you that cause doctors that perform those operations to be scared for their life when all they are doing is helping a woman who is in a time of crisis. You don’t have any shred of right to say anything about what a woman should be able to do with her body. I bet you would like it if they just took all rights away from them too, that would make it much easier for you to enforce your “beliefs” on them.

Poster I believe in abortion in some situations. Like rape cases and when the mother’s life is in danger. There are plenty of times where a married man and wife are pregnant but they have to have an abortion because if they don’t both the mother and child are almost guaranteed to die.

I understand not believing in abortion. Howwever I think it is only wrong sometimes. I think women should be more careful, but, for example, a teenage girl with an unsupportive family with a boyfriend who runs away when he finds out she is pregnant shouldn’t be forced to have the child. Yes she could always give it up for adoption, which is often a better choice. But that is only a good option if the girl’s life isn’t endangered by the child. And then she has to wonder and worry whether or not the child was placed with decent people or not.

I also believe abortion is murder, but I also know that killing in self defense is not a sin. It would still be hard to do, and abortion is no something I would ever even consider unless I was going to die.

The name calling was probably directed to Person 4, who started the name calling in the first place. It is hard to not get rialed up after someone calls you a “brainwashed” “ignorant douche”

I don’t entirely agree with Antagonist, but I think the name calling was uncalled for.

He wasn’t saying all women are sluts, he was saying the ones that are sluts and don’t want to pay the consequences.

Person 4. I think you need to calm down. Respect others opinions. There was no need to start name calling. Once you do that it makes it so much harder to have a civilized conversation.

Person 2 I was just stating my opinion and got ripped into. That’s not respectful.

Poster I agree, he was disrespectful to you, 3 and 1. I think it might have been as a backlash effect tho. I agree tho, he shouldn’t have gotten mad at you three

Person 4 the only reason i jumped in is because he decided to start lashing out against Persons 1 and 2. so if your looking at anybody

Person 4 it should be him

Person 4 he has no right to be calling people murderers

Antagonist Thats funny, cause God does. Abortion is considered an ABOMINATION. And as far as rights go, I fought for my right to freedom of speech, as well as yours. Ill say whatever I damn well please.

Poster, Killing as self defense does not fall under, “thou shalt not kill”, you are right about that, however, abortion is not “in defense”. It is one thing for an individual family to save the mother’s life over their childs, that is a decision they must decide and live with. But as you said above (kudos btw) the SLUTS who have sex, get pregnant, and use abortion as a way out, were what I was refering to. But Person 4 wants to use the typical democratic attitude of stereotyping republicans (aka REAL MEN) which is what set me off. To 1 and 3, not that I particularly care, but I wasnt “lashing” out at you two, it was directed at No Balls above.

Oh and btw, the sperm and eggs are both moving and alive. once the sperm fertilizes the egg it is a fetus. At around 3 weeks the fetus has a heart beat, making it a LIFE. Life is a heartbeat. To end a heart beat, is to kill it. To kill is to murder.

Maryanna Price Fun fact, Antagonist, I’m Christian and, unlike you, seem to have read the Bible. I defy you to come up with one Bible passage that supports the forced-birth agenda. And don’t you dare throw that Jeremiah verse at me unless you’re prepared to admit that God was *only* talking to Jeremiah (“[…] and appointed you prophet of all nations.”)

Person 2 Yay Maryanna, the voice of reason.

Antagonist You are a christian so you claim, and yet you do not live the life of a christian. If you had actually read the bible as much as I have, being that I have not just read but studied the entire KJV, you would not be for abortion. THe bible does not refer at all to a woman being with fetus, BUT WITH CHILD.

Abortion is, first and foremost, a sin against God and His Perfect Law, “thou shalt not kill” (Exodus 20:13). The opposite of “giving” life is “taking” life, or in stronger words, “killing” life. The only One with the ability to “give” life is the LORD Creator of Heaven and Earth. “Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, ALL POWER IS GIVEN unto ME in Heaven and in Earth” (Matthew 28:18). The LORD Jesus Christ is the “Faithful Creator” (1Peter 4:19). “All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made that was made. In Him was Life; and the Life was the Light of men” (John 1:3-4). Therefore, He is the only deserving One to “take” life. Jesus said, “I lay down My Life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again” (John 10:17-18).

Abortion is a sin against ourselves, “in those things whereof ye are now ashamed… for the end of those things is death” (Romans 6:21). Sin destroys our whole being, from that “which is outward in the flesh” (Romans 2:28) to the heart-core of our “inner man” (Ephesians 3:16)– our eternal soul. “But he that sinneth against Me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate Me love death” (Proverbs 8:36).

Abortion is a sin against another human being. “If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him” (1Samuel 2:25). But abortion is not a sin against just any human being– it’s the ultimate sin against ultimate innocence. “Their feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed innocent blood: their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity; wasting and destruction are in their paths” (Isaiah 59:7). Abortion, as it is commonly used, is murder. “Spake I not unto you, saying, Do not sin against the child; and ye would not hear? therefore, behold, also his blood is required” (Genesis 42:22).

If men strive, and hurt a woman WITH CHILDso that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow, he shall surely be punished, according as the womans husband will aly upon him…..Exodus 21:22

(Thought i might touch on homosexuality here too: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with woman kind: it IS abomination. Leviticus 19:14)

Antagonist But wait! Not done yet!….

Maryanna Price You aren’t supposed to wear mixed fibers or poop inside of your house, ether. I’ll read your points and respond after class.

Antagonist ‎”Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? yea, they may forget, yet will I not forget thee” (Isaiah 49:15).

Antagonist Maryanne, you are not a christian. You can live in denial all you want. Abortion is murder. You obviously have not read the bible, nor understood it. Im not going to sit here and entertain your misbelief that abortion is not murder or that the bible does not state it as such. A child in the womb is a child. To kill it is murder. It is evil. IT IS ABOMINATION. You call yourself a christian yet have no understanding of the bible, and sit here and attempt to contradict the word of God? And btw, the bible wasnt written to support ANY agenda other than GODS.

Antagonist I. Life is sacred, and it begins at conception.

A. God is the Author of life.

Genesis 2:7

Deuteronomy 30:20

Job 12:10

Psalms 66:9

Isaiah 42:5

Ezekiel 37:10

Daniel 5:23

Zechariah 12:1

Acts 17:25, 28

Hebrews 12:9

B. Only God is entitled to determine the end of one’s life. The deliberate destruction of human life without cause is sin, punishable by death.

