January 23rd, 2006

Thirty Three Years

It may seem strange that I’m the one to write about the anniversary of Roe v Wade on Bring It On! today. After all, being a man gives me a uniquely unqualified point of view on the matter. I’ll never need to grapple with pregnancy and it’s implications as anything more than a very interested observer. Still, my entire life has been molded and shaped in various ways by the Roe v. Wade decision. Our party’s past, present and future have been directly impacted by the decision. We all have a stake in the abortion debate, so I may as well speak my bit.

I’m Pro-Life. Anyone who has ever held their child in their hands is pro-life. Anyone who has ever witnessed the miracle of child birth, watching your son or daughter come into his world is Pro-Life. I can’t imagine not having my son to play with because we choose otherwise.

I’m also Pro-Choice. I think a woman has to have dominion over her own body. I think that understanding that a woman must be free to choose her destiny. Sometimes, for whatever reason, a woman is not ready or does not want to give birth. She may regret it later, she may not. She may learn a lesson or she may not. None of that matters to me. She still needs to be in control of her body to be an equal in this world. I’ll fight for her right to do so, even if personally I do not like the idea.

I guess I’m Clintonian in that regard - abortion should be safe, legal and rare.

Rare does not mean putting endless barriers up to a woman’s access. Rare does not mean passing more and more laws to make having an abortion nearly impossible. Rare means something that isn’t needed. All the marches, all the protests, all the candlelight vigils have failed because to many woman find themselves in a position of having to choose. The time to act is before the pregnancy, not after.

How many of the Pro-Lifers that read this blog support birth control being part of a prescription drug plan? How many Pro-Lifers out there are against teaching honest, sane and effective sexual education classes in high school? We teach drivers education, and brother,from my point of view a penis is every bit as dangerous as a car. How many Pro-Lifers are for increased coverage of pre-natal care and assistance to young mothers who choose to keep their babies?

Or how many of you simply say keep your clothes on or suffer the consequences?

That’s great, except last year we had approximately 1.2 million abortions.

90% in the first Trimester. Almost all of them voluntary. Think about the million women each year who have to choose between having a baby or an abortion and ask yourself where is your ‘Just Say No’ campaign getting you? Do you want 1.2 million more next year? How about the year after? How are you helping to make it Rare?

Lest you think I’m laying the blame on my conservative friends, I have some issues with my party as well. To often we fight the abortion battle from the extremes. We argue for the 100% rule for unfettered access. We rail against parental notification. We go ballistic when someone mentions partial birth bans. We marginalize ourselves and make it much much harder to find common ground to make abortions rare. Remember, the majority of the country supports our position that a woman should be allowed to choose for herself. The GOP wants to ban abortions. Most people just want some sane guidelines. They want Safe, Legal and Rare.

Should a teenage girl have to inform her parents? Most people think so. Should they ALWAYS have to inform her parents? No. We need to fight to ensure the safeguards are there, not to look like zealots. Should partial-birth (a very nebulous term if there ever was one) be banned? Not when a woman’s life is in jeopardy or the fetus is already dead (or will be). Should it be a standard course of care- it’s really hard to make the case. I’m not sure we do ourselves any favors when we fight like hell to allow a procedure that sent shivers down my spine when I read exactly what it was.

Once we quit trying to fight at the fringes, I think we will have an easier time convincing most of the people in this country that we share their concerns about abortion, and also share their desire to see it remain legal. If not, we can keep handing the elections to the Republicans and guarantee sometime in our life, Roe v Wade will be overturned and a Republican Congress and President will outlaw it.

Is that what you want?

Posted in Politics, Current Affairs, DailyFeatured



45 Comment(s)

Leave a response »

  1. steve Says :

    33 years of legalized murder of a human being.  Something all Pro Choice should be proud.  No need to even respond to me here.  I just care for the idea of Pro Choice. EOM


             
    Comment score: 5.0
  2. The Bastard Says :

    It simply comes down to a belief system. Some think life is a miracle of god, and why not, until modern medicine either the mother died, the baby died or both. Chirld birth is not easy but science and medicine have made it easier.

    It’s an argument of when life begins, belief systems think one way while science, backed up by fact, think another. We are a free society with many different cultures. Most cultures believe in the sanctity of life but some don’t. Where do you draw the line?

    I say you draw the line with a pencil called education. “Just Say No” should not have been part of the drug wars it should have been a slogan for the sex wars.

    Tough subject to say the least, bottom line is that, although I don’t agree with the practice, I have no right to force my beliefs on others but I do have a choice to educate the people around me that unprotected sex is bad, whether it is sexually transmitted diseases or an unwanted pregnancy, unprotected sex is bad is something that needs to be taught rather than it being treated as a red headed step child.


             
    Comment unrated
  3. Your right Steve, no pro-Choice person should be proud that each year 1.2 million women feel it necessary to have an abortion. No Pro-Choice person should feel ‘proud” that nearly 90% of those are not medically necessary for the physcial health of the mother. No Pro-Choice person should celebrate that it happens. But we should be thankful it is allowed because 1.2 million women (or as you would label them murderers) felt compelled to make such a choice for whatever reason.

