top of page

The Pzygotic Paradox

Updated: Oct 31, 2024

Drawn on August 29, 2024 | Published from Miami |

Doctor studying a human zygote — fertilized egg cell resulting from the union of a female gamete (egg, or ovum) with a male gamete (sperm).
The Pzygotic Paradox

Effective control hinges on the balance between leaders and followers, with successful power-seekers adeptly aligning their ambitions with the ideologies of their supporters. Crucially, the secret often involves leaders integrating faith into their modus-operandi. The tactic is particularly pronounced in the United States — a country so steeped in faith that conclusive clauses to contracts typically play on some variant of “acts of God.” Faith exists as a spiritual bridge between the material and immaterial, freeing believers from the need to defend their convictions with quantifiable evidence. The danger of faith is that, in the absence of scientific proof, the pursuit of truth often devolves into a search for doctrine ordained by the divine. This is fundamentalism — a method of insisting that anything can be advanced on faith alone. And while one might expect this phenomenon to be confined to caliphates like Iran, the fact is that the perils of religious doctrine have been so effectively diluted into US politics that even the faithless struggle to see the forest for the trees.


“In America, the divisions in local elections are mainly on religious lines. This is no doubt convenient for the capitalists, and tends to make them religious men; but the capitalist alone could not produce the results. The result is produced by the fact that many working men prefer the advancement of their creed to the improvement in their livelihood.”

— Bertrand Russell, 1921.



Savvy modern-day spiritual leaders have eagerly adopted these age-old tactics in the West. Organizations like Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s [1] Roman Catholic Church and Jerry Falwell’s Evangelical Christians are spearheading faith-based political agendas in their respective spheres with great effect. Problem is that deferring guidance to gospel is a slippery slope to making bad ideas sound good. Seemingly benign edicts like “turning the other cheek” [2] can serve as gateway drugs to more sinister apostolic mandates, such as instructing “wives [to] submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.” [3]


A strong example of this holy influence on policy is the thorny abortion debate in the U.S., where manipulative arguments about saving the unborn are weaponized against women. Too often, the right to choose abortion is drowned out by Christian armchair scientists who object to any form of interference with the “miracle of life.” And while the defense for protecting this opinion feels objectively grounded, a closer look at the complex scientific definition for 'life' poses a challenge to this sentimental stance. “Miracles” are intrinsically inexplicable, whereas “life,” a complicated system, carries more scientific substance than what's taught in the Genesis story. Cellular organization, reproduction, growth and development, energy use, homeostasis, response to the environment, and adaptability [4] are the modern criteria for diagnosing something as “life.” Deep down, embryos positively check these boxes, so would this not be the holy grail against abortion?


Well, were one to extend this definition of life just a little further, inconsistencies emerge. Consider, for example, the case of cancer cells. They, like any other human cells, also meet the description but, through what I surmise could only be motives of sheer cruelty, we rather enjoy blasting them with X-rays when they start living life too fully. Given that even the simple act of digestion can kill thousands of human cells, should we not defend the rights of tumors and enterocytes [5] at the Supreme Court as well? Considering that neither probiotics nor radiation therapy feature as condemned sins on billboards outside abortion clinics, the line their authors draw at “life” might presumably be found somewhere else — somewhere elusive, somewhere intangible, somewhere illogical.


Such selective misuse of scientific nomenclature is best encapsulated in the frequently parroted idea that humanity is absolutely found "from the moment of conception, where every human being possesses inherent dignity and worth independent of age, stage of development, race, or abilities.” [6] Consider this emotionally packed rhetoric an egotistical aspiration to elevate us platonically closer to God’s power, echoing his creation myth where heaven and earth were essentially thought into existence. In fact, given that certain aspects of Adam and Eve’s monotheism mark thought-crime as sin, one's left to wonder why the line against abortion isn't drawn at inception rather than conception. Don't even think about it! Wisecracks aside, the haploid-cell fusion of parental genetic information in a zygote is held by Christians, ad nauseam, as scientific proof of the unborn humanity [7] of what could be more accurately described as an unbaptized eukaryotic mess tumbling toward mitosis. Ironically, this genetic pairing is equally true for the primary DNA sequences of the placenta, where the critical moment that determines a cell's fate depends on whether the double helix splits to fulfill placental functions or remains intact to create embryonic counterparts [8]. If the meiotic union of chemical information is indeed the tell-tale signature of humanity, then perhaps we ought to be saving the amniotic sac at birth too. Purgatory must be overflowing with placentas by now. Really, aren’t Catholics just as guilty of natal homicide as pro-choice gynecologists of the prenatal kind?


