Giving women options - unchristian and unamerican as soon as anyone started listening to Chuck Norris.

Surely if God was that worried about Neo-Mary aborting Jesus 2.0, he’d just knock up a lady who, uh, wanted to give birth to a new religion?  Not to mention that the Bible is fucking full of stories in which God says “You, you’re doing this,” and the response is “ZOMG DONWANNA!”. Yet somehow everything still wound up getting done, presumably because part of worshipping a deity is listening when they take the extra step of turning up and handing you your own personal to-do list.

I’ve never seen this movie, and I don’t have sound on my computer, but I have to know: Are they fighting over who gets to keep the kitten?

How do you get to be an adult and have NO CONCEPT OF CHOICE AT ALL without, say, starving to death? We make choices all the time. We get up in the morning and there’ll be cereal in the pantry and bacon & eggs in the fridge, and most of us can pick one to have for breakfast without the government banning one of the options for us.

Also, seriously, even working within the traditional Christian story: Mary was probably not the only virgin of marriageable age in the entire world at the time God picked her. God picked Mary specifically because she was devout and would listen to angels if they showed up and gave her orders. If she were the type to have tried to terminate the pregnancy in whatever first-century ways they had, like a lot of girls would have done, then God would have picked someone else, the way he didn’t pick any of the aforementioned other girls…

Bah. If you don’t think THE VIRGIN MARY OF ALL FUCKING PEOPLE wouldn’t have obeyed God’s orders if she had any other option, what does that say about how strong your own faith actually is?

I love that wingnuts thing the only thing that health insurance will cover is abortion, when it’s the one thing that it won’t cover under health care reform. 

Cynical, the “what if they had abortion then?” line exposes the ugly reality about how wingnuts think of women and pregnancy, which is that they see pregnancy primarily as a means to oppress women, and therefore find it impossible to believe that a woman would actively choose it.  You don’t choose the boot on your neck, you know?  Of course, as you point out, many women want children and so would choose pregnancy, but from a wingnut perspective, that’s silly.

I’ve read the four accounts of Jesus’s birth, and while there aren’t a lot of details, I don’t see anything in there suggesting Mary didn’t want Him.  OK, they probably wouldn’t include that in a hagiography, and Mary was a woman, so her opinion would have meant nothing anyway, but at the same time, isn’t the argument of the Biblical literalist that everything happened in the Bible exactly as written?  To be fair, I don’t actively know that Chuck is a YEC with all the literalist bells and whistles, but he sure talks like one.

Also, let’s assume that Mary would have wanted to abort had the option been available.  Wouldn’t that kind of sully the myth, having God rape a virgin?  I figure if God wants a baby to be born, that baby will be born one way or another, but Chuck apparently thinks God is less powerful than I do, and I’m an atheist—the definition of the term apparently being “knows the definition of ‘omnipotent’.”  Chuck appears to believe that for all His bluster, His will to save all of humanity can easily be subverted by an uneducated sixteen-year-old in the middle of the desert.

The Virgin Mary was still a woman, and thus would easily succumb to the evil “Democrat Party” activists known to hang around obstetric wards tricking pregnant women into going against nature and God and all that crap.

Even holy sainted chicks are still dumb broads, as any pope or preacher will tell you.

Also, I love the idea that women who are in danger of being murdered over a pregnancy should still be forced to go forward with it.  Fuck it if they get killed.  They’re not people, unlike sperm.

What if Godzilla was real?

What if men got pregnant instead of women?

What if Buddy Holly was a classical pianist?

What if soldiers fought with paintball guns instead of rifles?

What if people didn’t have to worry about getting help if they became sick?

What if C-Movie actors quietly retired instead of opening their ignorant cake holes?...

Note it never bothers them to pay taxes to murder brown children in other countries.  Nor does it bother them that it bothers me to have my tax dollars used for that.  My values aren’t values.  Their values are values.

Their mind-blowing hypocrisy is what makes them a total fucking joke.  Well, that, and their outfits.

I love how he slips “possible stoning” in there, because, you know, it might happen, but it shouldn’t really concern anyone, it’s just another issue women should have to put up with, because, well, it’s tradition.  Nothing to worry about really, just a severe punishment.  You know- if Joseph changes his mind or something, he still needs an out.  Wouldn’t want to condemn stoning, that one’s there for the men.

And while we’re at it, notice that Chuck here mentions “ridicule, ostracizing, persecution and possible stoning because of her out-of-wedlock pregnancy?” Umm, who the hell do you think would be doing all that? (I’ll give you a hint Chuck, you’d be in the front of the line to bash that filthy whore in the head with a brick.)