     No Pro-Life person should dare feel sanctimonious though. How many of those 1.2 million abortion last year did your Pro-Life beliefs stop? How many of those 1.2 million abortions did your bitter rhetoric keep from happening? How many women didn’t feel necessary to have an abortion because of all  your Pro-Life protests and marches? Obvioulsy not 1.2 million of them. What do you offer to help make abortion rare? The number I want to see is 0 non medical abortions, Steve - same as everyone I know. I am just in the majority on the issue that will keep it legal no matter what happens to Roe v Wade. Given THAT reality Steve, what are you willing to do to help make it less frequent?

     1.2 million women want to know.

     


             
    Comment score: 5.0
  4. frstlymil Says :

    I find it somewhat interesting that those who have commented thus far are men.  So I’ll jump in just for grins.

    First and foremost, like Cranky I am Pro-Life/Pro-Choice.  I would like to see it fade into oblivion - through proper education, medical care, prescription availability, parents actually having the guts to talk to their children rather than hiding behind the conservative movement of the day as an excuse not to - and to completely do away with the double standard.  Making it illegal is not going to stop it from happening - it will simply make it unsafe - possibly lethal.

    Why is it, that pharmacists can refuse prescription medication to women for birth control or the Morning after pill?  Why is it that most insurance companies will not pay for birth control pills - even when they are prescribed not as birth control, but as hormone regulation treatment?  Yet Viagra is covered, prescribed and those prescriptions are filled.  It may also interest you guys to know that as early as 1790, if a man got a girl pregnant who was not his wife, there was a little liquid that he could force her to drink to take care of the problem.  Force.  That liquid often turned the girl’s organs to jelly and killed her - but he was off the hook from any potential embarassment to the family or job.  Those married women that COULD be pregnant had to wear corsets to tightly bind the condition so that it wouldn’t show (I’ve got an antique ad for binding maternity corsets hanging in my bathroom - it’s a hoot) - often killing both the child and the mother. 

    I am old enough to remember a time when “date rape” was not even a term yet - let alone an prosecutable offense.  If a girl got pregnant this way - she had to stop going to school as soon as she started to “show.”  She was denied education, opportunity and publicly humiliated.  The boy who did it got to finish school.  

    I’ve worked extensively with disenfranchised youth here in L.A.  You might be interested to know that after age 11,  there is little to no protection for kids by social services - those over the age of 7 fall into the cracks of the system.  And, according to national statistics - men who sexually exploit underage girls are 65% white males between the age of 25-45, educated professionals with wives and children of their own.  Where is the moral outcry here?    

    Since California refused to accept federal funding for Abstinence Only education, and decided to actually TEACH sex education - California has the lowest teen pregnancy rate in the country.  Hmmmm.  Education.  Honesty.  Pregnancy goes down.  Fewer abortions.  What a concept.

    I’m really greatful that the men started the dialogue here - but until some men who simply shout “abortion is murder!” without truely looking into every situation involved - situations that will NEVER happen to the male, choose to actually read their history (start with American and move on from there) with respect to women, women’s rights, marital rights (didja know that marital rape was not made illegal until 1985?), health rights, etc. . . and actually attempt to even IMAGINE walking a mile in those shoes and imagine what it might be like to be in like circumstances - they should really sit on their hands, and listen to what women have to say on the subject that have actually had to be put into the position of making that dreadfully personal and private choice. 

     


             
    Comment score: 5.0
  5. steve Says :

    I am against abortion and I have stated it many times.  To me no matter the circumstance, even health or age of the mother, I can’t understand why someone would kill their baby.  At 5-6 weeks, I didn’t only hear our baby’s heart beat, I saw it!  That’s crazy!  At 12 weeks, the other day I watched it move.  Freaking shit!  But at 12 weeks, heck even 5, that’s a human life.

    If people want it to get rid of unwanted kids then I suggest we drop cynanide in every orphanage we have, because it’s basically the same thing!


             
    Comment unrated
  6. ken grandlund Says :

    We get the idea Steve. You have a serious philosophical problem with abortion. You see it as murder. Fine. That still does not give you, or anyone else who shares this view, the right to outlaw it for everyone who views it differently.

    Like Cranky, I would rather women (and girls) not have to be forced into a position of having to make this decision. But as long as people insist that no sex education in schools, no contraceptives, and no consequences for male impregnators is acceptable, we’ll be stuck with some people using abortion.

    If you really want to eliminate abortion, you have to take realistic steps to prevent pregnancy in the first place. Simply wishing it away using religious morality won’t make it so.

    And how nice to note that you would rather a woman’s life be in jeopardy, even to the point of her own death, to make sure a child is born. Then we would put that child into an orphanage since they had a dead mother and then we could gas them like you suggest.

    You, sir, are a very troubling individual.

     


             
    Comment unrated
  7. steve Says :

    “You, sir, are a very troubling individual.”

    Ken,

    Do me a favor, when you finally learn how to read and stop taking things out of context, you can stop your feeble attempts at trying to reason with my superior intellect, talent and tenacity.