The consequences of these epistemological takes on science extend beyond pure semantics about scrambling fetuses or setting caps with exceptions on pregnancy stages [9] — they effectively strip women of agency, reducing them to property [10] under a patriarchal, scripturally sanctioned social order. Families will invariably have reasons and reservations about the decision to abort. Pulling the plug on having a child is not easy, but by stripping away this critical opportunity to act, an endorsement of choice-restriction surfaces in glaring alignment with supernatural doctrine that seeks to algebraically hegemonize and brutalize women [11]. These biblical sentiments, anchored in the celestial dictates of the Old Testament God [12], ghoulishly find their way into law as twisted rulings on procedures like IVF. Such resolutions place not only women who cannot bear children, but also their doctors, in a position subservient to the unborn [13]. In fact, pioneering plaintiffs in states like Alabama are targeting the destruction of embryos during these in vitro treatments as potential infanticide or wrongful death, arguing that even accidental damage to this cellular cloud could result in civil and possibly criminal negligence [14]. Just think about that...


Perverse as this may sound, if empathy for the unborn truly stemmed from passion and rationality, recognizing embryos as human-beings with rights equal to the born would demand more than just treating abortion as a crime akin to murder. The government would also face an ethical obligation to remove unborn children from irresponsible or substance-abusing pregnant women, placing these embryos in state-appointed foster uteruses. Smoking kills.


Despite the tragic implications of forcibly outsourcing pregnancy, one might question whether the financial burden alone could deter anti-choice extremists from pursuing this morbidly radical federal surrogacy program — or if, at heart, religious opposition to homosexuals’ right to have children is the true clerical barrier to such activism [16][17]. Considering the absence of proxy parenting proposals in anti-abortion legislation, could it be that the bulk of purported empathy for the unborn might be little more than a bluff?


By legally codifying Bible verses, the abolition of abortion not only signals a bankrupted moral posture, but also literally endangers women's lives through an ecclesiastic license to subjugate humans. This is a methodical imposition of theology on society — a system where women are reduced to mere livestock and relieved of the responsibility over self-control. American courtrooms are complicit, busy approving Biblical mandates to perpetuate pregnancies, keeping man's chattel occupied with the mission of birthing God’s army. The outright ban on access to abortion is a fatal medical menace for mothers, based solely on a morality forged in the fiery furnace of Bronze Age faith. The right to choose — an already emotionally difficult and potentially life-threating decision — becomes impossible. This is a problem.


"Faith lifts mountains but gladly lets them fall on the heads of those who don't have it." [15]

— Boris Vian, (1920 - 1959).



All hope is not lost, however. The delicate issue of abortion remains a topic where most people disagree with the control that leaders toil to impose. The uproarious opposition to this manipulation of women indicates a clear imbalance in the power dynamic — stacked against at least half the population. The friction has become so dire that, in a rare display of human virtue prevailing over creed, even some religious groups themselves are rallying to defend the bodily rights of their female congregants. In Florida, for instance — a state so notoriously backwards that Bugs Bunny once sawed it loose from the continent [18] — certain synagogues are now defending abortion rights on grounds of religious freedom [19]. Talk about exploiting a loophole! Truth be told, we don’t owe lawmakers the benefit of the doubt about how God-fearing they claim to be, especially when their policies are carried by cherubs, but if their actions steer toward the denigration of women, then there is very little motive to be skeptical of.