I missed the verse in Matthew where the Virgin Mary was stoned to death for carrying an out-of-wedlock child.

And he must have missed all of the verses in the NT where an angel of the lord came to Mary and told her that she would give birth to the divinely conceived Son of Man.

The difference between Mary and your average scared knocked up teenager is that Mary knew everything was going to be ok (pregnancy-wise) from the get-go. She knew it would be hard, but the support of an omnipotent, omniscient diety kicks the ass of even the most wealthiest parents. Another big difference is that 2009 years ago, Mary was pretty much about at the age where she was going to start having kids anyway (Joseph wasn’t her BFF, after all). So the fact that she “jumped the gun” by a couple of months with Jesus wasn’t otherwise going to be a massive derail of her life (ok, obviously giving birth to the God’s only son *is* going to be a massive derail of the life, but not because you got pregnant 6 months earlier than you would have otherwise). It’s not like she was enrolled at Nazareth Tech where she was going to study leechcraft (or whatever passed for medicine back then).

Maybe Mary would have had a decent midwife and whatever passed for the best of obstetrical care back then, instead of having to give birth in a manger, which is basically a filthy place?  I mean, it’s the equivalent of giving birth in a back alley in terms of cleanliness and comfort.

Doesn’t the fact that Mary specifically *said* that she was okay with having the baby sort of defeat the whole argument?

You know, my grandfather offered my mother the opportunity to abort me, and she said no, because she *wanted* me. And I am incredibly glad he did that, because for the rest of my life I will know, deep down inside, that no matter what else my mother wanted me to exist. I wouldn’t have that certainty if she hadn’t had the choice. Maybe I’m talking out my lapsed Catholic ass here, but isn’t a large part of the whole Mary veneration thing based on the fact that God gave her a choice and she said yes? That her sacrifice was deliberately chosen (or at least deliberately accepted), not forced on her?

I’ve never seen this movie, and I don’t have sound on my computer, but I have to know: Are they fighting over who gets to keep the kitten?

FTW.  My favorite part of the whole movie is the dramatic kitteh zoom-in.  It’s doubly entertaining now that Chuck has turned out to be such a tool.  Too bad Bruce isn’t around to deal another much needed humiliating beat down!

This sort of brings out the inherent contradiction between the deity’s omniscience/omnipotence and human free will, doesn’t it? Mary freely chose to bear the kid of the holy spirit (yeah, sure, snigger, snigger, like no one’s ever used that excuse before, as auden points out). But if she hadn’t been going to make that particular choice, someone else would be revered as the mother of god, and if god had wanted to he could have just made her change her mind, like he did to Saul of Tarsus or the Pharaoh.

*head desk*

Apparently, Chuck the Christian doesn’t know his own theology. Mary was conceived immaculate, for the special purpose of giving birth to the Messiah, so “What if Mary had chosen to abort Jesus?” is like asking “What if you were Superman, but had no superpowers?” or “What if you were invisible, but everyone could see you?” It’s a bullshit question.

On a side note, since Mary was conceived without sin and conceived Jesus without sin, she supposedly had no pain when she was giving birth in that stable. Thus when ether was discovered (and doctors started giving ether to women during childbirth), there was a huge outcry from churchmen, who declared that the sinful mortal women were getting out of their punishment for sinning. God, they declared, enjoyed the prayers and screams of women in childbirth, and it would be sinful to deny God this.

Queen Victoria finally put her foot down and blessed ether for getting her through the births of her later children. Her position as God’s representative on Earth (or at least in Britain) shut the clergy up on the subject of God the Heavenly Sadist.

What does Remo Williams have to say about all this?

OK, unless some miracle has occurred since I last saw the news, no version of the health bill covers abortion in any way, so either Chuck’s an idiot (likely), or he’s lying (even more likely). Which is just one more point of evidence proving that it is utterly pointless and self defeating to “compromise” with the Republicans for the sake of bipartisanship. They already had the Hyde amendment, but screamed and hollered about abortion anyway and we wound up with Stupak-Pitts. They know they’ve won on this, and yet they’re still pretending that “your tax dollars will pay for abortions!”.

Secondly, Chuck’s “what if” is blatantly abhorrent. “What if a scared and threatened teenager, impregnated against her will actually had a choice about what happened to her?! What if people who need help are provided with help!” (leaving the actual details of the Bible story aside, as others have noted). Not to mention that he seems to be framing his story as if Mary would obviously want an abortion if she’d had access (I get the feeling that right wingers think that no woman would ever have a baby if she had the option, so they have to do everything within their power to force women’s hands) , and also that government health insurance will force women to get abortions.