Psalms 31:15 “My times are in thine hand.”

1 Corinthians 6:20 “You are not your own, you are bought with a price…”

Exodus 20:13 (cp. Deuteronomy 5:17) “Thou shalt not murder.”

II. Personhood of the Unborn

A. Scripture refers to the unborn as children, not “blobs of tissue.”

1. In Luke 1:36 we read that Elizabeth had “conceived a son.” Notice that the “product of conception,” as pro-aborts would call “it,” is simply called a “baby.”

2. In Matthew 1:18, 23, Mary is said to be “with child.”

3. When Rebekah conceived twins, it says, “the children struggled together within her…” (Genesis 25:22)

B. The unborn child is a separate being, apart from the mother.

1. The unborn child is able to sense such feelings as “joy,” etc.

Luke 1:44, 45 Elizabeth’s “babe leaped in [her] womb for joy.”

2. The unborn babe, independent of the mother, made movements (“leaped”) – so “it” cannot be reduced to merely a “part of the woman’s body” – a necessary step in reducing the issue to that of “a woman’s right.”

3. When Rebekah conceived, “the (twin) children struggled together within her…” (Genesis 25:22) They “struggled,” not she. This reinforces the fact that the unborn child is a separate being apart from the mother. (See also Romans 9:10-11.)

C. The unborn child is clearly a person, according to Exodus 21:22-25 – and causing it to die is murder, punishable: “life for life.. eye for eye, tooth for tooth.”

Exodus 21:22-25 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart [from her], and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges [determine]. And if [any] mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot

D. Even some basic personal characteristics of individuals are determined before birth. Of Jacob, whose name means supplanter, we read: “he (implying personhood) took his brother (also implying personhood, based on their biological relationship) by the heel in the womb.” (Genesis 25:21-24)

III. The Plan of God.

When we presume to play God, we interfere with the plan of the Creator.

A. God has a plan for each life, established at conception.

Psalms 139:13-16

Isaiah 49:1, 5

Jeremiah 1:5

Galatians 1:15

B. Abortion is the direct interference with that plan and, thus, a direct defiance of God’s will. This truth is clearly presented in both the Old and New Testaments.
Jeremiah 1:5 “While you were being formed in the belly of the womb,” God told the prophet Jeremiah, “I knew you and ordained (intended for) you to be a prophet to the nations.”

Isaiah 49:1, 5 “The Lord hath called me from the womb, from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name… to be his servant, to bring Jacob again unto him…”

Galatians 1:15 Paul said he was “called from my mother’s womb.”

Psalms 139:13-16 The psalmist wrote of his being “formed in secret,” in his mother’s womb, referring to himself in such a state, “yet imperfect (incomplete),” as “I” – that is, a person (Psalm 139:13-16).

C. God reigns sovereign over the timing and circumstances of birth and conception. “In the fulness of time, God sent His Son” – just as He raised up Moses, Isaiah, Deborah, etc. – “for such a time as this.”


Antagonist And the part about Jeremiah, even though God was telling him that he will be the prophet…..he FIRST said that “While you were being formed in the womb” -yet again another bble reference to an unborn child being a human not a fetus.

You Pro-Murder people make me sick.

Antagonist I hve proven you wrong over and over again. not just with scripture but also with logic. That being said I will leave with this:

“Be not Decieved, God is not mocked. For whatsoever a man soweth, That shall he also Reap.” -Galatians 6:7

Maryanna Price You say I “do not live the life of a Christian.” You know nothing about me. Instead of pointing out your blatant misogyny or ask you why a zygote conceived in rape is different from a zygote (FYI: 1 sperm + 1 egg = zygote, not fetus) conceived consensually or even reminding you that ultrasounds weren’t invented until sometime in the last fifty years, I’m content to merely rip your argument to shreds.

I’m not one to boast about being a linguist, but it does seem worth noting that the Bible was not written in English. The majority of the English versions that do exist say “pregnant woman” and, even if they didn’t, “with child” is a tenuous basis for your argument, considering we don’t talk about “bun in the oven” or a “visit from the stork” being literal, either. Also, the punishment for making a woman give birth prematurely is a fine, not death. If you had bothered to read the relevant passage instead of copy/pasting what your favorite website says, you’d see that Exodus 21:22 (taken form your King James) says “If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart [from her], and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges [determine].” That is, pay a fine. Exodus 21:23 says that “And if [any] mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life.” That is, taking other translations: New International Version: “But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life”; GOD’S WORD Translation: “If anyone is injured, the offender must pay a life for a life”; and the Bible in Basic English: “But if damage comes to her, let life be given in payment for life.” I’m not sure where you get “pay a fine for a miscarriage, kill a man for killing your wife” to mean “A BABY FOREVER!!!!!!,” but let’s move on.

Matthew 28:18 and the rest of your second paragraph is just Jesus talking about himself and God doing things that a savior and a god would do: giving life, having power, being creators of things, et cetera. Unless you are vegetarian and buy only vegan products, against war and capital punishment and keep every insect in your home alive, you, too, are in violation of God’s “perfect law.” In John 10:17-18, Jesus is talking about laying down his own life via the command he got from God. Not about abortion.

Romans 6:21 says absolutely nothing about abortion. It says that we are slaves to sin, the punishment of which is death. It does not say that abortion is a sin, nor have you, to this point, provided a verse that does. I’m not arguing that sin isn’t bad, but you have yet to enumerate any sins specifically mentioning abortion.

Maryanna Price ‎1st Samuel 2:25 is a tricky one. You almost had me, except I read the rest of the chapter. Samuel 2:22-25: “22 By this time Eli was very old. He kept getting reports on how his sons were ripping off the people and sleeping with the women who helped out at the sanctuary. 23 Eli took them to task: “What’s going on here? Why are you doing these things? I hear story after story of your corrupt and evil carrying on. 24 Oh, my sons, this is not right! These are terrible reports I’m getting, stories spreading right and left among God’s people! 25 If you sin against another person, there’s help – God’s help. But if you sin against God, who is around to help?” Eli’s son was, basically, sleeping with nuns. No abortion to see here. The entire book of Isaiah is a prophecy about the deliverance of Israel from the hands of Babylon, with God talking about Zion. They talk about the “sin-babies” in Isaiah 59:4. All of these horrible things, yet God will be their redeemer. Even on the off chance that abortion is murder and that we are all Israel, God still loves us. I do seem to remember something about God loving everyone being mentioned off-handedly once or twice in Sunday school…

If you want to play the “gays are yucky” card, I suggest you read the rest of Leviticus, wherein cattle are forbidden to graze with other breeds of cattle, different kinds of crops are forbidden from being together in the same field and clothing cannot be made of more than one fabric (all Leviticus 19:19). You should bar people with flat noses, blind eyes or lame legs from going to an altar of God (Leviticus 21:17-18) and anyone who curses or blasphemes God, say by misrepresenting his holy text, should be stoned by the community, as per Leviticus 24:14-16.

