IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

54 Pages V  « < 52 53 54  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Abortion, thoughts
insurrection
post May 6 2005, 08:28 PM
Post #796


Very busy w. school >_<
****

Group: Activist
Posts: 2,267
Joined: 18-April 04
From: Toronto, ON
Member No.: 2,022




Grimer 54, May 3 2005, 07:45 PM

Right on, although, that argument can be used in reverse: Pro-Choicers calling for an end to the death penalty uses the same logic, I think.
[right][snapback]171456[/snapback][/right]


No, because pro-choicers are not pro-death. There is a difference.



Jackie, May 4 2005, 09:21 AM
...
insurrection writes:

[i]Not to mention the almost comedic contradiction where often proponents of the [i]death
penalty consider themselves to be pro-life on the abortion issue. Not to mention the pro-life terrorists who killed doctors performing abortions. Pro-lifers murdering people. What a joke.
[/I]

Okay, as far as this is concerned .. that isn't me, I'm against the death penalty, I do not go out and kill people or bomb clinics .. don't judge a whole group by one misled person . . that is stereotyping a whole group on account of one or two people. . it isn't me, so this comment has no bearing
on my life.

Incidently, all muslims are not like the ones who bombed the World Trade Organization .. you know?
[right][snapback]171512[/snapback][/right]
[/i]

I should say also that I did not mean to imply that you believed this.
Second, the WTO was not bombed.
As for the WTC bombing, it is not completely clear that al Qaeda was in fact responsible. There is some evidence that points to other groups' responsibility (including the US government, but there are plenty of other threads to discuss this topic on in the forum).


Jackie, May 4 2005, 10:00 AM
...
I don't have to..the courts and lawyers, paralegals and what not, have already come up with anything I'm gonna need to argue my side and win the case. Sure, I could go and drag it all onto this forum and argue til' kingdom come with all the fools that want to argue with me, but honestly? I don't think it's worth my time.
[right][snapback]171521[/snapback][/right]


I find your refutation to be extremely convincing...




Oh wait. Why are you here again? You must think it is worth at least some of your time, otherwise you wouldn't've come back... please do stay though, but try and say something of substance instead of calling us murderers...


Jackie,May 4 2005, 12:16 PM

My "delusions" of having a truly FREE WORLD. .(note:not the NWO New World Order), but a TRULY Free World, where every citizen is protected, under law, from having their insides ripped outta them, from having their very hearts brutalized by a machine .. if that is "delusional thinking" my friend, I am all for it. . I suppose they said the same thing about Martin Luther King in His "I have a dream.." speech, but logic and sentiment measure out in time .. we'll see who's right, who's wrong ..when we see Roe v. Wade overturned, thus ensuring freedom for all men, women, and children, by protecting the lives of them all. Amen to that.
...
[right][snapback]171531[/snapback][/right]


A "truly FREE WORLD" you say. A world in which the state has authority over a woman's body. How much freer we would all be!
Protection from freedom. It's kind of like the capitalist argument about workers being "free" to choose their master.


Jackie, May 4 2005, 02:52 PM
you're being kinda cruel to the "less then four inches long fetus , who has no fully developed organs, who has fused eyelids etc." ... you want to kill 'em all don't you LP, just admit it (you have the soul of a murderer) You are obviously one of the people discussed in 1981 Senate Hearings on the Beginning of Life who say: even though life BEGINS at conception, we are not prepared to value this life at their most fundamental stages .. . so you choose to give the baby no voice .. good for you. I, however, am opting to GIVE THE BABY a choice, GIVE THE BABY A CHANCE. . and you find my comments offensive. After all the "fetus" as you call it ... " has no way to have any intellect as the organs needed for it are not developed, a fetus which cannot live outside of the womb, who in other words is not functioning human being yet"
...


As has been previously said, if this is your argument, you might as well say that any masturbation or contraception is murder as well.