Didn’t Amanda get in trouble for making this very suggestion anyway?

Also, I’d like to point out another stupid assumption of Chuck’s argument. Christianity already has a savior. They named the religion for it. So go ahead and abort all the fetuses you want. I can guarantee you that doing so will not retroactively kill Christ nor prevent a second one from being born.

Not only did Bruce Lee get to kill Chuck Norris in that movie; he also got to kill John Derbyshire:

http://www.olimu.com/Photographs/BackPages/ReturnOfTheDragon.htm

“either Chuck’s an idiot (likely), or he’s lying (even more likely). Which is just one more point of evidence proving that it is utterly pointless and self defeat”

The two are not mutually exclusive.  While many liars are not idiots, most idiots are liars.

Mary was conceived immaculate

I doubt Chuck Norris is Catholic.

End of hair splitting.

What if Godzilla was real?

The value of the yen would be lower.

What if men got pregnant instead of women?

We know the answer to this one. Abortion would be a sacrament.

What if Buddy Holly was a classical pianist?

That Weezer song would be about somebody else.

What if soldiers fought with paintball guns instead of rifles?

That’s barbaric!  Do you know how long you have to beat somebody with a paintball gun to kill him?

What if people didn’t have to worry about getting help if they became sick?

Ask Canada.

</blockquote>What if C-Movie actors quietly retired instead of opening their ignorant cake holes?… </blockquote>

Saint Ray-gun never would have been able to do so much damage to the country and the world.

Abortion was never an issue for Mary. Mary wanted to carry Jesus to term. Mary was not going to be the subject of gossip or shaming in her community, because she was betrothed to Joseph and so everyone knew they were going to get married anyway. The only one troubled at all was Joseph, and his initial reaction was to get a quiet divorce. But after Mary explained the whole “God impregnated me” deal, Joseph was cool with it.

Thanks for the Bruce Lee ass-kicking (well, head-kicking) action.  That made my morning.

Wait, doesn’t the whole concept of The Annunciation kind of prevent this whole rhetorical mess?

An angel comes to Mary and tells her that God has chosen her to bear the Messiah, if that’s something she’d be interested in.  She agrees to bear the child, knowing both the situation on the ground.

Yes, there is actually a part in the bible (too lazy to go look it up, paraphrasing from memory) where Mary affirms, “yes, if god wills it” or “god’s will be done” or some shit that totally proves that she had agency in CHOOSING to bring Jesus into the world. 

Though I know the fundies love to believe that all women are passive vessels for male (or godly) seed.  But they clearly have never read their own fucking bible.

(also, what Mighty Ponygirl and Alara Rogers said - I realized they brought this up after typing it all out and thought the fact that Mary chose to have Jesus bore repeating.)

I doubt Chuck Norris is Catholic.

End of hair splitting.

Is this something Protestants and Catholics disagree on?  Granted I grew up Episcopalian in a predominantly Catholic part of the world, so my “Protestants vs. Catholics” theology leader board can sometimes be a little skewed.

Though not being Catholic would certainly give Norris an out for not knowing his bible, and especially not knowing fuck-all about Teh Holey Virgin.  I swear the whole point of being an Evangelical is that the bible is really just a door stop with a few inspirational quotes about hating homos.

The only one troubled at all was Joseph, and his initial reaction was to get a quiet divorce. But after Mary explained the whole “God impregnated me” deal, Joseph was cool with it.

Well, he had some sort of dream/vision thing that confirmed it for him.  They may have lived in unscientific times, but I doubt that “No, honey, I’m not cheating on you - it was a miracle!” would have carried much water by itself. 

Also, why do I suspect that, in being “unwilling to expose (Mary) to the law”, Joseph was being infinitely more understanding and compassionate than Chuck or his readers would have been?

Truth be told, if “Mother Mary” had to be subjected to the mandatory purchase of a lousy for-profit criminal empire’s crappy product as stipulated in the current Senate healthcare bill or the Stupak amendment as stipulated in the House bill…

I’d feel really, really sorry for her.

But not for one single reason this idiot Chuck Norris claims as complaints against HCR.

Maybe I’m talking out my lapsed Catholic ass here, but isn’t a large part of the whole Mary veneration thing based on the fact that God gave her a choice and she said yes? That her sacrifice was deliberately chosen (or at least deliberately accepted), not forced on her?

My lapsed Catholic ass was thinking pretty much the same thing.  It has been a while since I read the Bible or attended catechism, but that’s how I remember it.

