Pat Endorses Who?

Parent Cafe
201

<p>

</p>

<p>Is it possible to be feminist and support animal rights?</p>

<p>Is it possible to be feminist and be against oppression…support groups like Amnesty International?</p>

<p>Is it possible to be feminist and be against racism?</p>

<p>Is it possible to be feminist and work to champion minority groups and all those who are oppressed?</p>

<p>Then why would it not be possible to be feminist and champion oppressed babies?</p>

<p>Were the leaders of the feminist movement (Susan B. Anthony, etc.) truly feminist?</p>

<p>They were pro-life. The considered it more oppression of women to be in a situation in which abortion was even considered. They championed FEMININITY which includes fertility.</p>

<p>What does the term ‘feminist’ mean, anyway? (Don’t bother with the dictionary definition - connotations are what matter, ultimately.)</p>

<p>Why does feminism have to be tied into the abortion issue? Are you not aware that there has been tremendous propaganda by the abortion industry, directly tying the issue to people’s idea of what feminism is? Feminism=pro-choice - perpetually united in people’s minds.</p>

<p>Yet, there are so many more aspects to feminism. Equal pay for the same jobs, empowerment to take control of one’s life, to not be beholden to or dependent on a MAN for survival.</p>

<p>Well, think about this for a minute: How empowering is it to be dependent on the abortionist? To be coerced into an abortion by an irresponsible boyfriend, pressured by embarrassed parents, forced by finances?</p>

<p>Yeah, all very empowering, right?</p>

<p>Why can pro-choicers not see that the very thing we consider feminist, EMPOWERMENT, is often taken away by easy access to abortion? I know several women personally who told me that they got abortions because their boyfriends or husbands essentially forced them. What weak women! </p>

<p>Easy access to abortion often disempowers women, not empowers them.</p>

<p>The very women that are often used in the pro-choice argument - teens, poor women, victims of rape or incest - are the most vulnerable of all. Does getting an abortion really help them? Oftentimes, no it does not - they just return to the same circumstances, and often the same scenario repeats.</p>

<p>Do you honestly think that these young, poor, victimized women are EMPOWERED by having abortions??? I think not. </p>

<p>The pro-choice argument is really boring. The same tired old lines, again and again. Bottom line is, that these are all just excuses to try to justify KILLING A PERSON.</p>

<p>They are all arguments that seek to de-humanize unborn babies, thus making it ‘ok.’</p>

<p>Well, ya know what? Life sometimes sucks. I intend to raise some holy hell once I ever meet the being(s) who designed this planet. Why did they have to design suffering? Why couldn’t we learn to LOVE on Earth School without it being so painful? And why did they create cockroaches???</p>

<p>Why is childbirth painful? Why are kids difficult to raise? Why do people sometimes get dumped by those they love? </p>

<p>Why does sex sometimes result in pregnancies when none is wanted???</p>

<p>(in the words of Roger Waters) “Why does it have to be so hard?”</p>

<p>These are the perennial questions about life that no one has definite answers to. Religions seek to answer these questions, but they rely on faith when they think they have it all figured out. They really don’t. They’re not anywhere NEAR close to having it all figured out.</p>

<p>Yeah, life really sucks sometimes. Having a baby when it’s not convenient, and having to go thru the hassle of carrying it for 9 months, enduring the pain of childbirth (thank modern medicine for epidurals) and then the emotional turmoil of giving it up for adoption…not fun. Never mind that the noble deed may result in untold JOY for some infertile couple…never mind that that child may indeed be the next Gandhi or Einstein…it’s still a major pain in the ass!</p>

<p>So yeah, make all those excuses, just like the slaveowners did with the Blacks…to dehumanize them and make yourself feel better.</p>

<p>It’s still killing. It’s killing an entity, with a beating heart, fingers and toes, facial expressions, and its own DNA. Why did the Lords of Karma design it that way? Such an inconvenience to the mother. Look at Nature and you see the same pattern.</p>

<p>My belief that abortion is wrong has nothing to do with religion, since I am not religious (although I am spiritual - there is a difference).</p>

<p>I believe abortion is wrong for the same reason I believe that raping the Earth is wrong, war is wrong, oppression is wrong.</p>

<p>Sometimes doing the right thing is a hassle. But ya know what, those 9 months of hassle aren’t really the end of the world. It’s not like the mother loses her life or anything. It’s not like a choice between the mother’s life and the baby’s life - nah, it’s just a choice between the mother’s CONVENIENCE and the baby’s LIFE. It’s just a hassle. Yeah, there are some risks to childbirth, but there are risks to abortion, too. Come to think of it, there are risks to life in general. Nothing new here.</p>

