Sunday, July 11, 2010

Abortion & the Right-to-Lifers

I’ve talked to a few people, some used to be friends, about abortion. We all agree that it’s wrong to deny life to any conscious being, i.e. we uproot plants and fungi but we wouldn’t break off Polly’s wing for a quick, uncooked snack. If you understand consciousness as I do, you can’t help but see humans as an unfortunate variation of random mutations. We are no more than the fibers and tissues that construct our body. The developed brain we possess is large enough to understand language, a system of communication that has granted us god-like superiority amongst the dumb beasts that also inhabit the Earth. This is what really separates us from animals, the ability to say “fuck you!” A growl is threatening but it’s indirect; growls and roars are meant to ward off all present dangers or hazards, not to instigate conflict. “I’m going to fucking kill you, asshole!” cuts right to the chase, so to speak. There is no ambiguity there, especially if alcohol and/or penis size is involved.

Consciousness, like every other mental disorder, comes in a multitude of levels. From ravenous brilliances to the obnoxiously stupid, humans claim the highest scale of intellect known to man. I don’t wonder why UFO’s never stop by to say “Hi!”; I’ve seen Springer and I’ve heard about the Jersey Shore. I wouldn’t stop here, either. Not even for a Klondike bar.

Life is not always conscious; amoebas, bacteria and parasites hardly exhibit or communicate any level of intelligence as they develop, grow and eventually cease to grow and develop. Bacteria do not deliberate over which organ is the next target, nor do viruses hold meetings to decide whether or not to germinate. Simply enough, life is the biological process of an organism. The duration, despite the expected life cycle, is irrelevant to consciousness. If you think there is a moral or ethical justification, or even righteousness, to saving a bus of toddlers over saving a bus of recently retired janitors, then I am afraid to inform you that you are a moron. The value of life is subjective; I guarantee that the custodians will give you better reasons, albeit not as cute, as to why they should live on.

If you can agree that life is just the natural process of dying, regardless of the ability to use a telephone, then you will understand why eating meat isn’t all that bad and why “humane” killing of animals isn’t that relevant when humans kill humans in the most barbaric ways. What ought to be promoted is the understanding and appreciation of all consumable organic matter. Food chains exist in nature. I’ve heard that humans are at the top but I know this cannot be true: chains don’t have a top. Chains are composed of links that are interconnected, in a shapeless figure, making it bottomless. This is yet another one of our selfish, egocentric notions that inevitably results in the unnecessary destruction of life.

Abortion is the removal, or termination, of a developing fetus from, or in, the womb. Birth may result in a baby, but I assure you that the majority of any females eggs, fertilized and otherwise, are flushed out. So, if abortion is murder then it goes without saying that any ovulating woman who has had unprotected sex is a possible serial killer. Imagine having a tape worm removed as opposed to an abortion. Both organisms rely on the host to survive and displacement most often results in cessation of what we consider life. Once dead and removed, both contain bacteria’s that are still alive and thriving. In fact, more life will be inside a decomposing body than in a live one. And in this society, we value quantity over quality. Just a thought.

The idea that humans deserve a right to life is just ignorant and egotistic thinking. We own this Earth no more than the parasites in our bowels own us. The most eco-friendly thing you could ever do is buy a Prius. Just kidding. Really, the most eco-friendly act any polluting, fertile and barely conscious being can perform is self-termination. And while you’re at it, suffocation is probably the greenest.

P.S. Do not use the car-running-in-garage method, it's just a dick move.


  1. I've had numerous discussions with pro choicers and pro lifers on the "ethics" of abortion, and your viewpoint is one that is quickly shot down on both sides, and not for good reason.

    It is hard for me to deny my own narcissistic nature, but it is even harder for the sheeple of this world (country, to be more specific) to accept it.

    So I ask you then, how can I posit an easy transition into a new way of thinking about this unnecessarily controversial debate? If you're interested in discussing this further, let me know.

  2. Essentially, there is no transition. It's a stark realization.
    Understanding that life is not sacred and that individuality is limited by our desire to conform, to fit in. Once the idea of belonging to a collective, whether it be religion (or that spiritual bullshit) or political affiliation, it's easy to see that life is meaningless. It is nothing more than a biological process. It is absolving all belief that you are special and are here for a purpose, intended or otherwise. It is knowing that you were born, and are alive, at random; that your thoughts are subjective and the only objective knowledge you will ever have is that you will die.
    There is no afterlife, there is no greater good, there is no higher power. I think this is the problem, the fact that everything is meaningless in reality. We try far too hard to attribute significance to life or creation, when really it is a mere blip, and unnoticed event, in the galaxy. Let alone the universe. We are nothing; our greatest achievement yet is plastic.
    For someone to even argue over whether a person has the right to remove a growth in said person's body is unreasonable. To force guilt onto this person is just unconscionable.

    There is no debate, there is only the exchange of misinformation when it comes to "pro-life" and "pro-choice." Instead of "debating", it should be educating.

  3. This comment has been removed by the author.