First off, if you have not read Alisha’s newest post, please do so.  Remember, there are two people here after all, and we are hardly carbon copies of each other.

So, Bill O’Reilly talked about us last night, and while I appreciate his comments (and respect him greatly), I feel that much of what is being said is still reactionary.  Watching Bill’s comments though, it felt as if he really didn’t have an opinion that they could convey other than “ewwwww”.

Tell you what, Mr. O’Reilly:  I’ll take the label of “pinhead” as justified if you still think so upon further reflection into this post.

Based on much of the response from the parts of the media that are conservative I want to help highlight some of what I’ve learned from this as well as something I’ve wanted to point out from the start.

This website and the vote behind it was started due to our initial uncertainty with our current pregnancy.  We had two miscarriages before this pregnancy.  One of them ended with a trip to the hospital and Alisha being induced to give birth to a baby whose heart had stopped beating 3 weeks prior.  The second miscarriage actually happened during our trip to France.  The photo of us in front of the Pont du Gard in southern France was chosen specifically because Alisha’s second miscarriage happened two days later.

With the health concerns involved in pregnancy with a couple that is not of optimum weight combined with two miscarriages in a row like we had, Alisha and I started eating better and working out.  Alisha had even gotten to the point where she was feeling like her body wanted to go work out and had lost 55 pounds.  My weight-loss has not been as spectacular, but I am at least losing weight.  This pregnancy came faster than we had expected.

We started this website in hopes to have a discussion with people in regards to our situation and to ask others to vote on what they think we should do based on the information.

Alisha and I had points we wanted to try to get across in addition to having a discussion and allowing others to help us make a decision.  She wanted to point out in the end how many do not take voting seriously, and I wanted to point out the hypocrisy of the labels “Pro-Life” and “Pro-Choice” used when discussing the issue of Abortion.

Now that we have  weeded out the fraud and have the final vote results, I think this is a great time to start this segment of the discussion.

Total votes: 278084
Give Birth: 73.79%      (205,189 votes)
Have an Abortion: 26.21%  (72,895 votes)

This is quite the change from the original vote numbers:

Give Birth 22.37% (448,777 votes)
243,588 Fraudulent votes

Have an Abortion 77.63% (1,557,586 votes)
1,484,691 Fraudulent votes

Now, there is a lot we have learned from all of this, too much in-fact for this post alone.  Let me preface my thoughts first by reminding everyone that there are two minds behind this site.  Mine, and Alisha’s.  As I sit here writing this posting, she is sitting at the kitchen table writing her own.  I find it amazing how much focus there was on me and the history of my thoughts when no one paid attention to what Alisha said.

Even an interview with CNN with both of us left out every word Alisha said.  From my perspective and my perspective alone, many in the parts of the media that are liberal seam pretty intent on attacking me instead of having this conversation.

I have learned over the decade of my internet ranting that often when one cannot actually stand and hold themselves to a discussion, an intellectually dishonest person will simply try to shut down the discussion or divert attention away from the discussion.  (Yes I admit my online ranting came off pretty aggressive until I grew out of my “I’m in college and I know everything” phase.  Then again, I also started my college life as a democrat.)  While many out there have attacked me, they ignore my wife and her opinion completely.  Oddly enough, her opinion is the one that matters most.

In the end, isn’t this whole thing… “Pro Choice”? (Though I hate the labels with a passion, as you will soon read.)  After all, isn’t the definition of “Pro-choice” by “Pro-choicers” say that ”abortion is an option that women should be able to exercise as a fundamental right”?  Well, perhaps with all the attention given to me, a “Pro-Choice” person should have instead focused on the woman, and the “why” behind the option that Alisha “should be able to exercise”.  Instead, they have refused to have the conversation with Alisha and have taken the intellectually dishonest tactic of finding reasons not to have the discussion in the first place.

As someone who has been pointed out as being a Glenn Beck fan and had others apply that as a core criticism, I find much of this very telling behind the actions of much of the left in general, but I digress.  I would like to highlight the primary thing I wanted to get across with my writings here.  And this is something that can be tracked back in my writings for quite a while.

The labels “Pro-Choice” and “Pro-Life” do nothing but confuse people (I’m talking about my side too here) and divert the conversation away from what the actual topic is: Abortion.

We have seen this too on our site, as many on both sides attacked us instead of actually having a discussion.

First, let me go after the label “Pro-Life”, as this is the part people are going to ignore anyway when they skip over Alisha’s thoughts to blog about me.  Keep in mind too, this is the side that I associate myself with.  Though like most, If given the choice between Alisha’s life and that of an unborn child, if her life were threatened, I would “choose” her.

Also in cases of rape or incest, I would have to go by what the woman wanted.  These are two attrocities that I wish no one would have to go through… though according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute 0.3% of abortions are from Rape or incest and 1% due to the risk of maternal life or health leaving 98.7% elective.

