Culture jamming - it's something often associated with the Left. But standing up for the oppressed is not always associated with being left wing. In fact, nothing could be farther from the truth when it comes to the standard definitions of right and left when it comes to the right to life.

Adbusters, a leftist publication from Canada, has some great points against consumerism and living a shallow life. But where Adbusters drops off is the right to life, because they, much like other liberal magazines, toe the liberal culture-of-death line.

That's where we pick up. We stand up for the terrorized, the downtroden, and yes, the unborn.

The Left can't have all the fun when protesting, writing or rocking the boat. After all, last time we checked, what we term "embryos," "fetuses," partially-born and new-born babies were living humans, too. Anyone who's been in a fourth grade science class knows that.

And if you're liberal and pro-life, great!  Sadly though, most liberals are pro-abortion, with a few exceptions such as Nat Hentoff and others, since being liberal (against responsibility, for relativism) is more inline with being pro-abortion. Being leftist (advocating violence against people who disagree with you) is also an aspect of being pro-abortion, as you can see from these hateful pro-aborts (contains language).

So what exactly does Culture Jam for Life stand for?

Here is a manifesto of sorts, which we believe are based on common sense and what a majority of the American public agree with. It's based on a value toward innocent life.

1. What's an abortion?

Abortion is a euphemism for, scientifically, the killing of a human life, the stopping of a beating heart, the sickening and tragic murder of an innocent life. It involves poisoning and dismembering of a baby. Just because someone is not responsible enough to use condoms doesn't make it okay to just kill the new life that has resulted. Abortion on demand has led to abortion as a form of birth control. Only about one percent of abortions are from rape or incest. About 99 percent are a form of "birth control."

2. Red Herrings

Just because many people who are against abortion favor various wars does not make abortion any more permissible. Many people complain, "Well what about war or the death penalty?" This is just a way to change the subject and is called a red herring fallacy. Besides, there are plenty of people that oppose both abortion and the Vietnam War, for example. There are some who support just wars such as World War II, while other subscribe to a more pacifist view. One could also say that people who are concerned about dead civilians from the Iraq War are often hypocritical when they pine for the likes of partial birth abortion. Even though they have a good point about dead civilians, and how we should avoid killing civilians of course, it doesn't make abortion any better, a form of killing, which is always on purpose.

3. Exceptions

Abortion should only be permitted when the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother, but everything must be done to save both the the life of the mother and the child first. There are many brave women who still carry their child to term even if it's dangerous, and they are self-less heroes. But if the chance of the woman beings killed (and the child as well) is extremely high, sadly, abortion would be the only way to save at least one of them. This is very rare.

And if a girl is raped, then she should have the choice to get cleaned out (to remove the rapists' semen and prevent it from reaching the egg) and take the morning after pill to prevent conception. This may unintentionally cause a tiny zygote to not attach to the uterine wall, but this wouldn't be known since the purpose would be to get the girl cleaned out and prevent conception.

The choice should lie with who to have sex with. If a woman or girl is raped, then it was not her choice to have sex in the first place and she should have the option of getting cleaned out after the rape. Yes, there is a chance that may result in the flushing out of a very early life, but the woman or girl's right to be cleaned out after a rape and to take the morning after pill to prevent the sperm from reaching the egg outweighs any right an hour-old zygote does to implant into the uterine wall, which may not even be there in the first place. She should immediately report it to the police for evidence so that the rapist can be prosecuted to the fullest extent. Of course, if some leftists allowed us to keep violent rapists, murderers, and pedophiles in jail for the rest of their lives, then we wouldn't have to worry about that as much.

As for when the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother, we might as well save the mother's life since both would die if the mother dies while the child is in utero. But having an exception for the "health" of the mother is inappropriate since this can be abused and has led to abortion on demand in various countries where the health clause is brought up for various reasons, from "mental health" and other made-up reasons to kill an unborn child. Besides, any pregnancy can pose a threat to the health of the mother, and so can an abortion.

Abortions from rape, incest or to save the life of the mother represent a tiny fraction of abortions, about one percent; sadly, most are a form of birth control.

