Virgin Eggs Over Easy, Hold The Sperm

Scientists say they have created embryonic stem cells by stimulating unfertilized ova. This could be the first step toward producing transplant tissue that’s genetically matched to the women who donated the eggs. The current debate around the use of stem cells from viable embryo has become legally, ethically and politically contentious.

Stem cell research could spare the lives of people suffering from ghastly degenerative and progressive diseases. Experiments would be conducted on human ova cells that have been started on their replication process, although lacking DNA and chromosomes from sperm. The mass of replicating embryonic cells is not the product of conventional or artificial conception, yet the Rev. Tad Pacholczyk of the National Catholic Bioethics Center in Philadelphia says:

“My view is that if these grow as organized embryos for the first few days and then arrest, they may just be very short-lived human beings,” he said. “One is very possibly dealing with a defective human being. And at a minimum, the benefit of the doubt should be given here, and these embryos should not be created for the purposes of destroying them.”

Doesn’t the above sound like a knee-jerk reaction, scientifically ill-informed at best, theocratic and doctrinaire at worst? “Very short-lived human beings“? What part of ‘no sperm used’ did he miss in the original research paper? His reasoning does not even follow the fallacious premise that the fetus-fetishizers promote in their abortion-criminalizing campaigns. Or perhaps his objection has more to do with the religious imperative that needs to control women’s reproductive organs and ensure that they are exclusively used for breeding?

But on another level, the Church Fathers may simply be cheesed off at the multitudes of life-creating and life-saving possibilities that ova promise. Especially since theological constraints ensure that clerics, from the Pope on down, must only shoot duds.

Source

Originally posted at Birth Pangs

Feta Rights Denounced by Miss Emily Litella

This evening, we have invited our popular guest commentator, Miss Emily Litella to share her concerns regarding Fetal Rights.

“What is all this fuss I hear on television about Feta Rights? It’s disgraceful! Why should Feta have more rights than American cheddar? And, in the first place, who started the idea of giving special rights to cheese? Maybe if we were all dairy or goat farmers living in France making one of those 753 French cheeses we would want special rights but the United States was not even invited to be part of the I.O.U.!!

Besides, feta is not even a French cheese, it’s Greek!

Not that there’s anything wrong with the Greek people. A country that lets women have their very own little Lebanese island where they can all live and not have to ask permission for their rights can’t be all that bad. But I digress. Feta rights are stupid! And those great big signs that the Feta Rights people wave around on television with pictures of gigantic Feta cheese curds – well you’d never see me eating one of those with my Greek salad! Yuck!

This is one more example of a special interest group – and I’m talking here of those Feta makers – going to Washington DC to lobby for special rights. I’m telling you, I’m sick of it! Where will it all end? Will the government be giving Velveeta its own special status next? How about Cheez Whiz which is just runny Velveeta in a jar?

I say that we tell those Feta Rights people to go home and make their flaky spinachgoatPitas and stop annoying the heck out of the rest of us who never eat that kind of cheese anyhow.

And another thing … you can’t slice Feta and put it on American apple pie!!!

What!? What!? It’s not Feta Rights?!? Oh ... never mind then.”

In loving remembrance of Gilda Radner (1946 – 1989), who created Emily Litella.

Originally posted at Birth Pangs

INSTEAD OF …

Fetus-fetishizers expend a lot of time, energy and money on one target: criminalizing abortion.
Here’s a modest proposal that would direct such resources elsewhere, with more positive results. If they let go of the fear, hatred and religious dogma that contaminate every action they take and every word they say - they could transform the sword of compulsory pregnancy held over women’s bellies into useful and concrete services.

INSTEAD OF standing outside clinics for the purpose of intimidating women and medical staff, those shouting, threatening men could work at refurbishing and maintaining daycare and playground equipment for children willingly brought into this world.

INSTEAD OF paying for the printing of repulsive pseudo-scientific propaganda, money would be better invested in the cost of school books and supplies.

INSTEAD OF purchasing ultrasound equipment for “pregnancy crisis” in non-medical clinics, the funding would support prenatal and postnatal centres that provide free health care to infants and children, and the assistance their mothers require.

INSTEAD OF glorifying adoption as the perfect solution to any and all unwanted and unplanned pregnancies, counseling could be available for children who suffer from post-adoption trauma and for their adoptive and biological families as well.

INSTEAD OF lobbying government legislators to criminalize abortion and to control women’s bodies, the focus should be on advocating social and economic conditions that make life worth living for everyone.

INSTEAD OF pushing abstinence as the only answer to preventing pregnancy, information and contraception should be free and accessible to women and men who are sexually active.

