Dillards 24 - Smug Bible Tweets and Maneaters (Jill/Derick/Israel/Baby Dillard)

[Jiraffe]

1 hour ago, EmmieJ said:

My son's father wanted me to have an abortion.  I chose not to.  The pregnancy was unplanned and I was using a contraceptive at the time.  In my initial shock at finding myself pregnant and probably facing single parenthood, I momentarily considered abortion.  I was only 7 weeks along.  After a few seconds, I knew I could not do so.  I've never regretted having my child, BUT I got to make that choice.  It was not forced on me!  I think it's cruel to bring an unwanted child into the world.  There are times when your child works your last nerve and you grip the counter so hard your knuckles hurt, so you don't reach out and smack him.  That's when you draw on your deep love for that child, to take a breath and hopefully speak calmly and rationally to the child having a tantrum on the kitchen floor.  But what if you never wanted that child to begin with, and resent him or her?  What if you take your resentment out on that child, tell him "I never wanted you" or "I hate you".  Worse, what if you hit and abuse that poor child?  

Better that child not be born to such a miserable existence.  If there is a God, then I'm sure any souls returned unborn to her will have other opportunities to be born, to parents who will welcome that child.

Oh man, I wish I could like this a thousand times. I miscarried, but I was in a very similar situation to you. And I could not agree with you more, especially re. the last part of your post (I don't know how to bold within a quote, sorry), about souls returned unborn. 

This is EXACTLY what I felt when I had my miscarriage, that the child was being returned and would be born to someone that could give it a better life than I could. I was going to keep it, but I could not have given it much opportunity in life at that time. And I think the same is true for abortions as well. 

[EmmieJ]

That's something I don't understand about religion and views on abortion.  They believe life begins at conception.  Therefore, that life has a soul.  The soul is ever lasting.  Before being born, that soul is pure (no chance to sin).  So, if that "soul" does not get born, it should return to heaven, right?  As heaven is the ultimate destination, why are anti-abortionists so exercised over abortion?

To compound the whole thing, those same people don't want their taxes spent on programs that help needy children, like Head Start, SNAP, affordable health care, child protective services, etc.  (Sadly, I have a sister who thinks like this:  the idea is something like, the mother was irresponsible and had more kids than she can afford, and we shouldn't reward irresponsible behavior.  But we don't want that same woman to have access to Planned Parenthood, birth control, or safe abortion, because ... any woman who is sexual deserves what happens?)  

The  lack of logic combined with misogyny is why I lost faith in organized religion a long time ago.  And just because there are a tiny minority of women who may have several abortions instead of using a contraceptive, I fail to understand why all women must be denied the right to control their bodies as they see fit.  It's total bullshit.  If men got pregnant, you better believe it would not be considered a sin.

[VeganCupcake]

Jill's cultural appropriation is so maddening. She thinks Central America is a cesspool of sinners that need her and Derick to come tell them how to live, yet thinks it makes her look cool to run around screaming "Hola!" at everyone and other phrases in her choppy Spanish. Like why does she have to constantly  attempt Spanish even at home. 

[WhyNotJulie]

HAHA when Jill called them the "training twos" I laughed out loud. I cannot even.

[Carm_88]

Abortions are hard, giving a child up for adoption is hard, having contraception fail is hard, finding yourself a single mom is hard, raising children is hard...summary life is hard but sometimes it's even harder to be a woman. Which is why we need to be supportive of each other. If a friend told me they had an abortion, I wouldn't ask why. That frankly is none of my business, I would say "That had to be hard. I am so sorry that you had to do that. Why didn't you tel me? I wish you weren't alone." Judgment is easy, fundies do it every day and we know that they don't use their brains. Being supportive and caring is very hard. 

Speaking of euthanasia, in Canada we now are trying the Dying with Dignity bill. As of right now, you can apply if you are terminally ill and your doctor will help you die peacefully. I've seen people suffer and I know it's controversial because suicide but oh my god, the peace. Having your family there knowing that you are at peace with this and that it doesn't have to hurt any longer. And it's iffy anyway, you're dying anyway...why does when matter? 

[PennySycamore]

@EmmieJ, something you said reminded me of what the great Flo Kennedy said years ago:

Quote

If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.

