Are you feeling enough shame and guilt, you bad women?

[joyfool]

No one can be on the internet longer than a couple of days without realizing there are stronger than normal opposite opinions out there concerning abortion. And that’s just how it is, no matter what side of the fence you’re on. But occasionally, someone’s beliefs are so spectacularly, um, interesting that they should be shared with the rest of the class. So, without further ado, in a thread about buffer zones around abortion clinics (Abortion clinic "Buffer zones" in Massachusetts not legal, says unanimous SCOTUS - Great Debates - Straight Dope Message Board), I give you the well thought-out and reasoned responses of one Hector_St_Clare.

First up:

@Hector_St_Clare

Would you respond the same way of we were talking about antislavery protesters at slave markets?

And yes, yes, I know, abortion isn’t the same thing as slavery. (Hint: it’s worse).

Yes, Virginia, Hector thinks slavery (you know, the thing that happened to an entire group of real live people, systematically, for far too long) is the lesser of what he deems two evils. Ooooookay.

Next?

@Hector_St_Clare

It may not be tasteful, but it’s true, and I’m uncomfortable with laws that say we have to lie for the sake of politeness.

Here’s a simple solution: if you don’t want people calling you a baby killer, don’t have an elective abortion.

Obviously, it’s nothing new that many folks believe that a woman who has an abortion is a “baby killer,” so I won’t address that. But good old Hector had been asked about the exceptions for those who were trudging through the gauntlet of protestors that were NOT there for an “elective” abortion and I was absolutely astonished, astonished I say, that he ignored answering this query. So to recap, if you’re female and going into a clinic that does abortions no matter the reason, it is totally acceptable to be harassed if it suits his purposes.

Moving on…

@Hector_St_Clare

It relates to the fact that in some cultural-liberal circles, disruptive and disorderly protest is cool as long as it offends some groups (here, supporters of the Russian state and the Orthodox church), and not others (women who want an abortion). The concerns here, I think, have less to do with how inherently disorderly, tasteless or irritating the protests are, and more to do with people being really, really invested in being able to have guilt-free and shame-free abortions.

This portion has to do with Hector’s assertion that protests in church are legal. His site? It happened in Russia. When it’s pointed out that, erm, we’re talking about the US, Hector was again surprisingly chooses to ignore such tangential facts and instead expresses something even more important, “guilt-free and shame-free abortions.” Apparently, if you have one, it definitely need accompanied with the above two emotions. Amazingly, just reading through Hector’s posting in that thread alone, this is a central theme for him. I cannot imagine why, so let’s investigate further.

@Hector_St_Clare

I actually do think Westboro Baptist should have been sued- it violates the entire purpose of a funeral to have people protesting it.

On top of that, of course, whatever your feelings on the morality of homosexuality, it certainly doesn’t inherently harm anyone else (except arguably the person themselves). The same can’t be said of abortion: those of us on the pro-life side believe it causes lethal harm to a third party.

Homosexuality harms the person who that’s their orientation? Good to know. I wonder if he prescribes guilt and shame for them also?

@Hector_St_Clare

I don’t see it as important at all that people should be able to have abortions, and I certainly don’t have any inclination that they should do so free of guilt or shame.

Abortion is legal right now, unfortunately, but that doesn’t mean it should be easy.

At least he’s consistent, right?

@Hector_St_Clare

Hypothetical.

I’m not invested in the clinic protests one way or the other, since I don’t participate in them. I am however entirely uninterested in abortion-seekers having special freedom from protests that other groups (except polticians, I guess) don’t have. If it’s legal to throw disruptive protests inside a church, it should be legal to have disruptive protests outside an abortion clinic. Abortion is already far too easy and guilt-free a procedure.

Ah, now he’s shown just a tad bit if disingenuousness, as several posters at this point have pointed out that “disruptive protests inside a church” are NOT considered legal in America. Perhaps he’s also standing on Palin’s porch?

@Hector_St_Clare

Yup.

The whole notion of your body being a ‘sovereign entity’ is pretty revolting.

I’ll just leave this one right here. It speaks for itself.

@Hector_St_Clare

Re: So you’re in favor of inequality between men and women?

You didn’t ask me, but I’d say, when there’s a good reason for it, sure. Men and women are different- physiologically, behaviourally, cognitively, and emotionally, in their reproductive functions, talents, interests and abilities- and within reason, I don’t have a problem with the law treating them somewhat differently. The important thing is to treat men and women fairly and justly, not to treat them the same.

More of the same. Maybe our dear friend here believes that women (which he stated repeatedly in all that discussion undoubtedly must not truly know what they’re doing, for their own spiritual good, he hoped) just aren’t capable of any important decisions. Me thinks we should leave that to some guy online with only our best interests (for the common good!) at heart. Duh.

The hits, they just keep a’coming…

@Hector_St_Clare

Which might suggest why it’s a bad idea to give everyone a voice and a vote.

