Here at D-J, we take a fairly libertarian view towards social issues and in general advise our clients to avoid interjecting themselves into ‘rabbit holes’ of personal belief. While we fully advocate one being strong in faith, it’s important to remember OTHERS have belief systems that may be incongruent with this. A God of ones’ understanding is a wonderful thing–but it’s an intensely personal journey. Others can certainly act as guides in faith–and there’s no need to be shy about this, but to willfully and forcibly impose beliefs on others is often counterproductive and just plain wrong.
Several of our clients have brought up the abortion issue and asked for advice regarding their customers and employees (the nasty term ‘abortion’ being cloaked in the rhetoric of ‘reproductive rights’). Our initial thoughts were just like that previously discussed–it’s an intensely personal and dividing issue. We had thought it best to leave it alone.
BUT
Unfortunately fate intervened.
We’ve often heard the ‘my body, my choice’ argument. And our staff felt it fine to leave things alone at that and for that crowd to believe what it wanted to believe. HOWEVER, we quickly found the same people uttering this rhetoric were the same people FORCING masks on others and FORCING those others to be jabbed with an experimental vaccine (which, as it’s turning out had many falsifications associated with it which were propagated by official government and medical entities). Logically, those two positions cannot cohabitate; you can’t rationally be FOR forced masks/vaxes and then claim ‘my body, my choice.’ The argument becomes wholly untenable the first time the first person is coerced into taking a vax.
Which got us to thinking–which is something men should sometimes never do.
When a child is conceived, there are initially two parties involved–a mother and father. At some point a fetus becomes a separate life and a third party becomes involved (this point as of yet being ambiguous and subject to belief). Does a woman have a SOLE choice of whether or not to terminate a pregnancy after conception ?
No. Legally, a father is required to pay child support TO support that child IF carried to term. As such, the father has legal rights in the equation as well and the woman (at least according to the logic of the law) can NOT terminate the pregnancy without the consent of the father. In short, the two must (legally and morally) be in agreement if a pregnancy is to be terminated. While this might not sit well with some people, the good staff here at D-J did NOT create the law holding a father liable to share in the support of a conceived child. Given that it IS law, this is the only path that makes sense. If a society wishes it not to be so–and the woman be the sole determinant, it must amend the law to give her sole responsibility IN providing resources for child rearing (of course, the father is free to voluntarily provide support). So it’s clear that BOTH parents have rights when it comes to the unborn.
And at some point, the fetus develops legal rights of its own. It’s preposterous to assert that a person could kill the child in the womb a week prior to delivery, yet it would be murder if it was done a week after. Again it’s logically and legally untenable. As such, states are free to render an opinion and set a legal definition at which point THEY believe the life of the unborn exists. Unfortunately, really the only place to make this legal determination is within the individual state legislatures. There is too wide a disparity between states for Federal law to attempt to intervene–and more so that that–in that Federal law is usually used to PROTECT civil rights, its role would be in PROTECTING the right of the unborn. You can’t arrest a person for a civil rights violation while allowing others to accomplish the ultimate truncation of civil rights by killing an unborn child.
Can we directly advise a client what to do in these matters ? Not really–we can simply forward this suggestion–that BOTH parents retain rights over the unborn and adjust their policies accordingly. As such, if they were to allow sick time or travel specifically for abortion, they must ensure that express consent of both mother AND father were received. We expect most companies will adopt such a policy in the near future.
We also advise them when they hear a rhetoric term like ‘reproductive rights,’ ‘gun reform,’ ‘gun crime’/’gun violence,’ ‘ESG,’ or ‘man-made climate change’ being spewed from a potential employee they not hire that kind of person or conduct business with such a group. It’s psychological manipulation for the weak minded, and NO ONE who spews such manipulative rhetoric should be in ANY position of responsibility.
As far as opening this can of worms, we remind our clients that it was not us that did it. It was those who forced masks and vaxes and initiated a train of logical thinking that many didn’t want to leave the station.
Diatomaceous-Johnson 