4. Contraception

Pre-conception contraception should be available to consenting adults. Conception that prevents conception, such as condoms, do not destroy a new life or a human being, but instead prevent conception. Conception is when life starts--it's scientifically proven. There is some "contraception," such as the abortion pill RU-486 or the morning after pill, that actually commits (or may commit in the case of the morning after) an abortion of a very early life. Except in cases of rape or incest, this should not be permitted, since it is the killing of an innocent human life for convenience.

We respect the official Catholic view that all contraception is wrong; but this is a religious view, not one that can be defened on secular or non-Catholic grounds. While some argue that banning abortion as a form of birth control is pushing a religion onto someone else, it's not. Objections to the killing of innocent human life--as well as objections to slavery, infanticide and murder--can be argued on both religious and secular grounds. The state has an interest in protecting innocent human life: in fact, it should be one of the foremost functions of the state. But the state has no business in taking away condoms from consenting adults.

Sex is not just for procreation, although a child may result from sex of course and the no one is an accident. The author of Song of Solomon is not talking about reproduction when he beautifully describes the love between a man and his wife. Banning all contraception--including pre-conception contraception such as condoms--would lead not only to over-population but also to more people being infected with diseases. Killing human beings is not the right way to manage population. But preventing conception can be if a couple doesn't want children.

5. Responsibility: Actions Have Consequences

Children should not be taught to have sex. Presidental candidate recently said that kindergartners should be taught sex educations. This is disgusting; let children be children and deal with sex later in life.

Sex is a beautiful thing that, according to Christianity and many other religions, should be enjoyed to the fullest extent between a husband and wife, within the context of marriage. Since many people are not Christians, they often engage in premarital or extramarital sex, and that is their choice. But there seems to be a worldwide agenda of organizations such as Planned Parenthood to encourage children to have sex. Children should be allowed to enjoy their childhood without perverted organizations such as Planned Parenthood that try to push sex as a recreational activity, devoid of any responsibility or awareness of the possible consequences.

If people are not ready to have a child, they should not have irresponsible sex; therefore, children should not have sex, since they are children. This is really common sense. Of course, when the adults themselves pushing the pro-irresponsible and random sex with various partners are not responsible themselves, how are the children they teach going to be responsible?

Pro-abortion organizations and pundits complain about abstinence-only education, but that truly is the only way for children to avoid STDs or unwanted pregnancies. While some people make bad decisions, that doesn't mean a child should die for their mistake.

6. Respecting All Innocent Life

Finally, with the exception of pregnancies resulting from rape or incest (by cleaning out the girl or woman after a rape) or those that threaten the life of the mother, abortion should be made illegal (as stated earlier, most pro-life organizations allow the exception to save the life of the mother since both would die anyway. It would be sad but necessary. As for rape, a woman has a right to get cleaned out after a rape and take the morning after pill to prevent the sperm travelling farther up to the egg).

Adult stem cell research now allows us to turn an adult cell into a pluripotent cell taht can be reprogrammed into various functions and tissues. Cloning embryos--tiny human beings--was never necessary and is a utilitarian, extremist stance pushed by the immoral media and morally vapid scientists who aim to make millions off of funding from the federal government for a technique that doesn't work as well as adult stem cells. A South Korean scientist fooled the New York Times and the rest of the liberal media by faking research in the journal, Science. Embryonic "stem cell research" should not just be defunded, but it should be banned. The killing of innocent human beings should be made illegal, whether it's abortion as a form of birth control, killing embryos for research, and killing unborn children for research (fetal experimentation).

The state has an interest in protecting the life of the innocent, especially the most vulnerable of human beings, the child. Hopefully one day the courts will not legislate from the bench, but instead realize the phantom right to kill an unborn child is not a right in the constitution but instead something pushed forward by moral relativists, eugenic bigots and an evil ideology that has resulted in the murder of millions.

Please look through the rest of this site to see what we stand for as well. Also add yourself to the mailing list and we'll e-mail you once our pro-life book is published! No spam.