<p>I know this post is going to trigger a lot of angry responses. To those who would respond: I invite you to ask yourself why you have such a contradiction in your thinking - you work to save the planet, the animals, and champion the oppressed…yet you cling to your justifications for killing what MIGHT very well be a baby human???</p>

<p>Such a contradiction.</p>

<p>OK, so we can’t PROVE it’s a baby yet? (not sure how much more evidence you need, but whatever) Well, are you so certain that it’s NOT a baby that you are willing to risk killing it?</p>

<p>Why can you not see the contradiction?</p>

<p>When you have to go to great lengths to justify something, chances are that’s a clue that it’s not a good thing to do.</p>

202

<p>

</p>

<p>Disregarding how loaded the term “oppressed babies” is, the question of whether or not someone can be a feminist and oppose abortion rights arises because many, myself included, believe that women can never achieve equality within a system when they can not even have complete control over their own bodies. My body is not public property, and if it’s subject to other people’s rules and regulations, I can’t ever be free.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Come ON, now! Is that the best you can muster? How weak. Susan B. Anthony lived in a completely different time. I admire much of what she fought for, and many of her ideas were radical for their time. Does that mean that, were she planted into 21st century America, she would be considered a feminist? I doubt she would, by most any measure.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I ALSO do not believe that a woman should EVER be forced, under any circumstances, against having a baby that she would want to raise under ideal circumstances. But how can you not get this? WOMEN ARE NOT BABY MACHINES. Not every woman wants to pop out a baby, and this is NOT ALWAYS DUE TO EXTERNAL FACTORS. To imply that women are naturally inclined to give birth/be “feminine” is, in my opinion, sick.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>“Abortion industry”??? Pllleeeease. If you go to Planned Parenthood’s website, they offer a wealth of information on alternatives to abortion. People don’t want other people to have abortions - I certainly don’t! There is very little money to be had - what is this “abortion industry” you speak of? What could their agenda possibly be? And, finally, how can you dare to talk about propaganda after praising the “Feminists for Life” organization?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I think feminism entails all these things. No, I would not consider someone a feminist simply because they are pro-choice - it takes a lot more than that, but I’d say it’s a pretty essential foundation of the feminist movement. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>The “abortionist”? Do you mean, “the doctor”? If that’s what you’re asking, I don’t think it’s any less empowering than being dependent on whomever is facillitating in the birthing process (whether it be the same doctor, or a midwife…) People don’t generally give birth alone. I also would support women giving themselves abortions, if it could be done safely. </p>

<p>Your point about the irresponsible boyfriend, embarrassed parents, etc. is a cheap shot (and, I think, absurd, too). To be pro-choice does not mean, under ANY circumstances, that we support those harmful institutions/relationships/circumstances. You cannot seem to grasp that there are other reasons for women to have abortions. Why is this??? If I got pregnant now, I would have an abortion, despite the fact that my family and boyfriend would support me no matter what my decision was, ultimately. I would have an abortion because childbirth does not currently align with my goals in life. Why can you not understand this, it’s so simple!</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I have addressed this at length. Go after the oppressive systems in place. By all means, I’ll join you, in a heartbeat. I would like to see every abortion that occurs for these reasons eliminated. You’re not coming at abortion from a perspective seeking to empower women, though - you’re, in your own words, looking out for “oppressed babies”. Just call a spade a spade, because you certainly aren’t fooling me. It’s such a joke that you’d even carry on this farce about feminism, while denying women personal agency and implying that they all seek abortions for the same two reasons.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Return to being raped?? Yes, I absolutely think getting an abortion solves one aspect of the problem for victims of rape, incest, etc. Does that mean that help starts and ends with abortion? Absolutely not. You don’t seem to understand that many within the pro-choice movement are actively crusading to end rape, incest, abuse, etc.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Not particularly, no. I wouldn’t use that word. They are absolutely disempowered, however, when forced against their will into childbirth.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I think feti are humans. How do you account for that? I never once denied their status as humans. </p>

<p>The rest of your post was too nauseating to reply to, actually. Perhaps I will make an attempt after a long bath.</p>

203

<p>

</p>

<p>So then you are admitting that it is acceptable for humans to kill other humans when convenient? when the killing human is bigger and stronger than the killed human?</p>

204

<p>“To use your own argument, just because burglary is against the law, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. Just as reversing Roe v. Wade won’t mean abortions won’t happen. What do you propose to stop those coat hanger abortions?”</p>

