Obamacare and birth control pills and the day after pills . . .

by chumchingee

There is a big controversy right now in the political arena over the above titled headline meaning.

It is a little bit more complicated than either side is willing to admit.

Nature is cruel. It disperses a large number of sperm to match up with a limited number of eggs in a woman. Most of those sperm die. End of story. Occasionally one makes contact with an egg and a new human being is born. Well we have a planet full of those “accidents.” The eggs die too. Once a month a woman has a mess on her hands as long as she hasn’t had an operation to stop it. That is the way nature works.

Now once an sperm and an egg combine, a human being is conceived. Anywhere in the next nine months it can spontaneously abort. It is called a miscarriage.

Women desperately want control over this situation. After all, it ties them down for nine months, destroys their figure and attraction by the opposite sex, and for the next 20-30 years they are responsible for a human being and its development. The other side of this picture isn’t pretty either. If they get that control a human being dies . . . Our laws concerning this are divided at best. If once a human being is visible, then it is murder. If it happens during pregnancy it isn’t that simple legally.

A woman’s body goes through a number of drastic changes the first time she is pregnant. Mood swings are common. Hormones play a drastic role in depression-related metabolism changes to accommodate a growing baby in her womb. In this time period a lot of women are very vulnerable. This is the time where an understanding male mate goes through a certain amount of hell as the mood swings, morning sickness, and body changes happen. Nature is cruel. Neither is birth without a certain amount of torture as the child is born. For some it is easy. For most it is difficult. Afterwards, for a lot of people, there is the wonderful reward of raising a child. You know never getting enough sleep, midnight feedings, oil changes, etc.

A lot of women feel it is their right to abort. To kill that child before it ever becomes a visible problem. They want the government to help them do that by providing the money necessary through insurance to do that.

The Bishops of the Catholic religion feel that women should not have that right. They should not have the right to kill their children under any circumstances. I am cutting through the bullshit at this point that intellectuals have put in place to make it sound nice. Kill a child not a cell structure, we are talking about legal murder if the child is undeveloped to a certain point without a developed brain.

Nature takes the attitude of survival of the fittest. All those sperm cells and most of those eggs die. But once an egg and a sperm combine, you have the seed of a human being in development.

What the law wants to do is provide semi-free birth control for everyone. They want you to be able to murder that seed after it combines the day after pill.

Where the churches and the women fall flat on their faces is that the human species depends on women having babies. The churches fail because many of these women do not have fathers of the children in the home. So they are stuck. They are going to have to raise a child with all the expenses of in both money and time of raising those bastard children. The children are short changed because without a role model in the home on the male side of things, they are likely to grow up and have bastard children out of wedlock themselves. This is intolerable. The churches have a morale obligation they are not fulfilling.

Once an unwed mother has a child, someone, somewhere has to help them raise that child to its full potential. And that is not happening.

The democrat way is to murder the child before it is born.

The republican way is to bring the child to term and then ignore the tremendous burden of raising said children.

I suggest we need laws to make the raising of the child a lot easier under the game plan. The government makes the rules. Under the current rules neither side of this question can win.

Your next Edison, Einstein, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, or any number of bright individuals are dependent on us changing the system of illegitimate birth. That does not mean murdering the children. It means the religions of the world have to change so that men feel they have to find the right person, marry that person, and give those children a home to be raised in that gives them the right training in life. It means women’s priorities have to change as well. They do not have it easy in a world full of illegitimate children and single parenthood.

The dumbest thing I have seen in 50 years is changing the rules so that parenthood has no legitimate encouragement in our tax system. You are financially better off to stay single and have children out of wedlock. Well those rules need to change.

If you have to have birth control in our lives, then make it a paid option that you have to pay for separate from your insurance. If you want that day after pill, then it needs to be a paid option not a mandatory thing on everyone.

We all pursue our own ideas of religious belief. That even goes for Atheist and Agnostics. It goes for scientists as well. Under my belief system, many of them will burn in Hell. Maybe that is why they have such a hard time with religious beliefs. If we are right, then they burn. If we are wrong, then there is nothing after death. We die and go back to being inert matter, most likely dust. Under their system, convenience is morale. Whatever is convenient, is morale. Under the religious systems, which influence even people that do not believe, there are rules of morale behavior.

One of those rules universal throughout most religious beliefs is it is wrong to murder a child. I define child as a developing being from conception.