 

[Mercer]

While I would agree that using abortion in lieu of reliable contraception is not optimal, I don't see a viable alternative to allowing her to make that choice. Would denying a woman an abortion in that situation really be of any help to her? Would it be fair to the child that would result from the unwanted pregnancy? If not, what's the point of even dissecting the woman's motives?

I certainly hope that if a woman has had multiple abortions, her doctor would be discussing contraceptive options with her. I just don't think that preventing her from terminating the pregnancy benefits anyone, or that women should have to prove to anyone that their need for abortion is justified.

[feministxtian]

When I got pregnant with my daughter (I wasn't quite 18) I should have had an abortion. I was NOT ready to be a mother. A "friend" told my parents I was pregnant, and THEIR decision was one of two things...either I kept and raised the baby OR they would adopt the baby and disown me. How much of that shit was actually legal in 1982 I don't know...but...my parents were control freaks. They made my life a living hell with that baby anyway. When I got pregnant with #1 son, I was married...and the first words out of the mother's mouth were "is it too late to have an abortion". 

IF I had been smart, I'd have had the abortion and disappeared..but...hey...you're talking to the kid who's father said she was a "thing". 

I'm all in favor of keeping abortion legal. AND...in those horrid places when parents find out their much wanted baby has a lethal defect, if they are not permitted to terminate the pregnancy, then the state should pick up 100% of ALL costs associated with that child. 

Regarding end of life: My mother sank into a coma after successive strokes and kidney failure...I refused a feeding tube and let her go. It was the worst month of my life...

Hey...maybe that's why I'm still so fkd up in the head. 

 

[BlessaYourHeart]

2 hours ago, EmmieJ said:

That's something I don't understand about religion and views on abortion.  They believe life begins at conception.  Therefore, that life has a soul.  The soul is ever lasting.  Before being born, that soul is pure (no chance to sin).  So, if that "soul" does not get born, it should return to heaven, right?  As heaven is the ultimate destination, why are anti-abortionists so exercised over abortion?

To compound the whole thing, those same people don't want their taxes spent on programs that help needy children, like Head Start, SNAP, affordable health care, child protective services, etc.  (Sadly, I have a sister who thinks like this:  the idea is something like, the mother was irresponsible and had more kids than she can afford, and we shouldn't reward irresponsible behavior.  But we don't want that same woman to have access to Planned Parenthood, birth control, or safe abortion, because ... any woman who is sexual deserves what happens?)  

The  lack of logic combined with misogyny is why I lost faith in organized religion a long time ago.  And just because there are a tiny minority of women who may have several abortions instead of using a contraceptive, I fail to understand why all women must be denied the right to control their bodies as they see fit.  It's total bullshit.  If men got pregnant, you better believe it would not be considered a sin.

Actually technically Christians believe in the resurrection of the body, so a soul doesn't come into it if you look at theology of all Christian churches 

[VeganCupcake]

Banning abortion would be a VERY slippery slope. Would every miscarriage be investigated as a potential murder? Would they try to hold women liable for alleged causes like excercising too hard, not taking the right vitamins, etc? It would get so dicey and subjective. 

[WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?]

@EmmieJ, thank you for sharing your story. I guess my point (if I have one) is that the choice to have an abortion or not can be a deeply personal one. And that a person who finds out that his or her parent or parents might have preferred to not have them can be hurt by finding out that fact.

I wish the person I know had never found out that their bio-father didn't want them and I wish Krista (the Duggars' friend whose last name I've forgotten) hadn't been told her mom almost chose not to have her. There doesn't seem to be any good purpose in telling one's child that, whether it's a screamed "I wish I'd never had you!" or a quieter conversation. And none of it seems appropriate for flippant "I survived Roe v Wade" signs.

[eveandadam]

4 hours ago, PennySycamore said:

@EmmieJ, something you said reminded me of what the great Flo Kennedy said years ago:

If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.

 

Perfect! :-) This reminds me of something I read once but I cannot find it anymore. It was a short blog/article about what the concept of gender/sex and of what the capabilities assigned to men and women would be like if we lived in a matriarchy. One of these things was:

- How can men understand the concept of time and it's measurement if they don't get periods and therefore will not know when 4 weeks have passed.