<p>My argument is this:</p>

<p>If we legalize burglary, we have a lot of burglaries, and very few armed robberies.
If we making burglary illegal, we have far fewer burglaries, and the occasional armed robbery.</p>

<p>You’d be crazy to consider the former option to be the superior.</p>

205

<p>

</p>

<p>Don’t ever attribute words to me that I did not in fact say, ever again. </p>

<p>The fact that I believe a woman is completely within bounds to have an abortion has nothing to do with her being “bigger and stronger” than the fetus, and no, I do not feel that size and strength are criteria in deciding who lives and who dies.</p>

206

<p>Quote:
"If one looks at the issue from a strict biological/scientific point of view, then one would ask, "At what point does the fetus dispaly the six characteristics of life?

  1. Living things are made of cells
  2. Living things obtain and use energy
  3. Living things grow and develop
  4. Living things reproduce
  5. Living things respond to their environment
  6. Living things adapt to their environment</p>

<p>Does anyone disagree that a fetus is a living thing?"</p>

<p>If you want a support for your point, this definition of life just does not do it. So, according to point 4 a pre-puberescent child is not “life”? How about Terri Schiavio and points 5 and 6?</p>

207

<p>Certainly a fetus is life. It is not a human being, only a potential human being.
The issue of whether or not is “life” is a red herring. Dozens of menstruated ova and billions of otherwise unused ejaculated sperm are also “life.”</p>

<p>I’m still waiting for the hordes of anti-Choice proponents who aren’t would-be ayahtollahs to join me in a plan to reduce abortions by affirming the right to widely distributed birth control and providing fact-based sex education. (The notion that kids are picking up factually based info on their own is laughable…look at some of the “Before” testing in Health classes that <em>do</em> teach fact-based sex education.)</p>

<p>Listen to the crickets chirp…</p>

208

<p>

</p>

<p>Actually, I think quite a few studies have shown that abortions occur at relatively stable rates, whether or not they’re legal.</p>

209

<p>More McCain:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Source: New York Times, p. A17 Jan 25, 2000 </p>

<p>I mentioned this to a friend who is a long time police officer. She said that would result in a huge up turn in way after the “fact” rape assertions against unknown perps by females who “can’t remember” any of the details and didn’t report the offense because they were traumatized and repressed the event. </p>

<p>She observed the hypocracy of McCain’s position and indicated that if he couldn’t see the practical results of this position he probably should not lead the country.</p>

<p>Anyone have other candidates to discuss?</p>

210

<p>I find if remarkable, and telling, that after 30+ years, that the abortionists have not been able to produce a better euphemism for this practice than “choice”.</p>

<p>You all are smart people, you should be able to do better than that. “chirp”</p>

211

<p>lealdragon, I think you covered many valid points in Post #201. I, too, see abortion as a patriarchal issue, which denies the normal biological function of women. Why are children so unwelcome? Feminism sometimes seems to force women to deny their femaleness, to contort themselves into some version of maleness. I don’t think feminism and abortion are necessarily linked, but if they are, I see abortion as one more way to oppress women.</p>

212

<p>BunsenBurner - Those six characteristics of life are not something I made up - check any Biology textbook & it will probably start with that.</p>

<p>You think a fetus or prepubescent child doesn’t reproduce? Ever heard of mitosis or meiosis?</p>

<p>Regarding Teri Schiavo and points 5 & 6. I believe it was noted that she did respond to her environment (i.e. showing recognition when someone familiar entered the room), but even if conscious response is not present, did she not have reflexes? Responding & adapting to the environment does not have to include conscious thought to be achieved (see tropisms) - otherwise how could plants be characterized as “living things”? </p>

<p>Further, it has been demostrated that a fetus will move away from a painful stimulus & respond to various other stimuli while still in the uterus.</p>

<p>The reason the “choice” argument is so frustrating for pro-lifers is that there really is no way to “justify” the pro-choice argument. Abortion is just plain wrong and we AS A NATION should not sanction it.</p>

<p>Pro-lifers aren’t telling the pro-choicers to “never have sex” - fortunately there are birth control options. If you don’t want to be a parent, that is your choice - just use BC. Why is that so difficult?</p>