Bringing up Isaiah again (49:15), you talk about the “son of her womb.” I am of my mother’s womb, as you are of yours. Being “of someone’s womb” simply means you are their child. New International: “Can a mother forget the baby at her breast and have no compassion on the child she has borne? Though she may forget, I will not forget you!” In those days, when Christianity was in competition with Roman tradition, it was not uncommon for a woman to leave her newborn out to die if it were unhealthy. This speaks to those they hope to convert, saying that, unlike the Roman (gods) who leave their ‘children’ to the elements, God will take up all of his children into the Kingdom. This is not about abortion.

Maryanna Price My name is “Maryanna,” by the way. If you read the Bible as closely as you read Facebook posts, I’m not surprised you’re confused.

“I. Life is sacred, and it begins at conception.”

You have yet to prove this.

“Genesis 2:7 [7 God formed Man out of dirt from the ground and blew into his nostrils the breath of life. The Man came alive – a living soul!]”

Glad you brought this up! See, I was never arguing that God didn’t create life and, thanks to you, I don’t have to dig up my passage again. Here we clearly see that God blew the “breath of life” into Man’s nostrils, supporting the notion that life begins at first breath.

“Deuteronomy 30:20 [20 And love God, your God, listening obediently to him, firmly embracing him. Oh yes, he is life itself, a long life settled on the soil that God, your God, promised to give your ancestors, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.]”

God is love. Again, I was never contesting that. All this verse says is that God is life (I should note that I have never heard anybody else make the argument that God is a fetus. Ten style points for you) and that he promised the ancestors’ of Moses a homeland.

“Job 12:10 [10 Every living soul, yes, every breathing creature?]”

This is a question, but let’s assume the answer is “yes.” The preceding passage (which includes the beginning of the sentence) is: “ Who knoweth not in all these that the hand of the LORD hath wrought this, in whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind?” As we saw in Genesis, life begins at first breath and, in this passage, there could be argued a reaffirmation that breathing = living.

“Psalms 66:9 [9 Didn’t he set us on the road to life? Didn’t he keep us out of the ditch?]”

Again, I’m not usually a braggart, but I did learn about metaphors in elementary school. I never said that God did not set life in motion, nor did I say that life is not a thing, but you must realize that this is figurative language. If you don’t, then fine. He set us “on the road” to life. If I am to take the preparations and precautions my parents take before sending me somewhere, being “set” would include a bag lunch, some warm mittens and a kiss on the forehead. God spurred biology, such that we would have food (umbilical cord) and warmth (uterus), but, just like my parents couldn’t prevent me from skidding on ice when I was actually on the road, God doesn’t seem to have much of a vested interest or power after that point. Miscarriages, Sudden Infant Death Syndrome and, yes, even abortion, sometimes serve as speed bumps that we just need to deal with. We are being “set” on the road to life as we grow and develop in utero, but we aren’t on the life-road just yet. The rest of this Psalm talks about God “training us” and “passing us like silver through refining fires,” and “pushing us to our very limit.” Those all sound like trials we undergo during life (you know, the one during which we breath, think and do things), not anything we need to do while we’re sitting, unthinkingly in the womb.

“Isaiah 42:5 [5 God’s Message, the God who created the cosmos, stretched out the skies, laid out the earth and all that grows from it, Who breathes life into earth’s people, makes them alive with his own life.]”

Maryanna Price God made Earth and life begins at first breath. We’ve done this one before.

“Ezekiel 37:10 [10 So I prophesied, just as he commanded me. The breath entered them and they came alive! They stood up on their feet, a huge army.]”

They became alive when they first took a breath. Unless you can prove that a fetus (or even a baby!) can stand on its feet, I’m pretty sure you took this out of context.

“Daniel 5:23 [23 Look at you, setting yourself up in competition against the Master of heaven! You had the sacred chalices from his Temple brought into your drunken party so that you and your nobles, your wives and your concubines, could drink from them. You used the sacred chalices to toast your gods of silver and gold, bronze and iron, wood and stone – blind, deaf, and imbecile gods. But you treat with contempt the living God who holds your entire life from birth to death in his hand.]”

God holds out lives in his hand from birth until death. Typically, birth happens well after conception and a full six months after 90% of abortions happen.

“Zechariah 12:1”
The actual text of Zechariah 12:1 merely says “War Bulletin,” as a title. The rest of Zechariah 12 says: “2 “Watch for this: I’m about to turn Jerusalem into a cup of strong drink that will have the people who have set siege to Judah and Jerusalem staggering in a drunken stupor. 3 “On the Big Day, I’ll turn Jerusalem into a huge stone blocking the way for everyone. All who try to lift it will rupture themselves. All the pagan nations will come together and try to get rid of it. 4 “On the Big Day” – this is God speaking – “I’ll throw all the war horses into a crazed panic, and their riders along with them. But I’ll keep my eye on Judah, watching out for her at the same time that I make the enemy horses go blind. 5 The families of Judah will then realize, ‘Why, our leaders are strong and able through God-of-the-Angel-Armies, their personal God.’ 6 “On the Big Day, I’ll turn the families of Judah into something like a burning match in a tinder-dry forest, like a fiercely flaming torch in a barn full of hay. They’ll burn up everything and everyone in sight – people to the right, people to the left – while Jerusalem fills up with people moving in and making themselves at home – home again in Jerusalem. 7 “I, God, will begin by restoring the common households of Judah so that the glory of David’s family and the leaders in Jerusalem won’t overshadow the ordinary people in Judah. 8 On the Big Day, I’ll look after everyone who lives in Jerusalem so that the lowliest, weakest person will be as glorious as David and the family of David itself will be godlike, like the Angel of God leading the people. 9 “On the Big Day, I’ll make a clean sweep of all the godless nations that fought against Jerusalem. 10 “Next I’ll deal with the family of David and those who live in Jerusalem. I’ll pour a spirit of grace and prayer over them. They’ll then be able to recognize me as the One they so grievously wounded – that piercing spear-thrust! And they’ll weep – oh, how they’ll weep! Deep mourning as of a parent grieving the loss of the firstborn child. 11 The lamentation in Jerusalem that day will be massive, as famous as the lamentation over Hadad-Rimmon on the fields of Megiddo: 12 Everyone will weep and grieve, the land and everyone in it: The family of David off by itself and their women off by themselves; The family of Nathan off by itself and their women off by themselves; 13 The family of Levi off by itself and their women off by themselves; The family of Shimei off by itself and their women off by themselves; 14 And all the rest of the families off by themselves and their women off by themselves.”

