Keep It In Your Pants!

    by Brother Theo


    just keep It In Your pants. Sounds too simple, huh? The sorry truth, which is that the bulk of those fighting against safe, legal abortion also fight against contraceptives with the same zeal as they show in the fight against abortion. It’s true. The Catholic Church, likely the strongest opponent to abortion, is deadlocked in a ferocious fight against contraception. Condoms, the morning after pill, plan B, pretty much anything that might prevent unwanted pregnancy, are anathema to the clergy. They approve of the rhythm method, but those who depend on that are collectively known as “parents!”

    After being drafted into a religion well ahead of our ability to discriminate between truth and lies, we are forced to publicly believe the notion that copulation (between a man and a woman) is for the purpose of procreation alone. The Talmud, that part of the old testament which somehow wrangled this idea out of the writings of mad prophets and monks living apart from their fellow man, does say that men should rejoice in sex, and that women are to allow the act at stipulated intervals. Each age group was to have joyous sex as married couples daily all the way to once a week after a certain age. The old Testament exhorts men to “be fruitful and multiply”.

    Undoubtedly some of this spite toward contraception is the result of altar boys not having to worry about pregnancy, but I believe that the bulk of this stupidity is deeply rooted in the fact that you have to swallow that gigantic inquisition pill, the one that forces us to admit publicly that we cannot have a personal relationship with God, and that every word in the “good book” is true.

    Understandable when you are trying to increase the number of people whose males will have a portion of their penis removed as an outward sign of their faith. It’s no wonder that the politicians want to turn the issue of a woman’s right to choose over to the courts, after all, while only twenty one percent of our politicians are catholic, fully sixty seven percent of our judges are catholic. But those fun loving guys at the Vatican are not the only issue here, so allow me to add another couple of points, if I may.

    First, the constitution. Our constitution has long been misunderstood by those too ignorant to read it to represent the rights of government. A long line of old white men have remarked upon the founding fathers and their intent toward behavior; Newt Gingrich said that the founding fathers intended that our nation be founded upon religion and faith. Not. Rick Santorum went on at length about how the church influenced the constitution, and how the teachings of the Old Testament prophets shaped constitutional policy.

    Really? Bill O’Reilly stated frequently that the founding fathers spoke out against licentious behavior. Can’t find that one anywhere. In fact a seemingly endless parade of hard liners in the “so called” debate against women’s health rights have pounded their tiny fists into their constantly open palms insisting that the constitution and our founding fathers intended Americans to be steadfastly moral and religious. I say so called debate, because they were the only ones who were talking about it. By the way, in case you haven’t read the Constitution, it expressly builds a wall between church and state. I know, you can’t deprive a person of life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness, and while that is absolutely constitutional, the constitution defines a legal person as being a human or non-human entity that is treated as a person for legal purposes, such as suing, being sued, owning property, or entering into contracts.

    Next, Paterfamilias. What probably at the heart of America’s difficulties is the simple but easily seen truth that the parental role has been gobbled up by the state. I mean, when I was a kid, my parents paid me the slightest attention when I disagreed with them. There was no dinner table debate about whether or not I went to school the next day, no mulling over the prospects of perhaps having candy and ice cream for dinner. When My mother or father said no television for a week, any disagreement on my part would have certainly earned me an extra week with no television! And this was true of anyone who was an adult. That’s because I was a child.

    White people in America come from Europe, and Europeans are basically bred from roman stock, and roman or not, the world existed for centuries under the law of paterfamilias, a term meaning that the father (later a role extended to single mothers) had a sovereign right to determine the futures of their children. The control given to parents over their children was inviolable. Of course, nowadays, a CPS worker, a policeman, or a teacher can just breeze right in and determine not only your child’s future, but whether or not you are a good fit for filling the role of parent for your child, breaching the contract between God and Man. Thus, allowing the state to determine whether or not a woman may choose to abort a child within a reasonable time or not removes the control God meant to have over her body, including a gamete or a fetus.

    Last, I want us to consider society at large. These same hard line inquisitors have been undercutting taxes for as long as I can remember. My God, listening to rich people carp about taxes is about the most revolting thing I have to put up with. People blessed with so much money that they cannot spend it all crying and sniveling about it is somehow soothing to Americans though. Or so it would seem, because we keep electing their pets.