<p>Once fertilization has ocurred, it is a human “LIFE”. Don’t kill it!</p>

213

<p>To all you anti-choicers- Here is my position:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Yes, the fetus is a human life from the point of fertilization onwards.</p></li>
<li><p>Yes, abortion is the deliberate killing of an innocent human fetus.</p></li>
<li><p>No, it is not a baby and it is not murder.</p></li>
<li><p>No, I have no problem with a mother deciding she wants to kill the innocent human life that is at the time living as a parasite on her own body.</p></li>
<li><p>I would have a big problem with someone forcing me to kill my own fetus.</p></li>
<li><p>No, I do not think the state has any right to restrict my choice in this regard.</p></li>
<li><p>And no, you cannot be a feminist (i.e, interested in the rights of the woman) and anti-choice at the same time.</p></li>
</ol>

214

<p>Personally, I think there is a very, very big difference between “life” and “a life”, and that that difference is key to the debate. I have no problem with ending life - it’s done all the time. Ending a life, however, I find objectionable. The question is when someone can be considered to have a life, i.e. when they can be considered to be a person.</p>

<p>Many pro-life advocates would say at conception; I disagree.</p>

<p>This argument in favor of abortion does not, by the way, even address the multiple societal issues involved with allowing abortion - i.e. all of the net positives for society that it produces.</p>

215

<p>“the abortionists have not been able to produce a better euphemism for this practice than “choice”.”</p>

<p>If “choice” is just a euphemism for abortion, why are all feminist organizations, from Planned Parenthood to NARAL to NOW, just as opposed to the Chinese regime – which is genuinely pro-abortion, and pushes women to have abortions whether they want them or not – as we are to regimes that criminalize abortion?</p>

<p>It’s because choice isn’t a euphemism for anything. We think it’s always loathsome and unjust for governments to make the reproductive decisions and then foist them on women and families. That’s just as true if the policy is pro-abortion and anti-choice (China) as if the policy is anti-abortion and anti-choice (Romania under Ceacescu).</p>

216

<p>

</p>

<p>Please notice the question mark at the end - I was ASKING you if that was what you meant.</p>

217

<p>

</p>

<p>This statement has absolutely NO factual basis. It’s a blow-off and completely meaningless, because you cannot prove it whatsoever.</p>

<p>If anything, there is more evidence supporting the idea that is IS a human (has its own DNA, a beating heart, functioning organs, etc).</p>

218

<p>

</p>

<p>Exactly!</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>That should tell us something!</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Well said! That’s what I was trying to say - people, sex makes babies. We have birth control available that is 99% effective. Is there still a slight risk of becoming pregnant? Yes. But there is risk in everything we do. There’s risk every day that we get in our cars and drive on the highway. We wear our seatbelts and drive carefully, but that does not completely neutralize the risk. We still drive anyway, because we consider it an acceptable risk.</p>

<p>Guess what, that’s just life! Life has risks!</p>

<p>When people have sex, the pleasure from sex is such that they are willing to accept that small risk. If the birth control doesn’t work, there are plenty of infertile couples willing to adopt. Sure, it’s inconvenient, but it is certainly not devastating! </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Those in favor of selective breeding would argue the same. Kill all the babies likely to be short, or fat, or stupid, or ugly…we’ll have a better society, right?</p>

<p>That’s easy for you to say, when you don’t think a fetus has any value, since you can always just get pregnant again, right? But it is this same line of thinking that favors killing any ‘undesirables’ - where do you draw the line? What about handicapped people? ■■■■■■■■ people? </p>

<p>Already abortion is making it easier to have designer babies. Already couples are aborting their babies because of very minor flaws that could be easily corrected.</p>

<p>Where does it end?</p>

<p>(BTW, Personally, since I believe in reincarnation and karma, I believe that abortion is actually MORE harmful, spiritually, to the woman and the abortionist than to the incarnating soul. Not provable at all, of course, since it’s just a personal belief, but belief in karma sure does explain a lot, about why people are born in adverse circumstances. Just something to think about.)</p>

219

<p>(Referring back to #217) On the other hand, can you actually prove, leadragon, that a microscopic piece of fetal tissue is, in fact, a human being? …
And why should a female ill-equipped emotionally, physically–or perhaps both–to endure a pregnancy and the life-long ramifications that follow, be forced to do so simply because others have interpreted for her when life begins? Someone else has decided on her behalf that this tiny speck of genetic material is not only “human,” but a more important human than the vessel carrying it. (At 12 weeks gestation a fetus weighs half an ounce. Human or potential human? Not my call.)</p>

220

<p>

And who put you in charge of the feminist membership list?</p>

<p>I don’t know ANY women that I would call anti-feminist. But then, I really only know educated women of a similar background. I DO know a number of high-achieving, feminist women who support pro-life positions. So your comment above is invalid.</p>