Signs of the Times Logo
Home | Site Map | Glossary | Quick Guide | What's New | Forum | Podcast | Printer Friendly | Archive | Perma-link

Signs of the Times for Thu, 02 Feb 2006

Signs Editorial:

Laura Knight-Jadczyk
SOTT
02/02/06
The other day a most interesting post was made to our modest little guestbook/forum as follows:

First of all, congratulations on your site - your work is admirable. Lately I have found on it one more piece of a puzzle I have been trying to put together for years.

The basic question goes like this: why does it seem necessary for the powers of the week to put down women to such an extent? An urgent sub-question is: why is George W. Bush so hellbent on taking away not only women's rights generally, especially reproductive rights?

Now, we already know some of the rather self-evident answers: a state oriented towards war and domination NEEDS babies, most of all babies born from poor and uneducated families, in order to have a) people willing to enlist in the army and b) cheap wage workers – it will be very important to have a lot of them when comes the time to remove unions and worker's rights. And you cannot get a high birth rate in a society where women are free to choose not to have babies. But then, that explanation is not enough.
Why? Because Bush could have easily forced thousand of underprivileged women and girls in unwanted motherhood with only a fraction of the anti-women laws he enacted (over 300 and climbing fast). Indeed, the plan seems to include if not all women, at least a specific category – those who cannot find the father of their children. Bush's last attacks were all about "spousal notification". What this means is that a woman's uterus is now the property of her husband/boyfriend and he gets to choose how the rest of her life is going to be.

Now, let's think. Who gets an advantage from this? Rapists in human form, of course, who get to spread around their DNA, and... who else really, really wants to spread their DNA? Who else wants women to have their babies regardless of the consequences? Did anybody say "human-alien hybrid program?"

Seriously, let's imagine a scenario. Let's say that Jane Doe becomes "mysteriously" pregnant, without any sexual contact - or else she "remembers" an alien abduction, either on her own or with hypnotherapy. If she is informed, she might very well want to opt out. But then she had to not only find the father, but make him sign a permission to get an abortion! There is a bunch of grays & reptoids somewhere laughing their asses off.

But there has to be more to it. For example, why did Bush need to so increase women's economic dependency on their partners? Between cutting off or restricting welfare to single mothers and putting them under high pressure to get married, taking away resources to eliminate discrimination and violence against women, squeezing battered women's shelters even tighter, and a hundred other vicious attacks, there seems to be another reason than babies to persecute women here. There are still a few puzzle pieces to find – anybody seen them?
All in all, some MOST interesting thoughts and speculations, I think. Then, today, there was another post from a woman victim of a psychopath who wrote:
As I read "The psychopath: The mask of Sanity" web page, the answers to all my questions came smashing into my face, ironically the same way "my" psychopath smashed my face days before I left him. All my unasnwered questions have all been answered. I knew he was psychopathic the day I met him, I even told him that as often as I could, but with the lack of knowledge I had of the disorder, I suppose I overlooked the fact that this man SERIOUSLY WAS PHYCOPATHIC. After 20 mintues of reading a year of wondering and confusion seems to have subsided. I cannot thank you AND GOD for bringing me to this page.

A question though, several times in the page it is commented that the psycho will definitely leave you or "get rid" of you when he is finnished with you. This, so far, is not my case. It has been 3 months since I left him, and he hasn't stopped stalking me, he hired a private investigator to find me in the town I had been hiding from him in. It has reached the point where I am just beginning to involve the police; he has made hundreds of threats to me in the past that if I do this, there will be severe consequences (mostly violent and criminal retaliation).

Does anyone have or know of any information of psychopathic stalkers, men that carry all psychopathic traits yet WONT GO AWAY!!?? I want him out of my life and he says he wants to marry me and he wants me to have his babies!?
Well, THAT gives me the shivers! Since it is generally agreed nowadays that psychopathy is mostly genetic, this only adds data to the problem presented by the first writer above.

In short, just now, women in the U.S. are in a very precarious position. With the approval of Alito to the Supreme Court, there are very dark days ahead indeed.

