offensivebuttrue

[offensivebuttrue]

Senator Lidia Thorpe of the Greens grandly disrespected Australia and her majesty, the Queen, in the featured clip.

Akin to her fellow virtue-signallers, she made sure to do the BLM fist-raising as she walked to make her oath of allegiance.

Following her graceful stride, she said, "I, sovereign Lida Thorpe, do solemnly and sincerely, affirm and declare that I will be faithful and I bear true allegiance to the colonizing Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II."

Rightfully, the rest of the room was visibly and audibly upset with this and she was forced to (properly) recite the oath, of course with the grin that I imagine a toddler who's just shit all over the carpet would have.

Why do we let people like this into parliament?

[offensivebuttrue]

Why I'm Pro-Life

Written by Patrick Reynolds

It has been a long time coming that I made a full, proper article to address my pro-life stance on abortion.

It was only when the news of Roe Versus Wade being overturned broke did I realize where I stood, when I realized; killing human beings is wrong.

And obviously, if you’re in support of abortion, you’ll say that fetuses aren’t human beings, as you have been all but educated on the matter. Fetuses are alive, and they are human, according to well-established science. Life begins with fertilization at the embryo’s conception, non-debatable. Fetuses are humans; they are the combination of human male and human female gametes, non-debatable.

Fetuses, on top of being human beings, are also separate entities from the mother. Because pregnant women do not have two times the amount of limbs and organs of everyone else, they don’t have 20 fingers and 20 toes.

So the statement ‘My body, my choice’ is unscientific, and illogical, based solely on the premise that fetus is in the womb and dependent on the mother, thus it must be part of the mother’s body.

And that premise is illogical also. 2-year-olds are also dependent on their mothers, but killing them isn’t allowed, let alone encouraged. The idea that fetuses are only counted as separate bodies when they leave the womb is stupid. Location is not the determining factor of how valid a life is, and using that as the factor for a life’s validity has also been a prominent ideal of xenophobes*.

Abortion activists love comparing fetuses to parasites. It’s based on the premise that fetuses are dependent on the mother, and pregnancy is physically draining, thus fetuses are definably parasites.

This follows a similarly arrogant train of thought to the ‘My body, my choice’ argument. Because there is a massive difference between fetuses and parasites. One of them is a human, the other is not. One is very unlikely to kill the mother, the other is very likely to.

Fetuses being dependent on the mother is a large part of mammalian life, through pregnancy. And of course pregnancy is physically draining - it’s the development of a human. That’s not an excuse for terminating them though. Imagine if we did the same with other physically draining activites, terminating; jobs, girlfriends and gym gains.

Another thing you’ll hear is that fetuses are just clumps of cells, which, while technically true, is also applicable to all forms of life. Are humans not all clumps of cells, whether or not they’re in the womb? And how do we differentiate which clumps of cells are valid to be protected? The few inches between outside and inside the womb? If a few inches were to determine whether or not my life is valid, I’d be gone.

You know what I mean.

Before the abortionists claim that any form of restrictions on abortions would increase the prominence of illegal ones, it’s important to note that abortion laws across the world, especially in comparison to countries like the United States, are, in most countries, strict. The French Prime Minister bitched about Roe Versus Wade, despite how much stricter France’s abortion laws** are.

Claiming that restricting abortions increases the prominence of illegal ones is illogical. It assumes that women currently, who get legal abortions, would turn against Johnny Law if there were restrictions put in place. That’s also acting like the only real difference between legal and illegal abortions isn't the legality. Both end in the death of one children or more, and both ‘industries’ prey on women for profit.

The last argument to cover would be the hypothetical situation that a woman was so poor they simply could not afford to take care of the child. Given the amount of welfare and social services available in countries like Australia and America, it definitely has the smell of bullshit.

And even if you were too poor to raise a kid, why not put it up for adoption? I’m not trying to undermine that there are problems with adoption, especially considering recent news of two men who adopted a kid to sexually abuse them, but adoption, in most cases, is good. If you don’t want your kid, give them to people who do; it's Ws all around.

If you don’t want kids, there are ways to avoid pregnancy. Birth control, condoms, sperm killer, pulling out and other such options, when used properly, work very well (especially when used in combination). Better yet, just don’t have sex.

That is why I’m pro-life.

*a person having a dislike or prejudice against people from other countries

**abortion for any reason up to 14 weeks, completely illegal after 14 weeks (no matter the circumstance)

[offensivebuttrue]

You might've realised that all the posts have been removed from this blog. Don't worry, there'll be better, longer versions of those up soon. The reason I took down those posts was because of a) statistical fuck-ups, b) strain on personal relationships, c) threats against my life and family and d) they weren't written very good.

Also, Donald Trump's house was raided by the FBI on Monday.

Lord, God, whoever's watching us, have mercy on our souls.