    “And how nice to note that you would rather a woman’s life be in jeopardy, even to the point of her own death, to make sure a child is born. Then we would put that child into an orphanage since they had a dead mother and then we could gas them like you suggest.”

    See, you silly man…  If abortion was outlawed the orphanage we wouldn’t be “gassing” anyone. We’d be fully against murderering children.  Gassing however is cruel, cynanide is much faster, even quicker if dispersed in the water supply. 

    ” Simply wishing it away using religious morality won’t make it so.”

    Uh ok… that’s what religious people do… wish for things.


             
    Comment unrated
  8. You know its amazing to hear your childs heart beat. It’s also amazing to hear my wife laugh. If I had to choose now, I couldn’t. if I had to choose during pregancy, I’d rather it be my wife who lives. While I can understand your logic Steve, I do not think you have the right to decide for a woman that she has to die because of pregnacy. You may hope your wife would carry to term and that some miracle happened, but hey guess what, since your never going to die in child birth you really don’t get to say. It’s pretty noble that you would be willing to sacrifice your partner for your ideals. I mean that does take some guts. I even respect that kin dof dogged determination.

     I’m just glad that the overwhelming majority (and I mean overwhelming. If Bush’s 3% is a mandate, this is divine direction) of Americans support the right to abortion when the mothers life or health are in danger. No matter what you think of elective abortion, the sanctity of life should start with the living. If you don’t give a mother (or the father if the mother can’t make the choice due to incapacitation) the right to decide if she is willign to die, then sir, not only are you out of touch with main stream America, you are advocating murder by proxy. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

     

    But still Steve I ask, what recomendatiosn do you have to bring the Rare version of Safe Legal and Rare into being. You know you will not win the legal battle, you will also not win a vote if it comes to that. Are you merely to call women murders (1.2 million new “murderers” each year - some of them you are bound to know, maybe even love) and wash your hands of it since you can’t outlaw it? Are you content to scream about the sanctity of life at the same time yelling NOT MY MONEY? What is your plan sir to reduce that number down as far as practically possible. You claim you have the moral highground with your tone. Please show us some of that morality. How will you help women sir. What is your plan?
     


             
    Comment unrated
  9. Mil - I’m kind of sorry it was me, the average White Guy who started this conversation. I waited and waited hoping a female would bring it up in the diaries or in the main page. It feels almost invasive to be the one - but I don’t really regrett it. We need to move beyond yellign abour abortion rights and start working on societal wrongs that make it necessary. I want to find answers not anger - ideas not ideology. We need articulate women like you speaking the truth, and strong men like Ken and TB supporting you. We need to make the country one in which having a baby early isn’t a financial death penalty, or educational show stopper. We are not there yet, but hey we are trying.


             
    Comment unrated
  10. frstlymil Says :

    I’m glad you brought it up, Cranky - don’t ever censor yourself - it’s an ugly subject that needs discussion.  Ya know - I’ve got a funny story for y’all that involves another cog in this wheel.  My sister’s friend, who looks quite young for her age, damn her, had a child a few years ago.  While in the grocery store with her stroller, a woman walks up to her and starts yelling at her about how she should be ashamed of herself, and that it is girls like her who can’t say no and who do nothing for society but crank out illegitimate children and cause a burden to the rest of society.  My sister’s friend stared at her, said, “I’m 38 - but even so - you are SOOOO out of line and need to get away from me before I have you arrested.”  I told this story at work, and it turns out this also happened to a female co-worker who took her neice and nephew out for the day.  Another concerned taxpayer worrying about the burden on society felt it their God given right to start yelling the same crap at this girl, who was not even the mother of the children in her charge.  Makes me wonder how many other people are out there singing the praises of the right to life - but they’ll let you know what they think of you if they think they might have to shell out a dime for it. 

    I too, would like to hear solutions to make it RARE that actually make sense, have been well thought out - and actually take the life of the mother into consideration - rather than treat her like an inhuman receptacle who’s sole purpose in life is to churn out children with no regard for her health - and for the children born without a parent in the picture?  part of that includes each and every anti-abortionist pledging to adopt, love, feed, clothe, love, send to gramar school, pay for college, love, pay for healthcare until age 23, etc. . . a child that needs it.  Steve, have you and your wife considered adopting your next child?


             
    Comment unrated
  11. Bonnie Says :

    Perhaps if we all agreed that we’d rather not have to choose we could start talking about ways to make “choice” irrelevant.  People WILL have sex and abstinence isn’t the answer.   We need good birth control and we need better birth control. 

    Statistically our nation has one of the highest incidences of abortion. This is not  because it’s legal. It’s legal in Europe.  It’s because we don’t promote birth control, we don’t have adequate healthcare resources and childcare resources for single mothers.  Young women who find themselves pregnant face censorship from family and they may not want to face that.  They face financial hardship.  They may have to give up dreams of making a better life–a life where they don’t have to live hand to mouth off of what the state provides. 

    Our nation does not address the issues of why  a woman decide to have an abortion. Instead we just say, well, she’s obviously immoral and horrible so let’s make a law.  