Now, I certainly appreciate the sensibilities of Christian women who are against abortion. Heck, I don't like the idea of abortion either. But we very often have to deal with things we don't LIKE with reason and an ability to see ahead what is best for ALL concerned, not just the selfish feelings of someone who likes or doesn't like this or that.

Some years back I read an article about recently uncovered Nazi "mercy killing" films. At the same time, there was quite a bit of news about Romania's forced child-bearing program and the resultant multitudes of unwanted, defective, and abandoned children. Both sides have some pretty strong concerns for all of us to consider.

The real issue boils down to: How and how much we value human life?

A philosopher once said that those who forget history are doomed to repeat it, so I think we need to consider the historical perspective as well as the medical and political slants. There are many wild claims being made by both sides -most of the information currently publicized by both the print and electronic media consists of non-issues. A non-issue is a smoke screen designed to distract attention from the real issue. The real issue is, as stated: How and how much do we value human life?

The Nazis made films designed to justify elimination of certain groups of human beings - those considered "morally or socially feeble-minded". This ultimately led to the near annihilation of an entire group of people based upon their ethnic and/or religious backgrounds. Here, I would like to mention that the MAIN group the Nazis were intent on destroying seem to have been the Polish Slavs. The Jews were included, certainly, but the preponderance of evidence points to the Poles being a primary target.

That issue aside, I want to point out that justifying the killing of anyone because they are, or may be, "socially unfit" is a dangerous path to tread. The Nazis were not the first to do this - only the most publicized of recent times. Nowadays, ironically, it is the Zionists who are justifying the annihilation of the Palestinians.

In their propaganda "mercy killing" films, the Nazis sought to justify "mercy killing" as more "humane" and noble. Now, this is not "assisted suicide" by a long shot. This is taking human beings who may have disabilities and executing them. Children with conditions such as Down's Syndrome, Spina bifida, various birth defects and results of neo-natal damages and so on. They also sought to justify the "mercy killing" of individuals who had suffered accidents and were subsequently unable to function normally. That meant that if your child or sibling or parent or mate suffered the misfortune of disability due to accident, they were to be summarily executed whether or not there was any full mental function or not.

Nearly every family I have ever known has had a member with either a birth defect or who has suffered an accident that left them disabled in some way. In my own family, there was my cousin June, who was in an auto accident that left her a quadriplegic. It was a great tragedy, but June's brain was not destroyed. She continued to love and be loved and there was value to her life.

Certainly, when we begin to think about killing unwanted members of society, it is a dangerous precedent that can go way too far in the wrong hands.

In the case of abortion rights activists, the unborn child is not given status as a human being. It is called by them variously a lump of tissue, a fetus, whatever. This is rather odd since, from way back, the laws applying to animal husbandry have given status and value to unborn pigs, cattle and birds! At the same time, I don't think that laws applying to animal husbandry ever gave any rights to the sow as to whether or not she wants to be used as a breeder to create more pork.

But the issue here is subtle: Is a potential functioning human less than a pig or a chicken? To reject that endowment‚ is to set a dangerous precedent. It would be a simple step further to reject the right to life for a woman who is morally or socially "feeble-minded" because she "chooses abortion as ameans of family planning". It would be just too easy to progress from unwanted children to defective children, to non-contributing old people, to unemployed or unproductive members of society. And, lest anyone think this is an absurd line of thought in these modern times, let me remind you that Germany was an industrialized and modern society too - but they had a lot of financial and political problems -just as we do today.

Obviously, we don't want to deny the the status of the unborn as potentially viable human beings. Too many pitfalls on that path.

But then, we come up against the rights of women as not just "potentially viable human beings," but fully viable. Women have been pretty much second and third-class citizens - if they have been citizens at all - for literally thousands of years. So this whole thing is a raw issue with a group of human beings consisting of roughly half of thehuman race.

A woman should never, EVER, be forced to bear a child against her will. An unwanted child is a burden on its mother, and usually becomesa burden on society. All rhetoric aside, the fact is that there are millions of unwanted human beings. We have institutions of all kinds full of them. Some few - vanishingly rare - make it in life due to the luck of being adopted or just luck alone. Most don't.

On the one hand we have the rights of a group of helpless individuals - the unborn; and on the other hand we have the rights of another group of helpless individuals -women who are pregnant and who do not wish to be.