It was a whole list of things, of course written in a wittier way which made perfect sense and showed that reasons used to tell women that they can'T do certain things were totally arbitrary and could be easily reversed if we were a matriarchy.

 

I finally found it. It was written by Gloria Steinem (how could I forget that!!!). and it's the reverse. If men could menstruate, enjoy:

https://ww3.haverford.edu/psychology/ddavis/p109g/steinem.menstruate.html

[SorenaJ]

5 hours ago, EmmieJ said:

That's something I don't understand about religion and views on abortion.  They believe life begins at conception.  Therefore, that life has a soul.  The soul is ever lasting.  Before being born, that soul is pure (no chance to sin).  So, if that "soul" does not get born, it should return to heaven, right?  As heaven is the ultimate destination, why are anti-abortionists so exercised over abortion?

 To exercise control over women. Cannot have anyone not obeying the patriarchy. 

[BlessaYourHeart]

6 hours ago, EmmieJ said:

 That's something I don't understand about religion and views on abortion.  They believe life begins at conception.  Therefore, that life has a soul.  The soul is ever lasting.  Before being born, that soul is pure (no chance to sin).  So, if that "soul" does not get born, it should return to heaven, right?  As heaven is the ultimate destination, why are anti-abortionists so exercised over abortion?

 

In addition to my  earlier post now that I have time to actually reply. 

Christian theology is that of resurrection of the body. The concept of the soul separate from the body after death is not Christian teaching. 

The apostles creed says 'the resurrection of the body and life everlasting' 

also because of the doctrine of original sin no body or soul is ever born pure because everyone carries the burden of original sin. Through baptism (and then confirmation in certain churches) the person is redeemed from all sins including original sin because they have declared their undying faith in The trinitarian god and accepted Jesus as God incarnate and the redeemer of sins. 

Also the idea of heaven is often contested/misinterpreted. The biblical teaching is that the bodily resurrection will all happen at once for all and the ever lasting life will be a paradise here on earth 

[nastyhobbitses]

2 hours ago, eveandadam said:

Perfect! :-) This reminds me of something I read once but I cannot find it anymore. It was a short blog/article about what the concept of gender/sex and of what the capabilities assigned to men and women would be like if we lived in a matriarchy. One of these things was:

- How can men understand the concept of time and it's measurement if they don't get periods and therefore will not know when 4 weeks have passed.

It was a whole list of things, of course written in a wittier way which made perfect sense and showed that reasons used to tell women that they can'T do certain things were totally arbitrary and could be easily reversed if we were a matriarchy.

 

I finally found it. It was written by Gloria Steinem (how could I forget that!!!). and it's the reverse. If men could menstruate, enjoy:

https://ww3.haverford.edu/psychology/ddavis/p109g/steinem.menstruate.html

I remember once having this discussion with my friends about what would happen if men could get periods. We concluded that they'd treat heavy blood flow and clots as a sign of virility, tampons would be free (or they'd be advertised as MAN-PONS: You ain't got time to bleed), and they'd bleed all over everything to mark their territory.

[KelseyAnn]

8 hours ago, Carm_88 said:

Abortions are hard, giving a child up for adoption is hard, having contraception fail is hard, finding yourself a single mom is hard, raising children is hard...summary life is hard but sometimes it's even harder to be a woman. Which is why we need to be supportive of each other. If a friend told me they had an abortion, I wouldn't ask why. That frankly is none of my business, I would say "That had to be hard. I am so sorry that you had to do that. Why didn't you tel me? I wish you weren't alone." Judgment is easy, fundies do it every day and we know that they don't use their brains. Being supportive and caring is very hard. 

Speaking of euthanasia, in Canada we now are trying the Dying with Dignity bill. As of right now, you can apply if you are terminally ill and your doctor will help you die peacefully. I've seen people suffer and I know it's controversial because suicide but oh my god, the peace. Having your family there knowing that you are at peace with this and that it doesn't have to hurt any longer. And it's iffy anyway, you're dying anyway...why does when matter? 

 

I agree about the Death with Dignity. My mother is dying right now and it's just so and painful for everybody involved. There shouldnt be any reason she can't chose to go painlessly rather than waiting for some anorexia-induced heart attack to take her of for her lungs to just stop working. 