Jackie, May 4 2005, 02:52 PM
Dear Lord oh My God in Heaven .. someone must stand up for them, against people like you .. Someone should give these babies a choice, a chance. . to develop their voice and speak for themselves .. until then, I will continue to speak up for "not fully functionaly human beings" who have no voice ..

I wonder what your opinoin is on the mentally ill or disabled .. they're not fully functioning either. . maybe we should "kill 'm all" but that is straight murder mentality right there. .


To be pro-choice is not to be pro-death. Don't be ridiculous.
Second we return to what I said about God... hardly an authority on moralism. A hypocrite by the gospel definition according to the Bible. This is aside from the point but worth mentioning anyway.


You do not value human life at its initial stages, therefore you believe it is okay to murder in such a case .. I wonder how much you value life at all .. you must have a miserable existence and I feel sorry for you, LP, I hope you find God in your own way, doesn't have to be in a church setting, just find Him, and I hope you sit down and have a good talk w ith her/him/whoever you choose God to be. . that's your only hope, other than that I have no words for you except .. your arguments are not only ignorant but based on illogic, and, no offense sista, but, resist that urge to kill another human being because you're gonna wind up facing someone who will not value your life either. . and they're gonna shred you to pieces .. It's called Karma, baby, and its very real. well peace out, Jackie
[right][snapback]171552[/snapback][/right]


We do value human life at its initial stages. However we do not define these terms in the same way so you may see it differently. Our position is consistent with humanism, though.


Jackie, May 4 2005, 06:06 PM
Oh, okay, and since most abortions are performed on POOR BLACK WOMEN .. I guess you are advocating stamping out this groups whole existence based on poverty .. I see so many of my black brothers and sisters being murdered in abortions, it is sickening .. and you can have a great "quality of life" without being rich .. In fact I would argue that the best "quality of life" exists among the impoverished segments of our population .. yeah I'm talkin' about the ghetto .. and the Wworst "quality of life" exists among rich WHITE folk .. no offense .. and who do you think benefits by stamping out the whole black population with abortion .. yeah that's right . .rich people .. go figure.
[right][snapback]171594[/snapback][/right]


Do you honestly believe that people with no hope of achieving anything are happier than those who have more opportunity than they need and are wealthy. I would not be one to claim that wealth = happiness, but you cannot reasonably argue that there is no relationship whatsoever. Classism again is the issue as it is in so many other cases. I would probably take the pro-life position more seriously if capitalism were not the current economic system, or perhaps even consider being pro-life. However this is impractical at the moment, and also ignores the important issue of a woman's right to decide what happens to her body.


Jackie, May 5 2005, 02:28 PM
...
I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to your death the right to say it.


It's interesting that you are so libertarian in your views on speech yet you refuse to transfer this to the abortion issue.


Jackie, May 5 2005, 02:28 PM
Definintely not, (if that were true we should all be murdered because all our parents our sinnners) so I refuse to say that there is EVER a case where abortions should be performed. . My God is it so hard to understand, if I were pregnant because of RAPE or the baby in my womb was a threat to my health, I would take it in trust and faith in God and have the baby no matter what. . that is how strongly I believe in ending abortion. . try me .. anyway. . I would give my life for my baby if need be, so I still do not understand why other people want abortion continued .. but not everyone is to that kind of a level so I do understand. .


Fundamentalism is never rational...
Also I should say that this position is fine for you, but not for every woman. Not all women would kill themselves for the sake of a child who would be motherless (wouldn't that suck), especially not if she were a single mother. That is what it means to allow a woman to make her own decision, rather than having the state ram it down her throat (either pro-abortion or pro-life, I should say also. That is to say, if she is willing to die as a result of pregnancy, she should be free to do so, though it would be extremely unwise).