             
    Comment score: 5.0
  12. cooper Says :

    Sorry it had to be you Cranky.

    I ,of course, am for leaving the law as it is; my reasons lie more with the fact that , as I think I have stated before , it will not be the upper middle class women, who are already educated and moneyed, that will be harmed ; they will get their abortions no matter. Where there is a means there is a way and they simply have the means. I simply would have the means even if every state in the whole country turned brilliant red and banned abortions. No, the women who will suffer are the poor, the uneducated, and living in the red states. The lack of sex education itself in most of those states is appalling, but given the lack of education of people living on the verge of poverty in general it would merely be exacerbated. This would in turn prevent in many cases them continuing their education and perpetuate their poverty.

    Surely we need to do better in the sex education department; clearly there is a problem with lack of parenting and guidance in many cases. Teaching abstinence does not work , real sex education does. Until then I can see no point in allowing the belief system of others to be foisted upon those who believe that a women has the right to make that choice.

    I do not particularly care how warm and fuzzy a man feels when he see his child for the first time…he does not have to push that ten pound screeching piece of flesh and bones out of a bodily cavity nor does he have to carry it inside him for nine months. Until he does, man need to step aside.

    It is really time to let this go, let the decision stand and leave it alone.

    I realize that technically they feel it was a bogus decision that the supreme court should not have made in the beginning and it looks like if Alito comes on board, knowing his feelings on the supreme court legislating from the bench, this decision is quite likely to be challenged and potentially overturned.

    I believe it should stand, and I also believe men should have very little to do with it..they have had way too much stay in what goes on with women for way too long.


             
    Comment unrated
  13. ken grandlund Says :

    Cooper-

    Much better said than anything I can offer. Know only that the right for women to control their bodies should always be left in their hands, not the hands of men who really have no concept of what motherhood is really all about. For too long, women have been subjugated by their men and by men in general.

    Cranky, Steve can’t give you any answers because he has none. His response is to simply make it illegal and to hell with any woman who would make the hard choice. See, Steve must think that having a penis gives him the ability to decide what is best for those without one. Sadly, he is not alone in this view. Fortunately, he is in the minority.

    There is a solution to make abortions more rare and we already know it: education first, contraception second. And while neither of those can trump physiology or hormones, at least they offer a fighting chance, and recognize that abstinence is not a viable solution. Hell, it’s not just young girls who have abortions. Many middle aged women have them too. For those whom contraception isn’t effective, we even have medicine that prevents the egg from implanting if taken immediately after sex. Of course, one must put aside the non-scientific belief that a recently fertilized zygote in the primary stages of meiosis is viable life to accept that that isn’t really abortion, but prevention as well.

    Nature aborts more possible life than anything else and does so in more cases than not.

    Further, the whole rhetoric of the “pro-life” fundamentalists is hogwash when you consider their other views on maintaining the quality of life for the living.

    Steve- I’ll give you that you posess tenacity, but your claims to superior intellect and talent have yet to rear their head. I hear mostly dogmatic retorts based in theology and mean-spirited corporate conservatism in your words. And if your contention that religious people simply wish for things, I guess it is up to the rest of us to actually make them happen.


             
    Comment unrated
  14. steve Says :

    Ken:

     

    ” Simply wishing it away using religious morality won’t make it so.”

    Uh ok… that’s what religious people do… wish for things.

    Quit putting words in my mouth!  You said it not me.  God, can you even read what you write?!?! 


             
    Comment unrated
  15. steve Says :

    And Ken:

    Why do you hate freedom? 


             
    Comment unrated
  16. ken grandlund Says :

    Steve-

     

    I said- ” Simply wishing it away using religious morality won’t make it so.”

    To which you replied- “Uh ok… that’s what religious people do… wish for things. “

    Which I then replied with “And if your contention that religious people simply wish for things, I guess it is up to the rest of us to actually make them happen. “

    Any confusion about who said religious people do wish for things to become real is apparent. It is clearly you who has the reading problem. And perhaps a memory problem too, since you don’t realize what it is you are writing. And obviously a comprehension problem on top of all of that.

    By the way, way to fall back on your favorite meaningless reply- Why do you hate freedom? It is a meaningless response and clearly the only one left to someone who has no real argument left.

     

     


             
    Comment score: 5.0
  17. The Bastard Says :

    And so we have it, it’s not religious its a matter of procreation. Let me ask you NewsGnome, you worried about so many dead why don’t you try this hard to end war. Crap at least there you stop the killing of living walking human beings. He if the next Einstein was a hard core islamic fanatic would you still believe in his findings? 


             
    Comment unrated
  18. Well Gee Coop, using that logic, (and playing devils advocate) Men should also be able to step aside fromthe whole deal. Should we be able to step aside financialy if it isn’t a  mutual decision? If we are not married? If we took precautions and they failed (maybe just sue Trojan for the money?) If you want men to just step aside lots of them qould be mor than happy to totaly oblige that request.