All I got from this was that God turn the families of Judah into a murderous horde on the “Big Day” and that he’s going to commit a mass genocide on all nations outside of Jerusalem.

“Acts 17:25, 28 [“[…] 25 or need the human race to run errands for him, as if he couldn’t take care of himself. He makes the creatures; the creatures don’t make him; 28 “We live and move in him, can’t get away from him! One of your poets said it well: ‘We’re the God-created.’]”

In Acts 17, a man comes across a shrine to God and asks what the dealio is. The people expound upon the graces of God, including that “24 “The God who made the world and everything in it, this Master of sky and land, doesn’t live in custom-made shrines 25 or need the human race to run errands for him, as if he couldn’t take care of himself. He makes the creatures; the creatures don’t make him. 26 Starting from scratch, he made the entire human race and made the earth hospitable, with plenty of time and space for living 27 so we could seek after God, and not just grope around in the dark but actually find him. He doesn’t play hide-and-seek with us. He’s not remote; he’s near. 28 We live and move in him, can’t get away from him! One of your poets said it well: ‘We’re the God-created.’”

As I have said time and again, I never said we weren’t God created, just that abortion was not murder. Your argument has only proven to me (who was already a believer) that God is a Creator.

“Hebrews 12:9 [9 We respect our own parents for training and not spoiling us, so why not embrace God’s training so we can truly live?]”

This tells us to live by Gods teachings which, as of yet, have not included a prohibition of abortion.

“Psalms 31:15 [15 My times are in thy hand: deliver me from the hand of mine enemies , and from them that persecute me.]”

A man entreats God to protect him. This is already an established role of God and, indeed, a big reason for many of the people who worship Him.

Maryanna Price “1 Corinthians 6:20 [20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.]”

God is within all of us. This is a central pillar of belief in Quakerism. Unless you mean to argue again that God is a fetus, I can’t follow your logic here. Even if you do want to argue that, that would mean only pregnant women are godly, which is also laughable, since society didn’t discover that women were people until sometime in the mid-1950s.

“Exodus 20:13, Deuteronomy 5:17 [Thou shalt not murder.]”
Oxford English Dictionary: “The deliberate and unlawful killing of a human being, esp. in a premeditated manner.”

Even if a fetus were a person, abortion is lawful in the U.S. and, as such, abortion is not murder. I’m not one to argue semantics, but the preponderance of passages stating explicitly that life begins with first breath are going to back me up with this one.

“ Luke 1:36 [“36 And, behold , thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.”]

If you ignore verses 34 and 35 (“34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be , seeing I know not a man? 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”), this could almost make a coherent argument. However, this is an angel talking to a woman telling her about what God is going to do to her and her family. God intervenes sometimes and I’m pretty sure he wouldn’t do so to a woman he knew was going to get an abortion. This is also supported by the fact that neither of these pregnancies were spontaneously miscarried, as can also happen. God is very specific about these particular pregnancies being of interest to him.

“In Matthew 1:18-23 [13 And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor; 14 And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud; 15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob; 16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. 17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations. 18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together , she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. 19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example , was minded to put her away privily. 20 But while he thought on these things, behold , the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying , Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. 21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. 22 Now all this was done , that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying , 23 Behold , a virgin shall be with child , and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is , God with us.]”

Bible wasn’t written in English, “with child” is a common term, other translations don’t say it that way, blah blah blah. The Greek (I’m not sure if it will show up on Facebook) was :” Ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν, καὶ καλέσουσιν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἐμμανουήλ, ὅ ἐστιν μεθερμηνευόμενον Μεθ’ ἡμῶν ὁ θεός.” The translation is along the lines of “And the virgin will conceive and bear a son and they will name him Emmanuel, which means “God is with us.” Did I mention I speak Ancient Greek? It may come as a surprise to you that the Bible wasn’t originally written in Greek, either, but this verb is “conceive” and, while it means the same damned thing as “be with child [but not actually a propaganda picture of three month-old covered in Spaghetti-Os that you think is an abortion],” you don’t seem to know what that means either.

Maryanna Price “Genesis 25:22 [22 And the children struggled together within her; and she said , If it be so, why am I thus? And she went to enquire of the LORD]”

A baby-to-be in the womb kick all the time. In this particular instance, God set apart this family to conceive and bear the fathers of nations. Rebekah thought she was barren, so her conceiving is already a miracle. If we read a bit further… “23 And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger. 24 And when her days to be delivered were fulfilled , behold, there were twins in her womb. 25 And the first came out red, all over like an hairy garment; and they called his name Esau. 26 And after that came his brother out , and his hand took hold on Esau’s heel; and his name was called Jacob: and Isaac was threescore years old when she bare them.” Well, now, Jacob and Esau are fighting despite being only a few seconds old. This doesn’t happen when your babies weren’t hand-picked and hand-crafted for the express purpose of founding nations under God.

“Luke 1:44 [44 For, lo , as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.]”

This baby is Jesus; he’s something of an outlier in the course of conceptions. Most virgins tend not to get pregnant, for starters. Even if this hadn’t just been a poorly-reported kick from a pregnant fourteen year-old girl, this is still a Jesus-kick. A newborn isn’t capable of feeling joy, so I sincerely doubt the average fetus can.

“The unborn babe, independent of the mother, made movements (“leaped”) – so “it” cannot be reduced to merely a “part of the woman’s body.”

I get leg spasms sometimes because I was in a truck accident and, when I haven’t eaten for a while, my stomach starts rumbling. I’ve been nervous and felt my heart “leap” to my throat as I struggle for words and I’ll be damned if you want to start giving those parts of me rights.

After this point, you requote your passages about Exodus and Rebekah’s striving children because you copy/pasted this from a Google search instead of writing it yourself. The person who wrote “D. Even some basic personal characteristics of individuals are determined before birth. Of Jacob, whose name means supplanter, we read: “he (implying personhood) took his brother (also implying personhood, based on their biological relationship) by the heel in the womb.” (Genesis 25:21-24)” didn’t even read the Bible when they were throwing this list together, because Jacob doesn’t grab Esau until verse 26, at which point they are both already ex utero..