Jackie, May 5 2005, 02:28 PM
On the other hand, I do respect your right to have an opinion and since you genuinely care about the women involved (unfortunely you do not have the same kind of sympathy for the baby) but since you do . .and planned parenthood is truly about choice because in their literature they list the joys of becoming a parent, and leave the choice to you .. as long as abortion is legal I would urge you and every woman to not kill their baby .. and I hopefully someday I'll give it a shot and put an end to this tragedy .. aight, that's my take on it .. no more debating because I have nothing left to say. . peace out, Jackie
[right][snapback]171702[/snapback][/right]


Ironically enough, in some ways sympathy for the child is exactly what is at the root of the pro-choice position. If there were a less classist economic system, I think the pro-choice position wouldn't have quite as strong a position.


Grimer 54,May 5 2005, 06:57 PM
...
SO yeah, I think the law should be pro-choice.
[right][snapback]171735[/snapback][/right]


Exactly. Let everyone live by their own value set. Do not impose your views on others.


Star_light_s0ul,May 5 2005, 07:10 PM
...
So as a society under central control and willingly being told whats best for you, you need to ask whats of more value, a womans life, or an embryo who isn't even aware it exists. Who suffers more?
And it certainly doesn't do to be the victim of an unwanted birth which i'm testament to unfortunately, and can tell you first hand, i wish i'd never been born into a world that didn't want me here, so imagine living with a mother who resents you? or gives you to a care system where the whole of society seems to resent you? its no fun, believe
I empathise with peoples views on being against abortion, but it surely is the individuals choice and not that of a mob majority whos intentions may well seem wholesome.

And now i gotta go through that whole messy business of dying zmat2.gif
[right][snapback]171738[/snapback][/right]


Spot on.


Grimer 54, May 6 2005, 10:59 AM
...
Which is what you are saying, if you're arguing that someone who has developed a little jiminy cricket conscience would say, "I'd rather die now, then live." That's a defeatist attitude, that in my opinion, is never, EVER, logical.
...
[right][snapback]171793[/snapback][/right]


That's easy for us to say. Ask someone who is less fortunate and you may get a different perspective.



This post has been edited by insurrection: May 6 2005, 08:38 PM


--------------------

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mars
post May 6 2005, 08:46 PM
Post #797


www.soundclick.com/ MarsThatRevolutionarySister
***

Group: Activist
Posts: 211
Joined: 6-April 05
From: ona MOVE!
Member No.: 3,288



I actually don't think this conversation has gotten off topic: it's actually the whole point.

WE CAN'T GET EVERYONE TO AGREE ON THE NATURE OF LIFE, ITS START DATE, ETC!

That's why the law says, AND MUST CONTINUE TO SAY, Women have the right to a safe and legal abortion. It doesn't say every woman under certain circumstances must have one! It is up to her, in consultation to whomever she needs to consult.

If you don't believe in abortion, then by all means, DON'T HAVE ONE. I'm not going to be judgemental about somebody else's religion and beliefs -- but I will speak up when you belittle a woman's ability to decide what's best in her life.

I support your right to believe abortion is killing a teeny person or whatever -- but I will also stand outside in the cold on a Saturday morning to make sure you don't chase women away from our clinics!

I advise that people regularly check out whose company our principles put us in. If you find yourself agreeing strongly with fascists, well, that's probably not good..

Finally, check this. Who does it serve for all these men to keep saying "Well, I'm not for abortion but I'm pro-choice"? (Not just here -- it's a popular line among young somewhat-openminded american men.) Sure you can imply that you are more MORAL or value life more, and that those who actually think abortions are fine are "sick."

How convenient for you that most of us who think abortions are fine JUST HAPPEN TO BE WOMEN, the people who will be judged no matter which "choice" we make?! If we have many kids, or can't handle the one we've got, folks say, "Why'd she have all those kids if she can't handle em?" If we choose not to have any ever, people say, "She's a dyke or a spinster or just doesn't love life" or other equally intelligent summations. And if we have an abortion, we are called every name in the book -- Names that ought to be used towards the REAL haters of life on this planet, the Fascists who run war machines when the multi-death corporations aren't quite enough and need a little something something...