Which is the greater wrong? To force a woman to endure pregnancy and childbirth against her will , or to take the potential life of an unborn child. A hard choice. Women are being sold out by both sides.

Certainly we must value Potential Life or Realized Life loses its meaning. As women we cannot and must not, denigrate the tremendous power and creativity we possess by devaluing its ultimate expression - our children. As human beings we cannot and must not allow ourselves to be devalued by perceiving ourselves as victimized by an accident of Nature.

Seems to me that the REAL choice we need to be able to make is to NOT EVER GET PREGNANT AGAINST OUR WILL!

And boy, is that a tough one! There is Rape and Incest and Accidents! No woman should have to bear a child that is the result of violence or accident! Women are being controlled by Violence and Ignorance. Abortion itself is a violent, invasive act. By whatever means, it disrupts a physiological course of events with ramifications as yet not fully investigated or documented by medical science. How do we know there is not some serious repercussion in our bodies down the road as a result of such interference in natural functions.

It seems to me that women need to really think about this and come together on the one issue that can unite us: dealing with violence and ignorance in our society. Remember, we are more than half the population, and we COULD exert our power to reach and educate every single female in this country -teach them esteem for themselves, their creativity, their power - teach them to esteem all life - teach them the power of true choice - the choice to Not Get Pregnant Against our will!

Women need to join together - all of us - and demonstrate true love and concern for ourselves, our children and each other. We must advertise and campaign; we must get out in the community; we must make birth control available to all and the knowledge of true choice a priority. We must defuse this whole subject as a political issue -for that gives our power away to men of violence who use it to either make experiments of us, set us up to create precedents for more death and destruction, or conversely, make baby factories out of us so that they can use the product of our creativity for more wars and violence. We must not allow our bodies or the bodies of our children to become grist for the mill of mostly male politicians.

Make no mistake - the product of conception is a human being if only in potential. We are not really being allowed to choose when we must so demean ourselves and the ultimate creative ability of women by being given the horror of a choice between fulfilling our individual potential in life and killing our children.

How Much Do We Value Life? So much that even potential life is precious. How do we do it? By truly valuing ourselves and not being forced into choices that are no choices at all.

In the meantime, until such a world exists, we still have difficult choices to make, and we must make them and learn from them. A woman who lives and breathes and functions in this world is "realized" life. An unborn child is only potential. The realized life has precedental rights over the potential life. It can be thought of as similar to the laws of primogeniture, certain rights are established as having superior claims because of "prior existence". In that context and that context alone can the issue be debated legally. And it ought to be debated by women ONLY.

I don't like the idea of abortion at all, but it is a necessary evil in an evil world controlled by psychopaths. I like even less the idea of men telling women that they are little more than cattle that must be bred and produce offspring for more violence and human evil. I think that if the Christian women who are so vehemently anti-abortion had more education and less religion and brainwashing by the priests of their rapacious male-dominator God, it would be a good thing. How many of them are being used as breeders for psychopaths?

That leads, of course, to a whole other issue: Are psychopaths human? And if there is good reason to believe that a woman is pregnant with the child of a psychopath whether willingly or otherwise, ought she be required to have an abortion?

Again, only women should debate these things, and only women with the knowledge of as many sides of the issue as possible. "Faith" has no place in such debates. We address this subject in numerous places on our website, but here's the short version from my book The Secret History of The World:

I don't think that one single person on this planet will disagree that they want a better life for themselves and their children; and most of them will add that they do not presently have the capacity to make it a reality. Except for a very small minority of very sick people, I don't think anybody really likes to see misery and suffering, disease and death and despair, in any context. And again we must ask: if these things are so detestable to human beings at large, if so many people are working and thinking and praying to improve the conditions of our world, why isnÂ’t it happening?

Seekers of Spiritual Verity - a large number of whom could be considered "Intelligentsia" - are always aware of these things, and they are asking, "What is the origin of all the misery and suffering? Does it just happen? Do people and only people cause others to suffer? Is it that God is good, but allows bad things to happen?"