    And I think you’ll find more men are Pro-Choice than Pro-Life because we feela tremondous amount of guilt even having an opinion. The pro-life women I know seem to be a lot more militant

     


             
    Comment unrated
  19. mighty maximus Says :

    Send this to your senators and representatives.

    Vote NO on confirmation of Alito or I boycott GOP contributor Dominos Pizza.

    Increase the minimum wage to $10 an hour and extend unemployment insurance benefits to a year or I boycott GOP contributors Wendy’s, Outback Steakhouse.

    Enact an 80 percent coverage prescription drug benefit under Medicare part B with no extra premiums, no extra deductibles,no means tests no coverage gaps or I boycott Eckerd,CVS,Walgreens Pharmacies.

    Get Tom Delay to resign from congress or I stop shopping at JC Penney stores (of Texas).

    End the war now. Replace US troops with UN troops, or I boycott GE Appliances, TVs, Radios, VCRs, stereos, lightbulbs.

    Enact U.S. vote by mail with paper ballots counted by civil servants or I boycott Wendy’s (of Ohio).

    http://www.boycott-republicans.com

    post this note at your library and supermarket too.


             
    Comment score: 1.0
  20. mighty maximus Says :

    To the pro life until birth conservative, get your nose out of women’s panties and men’s jockstraps and focus on your family.

    You don’t care about alot of people with an increased minimum wage, or an adequate prescription drug benefit under Medicare Part B. You want to leave vulnerable people to business abuse.

    So you going to organize the sperm police?

    LOL


             
    Comment unrated
  21. ChosenOne Says :

    Lets get straight to the root of the problem of RoevWade.  First of all it shouldn’t even be a political issue!!

    Second, a woman DOES have the right to dominion over her own body.  No different then any man.

    Third, I believe the solution should be one of the following:

    - a woman has the CHOICE of abstenence.

    - a young woman from her firt period should be given the following:  birth control pills (free of charge, lifetime), condoms (free of charge, lifetime), and a steralized hanger (free of charge, lifetime)!

     

    The problem with RoevWade isn’t, should the woman have the right to have an abortion because it’s her body.  The problem is in the education of how NOT to get pregnant!  Please don’t give me this crap about rape either.  Of course there are exceptions to all rules.

     


             
    Comment unrated
  22. jerseymcjones Says :

    Cranky (who I respect, totally) writes:

     

    “Lest you think I’m laying the blame on my conservative friends, I have some issues with my party as well. To often we fight the abortion battle from the extremes. We argue for the 100% rule for unfettered access. We rail against parental notification. We go ballistic when someone mentions partial birth bans. We marginalize ourselves and make it much much harder to find common ground to make abortions rare. Remember, the majority of the country supports our position that a woman should be allowed to choose for herself. The GOP wants to ban abortions. Most people just want some sane guidelines. They want Safe, Legal and Rare.

     

    Should a teenage girl have to inform her parents? Most people think so. Should they ALWAYS have to inform her parents? No. We need to fight to ensure the safeguards are there, not to look like zealots. Should partial-birth (a very nebulous term if there ever was one) be banned? Not when a woman’s life is in jeopardy or the fetus is already dead (or will be). Should it be a standard course of care- it’s really hard to make the case. I’m not sure we do ourselves any favors when we fight like hell to allow a procedure that sent shivers down my spine when I read exactly what it was. “

     

    I am certain that Parental Notification laws are unconstitutional, illegal, and unethical.  They may be “moral,” but morality is pointless. 

     

    Forced Parental Notification is Child Abuse.  It is legal protection for Child Incest, and the reversal of Statutory Rape laws.  Yes, parents decide on most non-emergency medical decisions, and must sign off on most everything, but unlike most of those decisions, pregnancy involves a responsibility saddled on that child for the rest of their lives - long after the parents legal obligations are finished.  And since when is it legal for a child to get pregnant in the first place?  By definition, a pregnant child IS a RAPED child.  Therefore, the consequences of that rape (pregnancy, for you conservatives out there who didn’t pay attention in Sex Ed) should not be forced upon that child.  The loopholes in the bills (allowing the child to appear before a judge, etc…) are unrealistic, scumbag, cynical bullshit.  What kid is going to do THAT?  The only case I’ve ever heard where that happened, the child was denied the abortion anyway.  I’m sure that went over well in the family.

     

    As for “Partial Birth Abortion,” there is no such a thing.  It was made up by the Right.

     

    The cowardly conservatives just find it easy to pick on little girls and ailing moms.

     

    Wimps.

     

    JMJ     

     


             
    Comment unrated
  23. steve Says :

    Jersey says:

    “I am certain that Parental Notification laws are unconstitutional, illegal, and unethical.  They may be “moral,” but morality is pointless.”

    All other forms of murder and manslaughter are illegal and abortion isn’t?  Hmm I suppose to you morality is pointless.  It appears to be pointless to Ken here as well. 

    “The cowardly conservatives just find it easy to pick on little girls and ailing moms.”

    Yeah it’s totally easy to do that because we are defending the life of an unborn totally innocent person.  People are born of Original Sin.  Let us at least baptize the kids before you kill them so they have a chance at going to heaven. Do you have a problem with heaven, Jersey?  I think Ken does.