So meanwhile, where are these men who were the other half of the life/embryo/fetus in question? Fighting beside us to make sure we even HAVE a choice? Or sitting on the sidelines hinting they're holier than thou, purer than thou, more moral than thou? But still want to be on record as Pro-choice? Of course -- you all know that your woman, mom, aunty, sister, daughter could end up in a situation where in your heart you'd support her terminating a pregnancy. You're just not willing to fight to actually defend that right. And of course nobody wants to risk being called a murderer.

So, to all the billions of men who like to taut this Have My Cake And Eat It Too, I hope you'll at least not make women's lives even harder by making us ashamed that sometimes we feel an abortion is the best choice in a situation.

((Can't believe someone had the audacity to mention 'meat hooks' on this thread. That feels like some 8-year old spreading crazy ideas when the teacher steps out, and all the other boys sit all wide-eyed, going, oh my god, is that true? I sure can't intelligently argue that it ISN'T, cause I'M EIGHT YEARS OLD!")))

P.S. Insurrection, THANK YOU for taking on some of the above post. I missed that because I was writing mine at that same time. And I STAND CORRECTED: let it never be said that a woman can be just as holier than thou and mean (boy, Jackie, how dare you address LP in such a hateful and disrespectful way...) as any man. Just to prove the point that abortion is not a WOMEN'S ISSUE: it is an issue of all people, and what position they hold when it comes to respecting the beautiful diversity of humanity.

This post has been edited by Mars: May 6 2005, 08:55 PM


--------------------
This is not a poem This is the eye of poverty
This is not freedom This is hypocrisy
These are not stories These are our blood-etched blueprints for the rebellion
Pro-choice. Pro-love. Prophylactics.
It ain't over till your brother counts the votes.
This is no democracy -- it's an auction.
myspace.com/marsthatrevolutionarysister
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Star_light_s0ul
post May 7 2005, 03:55 AM
Post #798


Libertarian socialist
**

Group: Activist
Posts: 176
Joined: 8-April 05
From: UK England (northern monkey)
Member No.: 3,292



QUOTE(rev79 @ May 7 2005, 04:26 AM)
QUOTE(Mumia Guan Be Free @ May 6 2005, 10:32 PM)
Abortion is the killing of a life and is immoral and sick.  I'm Pro-Choice though
[right][snapback]171871[/snapback][/right]


That was an odd statement, to say the least.
[right][snapback]171879[/snapback][/right]



Ditto blink.gif


--------------------
From Nova Express- William S Burroughs

Listen to my last words anywhere. Listen to my last words any world. Listen all you boards syndicates and governments of the earth.
And you powers behind what filth deals consummated in what lavatory to take what is not yours. To sell the ground from unborn feet forever.

"Don't let them see us. Don't tell them what we are doing"
Are these the words of the all-powerful? boards and syndicates of the earth?


-------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspirations include-
ZDLR, Saul WilliamS Burroughs William Hicks, Chris floyd Pink cornell, to name but a few.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Grimer 54
post May 7 2005, 04:35 AM
Post #799


loveable nemesis
****

Group: Activist
Posts: 3,623
Joined: 17-December 03
From: New York City
Member No.: 1,381



Suicide's not death? Look I'm all about the afterlife, but 'death' in the earthly sense, is when your body ceases to function. Suicide is when you choose to stop your bodies ability to function, by killing yourself. When I talk about death, I'm not talking about some spiritual death, I'm talking about mortal death, which suicide certainly brings about.

And... I am pro-choice! grin.gif


--------------------
This is the FiFTY-FOUR effect: (the loveable nemesis)
QUOTE(Grimer 54)
Society begets government. Anarchist theory is actually just a pseudo-intellectual state of denial, an idealistic illusion that can never be more than a wholly unfulfilled dream. Thus, it is a counter-productive measure that actually weakens, rather than improves the progress of society as government is inevitable in the maintenance of civilization. Therefore, it is infinitely more effective to pursue political upheaval through the system, rather then against the system. For despite all of its flaws, both Democracy and Capitalism are still rooted within the people themselves by rational and realistic means. That is not to say I advocate the status quo, but instead, a moral pursuit to right the endless wrongs brought on by the evils of human nature, via an unintimidated, undaunted, unmitigated spirit of liberty and justice for all, rather then the destructive hypocrisy of your so-called "revolution."

