Posts by complacenta
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
here is the quote from the NAPW webiste that truly makes me wonder
"..Dr. Tiller was extraordinary. When I met him he talked about why women have abortions and how they understand them in terms of their religious faith and spirituality. He described his efforts to serve them with respect, making possible rituals that would allow them to say goodbye to fetal life that they in fact valued.."
what terms could these be if they are not those of the oldest institution in the world, that of human sacrifice? -
NOW you're talking
abortion is obviously an emergency circumstance
unfortunately, 'humans' are creatures not of instinct
(although we are not of course yet devoid of it)
but creatures-of-representation of what it is that we do and how that is seen by others and maybe eventually even by whatever may turn out to actually be 'ourselves'..instinct sure as hell does not motivate this blog!
i think you can agree that little children as such, way before any mere over-shadowing woman, occupy a preposessing place in the hierarchy of our present sacral structure!and that is the inconsistency of affects that i am, however clumsily, trying to get at with my query
-
IS IT more exciting for you then to play this plainly puerile little game of round up and catch lil' p's outlaw ass if you can, rather than attempt to engage with with what she SAYS?
-
then i repeat my query
to what extent though is the idea that it be better that "the blow falls upon the woman" rather than that "tenuous scrap of life growing inside her" inconsistent somehow with the enormous social emphasis, from left right & god knows where else as well, put on the sentiment that it is children who must always be saved first, rather than more developed, experientially/contributionally, and even existentially-rich humans?
am i to BLAME for wondering about this????
-
you're back, mickificki, and without a single thing to say
-
to what extent though is the idea that it be better that "the blow falls upon the woman" rather than that "tenuous scrap of life growing inside her" inconsistent somehow with the enormous social emphasis, from left right & god knows where else as well, put on the sentiment that children must always be saved first, rather than more developed, experientially, contributionally, and even existentially-rich humans?