Pro...

Abortion.

Pro-life.

Pro-choice

Women’s rights.

This has been a controversial topic as long as I can remember. But lately, it has grown into one of the bigger hot-button topics of the day.

The topic of choice can be thrust into any area of life. My sister recently had a friend say to her that she can’t understand how people who are “pro-life” can have their cats spayed and neutered, since that is keeping babies from being born. That was a new argument that I wasn’t familiar with.

Pro-life proponents are often shown as old white men, who of course are not affected in any way by pro-life legislation. They are all ardent Trump supporters who think that a woman should be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, or she is missing the only calling that will give her life worth.

But that is not what all pro-lifers are.

I am pro-life.

I am a 29 year old woman. I am single, and I travel the world and like to have the freedom to do as I want.

No, I have not adopted a baby. That’s one of the arguments, where people say that pro-lifers are only pro-birth, and don’t want to help those lives once they are out there.

But I would love to adopt. I am not in a position that I can currently, but I hope to one day be able.

Because, you see, to really be pro-life, you can’t only say that abortion is bad and ignore the other stuff going on around you.

I know people who voted Trump mainly because of his anti-abortion stance. But, while I respect the fact that he thinks that abortion is bad, I do not believe that he is genuinely pro-life. His stance on the other lives throughout the world show that.

So, while I agreed with his stand on abortion, I felt that I was personally too pro-life to vote for him.

Pro-life to me includes the lives of immigrants, and people who are being attacked for their colour or religion. Pro-life means giving a child a chance for life even if the doctor says he or she will be badly disabled and termination is better.

I’ve talked to people who say that it is none of my, or anyone else’s business whether a woman aborts an unwanted child.

But if I was in a village in India, and saw a woman smothering her infant daughter directly after birth, because she doesn’t want to feed a daughter, and would rather try again for a son, those same people would say it is my duty to step in.

Those people would even advocate for education in poor villages, where they would teach the women to care for their daughters, and teach them that all babies are important. There’s a good chance that most of these people would even approve of punishment for the woman who would smother her daughter, or leave the tiny girl out in a field where she will quickly die of exposure.

How is it different? Yeah, it’s different in that the baby is not inside the woman’s body. But the baby needs its Mother. The woman can’t use her body in the way she desires (trying for a son so that she pleases her husband), because she has to care for this little person who is entirely helpless.

To be clear, I am not saying that we should allow women to murder unwanted infants. But if we wouldn’t allow it in the case of a poor woman who does not want a daughter, why would we allow it prior to birth.

A Mother and child are 2 separate bodies. As soon as a baby is conceived, it ceases to be a single body. Why else would the murder of a pregnant woman carry the weight of two murders? You can’t say that it is a person when it serves you in getting a stiffer prison sentence for a murderer, and not a person when it was an accident.

Back to the comment about pro-lifers spaying and neutering cats…that is a way to prevent births, which doesn’t take any life. We do not take pregnant cats in to be spayed, but instead wait until they give birth, then have all of them neutered. This is to prevent the cat population from reaching a point around here where they are fighting, and roaming all over, getting shot by farmers who don’t want them around.

I have no issue with people getting “neutered”. If you don’t want kids, make it so you can’t have kids. But once you’ve reached the point where there is another being in there, even if it is still just a “clump of cells” according to pro-choicers, that’s where you are screwing with someone else’s life.

If you sleep around, that’s also your choice. I don’t think that people should be banned from sleeping together outside of marriage. It’s probably smarter on a whole lot of levels, but again, this is your body. Two consenting adults…go ahead. But again, if that creates another life, it is no longer only you on this ride.

So be smart about the choices you make. If you’re not ready for a kid, don’t have sex. Yes, it sucks a lot more for women, as they’re the ones with the real responsibility when all is said and done. Though, I think men should be held to a lot more responsibility as well.

If you make a baby, no matter which part you donated, you have a responsibility to that baby. You either raise it, or you find it a new home. But abortion should not be an option. Ever. Choices have consequences. And a baby should not be the easiest consequence to get rid of.