"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend, to the death, your right to say it".
- attributed to Voltaire

Still a sheltered idealist... but learning:
This is no Oasis.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lostphoenix
post May 7 2005, 11:12 AM
Post #800


soul rebel
****

Group: Activist
Posts: 3,037
Joined: 31-December 04
Member No.: 3,077



the modern sense of what death is, is distorted.
aboriginals for example decide when to die and just simply stop their body's functions when their time is over. suicide? no, being tuned with nature, like animals...if they do not find death as a prey, strangely you can observe them knowing they are going to die and seem to accept it...are these indigenous people and animals commiting suicide?

anyway, that's again hijacking this topic into another topic...lets shut up....

mortal death and spiritual death goes hand in hand... i have had near death experience...so if any taker, thread on death?


--------------------
Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ImperialAerosolK...
post May 7 2005, 03:52 PM
Post #801


Freedom Advocate
****

Group: Activist
Posts: 5,060
Joined: 21-June 03
From: Vermont
Member No.: 483



i had a fairly ambiguous view on abortion until i read this thread and wished some people had been....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
insurrection
post May 7 2005, 06:46 PM
Post #802


Very busy w. school >_<
****

Group: Activist
Posts: 2,267
Joined: 18-April 04
From: Toronto, ON
Member No.: 2,022



QUOTE(ImperialAerosolKid @ May 7 2005, 07:52 PM)
i had a fairly ambiguous view on abortion until i read this thread and wished some people had been....
[right][snapback]172072[/snapback][/right]

had been... ?


--------------------

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
yabasta
post May 8 2005, 02:59 AM
Post #803


Crazy
****

Group: Activist
Posts: 2,124
Joined: 10-December 03
From: Land of the Dead
Member No.: 1,317



aborted i am guessing.


--------------------
"The more sensitive you are, the more likely you are to be brutalised, develop scabs and never evolve. Never allow yourself to feel anything because you always feel too much." - Marlon Brando
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Star_light_s0ul
post May 8 2005, 03:16 AM
Post #804


Libertarian socialist
**

Group: Activist
Posts: 176
Joined: 8-April 05
From: UK England (northern monkey)
Member No.: 3,292



QUOTE(ImperialAerosolKid @ May 7 2005, 11:52 PM)
i had a fairly ambiguous view on abortion until i read this thread and wished some people had been....
[right][snapback]172072[/snapback][/right]



Ambiguous... ?
Thats a big word kid huh.gif


--------------------
From Nova Express- William S Burroughs

Listen to my last words anywhere. Listen to my last words any world. Listen all you boards syndicates and governments of the earth.
And you powers behind what filth deals consummated in what lavatory to take what is not yours. To sell the ground from unborn feet forever.

"Don't let them see us. Don't tell them what we are doing"
Are these the words of the all-powerful? boards and syndicates of the earth?


-------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspirations include-
ZDLR, Saul WilliamS Burroughs William Hicks, Chris floyd Pink cornell, to name but a few.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ImperialAerosolK...
post May 8 2005, 05:08 AM
Post #805


Freedom Advocate
****

Group: Activist
Posts: 5,060
Joined: 21-June 03
From: Vermont
Member No.: 483



^Thanks pops
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Star_light_s0ul
post May 8 2005, 05:19 AM
Post #806


Libertarian socialist
**

Group: Activist
Posts: 176
Joined: 8-April 05
From: UK England (northern monkey)
Member No.: 3,292



^ your name?? i shortened it to kid, you chose it! i aint talking down to ya, you can call me star or soul, no need to be ageist tongue.gif


--------------------
From Nova Express- William S Burroughs

Listen to my last words anywhere. Listen to my last words any world. Listen all you boards syndicates and governments of the earth.
And you powers behind what filth deals consummated in what lavatory to take what is not yours. To sell the ground from unborn feet forever.