I entirely disagree with you about what fairness and justice are, and continue to be amused that you think this is about ‘men’ and ‘women’. You’re aware, right, that women are pro-life in about equal numbers as men?

The real division here is between people who think about themselves first and foremost, and people who think about their duties to the common good.

There’s that common good thing! I’m glad I didn’t miss it. But what’s the most important part in this portion? I do believe that it’s Hector feeling, “it’s a bad idea to give everyone a voice and a vote.” What say y’all? According to Hector, who should we leave out? Anyone want to volunteer to give up their vote? Their voice? I wonder if men are included in this. Hmmmm.

Sorry, this next one was fairly long (and this OP is already lengthy enough) and botched up anyway, so I cut it down to the relevant section. I hope the gentle readers at home don’t mind.

I support abortion in cases of serious medical threats to the mother, and not for any other reason (including rape, etc.). That’s not an extreme position, it’s (one of) the positions in the moderate middle.

Evidently we have very different ideas of what the common good is. I’d say the common good is eminently served by laws that say, no, no matter how unhappy you might be, and no matter how much it may hurt your feelings, you don’t have the right to kill your child. Their life is more important than your comfort and your ‘freedom’. Sorry.

Let me see if I can summarize: I understand that there is a contingency who view abortion as immoral even in instances of rape or incest, but I’ve never heard that called “moderate middle.” Others? But disregarding semantics, I’d just like to comment on Hector’s rosy-eyed optimism that abortions are performed for “comfort and [scare quote] freedom.” Versus, I dunno, the possibility of a life-time of abuse via a, say, violent significant other. Or parent who hates their daughter for getting pregnant, possibly by her father. Or such abject poverty that everyone in the household might already be just moments away from starving. Mental illness. You name it. Of course, those are all extremes, but it’s just all kinds of cute that the real reason women have abortions is for their “freedom.” As a red blooded, flag waving, American, would that make us brave then?

Last one! There was so many (Hector has soooooo much to opine on the topic, unless there’s a specific question he’d prefer to side step, that is), that I’m not sure if I boogered this up or he did, but I’m leaving it as is. Because I’m too flipping exhausted by such intellectual output to go back and check. Anyhoo…

[quote=“Hector_St_Clare, post:292, topic:691698”]

Sure, why not?

Again: I’m not a democrat and so I don’t see anything intrinsically wrong with restricting political rights to a minority.

@Hector_St_Clare

iiandyiii If there’s going to be abortions involved I’d want two doctors involved certifying that the decision was medically necessary, and publicly explaining their reasons.

“Restricting political rights to a minority?” That should go over well. Let’s restrict them to women who have abortions, okay? Or is that not what you had in mind? And finally, the goods; if an abortion is necessary (!), “two doctors involved certifying that the decision was medically necessary, and publicly explaining their reasons” sounds infinitely prudent and reasonable, yes? I’m sure, as soon as I hand in my woman card, I’m going to agree with this in its entirety. You?

I’m glad I’ve given this opportunity for Hector to speak for himself in front of a wider audience. I’m sure his beliefs are so much spot on perfect, that we’ll all be converting poste haste. And because I applaud such amazingly astute insights into the female condition and what we should be allowed to do and not do, I invite others to go forth and share more of Hector’s wisdom here. We will only be richer for it, especially us “cultural liberals.”

Thank you for partaking in my pitting. I hope you have an illuminati day.

[LavenderBlue]

Thank you for saving me the trouble! The man’s a sexist asshole who should not be allowed near women.

[iiandyiiii]

Excellent, well cited pitting. I heartily endorse it!

[joyfool]

Thank you both! And I appreciate the good fight you guys are giving it in that other thread. Jeez. Talk about denial and willful ignorance. Now, I must attend to my borscht and make sure my matryoshka dolls have been well dusted, like a good little lady. Because, in soviet…
ah, I can’t.

[Czarcasm]

I don’t think he want’s to restrict all women’s right to vote…just the educated ones.

[enipla]

@LavenderBlue

Thank you for saving me the trouble! The man’s a sexist asshole who should not be allowed near women.

Seconded. I did not participate because the guy is just so out there. Comparing abortions to slavery .

If anything, forcing a woman to proceed with a pregnancy, possible health problems, financial woes, and servitude for 18 years is closer to slavery.

[Siam_Sam]

A good pitting. But I must admit to felling a little disappointed, because I came into this thread expecting, shame, guilt and bad women.

[joyfool]

@Czarcasm

I don’t think he want’s to restrict all women’s right to vote…just the educated ones.

Well, yeah. The ones that have been force fed how to believe by the fathers, husbands and religion, they’re okay. Because they can be made to vote a certain way, see? It all makes sense that it comes down to us being uppity.

@enipla

Seconded. I did not participate because the guy is just so out there. Comparing abortions to slavery .

If anything, forcing a woman to proceed with a pregnancy, possible health problems, financial woes, and servitude for 18 years is closer to slavery.

