Myopic: narrow-minded, bigoted, prejudiced, intolerant
When I first read Toni Panetta’s rant against elected officials’ “myopic zeal to eliminate women’s ability to access abortion” I was struck with her talent for using words in a way that deconstructs actual facts about the human body and the ability of a woman to become pregnant and carry a child. For example, Panetta, who is the political director of NARAL Pro-Choice Colorado, paints a picture of “reproductive rights” that includes everything from prenatal care for mother and child to the expectant mother’s alleged right to pay a third party to kill her baby. Whether a woman wants or does not want to be pregnant, in Panetta’s world, depends on the equal opportunity to cherish or dispose of her baby. That’s what “reproductive rights” are all about.
This is a ridiculous, prejudiced viewpoint when one considers that, just like those who chose to turn a blind eye on blacks because they were slaves a couple of centuries ago, today people like Panetta turn a blind eye on their fellow human beings because they are not yet born. Panetta is incredulous as she tells her readers that “anti-abortion extremists are doing their best to accomplish” the banning of contraceptives through dangerous, deceptively-worded personhood measures that she says would grant “constitutional rights to fertilized eggs.”
For the record, the term “fertilized egg,” is very misleading since “there is really no longer an egg (or oocyte) once fertilization has begun. What is being called a ‘fertilized egg’ is not an egg of any sort; it is a human being.”
Not only that, but there is nothing extremist about defining differences. The trouble is that Panetta refuses to say that a “contraceptive” does not act to kill a human being prior to implantation, while the most common forms of birth control—the pill and the IUD—can act to kill prior to implantation. Such methods are not “contraceptive” but rather interceptive; they are designed to eliminate a child should one exist.
Panetta cannot admit this, for then her argument begins to crumble and she might be forced to tell the truth.
Note how cleverly she uses language to dismiss from the public discussion any semblance of actual fact in her disinformation campaign. Panetta’s closing remarks tell the tale:
When it comes to demonstrating their willingness to deny mothers, wives, daughters and neighbors their constitutionally protected right to make personal, private decisions, it’s clear that many of the candidates lining up for the 2012 election are in lock-step with the elected officials who reneged on their campaign promises to prioritize “jobs, jobs, jobs” by voting to restrict access to abortion and birth control.
The problem with Panetta’s perspective is that it is she, not pro-life advocates, who has chosen the myopic road—a road paved with prejudice, intolerance, and deception. She refuses to recognize the preborn as a human being, she gives no credence to anyone with whom her apologetic disagrees, and she is hell-bent on telling a story of when she thinks a human being exists to salve her conscience as well as that of others who are complicit in her charade.
Panetta is not the first to make such bogus assertions. She follows in a long line of radicals who use fiction to persuade and finger-pointing to avoid confronting the actual questions at hand. By conveniently ignoring the facts and focusing on trumped up claims about constitutional rights, women’s rights, and reproductive rights, such people are convinced folks can be lulled into believing that there is nothing evil, immoral, or unethical about abortion, contraception, and its progeny. It is her myopia that drives people like me to insist that if one is going to speak about human beings prior to birth, one must be truthful.
The human personhood effort, on the other hand, is not myopic. It is grounded in scientific truth, human decency, and a belief that human rights, equal rights, and civil rights apply to every human individual regardless of his age, health, residence or condition of dependency.
