politixcartoons:

New cartoons
for your inbox!


Safely delivered by FeedBurner

Archive for abortion

It’s About Woman’s Rights

This cartoon is probably going to get me in trouble. But here it goes anyway.

It’s partially in response to another cartoon I saw recently. It portrayed an elephant whipping a woman (with lettering on her that read “woman’s rights”). The elephant was asking, “Why doesn’t anybody like me?” What an outrageous and disgusting cartoon! It proves nothing. It fails to persuade. It descends into the lowest form of debate tactics, name calling. And to me, when the other side starts resorting to name calling, you know your argument has been won. Of all the conservative issues out there, abortion is probably the easiest to defend.

Here’s an analogy. If a woman suddenly said, “I want to cut off my right arm,” and starts to do so, we as a society would try and stop her. To say that trying to stop her from cutting her arm off violates woman’s rights is absurd! How much more valuable is an unborn child, with a separate heartbeat, than an arm? Yet somehow we can’t even talk about the issue without the other side screaming hysteria and accusing us of all sorts of awful, untrue things.

I’d rather defend a woman’s right to cut off her own arm at her choosing than the murder of unborn children. Regardless of the circumstance, the heartbeat in her womb is another human being, whose right to life needs to be protected.

Another argument often heard is, “Well, I think abortion is a terrible act, but I’m not going to dictate my morals on other people.” (Thank you Joe Biden.) Really? Then what do you call the banning of lightbulbs? Large sodas? Keystone pipeline? Are not these your morals you are pushing on other people?

If you really thought something is horrific, then yes, you would work to ban it. I’ll use an extreme to prove the point. If you think pedophilia is morally wrong, you wouldn’t be saying, “well, deep down in my heart, I think pedophilia’s a horrific act and wrong, but I don’t think it’s right for me to push these morals on other people, therefore it should be legalized.” See how absurd that sounds? It’s not logically consistent.

Going back to the other cartoon, after reading it, I was flaming hot. Heck, if he’s going to go to those depths, I can be just as outrageous. Normally I try and hold back. I’ve a reputation to maintain, after all. In creating this cartoon, I debated on whether the character holding the bag should be generic, or should it represent the Democrat Party. I realized that going with the latter would turn up the controversial aspect of the cartoon several notches. But the fact of the matter is, the Democrat Party has chosen to take the side of abortion. It’s within their bylaws. I’m not stating anything that isn’t true. And it’s the Democrat Party that has proclaimed that the Republicans are waging a “war on women” simply because we believe life is sacred. Until they change this position, the donkey stays.

Final note, the pro-life position is not an attack on women. And we certainly do not wish to leave women out to dry who may have been victims of man’s cruelty or simply made a decision they now regret. That’s why Christians have always done more than just state a position. Despite zero mentions of it in the media, hundreds of pro-life pregnancy centers exist across the nation and are staffed with compassionate and caring people who are not there to judge anybody, but are there to help protect life… both the woman’s and the child’s.

HHS Mandate

In case you have been living in a bubble the past few years, let me explain this cartoon for you. Obamacare has a provision which mandates that all employers, regardless of their religious objections, provide their employees with abortive and contraceptive care services.

To me, it was quite obvious what an obtrusion of religious freedom this mandate really was. In my narrow world-view, I could not conceive how anybody could choose the side of anti-freedom in this debate.

Then the attacks came and I quickly learned that those in favor of the mandate, through some twisted logic, labeled the mandate as being for freedom, and the churches as being against freedom. And in typical liberal fashion, it did not stop there. Many liberals then went on to conclude that because churches were against this mandate, they must somehow also be against women in general. Thus, conservatives must also want to deny women voting rights, working rights, fair pay, all the way down the line!

I remember a heated debate I had with a liberal friend. What was frustrating was that I just wished he would consider where I was coming from, even for a moment. A church is protected, by the Constitution, with their own freedoms. A church should be allowed to have a conscientious objection to covering abortive care, if it violates their tenants. But according to this man I was talking to, how dare the church push it’s views on its workers (he actually used the word ‘dare’).

I gently tried to explain to him, that the worker voluntarily chooses to work for the church, knowing their stance on these issues. If the worker does not like the church’s position, GET ANOTHER JOB! Nobody is forcing that worker to stay there. If the worker feels like they are being proselytized while at their church job, guess what, it’s the church’s building, the church’s payroll, the church’s right to believe and preach whatever they want. Freedom is allowing the church to have these positions, even if they are contrary to your own. If you don’t like it, too bad. That’s the consequence of a free society.