Call me nuts, but is charging biblical literalists in judicial robes with morally significant decisions, like abortion, not a colossal conflict of interest? Does this not underscore a grave misplacement of trust in leaders who profess compassion for the living while they paradoxically cling to a deterministic belief in the prophecy of an Abrahamic apocalypse? [more here] These extremists — architects dreaming of incinerating their own building — highlight the need for a reality check in reevaluating the honest worth they place on life. In a splash of irony, not only is the value of life being judged, but also the piety of those who claim to defend it. And yet, beneath this cloak of moral authority, the chief case against abortion is an exclusively immaterial argument, existentially slapped on to this single equation:


Spermatozoon + Ovum = Soul


I must have missed the Nobel Prize for that revolutionary discovery. While such debates rage on in the abstract about whether a parasitic zygote has a soul, the reality on the ground is stark: women — undeniably sentient beings — are dying [20]. Women are dying. If proclamations for the right to life indisputably strip women down to meager vassalage, does this not betray any supposed genuine empathy for the living? Where is the goodwill of pro-life activists who distort the concept of murder to such extremes that they spread chilling lies about the abortions of newborns [21]? How is the criminalization of halting motherhood in any way reflective of Jesus' allegedly compassionate temperament [22] ?


Biblical doctrine, a universal hurdle against the emancipation of women, already claims absolute dominion over life and the afterlife, yet its fundamentalists, no longer satisfied with their colossal kingdom, have extended their reach to pre-life. In this crusade, God-given morality reveals itself not as a beacon of kindness but as a mechanism for enforcing control over humanity and our progeniture. Ultimately, how can this ecumenical war against abortion pretend to protect "life" when it so readily offers women's health and freedom as blood sacrifice?



[1] Winfield, N. (2024) Pope slams both Harris and Trump as ‘against life’ and urges Catholics to vote for ‘lesser evil’, AP News. Available at: https://apnews.com/article/vatican-pope-trump-harris-election-0e0faef49ff587098f75b265e386bf22 (Accessed: September 2024).

"Both are against life, be it the one who kicks out migrants, or be it the one who kills babies" — Pope Francis.


[2] King James Bible, Matthew 5:39


[3] King James Bible, Ephesians 5:22

 

 

[5] Intestinal lining cells that control transport of nutrients, water, and ions from the intestinal lumen into the body.

 

[6] The Heritage Foundation (2023). Mandate for leadership: The conservative promise (p. 450). static.project2025.org. Available at: https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf (Accessed: 2024).


[7] DW Documentary, 2022. Abortion in Europe. [video] Available at: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSB6oCza2k8> [Accessed 6 May 2022].

 

[8] (Dad's genes build placentas, explaining grandsire effect, 2013) & (Simple twist of DNA determines fate of placenta, Hathaway, 2022):

 

[9] CDC (2023) CDCs abortion surveillance system FAQs, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/data_stats/abortion.htm (Accessed: 23 November 2023).

“Similar to previous years, in 2021, women in their twenties accounted for more than half of abortions (57.0%). Nearly all abortions in 2021 took place early in gestation: 93.5% of abortions were performed at ≤13 weeks’ gestation; a smaller number of abortions (5.7%) were performed at 14–20 weeks’ gestation, and even fewer (0.9%) were performed at ≥21 weeks’ gestation. Early medication abortion is defined as the administration of medication(s) to induce an abortion at ≤9 completed weeks’ gestation, consistent with the current Food and Drug Administration labeling for mifepristone (implemented in 2016). In 2021, 53.0% of all abortions were early medication abortions. Use of early medication abortion increased 3% from 2020 to 2021 and 137% from 2012 to 2021. Source: MMWR. 2023;72(9);1-29.”

 

[10] Mueller, J. (2023) Idaho bill would ban ‘abortion trafficking’ if passed, The Hill. Available at: https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/3925086-idaho-bill-would-ban-abortion-trafficking-if-passed/ (Accessed: 10 April 2024).