Though fetus-fetishizers are rabid about the rights of those they call the “pre-born”, they don’t really give a damn for the rights and personal safety of pregnant girls and women or their health care providers. Doctors and clinic staff have been injured and killed by anti-abortion fanatics. Once women who’ve been deceived or coerced by fetus-fetishizers give birth, they’re no longer a concern. After they’ve carried the exalted product of fertilization by a sacred sperm to its term, they’re no longer of interest to abortion criminalizers.

INSTEAD OF the shaming and the blaming that turns the crank of the fetus-fetishizers …
the respect and the responsibility that choice offers.That’s the BIG difference between compulsory pregnancy and pro-choice.

I am Joe’s fetus.

Unprepossessing but potent, this small blob of tissue has been entrusted to Joe in the hope that he can grow it.
Joe lives in a world that has no female humans left in it. It’s the year 2222. There are no women because the hormones in Monsanto’s genetically-engineered-synthetic chicken breasts wiped out the whole gender.
So the men have decided that they must now bear children and Joe volunteered to carry me - one of thousands of embryos frozen during the In Vitro Fertilization craze - in a Monsanto-designed artificial uterus that’s been attached inside his abdomen.

Joe was selected because he is a healthy 25 year old man. As a soldier, he volunteered for the job because he has been promised that this duty will help advance his career in the military.Joe is the first man to carry out this experiment. I am being constantly monitored while Joe goes about his regular job, which has been considerably lightened to accommodate the important project that he bears.

The artificial uterus, in addition to all the normal features that would be found in the womb of a four-month pregnant woman, has links to the outside world through various electronic leads that allow the scientists to watch every step of my development inside Joe’s body. As well, needles are often carefully inserted by the Monsanto biomedical engineers into the walls of their patented FetusCarrier™ to ensure that the levels of their synthetic hormones are maintained.

The fuss that surrounds Joe and his FetusCarrier™ continues like this, day and night. When I first started moving around inside Joe, I could sense how nervous that made him. But his doctor and the scientists quickly reassured and congratulated him about his role in hosting my growth. It’s not very comfortable for me when they make Joe stretch out on a gurney while they prod and poke at him. I much prefer when he’s walking briskly, bouncing me around inside the squishy artificial amniotic fluid.

But I suffer through the examinations the scientists and engineers conduct of their FetusCarrier™, scrutinizing every aspect of its functions captured by all the electronic devices that were inserted into it, at the same time that they stuck me here. Sometimes I wonder if my continued existence is only an adjunct to the important scientific work that they’re doing in testing out the efficacy of their new product.

Originally posted at Birth Pangs.

God wants you to carry your kidney stones to term

HOUSTON - Thurston Willaby was on his way to the hospital for surgery when he was approached by a couple who suggested that he had other options. He accompanied them to a ‘health crisis’ center, where he was given an ultrasound exam of his kidneys and promised help if he carried his stones to term.

“Once I saw the ultrasound pictures - I decided to keep them,” said Willaby. His stones were passed 3 months ago and Willaby can’t imagine why his doctor wanted to cut them out. To him the ‘health crisis’ center was a godsend.
“If it wasn’t for them, I’d have had that surgery,” said Willaby, a trucker with a family history of kidney disease. “It hurt like hell and I thought that I was going to die when those stones came out the natural way, but my counselor at the center prayed for me.”

The facility he visited is part of a burgeoning movement of free ‘health crisis’ centers set up by US Health Management Organizations to dissuade people from receiving expensive health care. The centers usually provide free tests, counseling, peer support and material aid such as hardwood sticks to hold in one’s mouth when passing kidney stones.

To many people, ‘health crisis’ centers, sometimes called “God’s Way” resource centers, provide a valuable service. President Bush is one of their supporters. People such as Willaby praise the emotional and material support they received, saying they are grateful to have avoided having a surgery.

Some agree that reducing surgeries should be a public policy goal but criticize the centers’ tactics. Many of the facilities masquerade as health clinics to pressure vulnerable people into avoiding surgery. In addition, they suggest that surgeries are frivolous and unnecessary, since they are expensive and require a lot of paperwork. William Gordon is among the people who feel that they were misled. The IT technician was headed for an out-patient surgery clinic when he saw an office in the same building that advertised free tests and said “People for Choice Health Care” on the door.

“I thought it was the clinic where I had an appointment,” said Gordon, “and the man behind the counter led me to believe they were expecting me.” The counselor asked intrusive questions about his religious beliefs, he said, and then told Gordon he needed to watch a video while he waited for the results of his test. “It was full of propaganda about the risks of surgery, and showed the instruments they use and body tissue being ripped apart,” said Gordon, who had his eye surgery later at a genuine health clinic. “It was meant to scare and manipulate me.”