     

     


             
    Comment unrated
  24. Jersey, parental notification isn’t necessarily deemed unconstitutional. As long as their are provisions in there that a girl can seek an alternate method (ie ruled competent by a judge) or there is a provision for medical emergency, parental notification is geenrally allowed. Look at the New hampshire (I think) case  that the Surpreme Court recently kicked back to the lower court. It didn’t rule that PN was an undue burden on the girl. Remember this is the last of the O’Conner decisions too. It’s about as liberal as we are going to see.

     

    I agree forced notifcation without any safety valves is an undue burden. Most people would agree. Most people would also agree that they would want to know about their child. We are held responsible for everything in our childs life, we will not win this issue in the minds and hearts of the vast majority of parents. Are we to jeopradize abortion rights compeltely because we are arguing against parental notification

    Notice I did not say consent.

    partial Birth abortion is, as you say, not a real medical term. It is however usually refering to an D&X procedure. If you click on the link I provided and read what that is, it si something that most people would blanche at. I do not want to go into detail here because frankly some people might be nauseated. Read for yourself. However, what the Pro-Lifers fail to mention is that sometimes it is the best option for the mothers safety. When the bill to ban partial birth abortions was voted against by many democrats (including John kerry) it was because there was no safetyvalve to allow a doctor to decide if it was needed.

     


             
    Comment unrated
  25. The Bastard Says :

    People are born of Original Sin.  Let us at least baptize the kids before you kill them so they have a chance at going to heaven.

    Now Steve, you are assuming that everyone shares you belief structure. There is no scientific fact that a kid is born with any kind of sin or wrong doing. It might be born addicted to crack but sin, I highly doubt it.

    Show a scientific study that points to where in the body original sin exists and you just might have an argument. And for that matter prove that something goes to a heaven. Crap, lets stretch the whole thing and ask you to prove your god exists. What if an athiest couple has an abortion.? How about a Jewish couple or a Muslim couple or a Satanist couple?

    Once again you are proving that this whole argument is based on belief structures. You can throw this in the heep with intelligent design.


             
    Comment unrated
  26. LiberPaul Says :

    Hear Hear Bastard!  Great comments and a good post…..


             
    Comment unrated
  27. steve Says :

    So why is my belief system so wrong guys.  Ya fell into a trick box.  It’s wrong because you say it’s wrong?  Religion has nothing to do with Science.  And Science has nothing to do with religion. So why put one over the other Bastard? I am giving you a philosophical problem and you are answering it with a scientific problem.  An Atheist child isn’t born an atheist.  They are born innocent of any decision.  How would you like to be a human life without a name?  No chance of freedom or control.  You guys spew it all all day how you have less freedoms with Bush in charge.  How you are forced into war or forced into having Alito be confirmed or how the election results were forced on you. You wanna fight for the lives of the sick, homosexuals or the poor yet cannot even fathom the thought with abortion you are taking away freedom of a human life?  What did the fetus do?  Meiosis?  You all preach quite well about the life of a mother or the life of a teenager but have no shame in ending the life of an unborn child? The mother or teenager has a statistical chance of getting hit by a car just as easily as having their life end by a pregnancy.  You all aren’t stopping cars are you?


             
    Comment unrated
  28. jerseymcjones Says :

    Steve, is a seed a tree?  No?  Then is cutting a seed in half the same as cutting down a tree?  No?

    Then abortion is not murder.  No woner you vcons are so callous with human life.  You equate pre-sentient embryos with children.  Disgusting.

    CL, I’m sorry but a raped child should not have their lives further complicated by judges and parents.

    JMJ


             
    Comment unrated
  29. Jersey, while I agree in theory, I think that your talkign about an incredibly small proportion of the cases, that most parents would still want to know, and that going to court in case the parents just couldnt know is something that is not going to be viewed as an undue burden. If anything maybe the bastard who raped her will stand justice - even if it’s daddy.

    None of what you say I disagree with, but my point is that arguing that parents have no rights to ever know, that it’s 100% or nothing will lead to nothing.  

     


             
    Comment unrated
  30. jerseymcjones Says :

    Steve, your argument is purely philosophical.  Science has proven that a fetur, prior to 24 weeks of development, can not think or feel.  They are not wired for those things.  They have no memories, no relationships, nothing.  For most people, it’s just no big deal.  Until you can convince people otherwise, you are shouting at a wall.

    JMJ


             
    Comment unrated
  31. jerseymcjones Says :

    CL, by the laws on the books in all 50 states, and the federal gov’t, a pregnant child is by definition a raped child, period. 

    Besides, rarity of usage should not be a condition of a right. 

    Very respectfully, JMJ 


             
    Comment unrated
  32. EsotericWombat Says :

    Wow, Steve.  Even the theology you present doesn’t hold water, nevermind the fact that it doesn’t belong in this arguement.  Limbo was invented by the church as a way of avoiding the issue of whether a stillborn child goes to Hell because of Original Sin.  But since then, better minds have prevailed and it’s been concluded that God Isn’t all about semantics.  But by all means, use the image of a baby going to Hell as a last resort when you’re all out of arguement.