“Psalms 139:13-16 [13 For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother’s womb. 14 I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made : marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well. 15 My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. 16 Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written , which in continuance were fashioned , when as yet there was none of them.]”

God makes life and he (via biology) makes life develop and happen. ‘Kay…?

“Isaiah 49:1, 5 [1 Listen , O isles, unto me; and hearken , ye people, from far; The LORD hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name. 2 And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword; in the shadow of his hand hath he hid me, and made me a polished shaft; in his quiver hath he hid me; 3 And said unto me, Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified . 4 Then I said , I have laboured in vain, I have spent my strength for nought, and in vain: yet surely my judgment is with the LORD, and my work with my God. 5 And now, saith the LORD that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, Though Israel be not gathered , yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the LORD, and my God shall be my strength.]”

“My name is Isaiah and I was chosen specifically by God to lead you all.”

“Jeremiah 1:5 [5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.]”

God ordained Jeremiah a prophet and had a special interest in him. Show me the parts of the Bible where God lays out his plan for each and every one of us and not just the ones who play a special part in his master plan.4 hours ago · Like

Maryanna Price “Galatians 1:15 [15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace, 16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood]”

Other translations include: New International (“But when God, who set me apart from birth and called me by his grace, was pleased”); English Standard (“But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace,”); and English Revised (“But when it was the good pleasure of God, who separated me, even from my mother’s womb, and called me through his grace”). This speaker makes a very clear point that it’s a big deal that he is separated from EVERYTHING, “EVEN from my mother’s womb.” This is not a typical state, it seems, or else there would be no need for him to draw attention to it.

“Psalms 139:13-16 The psalmist wrote of his being “formed in secret,” in his mother’s womb, referring to himself in such a state, “yet imperfect (incomplete),” as “I” – that is, a person (Psalm 139:13-16).”

Puh-leeze. This is the weakest one yet. Paul is already born, so it’s easy to talk about oneself in utero. “When my mother was pregnant, I gave her diabetes.” We have no conception of being something other than ourselves, so of course Paul we talk about himself that way. Not only that, but that author of the list even claims that Paul was “incomplete.” Also, please, please, please proof-read your arguments first to make sure you aren’t posting the same four passages over and over.


A man who kills a pregnant woman can be charged with two murders and, frankly, I disagree with that. It forms a slippery slope designed to slowly erode a woman’s bodily autonomy. Women since ancient times have found ways to terminate pregnancies and, if it is a sin, that’s for God to decide, not for you to dictate.

“And the part about Jeremiah, even though God was telling him that he will be the prophet…..he FIRST said that “While you were being formed in the womb” – yet again another bble reference to an unborn child being a human not a fetus.”

Which is just inaccurate; a fetus is an actual science term of development, not just liberal claptrap. It’s the same reason we have a word for “toddlers.” What you’re doing is asking for the equivalent of calling a newborn a teenager.

Now, it’s my turn.

Maryanna Price You already did me the favor of putting up Genesis 2:7, wherein life begins when God breathes into Adam. In Job 33:4 (“4 The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life.”), we see the pattern continuing, with life beginning with the breath God gave us. This is further and more explicitly demonstrated in Ezekiel 37: 5-6 (“5 Thus saith the Lord GOD unto these bones; Behold, I will cause breath to enter into you, and ye shall live : 6 And I will lay sinews upon you, and will bring up flesh upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and ye shall live ; and ye shall know that I am the LORD.”) We don’t live until we have sinews, flesh/muscle, skin AND breath. By your logic, a harlequin fetus would never, ever be alive even after birth.

I’ve argued you down from Exodus 21:22, where God explicitly says that a forced miscarriage is worth less than a murder. Since women pay for abortions, the “fine” is already paid and, therefore, it’s all good.

If God cared so much about fetuses, he would not call for the murder of pregnant women so often, as he does in Genesis 38:24 (“24 And it came to pass about three months after, that it was told Judah, saying , Tamar thy daughter in law hath played the harlot ; and also, behold, she is with child by whoredom. And Judah said , Bring her forth , and let her be burnt.”), Numbers 31:17-18 (“17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. 18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.”) and Psalms 137:8 (“O Babylon, you will be destroyed. Happy is the one who pays you back for what you have done to us.”). I can only assume that in the Numbers passage, there would be at least one pregnant woman among them, considering the lack of contraception. It’s heartening to know how much God loves virgins, though, allowing them to be taken for what I can only assume will be ice cream and a pizza party. In Psalms, Babylon is to be destroyed and he makes no exception for the pregnant women therein.

Monetary value to God is less for children and nonexistent for fetuses, as shown by Leviticus 27:6 (“6 And if it be from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy estimation shall be three shekels of silver.”). Children under one month of age aren’t even considered in a census: Numbers 3:15 (“15 Number the children of Levi after the house of their fathers, by their families: every male from a month old and upward shalt thou number them.”)

Maryanna Price God regularly uses abortion as a punishment or as a means of testing fidelity:

*Numbers 5:12-31 calls for women suspected of being unfaithful to drink a concoction that will cause an abortion if she broke her vows (12 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man’s wife go aside , and commit a trespass against him, 13 And a man lie with her carnally , and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, and be kept close , and she be defiled , and there be no witness against her, neither she be taken with the manner; 14 And the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be defiled : or if the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be not defiled : 15 Then shall the man bring his wife unto the priest, and he shall bring her offering for her, the tenth part of an ephah of barley meal; he shall pour no oil upon it, nor put frankincense thereon; for it is an offering of jealousy, an offering of memorial, bringing iniquity to remembrance . 16 And the priest shall bring her near , and set her before the LORD: 17 And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is in the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take , and put it into the water: 18 And the priest shall set the woman before the LORD, and uncover the woman’s head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse : 19 And the priest shall charge her by an oath , and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband, be thou free from this bitter water that causeth the curse : 20 But if thou hast gone aside to another instead of thy husband, and if thou be defiled , and some man have lain with thee beside thine husband: 21 Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The LORD make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the LORD doth make thy thigh to rot , and thy belly to swell; 22 And this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, to make thy belly to swell , and thy thigh to rot : And the woman shall say , Amen, amen. 23 And the priest shall write these curses in a book, and he shall blot them out with the bitter water: 24 And he shall cause the woman to drink the bitter water that causeth the curse : and the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter. 25 Then the priest shall take the jealousy offering out of the woman’s hand, and shall wave the offering before the LORD, and offer it upon the altar: 26 And the priest shall take an handful of the offering, even the memorial thereof, and burn it upon the altar, and afterward shall cause the woman to drink the water. 27 And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled , and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell , and her thigh shall rot : and the woman shall be a curse among her people. 28 And if the woman be not defiled , but be clean; then she shall be free , and shall conceive seed. 29 This is the law of jealousies, when a wife goeth aside to another instead of her husband, and is defiled ; 30 Or when the spirit of jealousy cometh upon him, and he be jealous over his wife, and shall set the woman before the LORD, and the priest shall execute upon her all this law. 31 Then shall the man be guiltless from iniquity, and this woman shall bear her iniquity.)