According to my friend, the church, by not refusing to pay for this lady’s contraceptives, is denying her access to care. Huh? The church is not stopping her from getting whatever contraceptive stuff she wants. If she wants it, she can pay for it. (And that goes for a lot of things by the way, from food, to vacations, to BMWs). If the church followed her to Walgreens and told the clerk not to sell this woman contraceptives, then yes, that would be a problem. But that’s not what is happening here. And again, I stress, if the woman wishes for somebody else to pay for these services, find another job that offers it as a benefit.

And I might add, if the lady lives a life that is promiscuous, the church should have the RIGHT to fire her if it violates some sort of ethical code they might have on chastity. There’s plenty of other employers who will hire such a woman. The church should have that freedom.

I could not get my friend to see where I was coming from and before long, the debate was starting to get so heated that I figured I should simply end it for fear of losing a friend. Following our debate, I began to see liberal talking heads repeating his same arguing lines, almost verbatim, without regard to the points conservatives have been desperately trying to make. Our voices are small, and the liberals have placed a bet that this is a winning issue for them on this election.


Now that I’ve gotten that off my chest, let me say one other thing, and this goes back to something Joe Biden said in the VP debates. He said that while he is pro-life, he wouldn’t force his morals on other people. This is a tired, old, worn debate I’ve heard most of my life. Every time I hear it, I begin to deconstruct it logically in my mind, and it simply does not make sense. I wish that just once, somebody would throw this back at whomever uses this line in future debates, simply because it is a logical fallacy.

Let me break it down for you. First, don’t tell me liberals don’t like to push their morals on other people. Please! What do you call smoking bans? What do you call the ban on the incandescent? What do you call soda pop bans? What do you call bans on manger scenes at Christmas time? Or crosses at memorials? EVERYBODY tries to push their moral world view through politics. And it’s a good thing, too. We all agree that murder is morally objectionable. Therefore, as a consensus, we have banned murder. If we were to truly hold to the idea that it’s not up to us to push our morals on other people, then we should allow murderers to kill, because it’s not up to us to push our morals on them.

As you can see, that’s utterly preposterous. The same holds true for abortion. If deep down in the soul of your convictions, you truly felt that abortion was murder of the unborn, it would not matter what the other person felt about the issue. It’s morally objectionable to you, and you would work to try and stop it. Since abortion is the law of the land, you would have to go about your work through the legislative process, but ultimately, trying to win the hearts and minds of people to see why you find it so objectionable.

Here’s another analogy. Let’s take another issue, say, pedophilia. Let’s say we lived in a society that found sexual violation of child to be no big deal, so they legalized it. But you thought it was awful. Would you say, oh, I’m against pedophilia, but I’m not going to push my morals on other people? Of course not! You would say that this is a horrible act and you are going to work to ban it!

The same holds true for abortion. To say that you’re against abortion, but you’re not going to push your views on other people tells me that you really are not against abortion at all! If you found it to be the despicable act that I see it to be, then you would work just as hard to stop it as I try to do.

Abortion is an extremely divisive issue and it does not lend itself to much humor. I apologize for the length of this column, but if you are still interested in reading more, I implore you to read an excellent article on this topic written by a friend, PA Ritzer. His article can be found here.

 

The War on Women

This cartoon so brilliantly conveys the point I’m trying to make regarding liberal hypocrisy, that I really shouldn’t write anything more.

 

I really shouldn’t.

 

But at the risk of being redundant and weakening the strength of the cartoon, I can’t help myself, I must interject a few words.

I debated on whether or not to portray it as the typical Democrat donkey, since Republicans can be just as guilty of nannyism as Democrats. However, it is the Democrats running around screaming we are somehow waging a war on women, so in the end, the donkey stayed.

I find it fascinating that the same people who say that a woman should be free to do whatever the heck she wants with her body are the first to initiate all these bans on foods. It completely does not make logical sense. So a woman is allowed (for the sake of argument, I’ll call it how they call it) to undergo the ‘surgical’ procedure called abortion, without question, no regulations, and a minor doesn’t even need parental permission. Yet they are not allowed to drink more than 16 oz of soda? Or even eat at a fast food restaurant in some places (yes, some cities have banned fast food restaurants within their limits). Shouldn’t that same woman be free to eat whatever the heck she wanted without government interference? That is, after all, what they claim they want with abortion.

