Quoting Quiverfull: Hiring Hitman For Hubby Same as Abortion?

from Ladies Against Feminism and The Gospel CoalitionWhy We Should Legalize Murder for Hire

I’ll be the first to admit it; hit men are shady. But they are shady because they are doing work that no one else wants to do, work that is, in fact, illegal. By labeling contract killing a “crime,” we have obscured the fact that hit men provide a valuable service to society.

Many women find themselves trapped in unwanted marriages. Matrimony severely curtails a woman’s freedom, and husbands can be unreasonably demanding. A woman in such a situation is vulnerable. She sees only one way out, and so she makes the difficult decision to kill her husband.

But the inconvenient truth is that a woman hiring a hit on her husband will likely have to pay tens of thousands of dollars, with no guarantee that the kill will actually take place. Legalizing the transaction would remove uncertainty. Hired guns could be vetted, trained, and held to professional standards of safety. No one wants a hit to go bad. Removing the threat of prosecution would drastically lower the cost of contract killings. Legalizing murder for hire would bring a sordid industry into the light.

I realize readers may be hesitant to endorse this proposal, but stop to consider the profound way that the legalization of abortion has taken away the stigma against a woman who wants to kill her child. Abortion was once considered murder and thus could only be obtained secretly and at great risk to women. Now, our country celebrates women who exercise their choice to kill their family members. Why shouldn’t we extend this right, and give women the choice to kill their partners?

Comments open below

 

QUOTING QUIVERFULL is a regular feature of NLQ – we present the actual words of noted Quiverfull leaders and ask our readers: What do you think? Agree? Disagree? This is the place to state your opinion. Please, let’s keep it respectful – but at the same time, we encourage readers to examine the ideas of Quiverfull honestly and thoughtfully.

NLQ Recommended Reading …

Breaking Their Will: Shedding Light on Religious Child Maltreatment‘ by Janet Heimlich

Quivering Daughters‘ by Hillary McFarland

Quiverfull: Inside the Christian Patriarchy Movement‘ by Kathryn Joyce

 


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Nea

    Siiiiiigh… For the gazillionth time, this mindset ignores the difference between consental acts (agreeing to marry) and nonconsentual acts (carrying an unwanted* pregnancy to term.)

    And also erased the multiple nonlethal ways for a woman to end an unwanted marriage… unless the LAF is actually that much against divorce?

    *Autocorrect rather judgmentally changed that to “unwed.”

  • mayarend

    They’d most likely say that there are non-lethal ways to get rid of an unwanted child like adoption. Of course they ignore that a woman can not give up a chyild for adoption BEFORE carrying it to term.
    Hell, I’d be all pro “ban abortion” IF I could take a 2 months old fetus of a pregnant’s woman’s belly and give it to soemoen else. Then we’d be cool.

  • AlisonCummins

    I can’t imagine that someone who thinks that abortion is the murder of a family member is ok with birth control. What most women would need in a world without birth control is somewhere to automagically transplant the egg that gets fertilized every few months.

    If on average every woman between 18 and 40 donates three fertilized eggs per year, it wouldn’t take very long for capacity to be overwhelmed. Even if we could build artificial uteruses to save the lives of all those children/eggs, who would raise them after the children had grown big enough to survive outside them?

  • B.E. Miller

    Aren’t there some folks who say vaccination is not Biblical? So you are not supposed to vaccinate kids? There’s your answer!
    (Okay, I’m engaging in morbid humor there. I’m trying to think of a way to turn this into a Monty Python skit. Sort of like that sperm being wasted song.)

  • Saraquill

    They would be conveniently forgetting that not all babies are desired for adoption. Special needs children for example, would have a harder time being placed.

  • mayarend

    But don’t you know that those having disabled babies are only because they didn’t pray enough?
    Also, do you REALLY think they care about “all” babies or only the white christian ones? :)

  • Trollface McGee

    And forgetting that adoption is not some easy, non-traumatic thing for the woman to go through, especially if they go through one of those “pro-life” adoption agencies.

  • Jennifer

    Soo, better to kill the babies then? And let’s see who suffers more: a woman trying to arrange an adoption or a baby with a pierced skull.

  • Nea

    They’re also conveniently forgetting sheer self-defense. Despite the sanctification of maternal self sacrifice, a woman isn’t obligated to bring a pregnancy to term if it endangers her own health.

  • B.E. Miller

    IF I could take a 2 months old fetus of a pregnant’s woman’s belly and give it to soemoen else. Then we’d be cool.
    Yes, this… I keep wanting to get some folks together and do fund raising for such research. Plus think of all the advantages of being able to do a placenta transfer! You could transfer the fetus from a mom who is too weak/sick/ needs treatment for cancer into a healthy surrogate.
    And even better, what if you could come up with an artificial uterus?! Then the fetus could be immediately transferred to the artificial uterus, and put up for adoption while still “in the bottle.”
    Or in the case of sick mom/mom needed treatment, the fetus will be able to develop safely while mom gets the needed treatment.
    Plus it could possibly help all those couples who want to conceive but have issues that prevent them from doing so.
    I’m pretty sure that if funds existed for such research, we could be there in about 25 years.

