The Forced Parenthood Hydra Returns

As many of you may have seen on Facebook, I am now going to refer to the Personhood movement as the "Forced Parenthood" movement. I think this more accurately reflects what they intend. After all, if they really believed a fertilized egg was a person, then they'd investigate all miscarriages, issue death certificates for them, and count those deaths in our mortality statistics. But that's not on their agenda - all they are really interested in doing is preventing women from having access to contraception and abortion. That, my friends, is forced parenthood - the opposite of planned parenthood - and a great infringement on our liberty.

I remember during the 26 campaign how some supporters claimed that we thought children born of rape or children born with birth defects should have been aborted. Certainly, I never thought such a thing, much less said it. You can be very sure that when you oppose these new forced parenthood measures, we will be accused of saying these things again. Here is my thinking on the subject:

If I say that a woman should have aborted (or been forced to abort) her child for any reason, then I am guilty of doing the same thing that pro-forced parenthood people are doing. I'm simply desiring a different outcome. Forced parenthood supporters want to control women's choices so that they will ultimately have children. Pro-abortion supporters (and who do you know who even is one?) want to control women's choices so that they cannot have (certain) children. Same game, different outcome.

I am pro-choice. I believe that the choice, as well as the responsibility, rests with the woman and those she chooses to include. I do not want to control the outcome but recognize her liberty to decide what is in her own best interest.

It's still amazing how these "small government" people want to force parenthood through legislation and ballot initiatives. Clearly, they are in favor of penis-sized government since they constantly attempt to ram belief down our throats, shove injustice up our rears, and fill our wombs with their tainted seed. This would be a humorous comparison if not for the fact that it's an insult to the penis which is generally a fine, worthy instrument.

Mississippi's battle starts anew today and many more states are going to be confronting heads from the same hydra. Our battle tactics are the same: cut off the heads and burn the stump. Get the word out and do everything you can. You may lose some fair-weather friends but you'll find better ones just around the corner...friends and neighbors who won't go into your bedroom uninvited and will be content to let you choose if and when you wish to be a parent.

Do not be ashamed of your position. Do not cede the moral high ground. Do not let anyone go unchallenged who says that you are evil because of your views. Stand up for yourself, for your family, and for your freedom. Stand up for what's right.

The Triad of Belief: Pt. 2 - Denial

Last time we examined the continuum of belief as it ranges from denial to skepticism to credulity. We talked about the meaning of skepticism and its value as a way of evaluating claims. Today we're going to look at denial. 

People tend to confuse skepticism and denialism. Remember that skepticism means, "Following the evidence wherever it leads," for the purposes of our discussion. Denialism, therefore, means, "Refusing to believe a claim no matter how much evidence supports it."

Let's look at the Holocaust. You've heard the stories about millions of Jews being murdered by the Nazi regime but is it true? Could 20th century human beings really have committed such an atrocity? You don't want to believe that a white, Christian society could have really done such a thing so you investigate.

You read everything you can find and the accounts give you graphic detail about the murders, the methods, the locations, and the graves. 

You interview survivors and their families. You hear their stories firsthand and see the numbers tattooed on their arms. You're still not sure.

You see the photographs and videos of the bodies piled into mass graves. You're still not sure.

You go to the museums and the former concentration camps. You see the relics for yourself.

Then you walk away saying, "It's all made up. It didn't really happen (or it didn't happen the way history says it did). You've fallen into the realm of denial because you have ignored or dismissed all the evidence in favor of your preferred conclusion.

Holocaust denial is not the only kind of denialism prevalent in our society. AIDS deniers (like Bryan Fischer of the AFA) claim that HIV does not cause AIDS despite the mountains of evidence we have demonstrating that it does. Vaccine deniers claim that vaccines cause autism or that vaccines are all harmful despite evidence to the contrary. The problem is not so much that these people are wrong - it's that they will cling to their erroneous beliefs no matter how much evidence is presented to them. The more you show them they are wrong, the more they dig in. They simply cannot be wrong.

Recently, we've seen a very good example of the difference between skepticism and denial in the climate change community. We know that there are climate change deniers who, in the face of all contradictory evidence, insist that the earth is not warming. They could be standing in front of a boiling ocean and they still wouldn't admit that something is going on. They are deniers. 

But Richard Muller is not a denier - he's a skeptic. He didn't think there was anything to this climate change notion. He thought the previous studies might be faulty so he did his own independent examination of the evidence. At the end of the day, he discovered that the other research teams were right and climate change really is happening. He changed his position based on the new evidence. That is skepticism and it's very different from denial.

What about religious denialism? I'm sure you've heard people say, "I don't care how much evidence you have, I have faith and I'll never stop believing in God." You've probably also heard people say, "Evolution isn't true because the Bible says God created the world in 7 days." These people will deny any fact in order to cling to their beliefs. They are not willing to change their minds. Period.

Denialism can be very dangerous for the individual and for society. By pretending that problems don't exist, it's easy to forget the hard-won lessons of the past. By pretending a horrible disease is behavior-based rather than rooted in germ theory, it's easy to demonize and persecute those who have the disease. By pretending that all vaccines are dangerous and do no good, millions of people become at risk for diseases that long should have been eradicated.

Let me be clear here: there is nothing wrong with questioning established claims or challenging the evidence that we accept regarding them. That's actually an important part of the scientific process. But once the jury is out and all your questions have been answered,  you have a duty to change your mind and accept the evidence. If you persist in disbelief and continue to throw mud seeing what will stick, you've become a denier. 

Ultimately, it comes down to whether you want to live a life of truth or falsehoods. Denial is for those who want to cling to falsehoods no matter what. It's easy to fall into, especially when the belief you hold is very important to you. No one is immune so we must always be vigilant and continue to go wherever the evidence leads.