*Hosea 9:11-14, wherein God says he will doom a people to being barren, a people who will miscarry and who will be punished solidly by God (11 As for Ephraim, their glory shall fly away like a bird, from the birth , and from the womb, and from the conception. 12 Though they bring up their children, yet will I bereave them, that there shall not be a man left: yea, woe also to them when I depart from them! 13 Ephraim, as I saw Tyrus, is planted in a pleasant place: but Ephraim shall bring forth his children to the murderer . 14 Give them, O LORD: what wilt thou give ? give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts.)

Maryanna Price ‎*God kills babies. Exodus 11:4-5: “4 And Moses said ,Thus saith the LORD, About midnight will I go out into the midst of Egypt: 5 And all the firstborn in the land of Egypt shall die , from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sitteth upon his throne, even unto the firstborn of the maidservant that is behind the mill; and all the firstborn of beasts.”

…and cattle. “Exodus 12:29 And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon ; and all the firstborn of cattle.”

Women aren’t people, according to the Bible, so it should matter a lot less what sins women commit than men. I’ve struggled with my faith, not because I LOVE TO KILL BABIES, as you would have people believe, but because this God has so little regard for the safety or lives of women. If nothing else, I’m inclined to say that God wouldn’t give a crap if we were to abort female fetuses.

Abortion is not anything you will ever have to deal with, so I suggest you butt out. If it is an affront to God, that’s for him to sort out. If you want, I’m more than happy to provide you with secular arguments in favor of abortion.

Maryanna Price I’m sorry for being belligerent , Poster. I’m glad you’re raising awareness for sex trafficking. Also, you look very pretty (if appropriately somber).

Person 4 I have read the bible also and never remember the exact
words “abortion is an abomination” being in there. Also if you didn’t know what you know as the “bible” is books that were chosen by men in a room hundreds of years ago, not by god. And Iam more of a man than you will ever be kid.

Antagonist Maryanna, you can twist the bible however you want. You are the one who has to answer to God for it.

Person 4, you are a pussy. You dont have the balls to do anything that Ive done. I hope you are enjoying the freedoms that Ive foughten to give you. Just Shut the fuck up, go cower in your corner, and enjoy the freedoms that better men have given you.

Maryanna Price I don’t care if you go away, but could you at least tell me if you read my eleven and a half pages of response?

Also, there are liberal soldiers, the only thing you fought for was the right to gas under $3.50 and you failed miserably at that, too.

Antagonist Whatever. You people are worthless. I have better things to do than argue with children on facebook. And for your information bitch, The year I spent in afghanistan was for your right to be such a dumb twat, amongst other things, like your right to live without the oppression of the muslim’s cult called islam. I lost friends and brothers in arms over there. Until you have seen combat dont even open your mouth about it

Maryanna Price I’m sorry you watched people die, but I don’t remember any point at which Muslims were trying to take over the U.S., nor anyone trying to impede my right to be a “dumb twat.”

Maryanna Price And you still haven’t answered my question.

Antagonist Then you are even more clueless. And yes I read all of it. As I said, if you want to misinterpret the bible, that is something you will have to answer to God for. What the hell do you think Sharia Law is?

Maryanna Price Sharia law actively encourages the use of contraception and a few guys running into a building, while tragic, is hardly the same as tens of thousands of “Muslim baddies” marching onto U.S. soil to forcibly make us believe in their religion.

See, the fun part is you’re trying to impose a theocracy, despite having “foughten [sic]” for my rights which, under the U.S. Constitution include the right to freedom of (and from) religion and, thanks to Roe v. Wade, the right to privately terminate a pregnancy.

Antagonist Wow. Maybe you should actually look at roe vs wade and its background. Abortion is murder and like murder should be illegal. You are absolutely clueless as to what sharia law is. It is the imposing of islmaic rule against all nations; to either convert the infidels to islam or kill them. People like you who are clueless as to what sharia law is and/or are tolerant of it are destroying America.

Maryanna Price I know a lot about Roe v. Wade, actually, which was more about physicians’ rights than those of women but did establish a woman’s right to control what happens to her body.

And, again, planes into buildings =/= imposing Islamic rule on all nations of the Earth. I was merely pointing out that sharia seems to care about women more than you, which should come as a surprise to exactly no one who has seen the hateful, spiteful shit pouring from your mouth since this morning.

Antagonist Sharia Law as well as Islam strips ALL rights FROM women!!!! Put down the crack pipe!

Maryanna Price Not all Islam. Read a book and stop pretending everyone with a Koran wants to be the next Hitler.

Antagonist Sharia Law is what that man who RAPED his wife used as an excuse to get away with it! Do you not pay attention to the news? Women have no rights under sharia law. Wow. You are straight retarded.

Maryanna Price Women have no rights under Biblical law, either. Try harder. I know that we both have better things to do right now, so I’m going to step away from this conversation. I enjoyed it fully, but I think it would be best if we debated other people.

Person 4 Wow the more you talk the number you sound, Islam was the first to give women rights you dumb ass. If you had any knowledge of history you would know that Muhammad is the one who started the struggle for women’s rights. He even worked for his wife who was a business owner. So before you go talking make sure you know what the fuck you are talking about. And I will fucking take you any time any day any where. Nobody is scared of your ignorant midgit ass.

Antagonist hahahaha! little boy, if you only knew. And for your information, ive read the entire koran and was taught islam by my 4 afghani interpreters. Keep opening your mouth scrawny boy. Your ignorance is hilarious.

Person 4 Obviously you never learned anything, and if you knew who I was you wouldn’t be talking half the shit that comes out of your racist sexist hate spewing mouth

Antagonist wow. way to live up to the liberal agenda. first of all asshole, im not racist. secondly, im not sexist either. wow you are way too fucking stupid to even insult properly. You are a scrawny white boy. Im a former active duty army military police officer and a war veteran. So aside from liberal pussy neverwas, who are you? Absolutely nothing. Thats what you are.