  • Jennifer

    Are we this against natural things like pregnancy now, merely because they’re inconvenient?? God forbid we give nine months of our lives to a child, instead of killing it bc we just can’t bear the inconvenience of carrying it or getting SOMEONE to raise the damn thing. We do not need to be wasting funds on unnatural pregnancy methods when we could be spending such money on improving immigration, foster systems, helping the homeless, keeping pregnancies healthy, preventing cancers, even getting better birth control or safe after-morning pills!

  • Jennifer

    So a baby should die rather than inconvenience its mother, Maya?

  • Jennifer

    Sorry, big holes there. What about women in arranged marriages? Do they have a LITTLE more right then to kill their husbands? And oh yeah, sex is a consensual act; does that, or anything, justify a horror like partial birth?

  • AlisonCummins

    Think about all the “family members” who die for lack of medical care when a woman doesn’t use birth control! Not all fertilized eggs implant (family member dies tom lack of medical care!), not all implanted eggs develop placentas (family member dies from lack of medical care!) and not all established pregnancies are maintained until the fetus is viable (family member dies from lack of medical care!).

    What are ladies against feminism doing to prevent these tragic deaths? Promoting the use of birth control? Advocating medial research to ensure that every single fertilized egg will always implant, develop and is carried to term?

    Do they hold funerals every time they have a period, on the grounds that there might have been a dead family member in there?

    (hat tip to Libby Anne)

  • Saraquill

    … And what about the women who carry a pregnancy to term when they can’t afford to pay for the delivery, let alone childcare? The unmarried women who carry a pregnancy to term? I doubt the writer would think positively about that.

  • Jennifer

    I don’t think a delivery would be so utterly impossible to do safely, and do you have any idea how many women are given Television shows to carry such babies?

  • Independent Thinker

    I think the craziness of equating abortion to hiring a hitman has pretty much been covered but as a married woman something else stuck out at me. ” Matrimony severely curtails a woman’s freedom” Um, maybe on your planet it does but not for every woman. I have furthered my education while married, traveled many times out of state without my spouse, have bought both cars and real estate while my husband was at home or work, and made many other big steps in my life while still being married. I have never thought of my relationship with my husband as something that curtails my freedom. If anything it has given me more freedom because he has always financially and emotionally supported my desire to better myself. Marriage doesn’t equal misery in all cases. This is the stuff that gets spewed that makes people not want to marry. I married my husband for two reasons the first is love and the second is my life is better and happier with him than without him.

  • http://biblicalpersonhood.wordpress.com/ Retha Faurie

    It is funny how seldom these women say something that actually creates respect for men and marriage (as opposed to just preaching you should respect men and marriage). It is great how often those who speak against the quiverful/ patriarchy people, for all our “feminism” proclaim more pro-man and pro-marriage views than those.

  • Nightshade

    Yeah. How about ‘Guys, in this life you get the respect you earn, so if you want your wife’s respect then try EARNING it’?

  • Madame

    The sentence should be “Patriarchal matrimony severely curtails a woman’s freedom”.

  • Jayn

    “She sees only one way out…”

    Well, maybe if you weren’t telling her that divorce is Wrong, she wouldn’t conclude that she needs to kill her husband. There’s a way to voluntarily end a marriage that doesn’t involve homicide–there isn’t a way to voluntarily end a pregnancy besides abortion.

  • Jennifer

    Ok, this is totally out of left field. You’re saying women who try to kill their husbands may just be victims of the anti-divorce beliefs? Would you say the same for a husband wanting to kill his wife? Did you know Scott Peterson seemed to think the only way out was killing his wife and baby? Was that the fault of some bad church in his lifetime? NEITHER bad theology against birth control nor divorce are excuses for killing a human being.

  • http://yllommormon.blogspot.com/ aletha

    “Thou shalt not kill…unless he’s mean, because divorce is SOOOO much worse than paid murder.”

  • Brennan

    Jonathan Swift she ain’t.

  • http://krwordgazer.blogspot.com Kristen Rosser

    Besides the eww-factor here, the article gets so many facts wrong. Abortion was in fact legal in the US for many years and was actually supported by evangelical Christians in the first century of this nation, because human life was not believed to begin until “quickening,” when the human soul entered the fetus at about 4 months along. Nowhere does the Bible say a full human soul is present at conception. In the Law an act that causes a miscarriage, when it doesn’t kill the woman, is not viewed as on a par with murder.

  • Jennifer

    Good points, people knew next to nothing about pregnancy back then, and relying on the Bible so literally is dangerous for many reasons; pro partial-birth people have even used it to claim that a person’s not Biblically human until they have “the breath of life” outside the womb! What do you know, there are freaks abusing the Bible on every side..

  • Melissa Jones Hollowell

    My husband does not live inside my uterus and feed off of me for sustenance.

  • Jennifer

    Yeah, damn those little leeches.

  • Jennifer

    This author actually makes good points. Inspite of the fact that, of course, there are some gigantic holes in the comparisons here: for one thing, an early term abortion is removing an egg; an after-morning pill is far less. Comparing these to killing a full-grown man, in a terror-filled death? Would you dramatic religious specimens please calm down? A partial birth or later term abortion, on the other hand, is far different. It just seems so harmless to some, doesn’t it? It’s quiet, it’s done in medicinal places and by doctors; how could it be bad? Just look into it; the procedures are brutal, painful, and sometimes torturous to the mothers too, who often feel the babies dying or harmed. Instead of a bullet piercing the skull, we have a nasty metal instrument.