 

[11] Sample of Abrahamic theology:


Tanakh translation by The Contemporary Torah, JPS, 2006 (2006) Sefaria. Available at: https://www.sefaria.org/.:

  • "And to the woman [God] said,

    “I will greatly expand

Your hard labor—and your pregnancies;

In hardship shall you bear children.

Yet your urge shall be for your husband,

And he shall rule over you.*” " (*rule over you (So NJPS.) I.e., for matters of sexual relations he will have the last word.)

- Torah, Bereishit 3:16.

King James Bible:

  • "Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."

    - KJB, Genesis 3:16.

  • "When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house." - KJB, Deuteronomy 24:1.

  • "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's."

    - KJB, Exodus 20:17 [10th commandment].


Qur'an translation by Haleem, M.A.S.A. (2005) The Qur’an. Oxford: Oxford University Press, UK. :

  • “Allah commands you regarding your children: the share of the male will be twice that of the female.”

    - Qur’an, An Nisa 4:11.

  • "Husbands should take good care of their wives, with a [the bounties]

    God has given to some more than others and with what they

    spend out of their own money. Righteous wives are devout and guard

    what God would have them guard in their husbands’ absence. If you

    fear high-handedness from your wives, remind them [of the teachings

    of God], then ignore them when you go to bed, then hit them.

    If they obey you, you have no right to act against them: God is

    most high and great."

    - Qur’an, An Nisa 4:34-35.

 

[12] Language used in the Alabama ruling:

Supreme Court of Alabama SC-2022-0515 (2024) https://law.justia.com/cases/alabama/supreme-court/2024/sc-2022-0579.html (Accessed: 2024).

“The common usage of this phrase has continued into the 21st century, referring to the view that all human beings bear God's image from the moment of conception.” (Supreme Court of Alabama, SC-2022-0515, p.31, 2024)

 

[13] SCOTUS rulings:

(No. 19–1392. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Supreme Court of the United States, 2022) with emphasis on Amendment XIV of the US Constitution. Mississippi (2022) & Arizona (2024):

  • Supreme Court of the United States, 2022. No. 19–1392. Dobbs, State Health Officer of the Mississippi Department of Health, et Al. v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization et Al., Washington DC: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/22067246/dobbs-decision.pdf, p.2.

    “The right to obtain an abortion is [...] an essential component of “ordered liberty.” The Court finds that the right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition. [...] The Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause provides substantive, as well as procedural, protection for “liberty”—has long been controversial.”

  • Billeaud, J. and Lee, M. (2024) What to know about the Arizona Supreme Court ruling that reinstates an 1864 near-total abortion ban, AP News. Available at: https://apnews.com/article/arizona-abortion-ban-what-to-know-797a4bbbc738497fe2284d6870c5be24 (Accessed: 10 April 2024).


[14] Full analysis of the Alabama ruling on IVF:


[15] Original French; « La foi soulève des montagnes mais les laisse joyeusement tomber sur la tête de ceux qui ne l'ont pas. »


[16] Hernandez, J. (2024) The Pope wants surrogacy banned. here’s why one advocate says that’s misguided, NPR. Available at: https://www.npr.org/2024/01/09/1223771148/pope-francis-surrogacy-criticism (Accessed: 2024).


[17] Guzman, C. de (2024) Pope Francis calls surrogate motherhood ‘deplorable,’ calls for Global Ban, Time. Available at: https://time.com/6553397/pope-francis-surrogacy-ban/ (Accessed: 2024).


[18] Looney Tunes: Bugs Bunny in Rebel Rabbit; Warner Bros. (1949)



[20] Surana, K. (2024) Under Georgia’s abortion ban, she died after delayed care, ProPublica. Available at: https://www.propublica.org/article/georgia-abortion-ban-amber-thurman-death (Accessed: 21 September 2024).


[21] Claims of legalized infanticide:

[22] The punitive aspect:

All audio is AI generated.

bottom of page