Imposition of Christiana Law

Are we really still debating the right to choose in the US? Really?

Does life begin at conception?
Have you heard of weasel words? It's when people use a word or phrase that is slightly different than what they mean in order to assert something that is either not factual or not provable. "Life begins at conception" is a perfect example of weasel words. Here's why:

What the statement "life begins at conception" says is that the embryo is alive. To prove that, you only need to prove things such as metabolism, biological function, etc. Easy. An embryo is most certainly, absolutely, incontrovertibly alive. So were the cells that existed before they fused to form it. So is a house plant.

What the statement "life begins at conception" implies, or is used to assert, is that a human life, humanity, with the right to not be murdered unless the state decides otherwise (lacking, however, the right to choose to end itself) begins at conception. And that's a whole other ball of wax isn't it? The belief that humanity begins at conception is just that, a belief.

So?
So probably more than 99% of the US population is opposed to the imposition of Sharia law within the US. It's one of the few things Americans agree on nearly unanimously. Why? Because Americans recognize that it's wrong to impose laws based on religious beliefs instead of laws based on clearly verifiable facts and logic. It's one of the most basic concepts of the US. Americans may disagree over the right of the US to tell other countries what laws they may or may not have, but advocating for a law limiting directed bequests to one third of the estate and requiring the rest to be distributed according to a state formula with female heirs receiving half as much as male heirs within the US, for example, wouldn't go far. That would be the imposition of a belief with no greater interest of the state involved.

So legislating the belief that humanity begins at conception is no different than the imposition of Sharia law.  It is the imposition of a belief with no greater interest of the state involved.

Every woman has the right to choose not to have an abortion if she believes that the life in her womb, however it was conceived and at whatever risk to her own health, should be viewed as a citizen with rights of its own. She does not, however, have the right to believe that on behalf of the woman next door.

The odd thing is that if I pondered the imposition of Christiana Law, I'd have expected the bits about loving your neighbor to be legislated first, paving the way for the total imposition of Christiana Law. Who knew restrictions would come first? As a Christian, I'm offended. There's nothing Christian about the imposition of Christiana Law. Attempting to found laws on the beliefs of a subset of Christians should be as repulsive to the American spirit as the founding of laws on the beliefs of anyone else.

Well Hmmm

Who's writing the script?

I mean.... If someone says, "A rose by any other name...," then anyone decently read has the Shakespeare bell go off immediately. When we watch ten different news anchors parrot a phrase like, "Muslim seminary," we know that writer of The Memo is speaking.

So when two speakers thousands of miles apart utter almost precisely the same words, who's writing the script?

Akin, US: "First of all, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something. I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist [and the woman] and not attacking the child."

Van der Staaij [Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij = Political Reformation Party = Anti-Civil Rights, Anti-Choice, Anti-Family-Support, Anti-Interracial-Adoption, Anti-Etc.*], NL: "Volgens SGP-leider Kees van der Staaij is er na een verkrachting maar een ‘hele kleine kans’ dat het slachtoffer zwanger raakt. Mocht dat wel gebeuren, dan is abortus geen optie, zo zei de lijsttrekker van de SGP vanmiddag bij RTL Z." [According to SGP-leader Kees van der Staaij there is, following a rape, only an 'extremely small chance' that the victim will get pregnant. If that happens, then abortion is not an option, says the top candidate from the SGP today on RTL Z (news channel).]

They don't both work for Faux News. They don't both have an interest in US politics, or Dutch politics for that matter. V.d. Staaij is running against the grain of vast majority of the Dutch population, and in the US, half the population will readily say they're opposed to abortion... until the situation is in their lap.

So who's writing the script? Has The Memo spread? What a horrific thought.

Just things that make you say hmmm.

* For the Americans amongst us, the Dutch system is very different. In the US, because there is direct voting for the Executive branch, political leanings are forced into two groups for the sake of survival. In NL, the head of the Executive branch is the first member listed by the party with the most votes in the Second House (Parliament). Because of this, and the coalition system that is used to form the government, political difference is encouraged. A party like the SGP, which represents just 5k (.4%) of the votes, is still taken seriously.

Acceptable Compromises?

It goes a little something like this: "Life begins at conception. Therefore all abortion and some contraception is wrong. Period. But if we say that, there's no way we'll be able to get our platform past the American people. Therefore, in order to get more votes, it's OK to kill children sometimes." 

Have the courage of your convictions, and attempt to establish policies that reflect what you actually think. Then the people will reject you. Oh, you knew that already. Sorry. 

The alternative is that the premise, "Life begins at conception" is NOT what you really think, and you have some other motive for attempting to control women's decisions. Again, have the courage of your convictions, and say so. Then the people will reject you. Oh, you knew that already. Again, sorry.