"Don't let them see us. Don't tell them what we are doing"
Are these the words of the all-powerful? boards and syndicates of the earth?


-------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspirations include-
ZDLR, Saul WilliamS Burroughs William Hicks, Chris floyd Pink cornell, to name but a few.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
somasoul
post May 13 2005, 12:43 PM
Post #807


Shit Disruptor
****

Group: Activist
Posts: 1,340
Joined: 28-August 04
From: Baltimore
Member No.: 2,633



QUOTE(ImperialAerosolKid @ May 7 2005, 03:52 PM)
i had a fairly ambiguous view on abortion until i read this thread and wished some people had been....
[right][snapback]172072[/snapback][/right]


It's always strange to me........................


--------------------
Instead of building newer and larger weapons of mass destruction, I think mankind should try to get more use out of the ones we have.

- Jack Handey
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jasonkennedy
post May 21 2005, 07:13 AM
Post #808


Junior Activist
*

Group: Activist
Posts: 1
Joined: 20-May 05
Member No.: 3,400



I was questioned one day on what I thought about abortion rights. The question came out of left field, not to mention that it was being asked by a man. Regardless, my composure returned quickly, and I replied, “is it really up to me, I mean, I’m not the one who’s pregnant and trying to get an abortion, so I really don’t have a say so in the matter, you know.” And as abruptly as the question came, the topic was dropped.
Later that night, I had been talking with my mom, you know, how your day and such was. When I eventually came crossed with that part of my day where my coworker had asked me that question, my mom wanted to know what I had to say on the subject, so I obliged. The first thin I said was, “first of all, men have zero authority on the matter.”
“Really, why’s that?” My mother asked.
“Well ok, let’s look at the fact here mom.”
1. “Men don’t carry a child for forty weeks.”
2. “Men aren’t the ones sacrificing their bodies for an event that is increasingly resulting in the cowardly departure of men not willing to hold themselves accountable for their actions.”
3. “Men don’t have to endure the psychological aspects of an abortion like women do.”
4. “Men also don’t have the draw back of decreased ability of ever giving birth after having gotten an abortion.”
5. “Not to mention, I think it’s a monumental mistake, on the male’s behalf, for a man to try and impose his will on to a woman for any reason, much less some bureaucratic male three thousand miles away, doing it indirectly through legislation.”
Smiling, I think my mother realized just how much thought I had given this problem, prior to calling her. “I wasn’t aware that you had such extreme views pertaining to abortion. I thought you were just going to tell me whether you agreed or not. But apparently, you have questioned yourself as to whether men have any right in the matter at all.”
“Well mom, the issue has been debated heavily by the legislation, the media, religion, support groups, and the list goes on. But what I don’t understand is, somewhere during the years of debate, the issue had transformed from a women’s rights issue into a human rights issue. Why?”
“I don’t know, probably so men could have their opinions heard without women telling them to mind their business.”
“Nice call mom. I was hoping you’d go in this direction. Because, when abortion, as a medical procedure, first became a topic of hot debate, it was a women’s rights issue being fought by women against abortion clinics and providers, and law makers. Most of which were male, which is always a losing battle at first. But after a while, a few men became sympathetic to this particular women’s rights struggle that had been going on for some time, and were really helpful at first.”
