Journal tomhudson's Journal: Interesting read ... 69
update Thanks to Some Woman for this link as described here.For doubters, I've see the same behaviour as described in the linked article.
Thanks to leoPetr for the link
Quote:
When I was researching this book,] I was happy to make distinctions and say, Well, we do have evidence that there's a wing of the pro-life movement that supports child care. But [what I found is that] there is no wing. And the opposition that we're facing to these issues is from these pro-life groups. An alarming pattern emerges: Not only do they want to take away legal and safe abortion, they want to stop people from having access to contraception. Coupling with that, they want to strip people of opportunities to put their children -- whether they wanted them or not or can afford them or not -- into child care.
Where does this lead? What is the point of this? How can you be against child care if you're against helping people plan their families? If you don't want to help people have limited numbers of children, why are you stripping them of the very things that make that possible? The only conclusion that this path leads to is one: The modern family is deeply offensive to the Christian right. The family structures in which we are living today, in which both parents are equal and they both bring home a living, they get to choose the number of children they have to what they can support and want -- that is offensive to the pro-life establishment. The whole reason why none of their programs are leading to fewer abortions is because that's simply not the point. The point isn't about abortion, it's about the family. It's about what the family looks like, it's about who's in it, who's leading it, who has the power, and who's the spiritual head.
While it sounds like a cliché, it's the truth, and we can't let the fact that it sounds like a cliché cloud the fact that it's the actual truth of what they're up to. If we ignore it because it seems passé, it will be our reality sooner than we think.
Raise em (Score:2)
I am not the biggest fan of the Abortion , but it is a persons right to choose
In Judaism , it is allowed in certain circumstances (IE: may put the mothers health at risk)as an interesting footnote .
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
The article makes an interesting read because it points out the inconsistency in the pro-life movement wanting people to NOT use contraceptives, thus leading to ore abortions and more child abuse, child poverty, etc.
Besides, if all abortions are wrong, including first trimester, then God is the biggest abortionist, because 20% of all pregnancies end before the woman is even aware she might be pregnant.
Read the first comment under the article for a real eye-opener.
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Re:Raise em (Score:1)
The article makes an interesting read because it points out the inconsistency in the pro-life movement wanting people to NOT use contraceptives, thus leading to ore abortions and more child abuse, child poverty, etc.
Why is it that anyone taking the pro-abortion position neatly forgets about adoption? There are plenty of people that are interested in adopting. The demand is high enough that people often adopt children from o
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
While that sounds lovely as a rhetorical smackdown, have you ever tried to be surgically sterilized as a nullipara under the age of 35? Good fucking luck.
Most doctors won't do it, because they are afraid of being sued when you decided that --oops!-- you actually want children. They will give you every condescending statement they can think of: you can't possibly know what you want, you're so young, wh
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Re:Raise em (Score:1)
I'm 38, and it went through pretty quickly. I don't have any experience with trying to get it done any younger than that. I know what you mean about the doctors being paranoid, though-- the form I had to sign before the doctor would do the snip-snip basically waived him from any liability, should I decide to have children in the future.
By the way, the o
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Definition of nullipara:
http://www.wordreference.com/definition/nullipara [wordreference.com]
http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/nu llipara [thefreedictionary.com]
Two points:
Re:Raise em (Score:1)
Details.
A woman who has given birth to 3 children cannot a nullipara.
Given. I should get in the habit of looking up words I'm not familiar with.
(... as an aside, are you volunteering to join me, Ethelred Unraed and FidelCatsro when they're having one of their "pink tutu" moments.
Absolutely.... By all means!
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
BTW - I'll have to disappoint you on the "pink tutu" bit - that's only for the men (though I did pick up a nice skirt yesterday - on sale, of course)
Re:Raise em (Score:1)
If I can't keep my head, I lose worse than usual. I'm not very good at debates to begin with. I could go into a debate of whether or not the grass is green, take the side of "green", and still lose. It doesn't mean I'm not right (Well... There is the blue grass of Kentucky...)-- it just means that I'm not very good at arguing a case. (There's a reason I'm not a la
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
A trap? Qui, moi?
