![]() |
| Your Excellency |
The earlier Supreme Court decision had been made possible by the influx of conservative Catholics into the Court. The five serving Catholics, enough to form a dangerous majority, voted in favour of dismissing a constitutional right to abortion.
It would be delusional to think that behaving ethically figured high in the priorities of such people. Justice Kavanaugh hardly acquired a sterling moral reputation when it came to regulating certain sexual proclivities. Do as I say not as I do. It is more about controlling how others live via judicial imposition of religious tenets they do not subscribe to and may even vigorously abhor.
The Catholic obsession with controlling both women's bodies and their fertility is inextricably linked to the post Vatican 2 ultra-conservative blowback "obsessed, above all, with issues related to sexuality and the place of women."
For these conservatives, the womb belongs to the Church, not the woman whose body it is in. This helps explain why the Irish Times columnist Breda O’Brien, an enthusiast for the Supreme Court assault on women’s reproductive rights previously wailed against the cold choice women were being left to make.
The choice should be left to the Catholic, O'Brien, and others who share her antiquated religious views - the reptilian bishops. The Vatican magazine Men Only might rummage around the writings of the deranged they have manufactured as saints in a bid to explain that the womb is such an important element of Church property that it cannot ever be allowed to fall into the hands of women - vicious nuns excepted. It must also be protected from dicks, particularly those dicks not blessed with the sacrament of matrimony.
This dick obsession has been the source of much warped teaching, best described as religious wank, not to mention untold misery. The perennial concern about dicks has one exception - dicks being inserted into children by the clerics seem not to bother the bishops so much for some reason, the response frequently enough - new parish, new child.
Not much point in complaining that the theology underpinning any of this is dubious. All theology is dubious. Using Occam's razor we can slice through to the essence: Domination Theology that seeks to subjugate women and suppress their sexuality.
Having possibly misread the bible - is there any other way of approaching the bible than to misread it? - and having listened to the dickology and the dickologions who preach it, it is tempting to conclude that the Book of Genesis is in fact a typo, that it was really the Book of Genitals.