Maryanna Price You say that all Muslims want to impose Sharia law and that any woman who gets an abortion for reasons other than health, rape or incest is a whore. At the very least, you’re incredibly ignorant and, considering your insults to me have all involved calling me a “bitch” or a “twat” and that you say “you women” as though we were a different species, I’m definitely going to push you into the “sexist” category.

Antagonist NO, i did not say that. I said that slutty women use abortion as an easy way out. Good Job not paying attention. And YOU are a stupid twat. To be sexist I would have to believe that ALL women are stupid twats. And I also never siad that ALL muslims want to do anything. I said that that was what sharia law is about. None of you know shit about shit. Just go back to your corners, keep getting brainwashed by your college proffessors, and let the REAL men and women protect you. Sit! Stay!

Maryanna Price ‎”Sharia Law as well as Islam strips ALL rights FROM women!!!! Put down the crack pipe!”

Sounds like you said that Islam wants to strip rights from women to me, champ.

Abortion is no easy way out and to assume as much is to say that women are thoughtless in their actions.

I’m not brainwashed by anyone and I sincerely hope you live long enough to pull your head out of your ass. It’s going to take some considerable time.

Person 4 Sharia law is one thing, and you know how many islamic countries actually have sharia law? not very many, most muslims don’t want sharia law that is why most islamic countries are secular. (for you Antagonist who didn’t go to school and likes to not read it means seperation of religion and government). Turkey whose population is 98% muslim is one of the most secular countries in the world.

At this point, the conversation pretty much ended. Antagonist may have called Person 4 a pussy again and I probably repeated some of my points, but nothing worth having saved seems to have happened. About an hour after having saved this conversation, the Poster took down the original picture and conversation thread and reposted a similar picture later. There was no subsequent discussion.

Exceptions to Abortion Restrictions and Why I Hate Them

How exceptions for any law restricting abortion ever passed is a mystery for me. Rape, incest, health of the woman…? I agree with Rick Santorum on this one: they are crap. Of course, I agree with him for fundamentally different reasons, but I cannot and do not accept any exceptions to any law restricting abortion.


Because it is separate and unequal treatment of women and, for that matter, fetuses. A termination is a termination, whether it be due to rape or romance. Exceptions are a clear, blatant way to punish women for having sex, in addition to showing off how little the “life” of a fetus matters. No other medical procedure has so many hoops, nor exceptions, exemptions or stigma attached. It should never have been allowed to become a political issue, but since it did and was ruled a Constitutional right, that should have been the end of it. Any and all restrictions on the procedure should have been laughed out of Congress and any exceptions to the restrictions should have been also disregarded and called out for what they were: Bullshit.

“Fortunately,” many leaders in the forced-birth movement are beginning to pick up on this and decry anything that may possibly help any woman in any way. Rape is no longer enough for many of them (see H.R. 3) and increasing numbers of laws telling women that their bodies are not their own provide no exception for rape, incest or the health of the woman. Those that do are making the definition of ‘acceptable’ rapes narrower and saying that ‘health’ of women only matters when they are facing “grave physical harm,” with no exceptions for mental health. As many as 100 women in South Carolina alone have been unjustly stripped of their rights and their own personhood in the face of laws that include accidental deaths of infants and miscarriages under their “feticide” laws. Only one man has ever been charged under these laws and his case was later dropped.

In some decent news, states have been told that they can’t defund Planned Parenthood just because they hate women and that making women go to non-medically licensed Crisis Pregnancy Centers to be told lies is generally bad policy. Kansas has narrowly avoided being the only state in the nation without an abortion provider by allowing one to remain open. That is, only one provider for approximately 1,435,118 women.

The time to be incensed is now. Not the week before the elections. Not six months afterward. We need to mobilize, debate, donate, protest, rally, organize and, generally speaking, do ANYTHING to get these facts out in the open. People don’t talk about abortion politics because it’s so awful so consistently, but our silence is filled by fearmongering, misogyny and lies of the forced-birth movement.

Mothers’ Day

I’d like to start this post the way any half-decent person should by thanking my mother for having me, taking care of me and generally being great. There are literally billions of other women out there I need to tip my hat to as well, so please consider this a broadcasting of gratitude to all female caretakers of the world today.

Following that, I need to turn to more pressing matters. That is, most specifically, the forced maternity hoisted upon countless women each year through coercion into pregnancy, inaccessibility of birth control or abortion services and new, draconian laws designed to shame women for having had sex.

We look at Mothers’ Day as a day to think about all that the women we call mothers (and grandmothers, stepmothers, attentive aunts, responsible sisters, etc.) do and go through for us. We talk about the sacrifice, the toil, the hard work… These are women responsible for the rearing of the next generation, women we trust with our literal future. And yet, for some reason, these women don’t deserve to decide what happens to their bodies.

For some reason, we allow the misogynistic minority to have all the attention and the legislative power. “Why don’t you just give it up for adoption?” is a common and widely-accepted counter-argument to a woman who says “I’d like to decide what, if anything, I dedicate my body to for nine months at a time.” For some reason, we worship these women who go through hell and high water to provide for us, but if she happens to not want a child, we discount all of the troubles, stress and complications that pregnancy (and motherhood!) can bring. We don’t trust women to make a choice, but we trust them to raise a child?

The disconnect between logic (“Mothering is hard and important and should only be entered into by someone dedicated to the task at hand.”) that we enshrine today in bouquets and pink cards and fundamental disrespect for women (“The wants and needs of a woman ought to be trumped by another person’s idea of morality.”) is frightening and getting bigger. It’s getting scarier and more real every day and there’s no sign of it letting up. It’s exhausting and people are tired of hearing about it; it’s easier to play Pokémon Tower Defense games. And that is precisely what “they” want. When people aren’t paying attention, they’re free to slip through ultrasound bills, waiting periods and doctors’-scripts legislation. We’re getting worn down and mothers are getting marginalized to the point of being utterly inconsequential.

*Women have been jailed for “attempted infanticide” after falling down stairs or trying to kill themselves.

*During the hearings for the Ohio Heartbeat bill(1), an ultrasound was performed on a woman to show the fetal heartbeat. The woman was not asked to say anything.

*Women who do choose to carry their pregnancies to term are being slapped with proposals for drastic cuts to the programs they need to care for their children, including having high schools for young mothers shut down and their students arrested.