"DonÂ’t forget the power of prayer," we are told by our religious leaders, or "positive thinking," as the New Age gurus tell us. The only problem is, prayers and positive thinking do not seem to have improved the world very much on the occasions when it is certain that nearly every human being was praying for a certain outcome.

Jesus promised: "If any two of you shall agree and ask... it shall be done." (Matt 18:19) That's a promise. What do you want or need? Just ask!
But it doesn't work and we see it!
Over sixty million people died because God didnÂ’t do what everybody thought he should do. C.S. Lewis struggled with this issue in the latter part of his life. He saw clearly that, before World War II, practically every human being on the planet was praying to Jesus, God the Father, the Virgin Mary, Allah, Buddha and whoever else you can name or mention, so all the bases were covered that this terrible thing would not happen. The memory of the previous "Great War" was still fresh in the mind of mankind. They remembered the horrible carnage and vowed, never again!

In the end, after the mightiest cry of prayer in human memory, rising from the earth, almost one-third of the world was uninhabitable and sixty-five million human beings were dead. Are we to think that this was God’s answer to prayer? It certainly doesn’t give us much hope for the “power of positive thinking.

Think about it.

Throughout history we find one group praying to their god to protect them from the depredations of another group. The other group is praying just as fervently that their predations will be successful. When one group succeeds in killing another, is that proof that its god is supreme? What then happens if the members of the successful group are then reincarnated into the group that was defeated? This is not a rhetorical question since a very interesting book was written about the great numbers of Jews who died in the holocaust now being reincarnated as Christians. There has also been some suggestion that many Nazis are now being reincarnated as Jews. What then, does such an idea do to the concept of "my god is the only right one?" [See: Gershom, Yonassan, Rabbi, Beyond the Ashes (Virginia Beach: A.R.E. Press 1992]
Science is revealing, little by little, that psychopaths are NOT precisely human. They are a statistical aberration. And when they increase in the population, only tragedy results. That is science. Religion that does not consider the scientific evidence has no place in such a debate. If you like, "God gave us minds to think with and facts to think about, what we do with it is up to us. That's free will. If we choose to ignore what God teaches us through science, we have no one to blame but ourselves." And God is teaching us a lot but we don't seem to be getting it. I think She may be getting impatient with humanity's persistent ignorance.

The bottom line is: Women need to be more cautious than ever in this present day when violence is increasing exponentially, and laws that violate the rights of women more than ever are very possibly in our future. Getting pregnant without your free will choice now may bring on horrible difficulties. We need to educate the young ones as fast as possible, and that is going to be difficult since we are working against so much propaganda and religious disinformation. As over half of the population on this planet, if we can't pull together and get over what we "like" and "don't like" based on emotions or belief, then there is no hope. Let me quote again from The Secret History of The World:

I suspected something was wrong with the "facts of life" as they were presented to me when I was a kid. Sure, I then spent a little over thirty years trying to be "normal" and make that square peg fit the round hole, "looking for a reason to believe." But then there was a memorable day when I finally grew up and admitted that maybe - just maybe - the Emperor was naked. And here it is, over twenty years later, and now - well, now I know that not only is something rotten in Denmark, I also know there is a dead elephant in the middle of the collective global living room and I can never NOT see it again.

During that twenty plus years of uncovering that huge, dead critter that occupies a central place in our reality, I was driven by the idea that I just wanted to know what was REALLY going on in this strange world I lived in where, on the one hand, science was moving so fast that we would soon be able to destroy our planet, while on the other hand, the varied religions were telling us not to worry, God was probably gonna destroy it for us and we had better believe in the "right god" or we were toast.

How can a person live in a world where "the End of the World" is being predicted every minute? That's crazy!

But darned if that isn't what just about every religion on the planet talks about!

You go to church, get scared to death in an hour and a half, warned about hellfire and damnation, and then they pass the plate so that you can pay the high priests to put in a good word for you with God so that maybe you won't suffer as much as that jerk down the street who goes to a different church! And even if you do suffer here on earth, if you believe hard enough, and prove it by putting your money where your faith is, at least youÂ’ll get your reward in paradise.