     Until next time kids, remember that religion doesn’t give you carte blance to throw reason to the wind.
     


             
    Comment unrated
  33. jerseymcjones Says :

    There’s NOTHING in the Bible about abortion, though they were a common practice throughtout history, save for the story of Rebecca, in which case Rebecca was told to have an abortion, and the Judaic law proscribing criminal proceedings against a man who harms another man’s wife’s fetus with their permission.  That’s why most Jews are pro-choice.

    The entire issue was invented to rile the rabble of the right - to take their eyes off the prize of responsible and appropriate governence.

    JMJ  


             
    Comment unrated
  34. Strike Z Says :

    Make life the best choice.  Take away the reasons for having an abortion.  Not the choice to have one. 


             
    Comment unrated
  35. steve Says :

    “There’s NOTHING in the Bible about abortion,”

    WRONG JERSEY THERE IS!!!!!

    HERE!!!! 


             
    Comment unrated
  36. Chris radulich Says :

    Steve 

      You asked Ken “why to you hate freedom?”  apparently you do not understand the word so here is the definition.

     

    ree·dom   
    ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (fr

    d
    m)
    n.

    The condition of being free of restraints.

    Liberty of the person from slavery, detention, or oppression.

    Political independence.

    Exemption from the arbitrary exercise of authority in the performance of a specific action; civil liberty: freedom of assembly.

    Exemption from an unpleasant or onerous condition: freedom from want.

    The capacity to exercise choice; free will: We have the freedom to do as we please all afternoon.

    Ease or facility of movement: loose sports clothing, giving the wearer freedom.

    Frankness or boldness; lack of modesty or reserve: the new freedom in movies and novels.

    The right to unrestricted use; full access: was given the freedom of their research facilities.

    The right of enjoying all of the privileges of membership or citizenship: the freedom of the city.

    A right or the power to engage in certain actions without control or interference: “the seductive freedoms and excesses of the picaresque form” (John W. Aldridge).

    Now you are the one attempting to prohibit an action, therefore you are the one against freedom.

     

    Also you say “So why is my belief system so wrong guys.  Ya fell into a trick box.  It’s wrong because you say it’s wrong? “

    Actually yes it is wrong for me because I say it is. Same as All the other billions of people on this planet who are not christian. It is right for you because you say it is right, which is fine. What is not fine is you taking your belief system and imposing it on others. When you make the argument that something is wrong because your god says so, what you are  saying is that you have no valid arguement and the opions of others who do not share your beliefs are irrelevent.

     

    By the way where is your proof that you are gods intermediator?

     

     

     

     

     

     


             
    Comment unrated
  37. EsotericWombat Says :

    Ten Commandments again.  Cute.  You know damned well what he meant


             
    Comment unrated
  38. steve Says :

    Chris radulich=Fucking elitist!


             
    Comment unrated
  39. Bah elitist? So Chris thinks your wrong but supports your right to think however you choose as long as you dont expect him to agree.  You think Chris is wrong - but do you support his right to think so? That would mean you would have to support his right to believe in choice. Do you do that? 

    What makes your “morality” worth anything at all Steve? Because you believe it? That I will buy. Because someone told you it was right? I know your not overly religious so I doubt it was the Priest or anything, but why do you know your right?  I’m not really seeing this trap or box or whatever you think you caught people in. Feels pretty comfie to me.


             
    Comment unrated
  40. PhiloTBG Says :

    Some relevant words from SusanG of DailyKos:

    I’m just trying to tune in to the logic here of this fetishization of the fetus, this cult of the blastula. As far as I can tell, the “reasoning” must go something like this: Embryos are innocent and sinless, unlike the rest of humankind, therefore God commands that they are somehow deserving of treatment as a special class (although it’s hard to justify the God-induced early miscarriage rate under this argument … but never mind). But watch out, kiddo. Once you draw that first lungful of breath, sin must get sucked into your lungs like a couple gallons of evil in sick building syndrome, because … Baby, you are on your own. Yeah, you and your mama too, if she’s not of the right economic class. No child care, crappy and undersubsidized health care, no Head Start, no school lunches, no student aid to dig your sorry ass out of the mess you were born into, no federal job training if the conservatives continue their slash and burn budget cuts (but you can join the military, babe). Once you draw that first fateful breath, you’re just as worthless as the rest of us … and part of the growing legion of the discarded, shamed, blamed and forgotten, tossed into the dark corners of our “free” society. Crawl your own way out of the ditch the compassionate conservatives dug for you. Little infants who respirate, be on notice: You are the embarrassing debris left over from the American dream. Get used to it.

    I can’t say I really enjoy what started out as a historical/policy debate about abortion with a rightwinger like Steve. He’s not going to change his mind and he’s certainly not going to change ours. In this case Steve is just being a troll. I do think abortion policy debates can be very valuable within the Democratic community. Of course, that doesn’t work when you’re arguing with someone about whether we’re all going to hell (or should go to prison, not sure which is worse) for believing in the right to choose.

