Along with the rest of the world, I’ve noticed the liberal lexicon has gone full-bore 1984 in recent years with its redefinitions. The most recent newspeak is the use of “birthing person” instead of “mother”—as though a man could be a birthing person. People who use the phrase “birthing person” should be interrupted and asked why that phrase is being used.
But we know why it is. Communitarians know that the nuclear family must be destroyed and mothers replaced with state-approved caregivers to reach utopia. Whether it is Marx, Margaret Sanger, BLM, or antifa barbarians, those who believe themselves anointed with the necessary wisdom to remake society always know that the center of culture is not in a state capitol, but in churches and families’ kitchens, and the fundamental family unit must be eliminated and replaced by the state.
Margaret Sanger, saint of abortionists everywhere, spoke plainly and consistently on these issues: “Birth control appeals to the advanced radical because it is calculated to undermine the authority of the Christian churches. I look forward to seeing humanity free someday of the tyranny of Christianity no less than Capitalism.”
Of course, her most famous line can never be forgotten: “The most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
And we should not forget this suggested change to our culture from Ms. Sanger: “No woman shall have the legal right to bear a child without a permit for parenthood.”
Modern liberal feminists often say that they just want women to have choices, but some are more frank. For example, Simone de Beauvoir, a feminist heroine, has made statements like, “As long as the family and the myth of the family … have not been destroyed, women will still be oppressed,” and, “No woman should be authorized to stay home to raise her children. Women should not have that choice, because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one.”
Get that? Ms. de Beauvoir believes that women should not be allowed to “have that choice,” regardless of their own preferences.
Democrats and other would-be saviors of humanity always say that we have to save the planet for future generations, but then they shriek with horror when someone suggests that making and rearing children is an honorable profession that should be held in high esteem.
One wonders: For whom are we are saving the planet?
And woe to the Neanderthal who suggests that society should prefer and reward bigender complementary relationships over all others based on the biological fact that such relationships are responsible for the existence of 100% of all children and the most stable means of caring for them. We call those facts “inconvenient truths.”
Today, I lift my glass to every woman who has born children, aspires to bear children in the future, and has cared for children as only a mother can. Salut!
This is a commentary republished with the author’s permission. If you wish to submit a commentary to Texas Scorecard, please submit your article to firstname.lastname@example.org.