    The southern coalition against smart people, or the redneck states, as I like to call them, have joined hands with Utah, the state populated by folks who have sex in their underwear, to mark up laws that outlaw abortion. I can understand the Mormons outlawing abortion, in as much as their religion (which is far more sensible than Catholicism) may have laws on the books about polygamy, but if you think it isn’t practiced there regularly, well, you just haven’t been there. Any religion that explicitly encourages multiple wives is going to shoot the moon on abortion, that’s the only sensible thing in this otherwise ridiculous mess. But make no mistake, we ain’t building schools for all those new kids, we sure aren’t building hospitals to treat them when they get sick, or even birth them when they come knocking on the door of what used to be the land of plenty. It’s like some kind of dystopian nightmare! There isn’t enough infrastructure for the people that are already here, and I’m supposed to be overjoyed that meth babies are dropping all over the place?
    So, yeah, what she said. Give women not just access to, but free contraceptives. Let women control their own lady parts, and for God’s sake, keep it in your pants!

    The Butcher Shop
    Previous articleNobody “Likes” Abortion!
    Next articleIt’s More Than Just About Other People’s Money
    The Butcher Shop is an alternative news source based in the Tea Party Tribune with an eye on God, family, and preservation of America. It is a collection of minds started by Bill the Butcher, a conservative op/ed journalist who began publishing forty years ago. We strive to make the articles informative, entertaining, and diverse. All you see will cause you to stop and consider. We try not to drone on with the same old day after day clap trap that may have driven you away from mainstream media. You will read things here that you will see nowhere else. We are from London to Austin to the Escalanté. So, what’s your cut of meat? Shop around. The Butcher Shop is happy to fill your order.


    1. The problem is, we as a society have become superficial, If it feels good do it, do it and it's always someone else's fault. Throughout the article, I see nothing but excuses being made for this feel good society and nothing about responsibility. Years ago, in a time we grew up in, a sexual encounter with the opposite sex was kept under raps, now these ladies brag about it worse then men. At some point, there has to be accountability for their actions. If we allow and except the premise that a mother can kill her own child, how can we tell others not to kill one another? Think about it…
      98% of all abortions are performed as a matter of convenience and have nothing to do with being raped, or the mothers life. It's a selfish act to make up for a foolish act. Most abortions are performed because it would interfere in that persons personal life, whether it be a career, or financial, or some other excuse and has little to do with that person's health. The sad part is, if we were talking about a puppy, these same people would be up in arms and talking about animal cruelty. Well mankind is turning into the cruelest animal on the planet, so cruel that they now think it's a right to kill their own children and in some states it has even spread to killing the elderly….Here's the deal, there are too many ways available to keep from getting pregnant. Starting with a condom, birth control pills, morning after pills and many more, are you telling me that you didn't take precautions and use the available protection on the market, and waited until there was a detectable heart beat then decide to abort the baby? With all the things available to you, you were to lazy to use the precautions, and now that there is life growing inside you, you feel it's your right, because it's your body, to kill that life growing inside of you? That life growing inside of you is a body as well, what right does that baby have? Once that body starts developing, it's no longer just your body. Deciding to kill that life inside of you is nothing more than pure evil selfishness. Think about that! Again, 98% of all abortions are performed as a matter of convenience and have nothing to do with being raped, or the mothers life. It's a selfish act to make up for a foolish act. Here's another way to think about this…In 38 U.S. states it is a double homicide to murder a woman AND her unborn baby. Regardless if she is in the first, second, or third trimester. Is anyone able to explain to me how this unborn child is any different biologically than an unborn child being carried into an abortion clinic by her mother? Even if the mother survives and the baby dies, you're charged with a homicide. How is it in one scenario, this child is considered an unborn baby, a life, and in the other it is just a fetus? There can not be a double standard, it's either considered a life or it isn't. Since it has already been determined that life does indeed begin at conception, then we can reasonably discern, that it's murder in both cases, we can't have it both ways under the law. It either is or isn't.