by Liz Thatcher

Jezebel may have outdone themselves this time. In a Feb. 6 blog titled “What’s the Best Age to Have an Abortion” blogger Erin Gloria Ryan pontificates the pros and cons of getting an abortion at different ages. Her conclusion on the best age? “Taking into account access, ability to keep life plans intact, affordability, and likely relationship status, it's 25.”

Oh, well that’s great to know!

Aug.

In the discussion of pros and cons of teenagers under 18 getting abortions, Ms. Ryan stated that it could be hard because “kids still living under their religious parents' roof may have some Bachmannian hang ups about when life begins and how totally damned they'd be if they ended their pregnancies.” Ironically enough, Salon.com, another liberal rag, published an article on the 40th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade titled “So What if Abortion Ends Life?” In this article, Mary Elizabeth Williams argued that feminists can’t continue to pretend that pregnancy isn’t a life if it was unplanned or you don’t desire a child. “Fetuses aren’t selective like that. They don’t qualify as human life only if they’re intended to be born.”

Apparently Jezebel missed this [equally atrocious, yet honest] article.

Don’t worry, it gets worse.

The only con listed for the age range of 18-23 is simply the “cost, access, you can't use your parents' insurance because they'll know.” Never mind the fact that you are taking the life of a child … oh wait, silly me. Jezebel is full of feminists that deny the science of life at conception. But it's totes cool to lie or hide the fact that you got an abortion from your parents ... even though it is a risky medical procedure. How irresponsible can these women get?

In the 27-30 age range, a pro of getting an abortion was “if you saved up a little, you could probably afford a designer abortion. A Marc Jacobs abortion, in teal.” Feminists always know how to keep it classy!

If you’ll recall, Jezebel was the site that had the freak out session on the 40th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade because they feared that states were shutting down women’s rights to have abortions whenever the heck they felt like it, and attacked Norma McCorvey, the infamous Jane Roe and plaintiff in their sacred court case.

With garbage like this, is it any wonder that pro-choicers are losing ground?

by Liz Thatcher

I recently came across an antagonistic article on Jezebel that made my skin crawl … but also reminded me why exactly I refuse to refer to myself as a “feminist.” The article, titled “There is No Such Thing as a Pro-Life Feminist” did nothing but bash on conservative women like Sarah Palin and organizations like Feminists for Life that provide a pro-life, feminist alternative to the far left feminism of today’s society.

While I found the entire article to be ironic, my favorite line was a rhetorical question, in which the author asked “Who the f*** are you to actively work at taking away other women's right to make their own personal decisions about their uteruses?”

Ahhh yes…the ridiculous, age-old question of “legislating morality.” But is that what the pro-life movement is actually doing?

Let’s just look at this from a “feministic” point of view. Who are you, liberal feminists, to push for the murdering unborn girls who will turn into women someday? Gendercide is an epidemic, and not just in third world countries that have dowry or China where a strict one-child policy is enforced. This happens in America, too, where people choose to abort their babies because they are girls. I’ve written about this before.

Oh, the irony. As a commenter on this article so eloquently asked, “Isn't the entire idea of third-wave feminism based on the premise that a woman can be WHATEVER she wants, be it a business woman, a homemaker, a Democrat, a Republican, a construction worker, a sex worker -and someone who identifies as pro-choice OR pro-life? Who gets to define feminism?”

A great question indeed.

What feminists fail to realize is that through their emphasis on being pro-choice, anti-man, and pro-lesbian (which aren’t touched on in the Jezebel article, but are other common feminist themes) they are destroying their movement. Without reproduction, liberal feminism as it is being pushed today is self-defeating. It can’t perpetuate itself since feminists are killing and preventing the births of new ones. It demands the coercion of new feminists through the culture.