The “what if Mary had an abortion” argument is the oldest anti-choice trick in the book.  The only way to counter is it say, “What if Hitler’s mom had an abortion?”, or you could use my dad’s response in the case of ridiculous hypotheticals: “what if your legs were ten feet long?”

America: that wonderful country where the statements of tenured and respected scientists speaking on topics germane to their field (see: climate change) are dismissed as lies and fabrications and opinions about complex social and environmental issues made by martial arts actors based on their misreading of 2000-year-old-heavily-edited manuscripts are taken as the complete and unarguable truth.

Is this something Protestants and Catholics disagree on?

Well, ‘Protestants’ being a stand-in term for pretty much any non-Catholic, I can’t answer that precisely, but I was under the impression that most protestant sects reject the Immaculate Conception (which is that *Mary* was conceived without sin… that Jesus was is pretty much a given).

It is most often used by evangelicals (which I believe Chuck Norris is) or other fundamentalist to attack Catholicism as a neo-pagan Mary worshipping (as well as saints worshipping) perversion of True Christianity, which they obviously are the only one to have claim on the title.

“That Weezer song would be about somebody else.”

Well, Weezer could also have wound up a very different band with a very different-sounding song about Buddy Holly.

Black Belt Patriotism

Side-splitting!

Also, Erik D @12 and tannenberg @36 laid some nice posts today.

I agree with Chuck Norris, I think the laws of the United States should say about abortion exactly what the Old and New Testaments agree in saying: nothing.

Given: The Christian God is omnipotent and omniscent.

If God performed another immaculate conception and the woman who was impregnated had an abortion, would that not mean that (1) God knew that was destined to happen and (2) It was God’s will that the event should occur?

Wouldn’t that prove the Christian God is objectively pro-abortion?

I can has yur chest hairz? Yez, cuz I haz teh kitteh style!

It really is perfectly illustrative of the conflict between conservatism and liberalism. Chuck, the conservative, is defeated because he is unable to adapt his ancient, static style while Bruce, the liberal, is all about adapting his techniques to the moment.

What if C-Movie actors quietly retired instead of opening their ignorant cake holes?

Or at least understood that their sudden popularity after years of hawking work out equipment on late night TV is based on a goofy, random and mainly ironic website.

I think he’s tipping his hand. Chuck obviously finds all children (even the known Son of God) revolting, and that no woman would voluntarily have a child and would abort at the first opportunity she got.

I doubt Chuck Norris is Catholic.

End of hair splitting.

Neither am I; that’s why I spelled it lower case, instead of capitalizing it.

Actually, I had one grandparent who was a fallen away Catholic, and two others were conservative Lutherans, so the three of them pretty much agreed on the immaculate conception of Mary, if not on the Pope.  The more conservative the Protestant (like the Lutherans and the Church of England), the more likely they are to play up Mary and her predestined role as the Mother of God.  If God made you especially to birth the Messiah, you can’t say “I’d prefer not to at this time.” any more than your son the Messiah could say “Dying on the cross?  Screw it, I’m out of here.”

Fundies are more of a mixed bag.  If you really want to see the fur fly, ask a group of random fundies about “Free Will” versus “Predestination”, and then be sure to sit where the blood won’t splatter you.

Considering Mary explicitly agreed to carry Jesus (at least according to the Bible), I am having a bit of trouble figuring out why Chucky even thinks his question is a relevant one. This is a stretch even by wingnut standards.

Luke 1:38. Which part of “choice” do they not understand?

Look, I’m not Christian so maybe I’m missing some subtleties. But how can people who get offended by a store clerk’s failure to say “Merry Christmas” fail to be offended by the idea that God was so incompetent that his chosen vessel would have aborted the savior of mankind given the choice.

Seriously, I’m pretty sure this is heresy.

Though not being Catholic would certainly give Norris an out for not knowing his bible

This is embarrassingly ignorant. The usual slur on Protestants is that they worship the bible, just as the slur on Catholics is that they worship the Pope, and it’s something of a cliche, for good reason, that Protestants and Catholics have trouble communicating because Protestants think that Scriptural cites are the ultimate authority, whereas Catholics, well, don’t.

I mean, being able and allowed toread the bible was a huge issue of, you know, the Reformation.

It’s all the same to me if Christianity perishes from the earth in all its various creepy forms, but for fuck’s sake, this isn’t obscure stuff.

If God made you especially to birth the Messiah, you can’t say “I’d prefer not to at this time.” any more than your son the Messiah could say “Dying on the cross?  Screw it, I’m out of here.”