[anotherone]

21 hours ago, JesSky03 said:

I am Christian but I don't think it has much impact on my feelings about abortion. I fall somewhere in the middle...I do not like abortion. .....and so that women who need one aren't turned away and later die as a result as seen in the links posted throughout this thread? I have no good answer...therefore as much as I dislike abortion, I do believe it needs to be legal and it needs to be safe. .....

This is probably a very common viewpoint. Nobody, no matter how liberal or how pro-choice or how feminist, likes it.  A large segment of pro-choice women believe just as you stated ("I don't like it but I believe it has to be there.")  It's horrible that politics got it to the point where pro-choice people are viewed as pro-abortion, not pro-reproductive rights.

[VelociRapture]

7 hours ago, VeganCupcake said:

Banning abortion would be a VERY slippery slope. Would every miscarriage be investigated as a potential murder? Would they try to hold women liable for alleged causes like excercising too hard, not taking the right vitamins, etc? It would get so dicey and subjective. 

Exactly.

I miscarried our first one year ago next month. Despite being very early on, it was devastating enough to deal with - adding on prying questions or accusations on top of it all would have driven me insane. People can say whatever they want, but at the end of the day those laws are simply designed to punish women - either for being too sexual or too slutty or for "tempting" a rapist or for their body simply failing to sustain life.

A miscarriage can be the worst day of a woman's life. Not always, but many times it is. Why the fuck would any decent and kind person want to support laws that could even have the remotest chance of making that worse for her?

[anotherone]

20 hours ago, nausicaa said:

That's interesting. I've known religious people who are against euthanasia, but didn't know there were people also against DNRs. I have a friend who is an EMT and works with a lot of elderly people because of his location, and he says he's only had one patient above age ninety who didn't have a DNR. 

My understanding is that the Catholic church is not against DNRs? My very Catholic grandfather chose not to have yet another surgery for his terminal cancer because he was 84 and just wanted to live out his remaining days in peace. Isn't that similar to a DNR in philosophy?

I have multiple relatives that are medical doctors and they say that the resuscitation is brutal and not always successful.   They're taking this old fragile person with many other health issues and jamming tubes into them and all sorts of other invasive procedures, and sometimes the person is just revived into a coma and alive only by machines.  So they linger with machines and medications keeping them alive, and that could last years.  I will guess that many fundies who are against DNRs have never seen what the reality is.  Everything seems so black and white to them.

8 hours ago, Mercer said:

I certainly hope that if a woman has had multiple abortions, her doctor would be discussing contraceptive options with her. I just don't think that preventing her from terminating the pregnancy benefits anyone, or that women should have to prove to anyone that their need for abortion is justified.

The only person it benefits is the self-righteous person that insisted they had the child so that person can feel all smug and morally superior.

[Cleopatra7]

11 hours ago, EmmieJ said:

That's something I don't understand about religion and views on abortion.  They believe life begins at conception.  Therefore, that life has a soul.  The soul is ever lasting.  Before being born, that soul is pure (no chance to sin).  So, if that "soul" does not get born, it should return to heaven, right?  As heaven is the ultimate destination, why are anti-abortionists so exercised over abortion?

To compound the whole thing, those same people don't want their taxes spent on programs that help needy children, like Head Start, SNAP, affordable health care, child protective services, etc.  (Sadly, I have a sister who thinks like this:  the idea is something like, the mother was irresponsible and had more kids than she can afford, and we shouldn't reward irresponsible behavior.  But we don't want that same woman to have access to Planned Parenthood, birth control, or safe abortion, because ... any woman who is sexual deserves what happens?)  

The  lack of logic combined with misogyny is why I lost faith in organized religion a long time ago.  And just because there are a tiny minority of women who may have several abortions instead of using a contraceptive, I fail to understand why all women must be denied the right to control their bodies as they see fit.  It's total bullshit.  If men got pregnant, you better believe it would not be considered a sin.