Sorry if this was offensive. But I think it is important to show people who are pro-life, but aren’t old white men who are pro-Trump. I want to be honest here, and if that means occasionally stepping on toes, so be it.

I do not write to be deliberately offensive, and will reply to any questions for clarification on any of my points. I write to share my beliefs and views, and appreciate people who can have a sensible conversation with those who have differing thoughts on matters.

Thanks for your time, and have a lovely day.

Don't Ruin Beauty and the Beast

It feels like there are more and more subjects every day that people hesitate to broach. Could your topic be seen as even somewhat offensive to some group of people? Then don’t say anything.

It used to be politics and religion which were off-limits. And that was a thing when you were in a more formal setting, such as a first date, or going out with colleagues, who you weren’t really close to.

Now, it seems like you can’t say anything without offending someone.

I am not pro-hate speech. I don’t say things with the purpose of hurting other people. And I can’t stand people who do that. But a person should be able to say what they think without searching every word for hidden offenses.

For example, I read an article about the new Beauty and the Beast movie. It refers to the fact that Disney put in an “explicitly gay scene” between Gaston and Le Fou into the movie.

Which kind of upset me. And when I posted something negative about it, I knew that various friends would probably take it in a way that I didn’t mean it.

My more liberal friends, those who are pro-LGBTQ, or gay/bi themselves would see it as an attack. I look close-minded because I don’t want Disney adding gay scenes to their films.

My more conservative friends would see it as a “sister-in-arms” statement. It would look like a line in the sand.

But really, all that I meant by it was that I don’t want them messing with my favourite movie.

I was mad when I saw an early teaser trailer, and heard Ewan Mcgregor’s deplorable French accent (a Scottish actor as Lumière? Maybe not their best choice…).

I was even a little annoyed when I saw how they made Beast look.

Beauty and the Beast has been one of my favourite movies pretty much since it came out. Maybe my absolute favourite movie. And the older I get, the more I love it. I have the special edition of it, and I never watch it with the bonus songs, because the original is pretty well perfection.

My problem isn’t really the gay aspect of it. I couldn’t care less if they give Elsa a girlfriend in the new Frozen movie, because I thought Frozen was complete rubbish, and I don’t care to ever see the second one.

My problem is that they are taking Beauty and the Beast, and making it a vehicle for their agenda. They say that the gay scene is “really subtle and delicious”, but when they went on record to point it out, they changed the movie into something other than what it was.

There’s always been speculation that Le Fou is gay. In any story, when there’s a same-sex duo, and the one is more bold and manly, and the other is more delicate and feminine, there’s always speculation. It’s not really that much different than the automatic guessing to figure out which male/female couple is going to get together in a movie (thanks for that, Disney and Hallmark).

I am getting super tired of every area of entertainment being used for one agenda or another. Honestly, even if they used Beauty and the Beast as a platform to promote helping refugees, or rescuing abandoned puppies, I’d still be pissed.

Yes, we need to be aware of issues facing our world. Yes, we need to educate children about what is happening around them, and teach them to not be afraid of people who are different.

But don’t screw around with the classics.

If you want a gay Disney character, write a new story. Don’t take a movie that has been around for 25 years and make it into your gay love story.

And, something that just occurred to me…wouldn’t this be offensive to gay men? I mean, seriously, the first gay Disney character, and he’s one of the biggest idiots in Disney history? That’s empowering…Anyway…that’s off-topic.

My initial reaction to reading this article was that I’d not see the movie. But I probably will after all. I’ve been uneasy about seeing it since I first heard they were doing a live-action version.

Yes, my affection for this film may be slightly ridiculous. But remember, I saw it when it first came out. I still remember seeing it at the theatre. It was snowing when we walked outside after the movie. That was 25 years ago…I’m 29 now. It’s been a major part of my life, and when they take something like that, which means a lot to me, and they cheapen it by making it a “watershed moment” for the studio, it makes me mad.

Maybe I should go watch the original. That always makes me happy.