We need to make sure that our nation remembers that women are people, this and every day. Mothers’ Day should be a time of gratitude and appreciation for the women who take care of us, not a time when we look with horror at the systematic abuse of legislated morality.

(1) Makes abortion illegal after the first detectible fetal heartbeat. This can happen as early as eighteen days, whereas pregnancy tests aren’t reliable until around day twenty-one. It’s designed solely to attack first-trimester abortions (when 89% of abortions happen) and to make abortion inaccessible to women who don’t even know they’re pregnant yet. It is an essentially arbitrary distinction aimed at stripping women’s rights in anyway they can, because fetuses develop at different rates and the position of the fetus, age and weight of the mother and the manner of ultrasound can obscure readings. Essentially, one woman may be allowed to get an abortion at eight weeks while another wouldn’t. It has passed the Ohio House.

Why the Pro-Choice Movement is Doomed to Fail

We’ve heard  a lot of back-and-forthing recently about whether women deserve health care and, overwhelmingly, the answer is ‘no.’ Over a third of the people in the U.S. are opposed to any monies going to family planning, including women’s health services like cervical cancer screenings. ” From Planned Parenthood being inches away form the chopping block, to “Obamacare” being mostly forbidden to receive any federal  defunded due to riders Obama agreed to*, from women in D.C. being denied city-based financial assistance for abortions even though it won’t save the government a single penny to the myriad state legislations making not only abortion, but all women’s health services increasingly difficult to obtain, a small portion of the population seems to have woken up and remembered that we are 51% women and that we have mothers, sisters, friends, aunts and grandmothers who are being punched over and over again. That’s cute. However, it’s decades too late and the abortion fight is all but lost. Here are (some of) the reasons.

Apologetics and Rhetoric

Recently, Sen. Kyl said that abortion is “well over 90%” of what Planned Parenthood does. Everyone from Cecile Richards to Stephen Colbert was quick to point out that he was a liar-liar-pants-on-fire and that, of all of PP’s services, abortion makes up only 3% of what they do. Here’s the thing. It shouldn’t matter. Abortion is legal and, despite what the people with their placards would have you believe, incredibly safe. If 99% of what Planned Parenthood does were abortions, no one should have blinked an eye. This is the equivalent of saying “90% of what that dentist does is fill cavities, so he’s always using his drill.” He’s doing his job and his job is a legal service provided to people at their own behest. If anything, the dentist example is less ethical, because dentists are experts at laying on the guilt trip for you to get your teeth ‘fixed,’ but PP just does what they’re asked to, including on-site counseling about the procedure and other options available (just in case women somehow don’t know that an abortion will make them un-pregnant).

Furthermore, abortions are always painted as a “difficult” choice. No doubt, there’s thought and consideration, sometimes even inner turmoil, that accompany the decision to have an abortion, but all this sort of language does is embolden the legislation to force through more legislation to “protect” women from themselves and the increased mystique of abortion makes more women worry about their choice to have an abortion, delay their getting of an abortion until it’s more risky and more expensive and, in some unfortunate cases, chases them to illegal clinics where they are maimed. Abortion may be a difficult choice for some women, but it needs to be painted first and foremost as a “personal choice.”


Women’s rights advocates are painted as hairy-legged man-haters who, for some reason, love having sex with men and filling out their “Buy 10, Get 1” card at the clinic. Reasonable people are either mutely pro-choice to the public (Dems and pro-choice GOPers who only mumble about “women’s choice” a few times an election cycle) or simply don’t think it matters because of “Roe v. Wade.” Talking about “women’s issues” is something that only happens behind a podium every few years, not something to be discussed around the dinner table. Our hang-ups about sex and refusal to talk about abortion has built up a veil that the forced-birth movement has been only to happy to create their own mythos about. In the late 70s and 80s, celebrity women would routinely talk about their experiences with abortion, their unfortunate illegal experiences and their easy, safe, compassionate experiences with the newly-legalized procedure. Now, those stories have vanished and become anecdotes about “This girl my brother knows” who ends up driving her car off a cliff into an orphanage after realizing that she “killed her baby.”

They’ve already lost

The Roe v. Wade decision had almost nothing to do with women. The case was about whether a doctor had the right to perform a procedure without his own privacy or practice being jeopardized, not if women had the right to decide what happened to their bodies. The “undue burden” has been found only once and, since then, anything else the forced-birth movement can throw at women to slut-shame them has been welcomed with open arms, including making women pay for their own forced ultrasounds.

Several states have imposed waiting periods,mandatory but medically unnecessary transvaginal ultrasounds and, in South Dakota, requiring that a woman visit a “Crisis Pregnancy Center,” a volunteer-staffed office, usually Christian, that’s only business is dissuading women from getting abortions through lies and scare tactics**. Ten states include information to all women about the fetus’ ability to feel pain, despite the protests of SCIENCE that say a fetus cannot feel pain until well into the fifth month of gestation.

Furthermore, 87% of counties have no abortion provider and three states (ND, SD, MS) have only one abortion provider. In South Dakota, the provider has to be flown in once a week by private groups and the women who seek an abortion need to be able to travel for hours to get there and be able to afford childcare or a hotel while they visit, plus a second trip when they come back after their mandatory three-day waiting period. The median cost of a first-trimester abortion nationwide is $523, hardly chump change by any definition and incredibly difficult to come by within three months for the tens of thousands of women struggling to make ends meet, teenagers, the unemployed or those on federal assistance (who can’t use their money on it anyway).

TRAP laws are designed solely to make abortion clinics have to shut down, demanding that they meet standards not imposed on any other out-patient procedure clinics, such as the recently failed measure in Maryland requiring that women who want abortions be transported only be ambulance, or the passed one in Virginia saying that all abortion clinics must meet hospital standards.” Abortion has been taken out of hospitals, making abortion clinics an easy target for extremists, whether they picket or bomb.

There are at least six other categories and ten extra points to add to each of these paragraphs, but I have homework and am sick to my stomach thinking about how this country has giddily allowed its women to be made into second-class citizens.

*Just a partial list. The Democrats agreed to every one except blowing up the EPA and stripping Planned Parenthood of all funding and they didn’t speak out to the American people once to enumerate them.

**This includes telling them that abortion causes breast cancer and that they are XX% more likely to commit suicide. They give pregnancy tests, but refuse to tell the results. They show graphic videos of illegal or faked abortions and not one of them is medically trained, yet several centers offer (and insist upon) providing ultrasounds.