“Then for some reason, men started to misconstrue the foundation that this issue had originally represented. Men started to consign elaborate defenses as to why this was a human rights issue, mainly so men could justify their ‘invasive’ candor with a women’s right to make a choice. But what really gets my goad, is that this behavior is repetitive. Women saw this behavior with contraceptive rights, voting rights, working right, and almost any other civil rights infringement that had been imposed on them, that had originally started out as a women’s movement or cause. That, in its self, should be apparent to the female population.”
“God, your really on one today aren’t you. You know all men are not like that, and to alienate them would only prompt a preemptive mentality of trying to take control of a situation. One that you apparently feel they have no right to even approach.”
“I’m not trying to say that no man is genuinely good, mom, but if women don’t learn that the recruiting of male sympathizers for the dual purpose of sheer numbers and legislative prowess in the law making process, men are going to continue to undermine any real authority women might have over themselves. The bottom line is this. The men calling the shots are being driven by obsolete dogmas that are directly paralleled to a mentality of men that existed thousands of years ago. It’s past time for an upgrade in man’s perception of equality for women. Equal rights doesn’t mean that they’re decided on equally, some issues just aren’t for a man, or a woman, to decide, and any issue that does concern both, should be right down the middle.”
“This brings me to another point.” I expressed.
“Ya, what’s that?”
“I abhor the notion that the rights women have acquired thus far are the result of man’s willingness to distribute them as seen fit. It is not right for men to believe that they are the harbingers of hope, concerning equal rights for women, when it has required centuries for men to even recognize that they just naturally exist. I also think that men should not feel, that they have to hold a women’s hand in the process of acquiring those inherent rights denied to women for so long by men. Women are more than strong enough to force the acquisition of their own rights without a man inquiring on the matter.”
“I think you lost me. You went from abortion rights to rights in general. What are you trying to getting at?”
“Good question. Let me bring this together, alright?”
“The perception of abortion as an element of being a human rights issue, was a concept created by men seeking grounds in which they could, once again, possess the notion that distributing women’s rights, was a man’s prerogative to consider. This, again, undermines the authority women have over themselves. It is not a man’s right to allot portions of equal rights at their discretion and to do so is leading to the social suicide of our moral female/male relations we’re seeing in the world today.”
“Now, with all of that said, this is where I stand.”
“If men are going to continue to exempt themselves from their responsibility as a part of the traditional family unit, then it is that man’s responsibility to consciously attempt to eradicate the need for abortion to even be an issue in the first place. All it takes is the utilization of his intelligence to come up with, what should be, a wise decision, and discipline to act on it. If a man forsakes that responsibility, unwittingly or not, he then relinquishes that control to the woman’s right of free will, regardless of the circumstances.”
“Well, you can’t get around that. I don’t even know where to begin to comment. You pretty much put the man’s opinion in the grinder, and then you went on to slander their sense of compassion and personal worth. These are some really strong ideas. But I would never make them public. I guess you’re lucky to have a knack to compel others to generate new ideas for themselves. Don’t you?”
“Well. You know me. I try.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
insurrection
post May 23 2005, 06:44 PM
Post #809