So what does “Pro-Life” mean?

pro
–adverb
1. in favor of a proposition, opinion, etc.

life
–noun
1. The condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects and dead organisms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally.

It is difficult for one to hold the stance of being “Pro-Life” when one is not for “life” in all regards.  When one sacrifices a life, weather that be a human being, animal, or plant, one cannot say they are “Pro-Life” but rather “Pro-Specific-Kinds-of-Life-Over-Others”.  Meat is murder, but it is tasty tasty murder to sustain the life of a creature higher on the food chain.  In its most basic form, based on the definitions of “pro” and “life”, it is difficult use such an all-encompassing label when those who use the label do not… encompass all.

Then we can go onto those who are “Pro-Life” but still believe in the death penalty for some who society deems worthy of such a punishment.  Or what about assisted suicide?  If we focus the label of “life” onto that of a “human life”, how can we not be against the death penalty?  Shouldn’t then the label read “Pro-Life-So-Long-As-A-Group-Of-My-Peers-Don’t-Think-They-Should-Die”?

So, the label “Pro-Life” is completely bunk.  Stop using it “Pro-Lifers”.  It’s doing the cause far more harm than good.  Instead, be intellectually honest and talk about what you are really saying:  “Anti-Abortion”.

Now, on to the “Pro-Choice” side.  This label is not only a great distraction to the topic of Abortion, but with it comes a misunderstanding of the word “choice” that strikes straight through the political side that chooses to use the label most: Those who long for a “liberal” use of government.

So what does “Pro-Choice” mean?

pro
–adverb
1. in favor of a proposition, opinion, etc.

choice
–noun
1. an act or instance of choosing.
2. the right, power, or opportunity to choose.

Here, it is difficult for one to hold the stance of being “Pro-Choice” when one is not for “choice” in all regards.  When one sacrifices a the ability for others to choose (whether it be the life of a human being, how much bacon to put on the triple hamburger, choosing an SUV over a hybrid, or choosing to text while driving), one cannot say they are “Pro-Choice” but rather “Pro-Choice-So-Long-As-It-is-A-Specific-Kind-of-Choice-Over-Other-Kinds-Of-Choices”. 

I have even been called “Anti-Choice” by those in liberal blogs.  This is most humorous to me as I am not so ignorant to call them “Anti-Life”.  In fact, I am willing to go out on a limb and say those who approve of the increased power of government reek of hypocrisy the moment they claim to be “Pro-Choice”.  I would even say as a Libertarian/Conservative, I am far more “Pro-Choice” then the typical person who labels themselves as “Pro-Choice”.  This is all part of WHY the label of “Pro-Choice” simply does not fit the topic.

For Example:  How can one say they are “Pro-Choice” when they are often for increased laws and regulations?  How can one be “Pro-Choice” and yet “Pro-Seat-Belt-Law”, “Pro-Socialized-Medicine”, or “Pro-Automotive-Fuel-Standards”?  Where is the advocacy group that wants to defend my “Automotive-Freedom-of-Choice” and remove the requirement for eight side Air-Bags and higher fuel emissions?  If I want to drive something that gets 12mpg, isn’t that my “choice”?  Why do so many claim to be “Pro-Choice” and yet restrict my ability to “choose” to own the same firearms our police and military have?

How can someone be “Pro-Choice” and yet side with nearly every single increase in government power when it comes from the side that labels themselves as “Pro-Choice”?  I submit that this occurs because some do not understand what “Choice” is and where the government gets their power.

Government gets their power by taking it from the people.  As they get stronger or as government is applied more “liberally” the “choices” an individual has are further restricted.  I may not dig the ability for a person to have an abortion because they are not economically ready or because they simply do not want children… but as an individual who wishes for a reduction of government power and control over an individual in almost every single other topic, I am far more “Pro-Choice” than most who carry that label on a pin next to their “Che” Guevara sticker.

Keep in mind though that “Pro-Choice” does not specifically equate to “Pro-Abortion”.  Though the population is split on the topic of Abortion by 51“pl”/42“pc”, the vote we see does not reflect those numbers.  This is another example of where the label “Pro-Choice” simply confuses those who apply that label to themselves.

We have had so very many comments from individuals who call themselves “Pro-Choice” that are calling our un-born child a “life” despite the abortion not carrying any penalty like the termination of any other life.

So, like the “Pro-Life” label, the label of “Pro-Choice” distracts from the actual topic of abortion.  Instead of talking about abortion, the labels are a warm and fuzzy way of speaking without actually discussing why removing a life from existence should be legal.

These labels should be aborted.  Instead of talking about a vague word that has little to do with the actual topic, we need to be intellectually honest and talk openly.  The more we use labels that have nothing to do with the actual topic, the more this entire conversation remains “educational” at best.  Perhaps this is one of the reasons why Roe-V-Wade hasn’t been overturned in 30+ years.  We have spent all this time talking about “choices” and “lives”  instead of abortion.

 -Pete




Share

« »