The Need(?) for Rape

In a certain sense, the two sides on the issue of rape are irreconcilable. Both will continue to make their case passionately to the nation. Surely, we can have this discourse without demonizing each other. Surely we can work together on concerns we share in common. If together we work to eliminate the "need" for rape, surely that will be something both sides will agree on.

I sincerely hope that you -- the reader -- recognize the above as totally berserk! Yet, simply switch the word "rape" with the word "abortion," and you have essentially the proposition made yesterday at "South Bend Secular University" (aka; "notre dame") by President B.H. Obama.

And, of course, as he let these oratorical pearls drip from his pursed lips, the clowns on stage with him -- including many sporting Roman Collars under their academic robes -- applauded loudly (on cue?). By their applause, they indicated approval of what had just been said. They, by their applause, agreed that there actually IS a "need for abortion." Well, there you have it -- it's not "sin," because it is a legitimate need. We certainly don't want to "demonize" it, do we?

I am wondering if Mr. Obama will say something similar to the Prime Minister of Israel when they discuss the problems in the mideast. Will Mr. Obama suggest that surely the two sides can work together to eliminate the "need" for missiles to be lobbed into Tel Aviv?

You see, when we upgrade evil to the status of "need fulfillment," it's no longer something serious enough to "be against." Then we just "work together" to be sure the "need" is fulfilled in a "legal, safe, and rare" fashion.

Excuse me, I think the Kool-Aid is ready!