Very busy w. school >_<
****

Group: Activist
Posts: 2,267
Joined: 18-April 04
From: Toronto, ON
Member No.: 2,022



QUOTE(The Nation,)
Katha Pollitt -- Subject to Debate [column name]

Virginity or Death!

Imagine a vaccine that would protect women from a serious gynecological cancer. Wouldn't that be great? Well, both Merck and GlaxoSmithKline recently announced that they have conducted successful trials of vaccines that protect against the human papilloma virus. HPV is not only an incredibly widespread sexually transmitted infection but is responsible for at least 70 percent of cases of cervical cancer, which is diagnosed in 10,000 American women a year and kills 4,000. Wonderful, you are probably thinking, all we need to do is vaccinate girls (and boys too for good measure) before they become sexually active, around puberty, and HPV--and, in thirty or forty years, seven in ten cases of cervical cancer--goes poof. Not so fast: We're living in God's country now. The Christian right doesn't like the sound of this vaccine at all. "Giving the HPV vaccine to young women could be potentially harmful," Bridget Maher of the Family Research Council told the British magazine New Scientist, "because they may see it as a license to engage in premarital sex." Raise your hand if you think that what is keeping girls virgins now is the threat of getting cervical cancer when they are 60 from a disease they've probably never heard of.

I remember when people rolled their eyeballs if you suggested that opposition to abortion was less about "life" than about sex, especially sex for women. You have to admit that thesis is looking pretty solid these days. No matter what the consequences of sex--pregnancy, disease, death--abstinence for singles is the only answer. Just as it's better for gays to get AIDS than use condoms, it's better for a woman to get cancer than have sex before marriage. It's honor killing on the installment plan.

Christian conservatives have a special reason to be less than thrilled about the HPV vaccine. Although not as famous as chlamydia or herpes, HPV has the distinction of not being preventable by condoms. It's Exhibit A in those gory high school slide shows that try to scare kids away from sex, and it is also useful for undermining the case for rubbers generally--why bother when you could get HPV anyway? In 2000, Congressman (now Senator) Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, who used to give gruesome lectures on HPV for young Congressional aides, even used HPV to propose warning labels on condoms. With HPV potentially eliminated, the antisex brigade will lose a card it has regarded as a trump unless it can persuade parents that vaccinating their daughters will turn them into tramps, and that sex today is worse than cancer tomorrow. According to New Scientist, 80 percent of parents want the vaccine for their daughters--but their priests and pastors haven't worked them over yet.

What is it with these right-wing Christians? Faced with a choice between sex and death, they choose death every time. No sex ed or contraception for teens, no sex for the unwed, no condoms for gays, no abortion for anyone--even for that poor 13-year-old pregnant girl in a group home in Florida. I would really like to hear the persuasive argument that this middle-schooler with no home and no family would have been better off giving birth against her will, and that the State of Florida, which totally failed to keep her safe, should have been allowed, against its own laws, to compel this child to bear a child. She was too young to have sex, too young to know her own mind about abortion--but not too young to be forced onto the delivery table for one of the most painful experiences human beings endure, in which the risk of death for her was three times as great as in abortion. Ah, Christian compassion! Christian sadism, more likely. It was the courts that showed humanity when they let the girl terminate her pregnancy.

As they flex their political muscle, right-wing Christians increasingly reveal their condescending view of women as moral children who need to be kept in line sexually by fear. That's why antichoicers will never answer the call of prochoicers to join them in reducing abortions by making birth control more widely available: They want it to be less available. Their real interest goes way beyond protecting fetuses--it's in keeping sex tied to reproduction to keep women in their place. If preventing abortion was what they cared about, they'd be giving birth control and emergency contraception away on street corners instead of supporting pharmacists who refuse to fill prescriptions and hospitals that don't tell rape victims about the existence of EC. David Hager (see Ayelish McGarvey's stunning exposé, and keep in mind that unlike godless me she is a churchgoing evangelical Christian) would never use his position with the FDA to impose his personal views of sexual morality on women in crisis. Instead of blocking nonprescription status for emergency contraception on the specious grounds that it will encourage teen promiscuity, he would take note of the six studies, three including teens, that show no relation between sexual activity and access to EC. He would be calling the loudest for Plan B to be stocked with the toothpaste in every drugstore in the land. How sexist is denial of Plan B? Antichoicers may pooh-pooh the effectiveness of condoms, but they aren't calling to restrict their sale in order to keep boys chaste.

While the FDA dithers, the case against selling EC over the counter weakens by the day. Besides the now exploded argument that it will let teens run wild, opponents argue that it prevents implantation of a fertilized egg--which would make it an "abortifacient" if you believe that pregnancy begins when sperm and egg unite. However, new research by the Population Council shows that EC doesn't work by blocking implantation; it only prevents ovulation. True, it's not possible to say it never blocks implantation, James Trussell, director of the Office of Population Research at Princeton, told me, and to antichoice hard-liners once in a thousand times is enough. But then, many things can block implantation, including breast-feeding. Are the reverends going to come out for formula-feeding now?

"It all comes down to the evils of sex," says Trussell. "That's an ideological position impervious to empirical evidence."

Link: http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050530&s=pollitt

This post has been edited by insurrection: May 23 2005, 06:44 PM


--------------------

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

54 Pages V  « < 52 53 54
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 27th October 2020 - 04:32 AM