I know, right? Slavery was a walk in the park, man. All that other stuff? That’s what good, little wimmins are supposed to do anyway. It’s not like we have a life outside if birthin’ babies.

@Siam_Sam

A good pitting. But I must admit to felling a little disappointed, because I came into this thread expecting, shame, guilt and bad women.

Sorry. I can try to hustle you up some links, but I bet they wouldn’t be nearly as exciting as what’s in your local.

[YogSothoth]

What a freaking lunatic.

[WolfpackJeep]

Very thorough, and well-deserved.

[Typo_Negative]

@LavenderBlue

The man’s a sexist asshole who should not be allowed near women.

Pretty sure the women have already taken care of that.

[HookerChemical]

This should serve as the standard for a good pitting. It contains context of what’s being pitted as a whole, sufficient excepts to hang the pitee, and enough snark to be a fun read. If I were to offer any criticism, it’s that more vitriol would not have been out of line, but that’s a quibble. Well done.

[RTFirefly]

@enipla

Seconded. I did not participate because the guy is just so out there. Comparing abortions to slavery .

If anything, forcing a woman to proceed with a pregnancy, possible health problems, financial woes, and servitude for 18 years is closer to slavery.

Indeed.

For me, parenthood has affirmed the importance of the right to choose. It’s the best, most joyous thing I’ve ever been a part of, but* that’s because it was what we wanted*. But being a good parent is also a metric ton of work that never goes away, and how’s that gonna work out for someone who didn’t really want to be a parent to begin with? How’s that gonna work out for the kid who didn’t ask to be born in the first place?

Not very well at all, of course.

But the pro-life movement doesn’t give a good goddamn about the kids*, when you come right down to it. The kid is just a prop. The point is to punish that slutty woman by sticking her with a kid for the next 18 years.

*This isn’t to say that there aren’t any sincere pro-lifers who really are all about the kids, just like there are a few evangelicals here and there who are really Christians. But the movement is like this.

Here, for example, is the emphatically pro-life Christianity Today shrugging off the death of two children with the headline, “Parents Sentenced to Prison for Belief in Healing Power of Prayer” with the subhead “Couple who broke probation with death of second son given one of harshest punishments for faith healing.” This couple killed two of their children through neglect, by praying for them instead of seeking medical treatment. But to CT, the cruel murder of these *born *children isn’t what upsets them - the outrage is the ‘harsh punishment’ of these parents for practicing their faith.

The children don’t matter; it’s all about the parents. And since these parents are devoted Christianists, the death of the [del]props[/del] kids is the lesser concern.

[Jungian_Camisole]

I’ve been told there are cookies. Where are the cookies? Do I get cookies if I have an abortion?

Well done, faithfool. ::golf clap::

[wonky]

Holy shit.

Like faithfool, I decided to look this guy up. Wow.

[wonky]

@Jungian_Camisole

I’ve been told there are cookies. Where are the cookies? Do I get cookies if I have an abortion?

You get cookies if you have a uterus and a man tells you to have cookies AND NOT ONE MINUTE SOONER.

[Czarcasm]

@HookerChemical

If I were to offer any criticism, it’s that more vitriol would not have been out of line, but that’s a quibble.

Hector_St_Clare is a self-righteous asshole that hides behind the Bible to justify his horrendous hatred/fear/disgust of any women that dares have an opinion that deviates from Genesis 3:16.

[Czarcasm]

@jsgoddess

You get cookies if you have a uterus and a man tells you to have cookies AND NOT ONE MINUTE SOONER.

I’ve got your cookies right here, woman!
Right here on this plate, that is-freshly baked cinnamon raisin. If you don’t like cinnamon raisin, I’ve got Tollhouse cookies that’ll be ready in about 15 minutes. Would you like a glass of milk to go with?

[OurLordPeace]

@Czarcasm

Hector_St_Clare is a self-righteous asshole that hides behind the Bible to justify his horrendous hatred/fear/disgust of any women that dares have an opinion that deviates from Genesis 3:16.

I’m pretty sure he’s the same Hector St. Clare who comments on the insufferable pearl-clutching square Rod Dreher’s blog on The American Conservative.

[joyfool]

@WolfpackJeep

Very thorough, and well-deserved.

Gracias. What can I say? I was inspired.

@Typo_Negative

Pretty sure the women have already taken care of that.

Should we thank God for that?

@HookerChemical

This should serve as the standard for a good pitting. It contains context of what’s being pitted as a whole, sufficient excepts to hang the pitee, and enough snark to be a fun read. If I were to offer any criticism, it’s that more vitriol would not have been out of line, but that’s a quibble. Well done.

My apologies on the obvious lack of vitriol. However, in my defense, I just can’t really take hyper anti-abortion men serious. They’re creepy as all hell and I can’t do much more than envision them with tiny fists clenched, spittle flying from their mouths and eyes screwed up in rage over the mere thought of women being allowed to do anything but serve them and knowing in their heart of hearts, it’ll never be the way they interpret their holy books to say it should. But I promise to try harder next time.