    Oh well, this isn’t ever going to be the place for a Blue-only discourse on democratic policy. Hopefully next time, though, the good policy suggestions about keeping abortion safe, legal, and rare won’t get hijacked by the few hardline conservatives here. We could make a difference if we liberals use the opportunity to talk to each other without the distraction of venomous debate on what should have been a day of celebration.


             
    Comment unrated
  41. steve Says :

    Cranky:

    Actually your latest comment is inviting and deserves a softer answer.  I believe what I believe out of instinct.  If it’s smooth and fluid and natural, I believe in it.  (That just sounded overtly sexual, I think) Anyhow, when I see the concept of abortion, to me it’s like seeing a red flash.  When I see the issue of the death penalty I see the same color or feel.  It’s hot, it’s burning, it’s nails on the chalkboard.  Same with politics and elected people.  When I look at Bush, I see him as a good guy.  Hell, I saw Clinton as a good guy.   Those two individuals have some corruptions in their lives that I cannot overlook and I see those issues as immoral, yet those two are good genuine guys.  You may have icky bad feelings on Bush and that’s ok, I see that, but I don’t. Bush is a moral person but is not innocent of immorality.  

    On the flipside, for example, Barbara Boxer scares the shit out of me because I see that red, broken glass, nails on the chalkboard feeling and colors when she opens her mouth but not so when I see Feinstein even though she looked like an idiot today at the Alito vote.  Kennedy makes me as uncomfortable to look at probably Delay does to you, we all get that way with people or issues. 

    I feel though I have a moral sense is a little more tuned in than others.   I cannot lie to my parents or my wife.  I cannot even fathom the thought of killing someone unless they were trying to kill me.  I cannot steal.  I never have stolen a thing.  For example, I walked out of Home Depot once with a handful of brass pipe fittings I had stuffed in my pocket because my hands were full and forgot to pay for them.  I drove miles back because of the guilt and to pay.  I thought for sure I’d have wanted posters up with my picture.  I asked to see the store manager to turn myself in.  He gave me the freaking fittings for my honesty.  I still feel like shit over it and it was 4 years ago!!  So I have that same guilt feeling on abortion or the death penalty.  Erring on the side of life is the most important for me.

    Why it’s a trick box to me though is I see some arguments people get behind as two faced.  I listened to Sean Hannity this evening on the drive home, not a normal thing believe me, but he was talking to Charles Rangel.  Sean asked Charles Rangel who was a more trustworthy person, Bush or Clinton.  Almost like a programmed monkey Charles answered Clinton with no doubt even with the who Lewinsky thing.  I almost crashed my truck!  We know what Clinton did because we have two people who have said so.  On the WMD’s thing, where all the left calls Bush a liar, can you really prove him wrong for going to war even though he has come out and said what he’s said.  Kerry, Clinton, Kennedy and Rangel all voted for war.  They are just as immoral if Bush is as well.  So why should we listen to Kerry, Clinton, Kennedy and Rangel.  Who the hell is voting for these people?  Why are the Democrats not against them?  Because they are Democrats!!  So Cranky, do you sorta see where I come from?


             
    Comment unrated
  42. steve Says :

    PhiloTBG:

    If you wanna know, I have been sort of invited to come here.  It says Bring It On at the top of this blog.  Nothing makes me happier than to read what Cranky and Bastard say and just “Bring It On”.  What would I do without them?  Hang out on a “red” only site play grab ass while bashing the ACLU or Ted Kennedy or whomever the next liberal waste stood in our way?  Where’s the fun in that?

    If you are calling me a hard line rightwing conservative, thanks!  You are tree hugging, Jane Fonda loving, hippy, pothead…  Does the truth satisfy you?

    Personally the debate went well.  Did you not see both sides of it or do you only want to see one side of it: YOURS!!!!


             
    Comment unrated
  43. john Says :

      The next liberal waste that stood in our way.  Steve you make your side seem as if you are war with everyone who disagrees with you. 


             
    Comment unrated
  44. steve Says :

    I am not against liberals, I am against “liberal wastes”.  Big difference there chief smarty pants!

    Example:  

    Decent Liberals:  Diane Feinstein, Bastard, Cranky, pia…etc

    Liberal Wastes:  Ted Kennedy,  Michael Moore, France, Cindy Sheehan, the ACLU… get it?


             
    Comment unrated
  45. No we want Steve to comment, even if we disagree with him What we also want is Steve to give some policy positions on reducing the need for abortions. The moral ballis in his court here. Abortion is legal, will stay legal for the forseeable future, and opining that we must overturn the law shows the extent of the willingness of many on the right to actually do somethign contructive about abortion. WE recognize that in an ideal world there would be 0 need to have a non medical abortion. Steve just sticks to the outlaw it mantra. I just find it funny that the people most against a right to choose are the least interested in helping a woman not to face said choice.


             
    Comment unrated

Leave a Reply

Note: if you are typing html tags into the comment area manually (i.e. not using the editor) please use the "toggle html source" option above.

Fact-check it!

Enter a keyword, click the button below. Search result opens in new tab / window



Fish.Travel