Christin Nash of FearNot, an umbrella group that provides resources to ‘health crisis’ centers, contends the centers do not pressure clients; instead, they want to help people to make fully informed choices. “We don’t want them to feel coerced by their spouse or friends, their doctors or the hospitals,” said Nash. “We would like each person to decide, but having received all the necessary information and knowing that if they want to avoid surgery and let God help them deal with their crisis, that they’re not alone.”

Officials at Houston’s Free Health Crisis Care, where Willaby went, say they tell callers up front that they do not perform surgeries. “The counseling relationship has to be based on trust,” said Stan Digby, chairman of the center’s board, which is affiliated with the Green Cross HMO. “Right from the start, we’re going to be truthful.”
Serena Jones, director of client services at Free Health Crisis Care, said her staff is not judgmental and goes over both options with each client: no surgery or surgery.

The main room of the counseling center at Free Health Crisis Care looks a lot like a medical office, with its white cabinets, stainless-steel sink and specimen jars for urine collection. Atop a chest of drawers are four pink-rubber anatomical models (discretely covered with hospital gowns) of a human torso, a brain, an arm and a leg that have several surgical instruments, tubes and clamps inserted into them. Center staff said the models are used to show a client what their surgery could look like, but only if they want to know.

Nash said nearly all health crisis centers are “economics-based” and “pro-nature.” They feel that the ‘wait-and-see’ approach is God’s way. “As a Christian organization, we desire that (the centers’ clients) would come to know Jesus as the personal savior of their health,” Nash said. “Our primary goal is to prevent expensive surgeries and share the love of Jesus Christ.”

The National Hospital Federation issued a report on ‘health crisis’ centers last year. The NHF’s report states that although many centers look like medical facilities, “most volunteers who work directly with clients are not medical professionals. Their main qualifications are a commitment to Christianity and anti-surgery beliefs”. Also, the main source of funding and support for these so-called ‘health crisis’ centers comes from HMO’s and the health insurance industry.

The source of inspiration for this spoof came from a news item about ‘pregnancy crisis’ centers in the US. It concludes with this statement: “Many ‘crisis pregnancy’ centers receive federal support, mainly through programs that fund abstinence-only sex-education programs. According to the report, anti-abortion pregnancy centers have received more than $30 million in federal funding since 2001, when President Bush took office.”
Originally posted at Birth Pangs

The Advantages of Abortion

There are many benefits to remaining unpregnant. Now there is solid research proving that having an abortion improves a young woman's educational outcome.

The Incarnating Game

(voice-over) Heeeere’s Gabriel Angel, the host of this popular R.E.A.L.ity television show!!!

Gabriel: Today’s heavenly bachelor is God, and he is looking for a virgin who wants to get pregnant and give birth to his son. Let’s meet our three virgins right now.

(voice-over) Virgin #1 is the daughter of a movie producer who’s kept her in a secure fortress under lock and key on a remote island to preserve her innocence and of course, her virginity. Virgin #2 recently left the cloistered order of the Sisters of Perpetual Misery because she was the last nun left in the convent and it was more work to run the building than she could handle at the age of 93. Virgin #3 is a virtuoso pianist, an Olympian gold medalist in judo, a video game designer, an award-winning Cordon Bleu chef and, in her spare time, she knits hats for orphaned baby bald eaglets.