I have an idea about why self-described "Pro-lifers" tend to be against strengthening the social safety network. It goes back to Casti Connubi, an encyclical written by Pope Pius XI back in 1931 that is the basis for modern Catholic thought on contraception and abortion. Casti Connubi was written in response to the Anglican Communion okaying contraception for married couples and Pius' fear that there weren't enough Catholics to fight against communism. Here is a link to the complete document:

https://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19301231_casti-connubii.html

There's a lot in this document that will be of interest to FJers, but I want to focus on paragraphs 121 and 122:

Quote

121. Wherefore, those who have the care of the State and of the public good cannot neglect the needs of married people and their families, without bringing great harm upon the State and on the common welfare. Hence, in making the laws and in disposing of public funds they must do their utmost to relieve the needs of the poor, considering such a task as one of the most important of their administrative duties.

122. We are sorry to note that not infrequently nowadays it happens that through a certain inversion of the true order of things, ready and bountiful assistance is provided for the unmarried mother and her illegitimate offspring (who, of course must be helped in order to avoid a greater evil) which is denied to legitimate mothers or given sparingly or almost grudgingly.

In other words, providing assistance to unmarried mother's is a necessary evil, but the really moral and dare I say "natural" thing to do (from a natural law perspective, at least) would be to provide aid to "respectable" Catholic married women, rather than waste it on lazy sluts who should be doing penance for their sin. Obviously, this is the Catholic view, but I've noticed in the US at least that conservative Catholics and Protestants are stealing the worst aspects of each other's thought and culture. Thus, you have Protestants who consider birth control a sin, and Catholics who advance what they believe is a "Catholic work ethic."

[JillyO]

1 hour ago, VelociRapture said:

Exactly.

I miscarried our first one year ago next month. Despite being very early on, it was devastating enough to deal with - adding on prying questions or accusations on top of it all would have driven me insane. People can say whatever they want, but at the end of the day those laws are simply designed to punish women - either for being too sexual or too slutty or for "tempting" a rapist or for their body simply failing to sustain life.

A miscarriage can be the worst day of a woman's life. Not always, but many times it is. Why the fuck would any decent and kind person want to support laws that could even have the remotest chance of making that worse for her?

For those of you wondering what would happen if we started prosecuting women for having abortions: I present to you the case of El Salvador, where women are convicted as murderers for suffering a miscarriage.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/el-salvador-where-women-are-jailed-for-40-years-for-the-crime-of-having-a-miscarriage-a7053501.html

[Fun Undies]

12 hours ago, EmmieJ said:

That's something I don't understand about religion and views on abortion.  They believe life begins at conception.  Therefore, that life has a soul.  The soul is ever lasting.  Before being born, that soul is pure (no chance to sin).  So, if that "soul" does not get born, it should return to heaven, right?  As heaven is the ultimate destination, why are anti-abortionists so exercised over abortion?

- snip-

5 hours ago, BlessaYourHeart said:

-snip-

Also the idea of heaven is often contested/misinterpreted. The biblical teaching is that the bodily resurrection will all happen at once for all and the ever lasting life will be a paradise here on earth 

I'm a fundamental Christian in the sense that I believe the fundamental ideology that Jesus was the son of God ~ because his words to speak to me on a divine level (though I can certainly appreciate bits and pieces of multiple religious figures/prophets/ideologies).  That being said, I am VERY grateful to belong to a UU church.  I don't fit in with the "standard" Christian, because I believe in universal salvation for everyone, no Hell, reincarnation, and compassion and love for all God's creatures.  I'm a hippy-Christian-UU with some Hindu, Shamanic, and Buddhist appreciation sprinkled in there. 

That's the thing with the Bible, it's so interpretive that it has literally caused such a large amount of fragmentation among Christians.  We argue over what Heaven looks like (on Earth with the 2nd coming, in the sky, purgatory/no purgatory etc.), how to get there (faith only, faith and works, etc.), how involved to be in church, how much to donate to the church, and it just keeps going.  If we can't agree on anything, how are we supposed to make the argument that ours is the "best"? 

