The Irony of Discriminating Life: "!GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH!" I would rather have cake please, with rainbow sprinkles inside!!

So the Annual Right To Life March was held this weekend; there will be another Political Banquet later in the year as well as an Election Survey and possibly a Debate Scenario - even for City Government races. Unfortunately, not most but some realize that this event (The Burgess Candidate) is a Political dog show more than it is a concerned public speaking out; while they still have a right to march and all the ability in the world to speak, this is not a religious act of any degree, but political, and historically bigoted.

The corporate structure of the event (while individual intention be noble) the collective act is both political incumbent show ponies benefit before we really know whom all the Primary contenders are going to be for election and so misleading to the general public, that the history of the "outrage" needs to be explored and exposed, in order to clean up our Civil Discourse in the public arena, and for once begin to have an honest vociferous conversation about ideas rather than rhetoric that divides and demonizes, I think we have all had enough of that kind of politics and bullshit.

I have discussed at length before, last year even, the moral, scientific, theological, and legal issues surrounding Abortion/Infanticide, but my main goal here is communication of a concise historical record, so that way we can move forward in debating out the necessary resolutions to the idea of Abortion being a legal medical option that is rarely if ever used as originally intended by the Courts and not a spiritual anathema that is used to guilt and slander women in their most vulnerable moments.

Pro Life vs. Pro Choice, personally is the wrong statement or query. I think most of us can a agree that we are against the act every being necessary socially - as it is heinous; while at the same time, recognize that in some cases for medical (not just physical but also psychological), having the safe, medical procedure available to those whom need it, should have access to it, personally speaking, in a Hospital not a clinic - a fetus shouldnt be regarded with the same vitriol as a sprained ankle more treated like an appendix rupture, with care - before during and after the process if it is deemed necessary between a Patient and their Physician.

There is a major difference between which version of Pro Life you are trying to label someone with. Technically to be fully Pro Life you must be against Abortion, and the Death Penalty, and Contraception, and lets not even get started on the Prebondedforlife Coitial Activities conversation. This nation has never really been Pro Life, we have adapted that advocacy genre because the Religious Right (which is a political action) used it as a niche issue to elevate their cause and political strength thru the Churches because they were butt hurt over forced Racial Integration of our Schools and Society, the historical record is there, you just have to study it out and that is what I am presenting to you now as well as the prior analysis I have done below that.

Why I am bringing this all up is in concern not just for all the babies that we have lost, but all the ones that are born and we keep throwing away. The same vitriol that allows the above political actions with religious overtones to take hold in our Civil Society are the same that validate and promote the mendacity which permits people a Divine Authority to deny an inherit dignity to Gay and Lesbian and BiSexual and Transgender Youth and Young Adults to the pointe of bullying and suicide and attempts to abuse medical science in an effort to stabilize their crumbling World view.

More Info: Miracles and Mendacity explained by Randy Roberts Potts (grandson of Oral Roberts)

Religious Liberty Laws that are being considered to allow discrimination over public access to commercial endeavours, like Bakers, and Florists, are the same discriminatory Right To Refuse Service laws employed in the South and a few other places to deny a Black person the ability to sustain life or just enjoy a cold Root Beer on a hot summer day. Some will deny to their dying breath that the conversation on GLBT Civil Rights and Black Civil Rights are not the same, when if not in fact then at least in structure of the obstacles placed in the way of equal access, they are the same dog and pony show, just with the appearance of different rules and circumventing debates.

How that relates back to Abortion and the Right To Life Campaigns is three fold. Part of the inherited rhetoric of RTL is no sex outside of straight marriage, and no contraception, amongst others.

1. GLBT Marriage Equality challenges not just the less than a thousand year old Sacrament of Matrimony (Cannons 50-52, 4th Council of Lateran Basilica, 1215 AD) Marriage was not originally a Sacrament of the Church because it both prefigures and preordains the Church. Additionally the Ministers of the Sacrament is not the Priest or Clergy member but the People themselves getting married which forms the Covenant thru the act of sex, hence the phrase - consummate the marriage. There are several things required for a Covenant to be formed: tearing of the flesh, shedding of blood, and the mutual exchanging of privileges and rights - that is achieved during sex - the original Covenant bond - which also makes the Bible a Sex Manual in some peoples eyes, but I digress.

2. GLBT Marriage Equality also challenges the Religious Rights core Issue Statements; that if GLBT Persons are equal: then they can both choose to have sex, do so outside of or inside of marriage, and as a matter of necessity of health as well as courtesy to their partners have access to contraception unfettered, and "God forbid it", actually raise 'our' unwanted children or the children that they choose to conceive thru which ever means they choose to contract or facilitate.

3. GLBT Marriage Equality also means that Sexual Health and Education courses need to be all inclusive and actually educational rather than utilizing unproven, historically nonserviceable ideas, like Abstinence Only Education, as a political wedge issue.

Over the past 25 years, Congress has spent over $1.5 billion on abstinence-only-until-marriage programs, yet no study in a professional peer-reviewed journal has found these programs to be broadly effective. Scientific evidence simply does not support an abstinence-only-until-marriage approach. 

01. Federal Evaluation Finds Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Programs Ineffective
02. Abstinence-Only Programs Do Not Impact Teen Sexual Behavior 
03. Abstinence-Only Programs Do Not Affect Rates of HIV Infection or Sexual Behavior 
04. Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Programs Negatively Impact Young People’s Sexual Health
05. Numerous State Evaluations Fail to Find Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Programs Effective

In April 2007, a federally funded evaluation of Title V abstinence-only-until-marriage programs was released. The study, conducted by Mathematica Policy Research Inc. on behalf of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, found that abstinence-only-until-marriage programs are ineffective. Of the more than 700 federally funded abstinence-only-until-marriage programs, the evaluation looked at only four programs. These programs were handpicked to show positive results and they still failed.

Source: SIECUS ~Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (Oct. 2009)

My Final Thoughts 

If GLBT Persons are treated equally, under the Law, the Religious Right will loose more and more of its power base (as they are proven logically false, in their theological and rhetorical diatribes, people will naturally reevaluate the message of their leaders) over the minds and hearts of the People because they have become entrenched within the Church Theology as well as the historical Racial Political divide.

^ see theological and rhetorical diatribes^
CNN's Chris Cuomo Eviscerates Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore
by John M. Becker c/o The Bilerico Project 20150212
VIDEO HERE via The Raw Story

UPDATED: They have become so entrenched in the Church Theology and the Racial Political Divide that even the State Supreme Court Chief Justice of Alabama attempted to cite the Bible as having Supremacy over the Constitution and by doing such (as exposed by JON STEWART on THE DAILY SHOW), violating their own State's Constitutional Amendment 1 (which prevented Foreign Laws from having Legal Standing) in order to avoid implementing a Federal ruling which over turned their ban on Same Sex Marriage because of 14th Amendment violations which turned into a political dog and pony show for a week and ruined a lot of people's Valentine's Day Celebrations, after this post was originally written. 

See also this Op Ed Too Much Prayer in Politics Republicans, the Religious Right and Evolution by Frank Bruni of the New York Times 20150214.

The Religious Rights only hope for retaining influence is to create "a political decent with religious overtones" and that is what allowing both the Right To Life historical movement to go unchecked is allowing the Racially biased Religious Right to promote even more divisiveness by claiming an old deed with a new name. Religious Liberty Laws - which are neither Religious, Liberty, nor Legal! They claim Constitutional authority to violate every principle of "forming a more perfect union"; in the land of the free, there is no bravery among those whom would call for such bias and discrimination, as "all are created equal" under the law is truly our creed.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Updated for content and links on 20150213