Gabriel: Now God, go ahead and ask these little ladies questions that will help you decide which virgin to pick to help you with your plan.
GOD: Virgin #1, Is your father Jewish?
Virgin #1: Duh, is the Pope Catholic? My dad’s name is like, Reuben. That’s totally not gentile.
GOD: Virgin #3, What does your father think of your work with the orphans?
Virgin #3: He says they’re cute when they’re babies but to dump them if they grow up to be doves. He says that predaTory birds are more like our own kind.
GOD: Virgin #2, Who’s your Daddy?
Virgin #2: You are, Dear God (her quaking voice rising to a crescendo) as you are also my blessed bridegroom since I took my vows 80 years ago.
GOD: Is it that long ago? Gosh, time sure flies when you’re having fun.
Gabriel Angel: While God is preparing another round of questions for the virgins, we’ll go to a commercial break for this fine product.
Gabriel Angel: We’re back and God has some more questions for the virgins.
GOD: Virgin #3, your voice seems very familiar. Do you have a part-time job staffing the phone line at 1-900-PATMYBUM while working on your PhD in Anthropology, on “The Post-Economic Puzzle of Polish Pole-Dancers in the Pre-Soviet Collapse of the Zloty”?
Virgin #3: God, that’s amazing. How did you know that?
GOD: (modestly) Well, I am God. I see you when you’re sleeping. I know when you’re awake. I know if you’ve been bad or good ….
Virgin #3: oh. Oh! uh-oh.
GOD: Virgin #2, I don’t actually have any more questions for you because you have been sharing all your thoughts with me for the last eight decades and, Theresa, I have to tell you: the mystery is gone. And as you know, religious belief is all about the mystery. So, moving on to Virgin #1, do you think that your dad would get me a role in one of his television shows, being that the critics say that his sitcoms are “godless pieces of garbage” and “wallowing in the third circle of Hell”?
Virgin #1: Like, God, my dad would be SO bummed if somebody in the business begat his grandson. But it would be totally awesome if you gave him the franchise rights after the Holy Birth.
GOD: Done deal. Forty-nine percent of the net retail sales, after taxes. Oh and another thing, he has to convert to Christianity.
Virgin #1: Christianity …. what’s that?
GOD: Ooops, I’m getting a little ahead of myself here. Never mind, you’ll find out in thirty years from now.
Soaring harp music, a chorus of angels singing as the camera turns to and zooms in on ….
Gabriel Angel: Another match made in Heaven …. Thanks for watching folks. And remember to tune in again, this time next week for the best hook-up show on television, The Incarnating Game. We’ll have Rosemary, a bachelorette burning with unholy desire for a son spawned by a Prince of Darkness.

For the faint-hearted who feel that this spoof of the vintage TV show, ‘The Dating Game’ is sacrilegious, tasteless or irreverent, please consider this: Anyone can play God. The anti-choice criminalizers and fetus-fetishizers do it all the time. Why should they have a monopoly on putting words in God’s mouth?
Originally posted at Birth Pangs.

Mandatory Obstetric Photography (MOP)

Birth Pangs announces today that it is embarking on a new campaign, Mandatory Obstetric Photography (MOP).

To help pre-pregnant women understand fully the long-term, serious consequences of pregnancy, we propose a law that requires pre-pregnant women to have Mandatory Obstetric Photography. The women would strip naked for a series of full-body, harshly lit photographs. Special attention would be paid to perky breasts, tidy hips, and taut skin. Then the women must look at the photos. Before becoming pregnant, all women would be required to sign an affidavit that they had seen the photos and understand that they will never look like that again.

To give credit where credit is due, we stole this idea from our fetus-fetishizing friends in South Carolina, who this week pressed forward a bill that would require all women seeking abortions to have ultrasounds and then swear they had seen said ultrasounds. From an AP story:

Pregnancy and femicide

The compulsory pregnancy crowd, also known as the fetus-fetishizers and anti-choice criminalizers, rarely if ever consider that this condition can be a factor in precipitating femicide.

Stephen Hart, a psychology professor at Simon Fraser University and an expert in psychopathic behaviour, has worked with the B.C. Institute Against Family Violence to look into spousal homicides in the province. Hart said that only about one-third to one-half of the relationships he studied showed a “pattern of escalating violence”. Another subsection of men showed a pattern of violence “across relationships”, while another one-third of cases showed no prior warning of violent intent. But here, men may have been triggered by a stress factor, which can include pregnancy.

Rosemary Gartner is a University of Toronto sociology professor has done extensive research and authored many studies and reports about femicide. There are a couple of issues around pregnancy,” Gartner said. “One is that some men respond to pregnancy with fear and trepidation—it means both a financial and emotional commitment to both the woman and the child. Another part has to do with the man [falsely] believing she is leaving him or that she has been unfaithful to him. Sometimes men question the paternity of the pregnancy.”

Hart agreed with Gartner that pregnancy is a “real risk factor”. “In the United States, the homicide of the mother is one of the major causes of prenatal mortality,” Hart said.

Information available here indicates that homicide is a leading cause of traumatic death for pregnant and postpartum women in the United States, accounting for 31 percent of maternal injury deaths. Also, women with unplanned pregnancies have a two to four times greater risk of suffering violence from their husbands or partners than women whose pregnancies were planned.

Although funding has been returned to Status of Women Canada, with the anti-feminist bias of “Canada’s New Government” visibly on display, what’s the possibility that any ongoing research into the prevention of femicide will be supported? Certainly not, if it challenges the half-truths and disinformation provided by groups such as the REAL-ly fundamentalist women.

(This particular entry is not meant as parody. There are times when it’s difficult to find humour in the unconscionable cruelty of those who claim to champion the pre-born (their terminology) as though their cause were exempt from the realities that women experience, pregnant or not.)
First posted at Birth Pangs.