Thursday, February 07, 2008

Dear JoJo: You really stepped in it this time.

Yes, I realize it's digging up and beating on a thoroughly dead horse, but there's just so much open-mouthed wingnuttery over at JoJo's that one can't help but continue to point out the idiocy.

Consider this latest example from JoJo herself, responding to an earlier commenter:

It also has to do with full disclosure, so an informed decision can be made.

I would agree that this is more the intent of the letter to the editor.

OK, then, it seems that JoJo has somewhat admitted that what she's primarily concerned about is proper "disclosure" of the risks of abortion and, frankly, I don't see a problem with that. But I'm guessing poor JoJo has no idea what she's just stepped in here.

In terms of "disclosure," I'm guessing that anyone about to have an abortion is already well-informed of the normal risks. That is, it's a medical procedure and, like all medical procedures, there's always a chance things can go wrong. In short, perfectly typical disclosure of the dangers of a medical procedure. But that's clearly not what JoJo is talking about here.

No, what JoJo obviously wants "disclosed" is the controversial abortion/breast cancer link, which brings up the obvious question: Does that link even exist? See, if it does, I personally would have no problem with women being warned about it.

But what if that link doesn't exist (as all of the current medical evidence seems to suggest). Would JoJo still want that disclosure, even though there's absolutely no evidence to back it up? Surely she wouldn't be that dishonest and ideological, would she? Which finally brings us to the uncomfortable position JoJo finds herself in.

JoJo clearly wants "disclosure" of the risks. And JoJo just as clearly wants that disclosure to include the questionable breast cancer connection. But at this point, JoJo had been informed -- in no uncertain terms -- that that connection is almost certainly bogus and has been refuted utterly. So what does JoJo do?

Unfortunately for JoJo, she's already promised in print:

I promise to check everything out carefully afterwards when I get a chance.

and, at this point, I don't think JoJo has a choice. Ethically, now that she's been informed of the refutation of her precious breast cancer link, she should stop referring to it until she's done a thorough investigation. And once that investigation is done, I suggest that she is also ethically obligated to present her findings and act accordingly. That is, if the evidence is overwhelming that there is no such link, she should shut the fuck up about it and admit that that should never again be used as an argument against abortion rights. (And, I hasten to add, she should also correct others who try to use the same bogus argument in her presence.)

So let's go, JoJo. You clearly want "disclosure" of the risks, but you just as clearly promised to look into the counter-claims made by your commenters. Now you're stuck with following up and reporting honestly on what you find. And now we'll see just what kind of ethical principles you have. If any.

Based on your history, let's just say I'm not optimistic.

P.S. As a much simpler solution, if barking loons like JoJo still insist on "disclosure" of their delusional fantasies, would it satisfy them if that disclosure included the thorough refutations of their pet idiocies as well?

That is, would it make them happy to hear something like:

"Before your abortion, Ms. Jones, I feel ethically obligated to point out this literature suggesting a connection between abortion and breast cancer. And to go with that, there's this material which demonstrates that that connection is utter, imbecilic hogwash."

There you go, JoJo -- there's your disclosure, only this time it's fair and balanced. Does that work for you? Or are you only interested in disclosure that's ideologically convenient?

No, no, don't answer that -- it was rhetorical, you know.

CSNM's Denise pops up again in JoJo's comments section and, once and for all, shows the world what kind of deranged, demented fuckwit she is:

Once conception takes place there is a perfect tiny baby alive and growing in her is her child.

There is absolutely no need to refute such delusional stupidity, and we are now free to consign CSNM's Denise to the intellectual recycle bin where she belongs. It only remains to see whether JoJo follows Denise down that road to absolute madness. Well, JoJo ... do you agree with Denise's "baby at conception" dementia? Seriously, some of us would really like to know.

. Hands up, anyone who didn't eventually expect this:

We want to reach out to women suffering in silence about their pain... and let them know there is hope and healing thru faith in Christ.

Yes, it took a while to get there, but the truth will eventually out -- it's the attack of the mentally-retarded, drooling Christopaths. I am so not surprised.

Congratulations, JoJo -- you do know how to attract and defend the most deranged of Canada's whackjobs. I'm guessing it gets easier over time.


Ti-Guy said...

It really doesn't matter how often you point out the dishonesty, the sophistry and the holier-than-thou passive-aggression of all these people who love planting their noses in the crotches of other people.

They'll just come back tomorrow and repeat the same things.

I'm amazed to see JoJo in that thread calling for information on consent forms for abortion. Does she even attempt to educate herself, or is it all just the usual "smoke and mirrors" of conservative propagandists trying to pass off sheer ignorance as doubt or controversy or "unsettled science?"

E in MD said...

Now you're stuck with following up and reporting honestly on what you find. And now we'll see just what kind of ethical principles you have. If any.

There's your first mistake right there. Thinking that right wing abortion whackadoos have ethical principals. If they did they wouldn't be lying to people in the first place.

Once conception takes place there is a perfect tiny baby alive and growing in her is her child.

Uh no... what you have at conception is a blob of cells that continues to divide and divide and suck resources from the mother. A parasite not even visible to the naked eye. It doesn't even vaguely resemble a human baby until month two. You wingnuts can romanticize, all you want, but facts are facts.

We want to reach out to women suffering in silence about their pain... and let them know there is hope and healing thru faith in Christ.

And that right there is part of the problem. You wingers are targeting people when they are at their most vulnerable. You don't give a fuck about them at all. It's about converting them to your religion. Your viewpoint. Your paradigm. Your delusion. Then sticking their asses in your pews so they give you tax free money and surrender their brains, their rights and their vaginas to live in your deluded fantasy of invisible sky spirits and 'perfect little babies' the instant the sperm hits the egg. If you really gave a shit about these women you wouldn't be telling them packs of lies, screaming at them, invading their privacy or trying to use litigation to get lists of their addresses so you can harass them at home too. You're terrorists, plain and simple.

jj said...

Consent forms?! What are they talking about, there are already Consent Forms. IIRC, they tell you all about the possible risks -- infection, septic shock, bad reactions to anaesthesia, etc. etc., it's a whole page of shite, just like with any surgical procedure.

However, there are no Bullshit Forms that tell you about a "breast cancer link" or warn that you might possibly go batshit insane like Denise there. Though I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that Denise's *mental condition* probably pre-dated her abortion(s).

Ti-Guy said...

The abortion consent forms should contain the warnings that the people who oppose choice are generally lunatics, liars and anti-sex fascists who will end up posing a threat to one's mental, and possibly physical, health...and I'm sure those are scienticially provable facts.