All I meant is that I never felt the need to wear a tutu to express who I am, and that I have no problem with "les Boys" having a bit of fun doing their impression of "Les Ballets Trocadero [wikipedia.org]". I think it would be a hoot, except that they might run into the same problem one of my straight friends ran into one Hallowe'en. He was working at a club, and all the staff did the Hallowe'en thing, and he went in drag, and guys kept hitting on him, no matter how outrageously male he behaved (walk,
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
And that was being a male near 40 with 3(?) kids. Now picture being a 25 year old female with no children. There is a huge, huge, huge difference between having kids and not as far as sterilization is concerned. There is also a monstrous difference between being a man and being a woman as far as your reproductive choicese are concerned. I haven't tried because I've heard too many disheartening stories of women being laughed out of the doctor's office,
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
This reminds me of two billboards that I saw on the same day. One was for Mpls/St. Paul adoptions and featured a few smiling black/asian kids between the ages of 5-10. The other was a Pro-Life MN billboard showing a perfectly healthy, full-term, white newborn. Cute. Very fucking cute.
Remember kids, abort if you're brown; adopt if you're white!
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Next?
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Sometimes I can spell.
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Disparate:
You know, sort of like defense/defence or Elisabeth/Elizabeth
It would certainly fit in the current context. You're right, though. The big demand is for white infants, not multiracial or older children.
Its the same illogic that drives people to want a puppy instead of an
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Ignoring the fact that he tells me that I must eke a mother out of my vagina in order to become a mother, this is
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
There's a whole slew of them here [house.gov]. Apparently nobody in their home state wanted them, so they sent them away. They're not really adoptable - older babies just aren't as popular with potential adopters.
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
I'd suspect this is actually true for most states foster care systems. Caucasians are in the majority in most states and therefore it stands to reason the demographics of children in foster care would more or less mirror the demographics of the state.
I don't think color has much to do with why most states have trouble adopting out children in foster care. First of all many of the children in f
Re:Raise em (Score:1)
So it's the kids' fault that Washington State has problems with its laws regarding foster care and/or adoption? What's stopping Washington State from looking at getting the kids adopted (or fostered) in other states?
My whole point is that thes
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Re:Raise em (Score:1)
I understand that. The big part of the whole argument, though, comes in defining the term "what actually is": Do we consider the life of a baby to begin at conception, at birth, or somewhere in between? What justification do we need to authorize (and conduct) abortions so everyone involved can have a clear conscience?
I know one woma
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
People can't control their libido. The majority of abortions are sought by adults. If they haven't learned by the time they're 30, 40, 50 (yes, I've known women over 50 who have had to get an abortion, thinking they were safe because they were "past that age" - surprise!) - how can you expect everyone to?
Contraceptives work. Churches should be 1
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
I also always wondered about identical twins, but this mostly applies when people bring up the "soul" argument. I was just never really clear on how souls are developed and split. Are they like earthworms, where cutting one in half results in
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
They believe original sin results long before birth - like a few thousand years ago (the "original sin" was reported in the Bible as disobedience to God - "don't eat that fruit", but in reality it was the worlds' first fashion crime. Fig leaves are SO tacky :-).
As for what people do with their miscarriages, I had the unfortunate experience of being around a "true believer" who miscarried her first month (or maybe just a more painful than normal period). My tolerance for other people's religious beliefs g
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
She borrowed and spent $8k from her father in just 1 month, just on legal fees ... while that was the worst month that I know of, it wasn't all that extraordinary . She burned through tens of thousands of dollars, and ended up spending a LOT of time in various courts and tribunals (civil, criminal, youth protection, small claims - you name it, she wa
Re:Raise em (Score:1)
Horse cookies. It's not that hard to figure out that there are alternatives to having wild, unadulterated sex with a woman, when a guy gets "excited". Options that are with reason to excercise: (1) do nothing. (2) go to the bathroom and take care of the matter on one's own. (3) if the woman is willing, ask her to "do something." (4) have intercourse. Any of the first three options are guaranteed to not result in a conception, depending on the methods used in option #
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
According to your list, there shuld be NO moral problem whatsoever for abortions in the first trimester. Clearly, the fetus is not developed enough to hose a person, any more than a 4004 or 8008 can run linux.