I don't know, I view my faith as me having humbled myself before God, and said, "Lead me, I know nothing."  So I find it weird to even contemplate walking up to someone and being like, "I have all the answers!"  God has the answers, I don't (though that's certainly interpretive, too! haha)

Speaking on contesting what Heaven is/isn't for those who might not be familiar, here's a quick wiki link to get your started (and how it can vary widely between different Christians) : Heaven in Christianity

12 hours ago, VeganCupcake said:

Jill's cultural appropriation is so maddening. She thinks Central America is a cesspool of sinners that need her and Derick to come tell them how to live, yet thinks it makes her look cool to run around screaming "Hola!" at everyone and other phrases in her choppy Spanish. Like why does she have to constantly  attempt Spanish even at home. 

Is she possibly just trying to help Israel become bilingual?  If that's the case, she'd need to speak a lot of Spanish at home, especially since he'd be hearing mostly English around him ~ just my two cents.

2 hours ago, KelseyAnn said:

I agree about the Death with Dignity. My mother is dying right now and it's just so and painful for everybody involved. There shouldnt be any reason she can't chose to go painlessly rather than waiting for some anorexia-induced heart attack to take her of for her lungs to just stop working. 

I'm very sorry KelseyAnn, and I hope your mother goes as peacefully as she can, and that you have a lot of support during such a tough time =/

[Fundie Bunny]

34 minutes ago, Cleopatra7 said:

Obviously, this is the Catholic view, but I've noticed in the US at least that conservative Catholics and Protestants are stealing the worst aspects of each other's thought and culture. Thus, you have Protestants who consider birth control a sin, and Catholics who advance what they believe is a "Catholic work ethic."

That's not the catholic view, it's the 80 year-old view

[BlessaYourHeart]

29 minutes ago, Fun Undies said:

I'm a fundamental Christian in the sense that I believe the fundamental ideology that Jesus was the son of God ~ because his words to speak to me on a divine level (though I can certainly appreciate bits and pieces of multiple religious figures/prophets/ideologies).  That being said, I am VERY grateful to belong to a UU church.  I don't fit in with the "standard" Christian, because I believe in universal salvation for everyone, no Hell, reincarnation, and compassion and love for all God's creatures.  I'm a hippy-Christian-UU with some Hindu, Shamanic, and Buddhist appreciation sprinkled in there. 

That's the thing with the Bible, it's so interpretive that it has literally caused such a large amount of fragmentation among Christians.  We argue over what Heaven looks like (on Earth with the 2nd coming, in the sky, purgatory/no purgatory etc.), how to get there (faith only, faith and works, etc.), how involved to be in church, how much to donate to the church, and it just keeps going.  If we can't agree on anything, how are we supposed to make the argument that ours is the "best"? 

I don't know, I view my faith as me having humbled myself before God, and said, "Lead me, I know nothing."  So I find it weird to even contemplate walking up to someone and being like, "I have all the answers!"  God has the answers, I don't (though that's certainly interpretive, too! haha)

Speaking on contesting what Heaven is/isn't for those who might not be familiar, here's a quick wiki link to get your started (and how it can vary widely between different Christians) : Heaven in Christianity

 

I'm doing a philosophy module at the minute and we're currently on the topic of life after death and I find it facinating with all the different interpretentions. The one that I said was in the textbook under the biblical teaching on life after death. It's also my (Anglican) churches teaching on it 

im not sure what I believe about heaven/afterlife, I think it's just one of them things you have to trust God on. 

[Cleopatra7]

14 minutes ago, Fundie Bunny said:

That's not the catholic view, it's the 80 year-old view

Well yes in the sense that it's impossible to have a religious group consisting of over a billion people and expect them to all have the same opinions on any given subject, but its what the institutional Catholic Church and the hierarchy is supposed to tech. Casti Connubi is much of the reason why the Catholic Church reiterated its opposition to contraception with Pope Paul VI's encyclical Humanae Vitae. Paul was advised by the Pontifical Commission on Birth Control to allow contraception for married couples, but he thought that changing course with Casti Connubi well within living memory would appear contradictory, so he refused to change course. Catholic Social Teaching of which Casti Connubi is part of is cumulative and based on tradition. This is why Leo XIII's 1891 encyclical Rerum novarum is still considered the gold standard for how a just Catholic society should be order, despite its age and the fact that it wasn't even progressive by 1891 standards. If you were to ask conservative and traditionalist Catholics why they don't believe in contraception, they would point to Casti Connubi and Humane Vitae as their reasons.