I’ve never seen anybody die from drinking 20 oz of pop. Yet over 50% of people die in every abortion procedure. (Yes, I’m including the unborn in this figure, however, there are still a small number of woman who also die due to complications of abortion. Actual statistics are hard to come by, the abortion industry is very hush, hush about it, but I can say this, if it were any other discipline of medicine, there would be malpractice lawsuits left and right.) Logically, it seems that if you are for no regulations for a procedure as dangerous as abortion, shouldn’t you also be for no regulations for something as innocuous as soda pop? Obviously, logic and reasoning have nothing to do with the issue.

Unrelated to this cartoon, but worth mentioning for the sake of argument: liberals LOVE to distort our side of the abortion argument, to make it sound like we are for something we are not, thus it makes it easier for them to provide their counter-argument. They’ll run around telling everybody what our point of view is, and be completely wrong about it. Nothing is more evident to this than the abortion issue. The big talking point is that Romney and conservatives hate women and don’t want them to have any freedoms. (First off, Romney’s anti-abortion stance is weak at best, so to try and lump him in with the rest of us right wing wackos is a bit unfair.) It is a war against women, the mantra goes. But they are completely missing our argument. It has nothing to do with women and what they want to do with their bodies. Heck, a woman can body-pierce herself into a straightjacket for all I care, whatever, not my life.

However, what a woman does to the life inside her, I do care about. Every human should be guaranteed the rights provided to us by the Declaration of Indepedence, and this includes life. The ONLY argument that we need to be discussing in the abortion issue is whether or not the unborn fetus is a human life, and at what point it becomes human life. During the sixties, the answer to this question was a lot more vague, but with new technologies, we can clearly see that even at a early stage, the developing child is unique and individual. Conservatives see no difference between a baby in the womb and a baby out of the womb. Both deserve protection from harm. Despite all of the liberal accusations and distortions, this is the only argument worth talking about.

A woman is free to do whatever she wants to her own body, and this includes eating salty foods. But the baby insider her is not her own body. She is a steward of that life. It is her divine privilege to be delivering the new life into this world.

Recant

I debated on whether or not I wanted to go through with this cartoon. I know it’s going to cause controversy, and believe it or not, despite being a political cartoonist, I really don’t like controversy. What pushed me over the edge were the multiple cartoons out there equating Santorum as being the leader of the Crusades, here to chop off your head if you don’t accept his religion. What a bunch of inflammatory nonsense! And while the Catholic church does have the stain of the Crusades as part of their history, many, many more Christians and Catholics lost their lives from Roman times to present day, due only to their faith.

These recent attacks on Santorum are not really aimed at him, but at Christianity in general. They are quite telling. According to a number of Liberals I’ve talked with, if you proclaim your faith, it’s ramming it down people’s throats. Therefore, equating Christians to all kinds of horrible activities is justified. Yet, they wouldn’t dare say those kinds of things against the Muslim faith, even though some jihadists will kill you if you don’t accept their faith.

But the most frustrating thing of all is the legislation Obama passed that would force Catholic organizations to provide abortion and contraceptive services to their employees, despite their moral objections. What’s frustrating is not that Obama did this, for he has shown his true colors by now, but that many of my friends are saying this is an issue of freedom. By not forcing the organization to provide contraceptives is denying the employees their freedom, thus this legislation was necessary. Huh?

The choice of what the organization provides as compensation, paid or in benefits, to its employees, should be up to that organization. That’s freedom folks! Freedom is allowing everybody their choice, including the so-called big guy. It’s the employers company, the employer’s money, the employer’s risk and the employee freely chooses to work there. Nobody is forcing that employee to work there. If they don’t agree with the company’s moral standards, then find another job. Santorum had it right. By forcing Catholic organizations to provide contraceptive services, it’s the government forcing its belief system on the church! Liberals get so worked up about the imaginary “Wall of Separation,” yet if they want to have this wall, then they need to be willing to keep their liberal government out of the church as well.

I’m not a Catholic, and I rarely get offended, but this past week has been very instructive about how people really view the church. And let me tell you, some of the talk has been scary. Religious freedom in America is on attack, and that’s really what this cartoon is about.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...