That it is human tissue is not the issue. The issue is whether there is, at that point in time, a PERSON alive in there, or just tissue. A person includes higher brain functions AND actual thought. Even the presence of the higher brain functions themselves is not enough to say "yes, there is a perso
Re:Raise em (Score:1)
That doesn't seem to stop people from trying to write (very limited) work-alikes for them. The biggest problem for those processors is that the processors are so limited that core functionality isn't possible. I see where you're going with this, but you still haven't answered my question: When does life begin, if not at conception?
That it is human tissue is not the issue. The issue is whether there is
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
No brain === NO functionality. Get over it. There is NO brain in a si
All your arguments still make this point valid (Score:2)
All your arguments still reinforce the "God is the worlds biggest abortionist" point I made earlier on.
This is a natural outgrowth of believing in God, and knowing that 20% of all pregnancies spontaneoulsly end within the first month or so (before the woman is even aware she's prgnant).
Saying this is an "unfair argument" without pointing out HOW it is unfair, is also no argument at all:
1. Saying that "they weren't viable" is irrelevant to the question. Doctors terminate non-viable pregnancies all the
Re:All your arguments still make this point valid (Score:2)
Or is God too busy in the bathroom with this year's copy of the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition to take heed to the plight of all those fertilized eggs?
OK, this is the funniest thing I've read all week. Off the irreverence scale, but great.
And hey - does this mean I was God yesterday? I should have found something more useful to do in my time of omnipotence.
Re:All your arguments still make this point valid (Score:2)
Actually, what makes it good is that I stole it from the Living Bible:
1 Kings 18:27:
You can find a quote to justify anything if you get to pick and choose the version of the Bible you use. Heck, you can prtty much justify anything with
Re:All your arguments still make this point valid (Score:2)
You can find a quote to justify anything if you get to pick and choose the version of the Bible you use. Heck, you can prtty much justify anything with that abortion of a translation known as the King James Version. Its known to be one of the worst bastardizations ever, and yet there are still people who go around saying "If it was good enough for Jesus, its good enough for me!" They seem to forget english hadn't been invented yet
I think that's one of the things that makes religions so powerful (and danger
Re:All your arguments still make this point valid (Score:2)
Walking away
Re:All your arguments still make this point valid (Score:2)
I know from experience - hard, bitter experience from the fundamentalist evangelicals at a very vulnerable point in my life - just how attractive a "we have the answers to your questions and problems" can be. Ultimately, though, it turned out that behind every "answer" was either a lack of basic knowledge of history or the sciences, an intellectual conceit, a wilful disregard of facts, an "us vs. them" attitude, or a disdain for genuine questions and doubts in favour of blind "trust us" faith.
It's an inter
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Rant time!!!
Re:Raise em (Score:1)
<sigh>
1. Adoption isn't an option for someone who is going to be crippled for life or die if they carry to term
You'll note in my original message, that I did say that there were reasons where abortion might be considered medically necessary.
2. Being forced to carry to term after a rape or incest is morally bankrupt. Women are not just "baby incubators"
I would post my general opinions about rapists and what should be done to them, but I don't want to travel to Quebec (as much as the thoug
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Human tissue does not a human being make. You need a functioning brain to be a person. That does not exist at the moment of conception. It is also not there in the first 3 months in sufficient form to house anything romotely like a personality.
Also, the so-called pro-life people ARE trying ot force their choices on everyone, by denying everyone the right to an abortion, whereas the rest of us are not saying anyone HAS to have an abortion.
I use the term "so-called pro-life" because they are mostly hypoc
Re:Raise em (Score:1)
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Maybe it was because she was clearly crazy? I had nicknamed it "The Blob", which tells you what I thought of the whole matter. No "person" there.
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
If men got pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.
(I didn't come up with that one, I stole it from some comic, probably George Carlin)
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Re:Raise em (Score:2)
Actually, a LOT of the "pro-life" movement is VERY anti-contraceptive. They consider the pill to be an abortifacant, because it prevents implantation of the egg.
Once you understand this, that they take the view that even a small clump of cells is, in their minds, a human with the same or more rights than someone who is brain-dead, you can get a better view of how its all based on religion rather than rational thought.