This was back in 1982 when I had three small children. As a mother, I wanted to know what to teach my children. I knew that what I had been taught to believe was frightening. I had grown up in a time when children were regularly taught what to do in case of an atomic bomb attack - Cuba was only 90 miles from Florida where I was born - and at the same time, the standard religious teaching of my family - mainstream Protestants - promoted the “suffer on Earth to get rewarded in Heaven” routine.

I knew I had certainly suffered from the state of the world and the teachings of my faith. I really, REALLY wanted to know if this was something that I should pass on to my children.

When I held my babies and rocked them or looked into their sweet, innocent faces - untroubled by the concerns of the world around, certain that Mother would make them safe - I had to ask myself "How can I tell them these things?" How can I "break it to them" that this world into which they have been born is so frightening and uncertain and full of traps that not only are their lives in constant danger, their very souls may be in peril?”

How could I tell that to my children???

If it was true, I HAD to tell them.

But what if it wasnÂ’t true?

WHAT IF IT WASN'T TRUE?

I knew one thing and one thing only: I wanted more than anything in the world to tell my children the truth, to prepare them for whatever might lie ahead of them in their lives. And the question burned inside me: What if I told those little beings who I loved more than my own life a LIE? What kind of a mother would I be? What kind of "Mother Love" is that?

That's the only thing that is going to save us: TRUE MOTHER LOVE.

Have a question or comment about the Signs page? Discuss it on the Signs of the Times news forum with the Signs Team.
Some icons appearing on this site were taken from the Crystal Package by Evarldo

Atom Feed

Remember, we need your help to collect information on what is going on in your part of the world!
Send your article suggestions to: email


Fair Use Policy

Contact Webmaster at signs-of-the-times.org
Cassiopaean materials Copyright ©1994-2013 Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura Knight-Jadczyk. All rights reserved. "Cassiopaea, Cassiopaean, Cassiopaeans," is a registered trademark of Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura Knight-Jadczyk.
Letters addressed to Cassiopaea, Quantum Future School, Ark or Laura, become the property of Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura Knight-Jadczyk
Republication and re-dissemination of our copyrighted material in any manner is expressly prohibited without prior written consent.



Sitemap Generator [Valid Atom 1.0]

Signs Archive


JFK

The Debris of History

The Gladiator: John Fitzgerald Kennedy

The Bushes and The Lost King

Sim City and John F. Kennedy

John F. Kennedy and All Those "isms"

John F. Kennedy, J. Edgar Hoover, Organized Crime and the Global Village

John F. Kennedy and the Psychopathology of Politics

John F. Kennedy and the Pigs of War

John F. Kennedy and the Titans

John F. Kennedy, Oil, and the War on Terror

John F. Kennedy, The Secret Service and Rich, Fascist Texans

John F. Kennedy and the Monolithic and Ruthless Conspiracy



Recent Articles:

New in French! La fin du monde tel que nous le connaissons

New in French! Le "fascisme islamique"

New in Arabic! العدوّ الحقيقي

New! Spiritual Predator: Prem Rawat AKA Maharaji - Henry See

Stranger Than Fiction

Top Secret! Clear Evidence that Flight 77 Hit The Pentagon on 9/11: a Parody - Simon Sackville



Latest Signs of the Times Editorials

Executing Saddam Hussein was an Act of Vandalism

What Is the 'Root' of Evil?

OPEN LETTER: To Our U.S. Senators: Show Me the Money

The "Demonization" of Muslims and the Battle for Oil

Clash of the Elites: Beltway Insiders Versus Neo-Cons

Sacrifice Translates into More Dead People

Soldiers and Imperial Presidents

Will Jimmy Carter's Book Liberate the Palestinians?

A Lynching...

The Capture, Trial and Conviction of Saddam Hussein - Another US Intelligence Farce



Signs Editorials By Author

Click Here For Full Listing



Blogs:

Laura Knight-Jadczyk

Ponerology

iChing Political Forecast



Latest Topics on the Signs Forum



Signs Monthly News Roundups!

June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006



Articles en Français
Artì­culos en Español
Artykuly po polsku
Artikel auf Deutsch



This site best viewed
with Mozilla Firefox

Get Firefox 2



Join the Mailing List

Sign up for the Signs Mailing List and get the latest Signs of the Times in your inbox!