Yeah, really. It’s not consent if you can’t say no without consequences. Maybe Mary really wanted to have ear sex with the Holy Spirit, and maybe she just wasn’t in the mood for a smiting that day. It’s kind of grotesque to use her as a poster girl for uncoerced consent, God’s the ultimate creepy harassing boss in that scenario. You don’t get a worse power imbalance than that.

Alara, THANK you! I have a friend who cites her own existence as the reason she’s anti-choice but she was born after Roe v Wade and her mother chose her in spite of advice otherwise.
I should think that being chosen would help make one pro-choice, and you obviously feel the same way.

And how can a person who loves their mother think it would be great if she was forced to make the sacrifices she’s made, rather than honor her for choosing to do so?

It’s not consent if you can’t say no without consequences.

Oh no, that can’t be right, or no one has ever consented to anything.

What would have happened if Mother Mary had been covered by Obamacare?

Probably NOT have given birth in a manger. Just a thought.

I have to argue against this whole notion regarding the manger birth.  First of all, Jesus was placed in a manger after the birth, not during.  Mary wasn’t a co-sleeper, apparently.  And second, clean straw is no more filthy than the average bedding from any inn that Joseph could have procured in that era.  Hygiene and birth is pretty much a problem only after the baby arrives.  The process itself can involve the baby’s own poop, lots of blood, and loads of the mother’s sweat and possibly other body excretions, so it’s not exactly tragic if a baby is born in a taxicab, a stable, or a supposedly sterile hospital room.  Unless the baby is born covered in open sores, the mess created by birth is unlikely to affect the baby’s health.  Once past the moment the airways open up and some coughs and cries clear up the various tubes, a baby is likely to be doing fine.  Just wipe away the crap of birth and everything is likely to be fine.

One added note that always makes that particular scene more fun for me: Bruce Lee was an atheist.

except for me, i was traumatized by the whole thing, for days!:  “Just wipe away the crap of birth and everything is likely to be fine.”

i kind of doubt mr. norris reads much of anything, much less the bible. he assumes his target audience doesn’t either, so they’re not going to realize his whole “argument” makes absolutely no sense whatever.

bear in mind, joseph and mary spent the night in a barn, not because they were poor and couldn’t afford a hotel room, but because there were no rooms to be had. joseph was a skilled artisan (carpenter), who appears to have made a pretty decent living; there’s no mention of jesus being raised in poverty in the new testament. he was a nice, middle-class jewish boy. probably considered a good catch by the girls in town, were it not for that whole “savior of mankind” thing.

had joseph and mary felt there was a need for skilled, medical help for the birth, they most likely could have afforded to pay a mid-wife to come and help out.

If I accepted the Bible as factual - which I don’t - and if I didn’t think Chuck was smoking crack when he said this - which I do - I would bring up this point, which is:

You remember that part with the angel? Where the angel comes, and and is like, yo lady you’re gonna get knocked up with God’s baby?

Do you remember what she said?

“Behold, the handmaid of the Lord; be it to me according to your word.” (Luke 1:38).

That doesn’t sound like a girl who wants an abortion to me. In fact, it sounds like a statement of almost God-like bravery and strength, coming from a girl living in a time when an illegitimate pregnancy could get you KILLED. But maybe I haven’t spent enough time drinking the Christian Kool-Aid to be able to read the Gospels properly. Maybe women are actually so fundamentally weak and stupid that they don’t know what to do with their own bodies, and need laws to protect them - from themselves.

FWIW: “ancilla domini” is originally “doule kyriou”, which is the original ambiguity between generic “servant-girl”, specifically “female bond-servant”, or just plain “slave-girl”. There wasn’t much of a difference at that point.

So I suppose someone could read it as a resentful “God can do whatever he wants to me, so why bother objecting?”; but I really don’t think that’s how it’s supposed to be read…might be an interesting take for a second-coming type novel, though…

Just remembered the question I meant to ask before I got distracted by the adorableness of that kitten - how come no one ever shows this kind of concern over Catholic vows of celibacy? Just think of all the poor little future Mozarts and Ghandis who never got the chance to be born because their would-be daddy or mommy decided to enter the priesthood or become a nun! And let’s not forget all the future Einsteins and Aristotles denied existence by God Himself due to miscarriage* - what kind of monster would choose to worship a deity that arbitrarily denies such wonderful potential people their rightful place in history, Chuck?

*I apologize to anyone who has suffered this tragedy either personally or through a loved one. It’s not my intention to make light of your pain, only to point out the ludicrousness of this sort of argument.