Plus, there's the whole "my kids won't be using birth control because we don't believe
Questions (Score:2)
Re:Questions (Score:2)
The problem is that there are people who are busybodies and control freaks. They have an agenda, and they feel its their god-given right to impose their beliefs on everyone else.
I remember when I was with the fundies, the stark contrast between public pronouncements and actual conduct. This was especially true with respect to abortion. Everyone said they were against abortion. At the same time, many were against various forms of contraception, and especially for their own kids (the "let them live with th
Re:Questions (Score:2)
This is one of the most disgusting things that I have ever encountered on the internet. Hypocrisy at its finest. A few of the stories involve women who
Re:Questions (Score:2)
Yup (Score:2)
The "pro-life" movement is one of the most cynical, disgusting, and evil expressions of sociopathy out there. Withholding access to medical care and contraceptives, forcing little girls to have babies, taking days off from work to shout evil and ugly things at unfortunate and vulnerable people and never lifting a finger or spending a nickel to help any of the unfortunate parents or kids they've helped screw over. Oh yeah, and shooting people who disagree with them.
And why?
Re:Yup (Score:2)
That link pretty much sums up some of the unspoken things I've sensed for a while about the Conservatives (our version of the NeoCons) here in Canada. The "blame the poor" mentality is alive and well here. Thanks - I'll rework it for the local market and send it along.
Re:Yup (Score:1)
Because some religious bureaucrats have discovered that you can't really convert lay people into believers that effectively (unless they're desperate or suffering)
That would explain the logic behind the hate groups picketing military funerals, claiming that soldier's deaths are "God's retribution" for us having a tolerant society. What utter bastards.
Re:Yup (Score:2)
If people are doing that they should be arrested - obviously their development is. That is just so totally wrong and mean-spirited. Freedom of speech does not give someone the right to dishonour a service for someone who died serving their country, no matter what their beliefs.
Re:Yup (Score:1)
Bikers roll to military funerals to oppose anti-gay protests [cnn.com]
Re:Yup (Score:2)
Cheap-labor conservatives oppose a woman's right to choose. Why. Unwanted children are an economic burden that put poor women "over a barrel", forcing them to work cheap.
Sorry for jumping in so late, but I wanted to reiterate this point - I have long believed that the root of the pro-life movement is economic subjugation. There's a fight going on in the US right now, a class warfare that threatens to destroy the middle class and create two groups - the Have's and the Have-Not's. The Have's are ensuring
Re:Yup (Score:2)
Now we see it being drawn along class lines instead of, or in addition to, sex. And this in what was a society formed as a rejection of the very concept of classes of people. It boggles the mind how we keep on becoming that which we hat the most.
This doesn't surprise me one bit... (Score:2)
These people really do not seem to care for the life of unborn children, just some mythical religious rule that has to be followed no matter what.
Re:This doesn't surprise me one bit... (Score:2)
The facts are simple, but those who seek to impose their moral views on everyone else seem unwilling to acknowledge them:
For a bit more balance (Score:2)
I did real
Re:For a bit more balance (Score:2)
I don't think you're going to see too many pro-choice people arguing for abortion on demand in the final weeks. However, it was a pro-lifer who made the original comment about viability when I pointed out tht 20% of all pregnancies spontaneously abort before the woman even knows she's pregnant - here [slashdot.org]
Re:For a bit more balance (Score:2)
No, but I think it would be interesting to see a graph indicating the latest stage in a pregnancy when a person felt that abortion should be allowed for non-medical reasons. There would obviously be a spike at or just before conception, but the final weeks is different from seven months is different from five months is different from the first trimester.
If they're going to defend what they believe
Re:For a bit more balance (Score:2)
Re:For a bit more balance (Score:2)
Why they believe what they do ... (Score:2)
NOTE: The following is not to be ascribed indicriminately to all christians, just the subset known as evangelical fundamentalists. It is based on my observations and experiences from when I made the mistake of joining the Baptists, of studying in their local seminary, and of being involved at all levels in their activities. However, mutis mutandis, many parts DO apply to others in the pro-life movement.
Unfortuately, the pro-life movement is in many ways a front for religious zealots to impose their be