West Seattle Blog...

WSB Forum » Politics

(103 posts)

You don't have to be a feminist to demand equality

Started 1 year ago by JoB
Latest reply from datamuse

JoB
Member Profile

It is so easy to miss the point in the argument over abortion.

Billboards would have you believe that this is all about killers.. killers of untold thousands of unborn babies in the most brutal way possible.

That may inflame emotions.. but it's not the truth.

The abortion debate is about women's right to control their own reproduction.

It's dead simple. Women can't be equal as long as someone else gets to decide whether or not they can terminate an unwanted pregnancy... regardless of the circumstances.

And abortions aren't the only target. Birth control pills and IUDs terminate pregnancies too.

think for just a minute how your lives...
male and female..
the lives of families as well as those of single women..
will change if the only pregnancy prevention choices are condoms, the rhythm method or sterilization.

This isn't about abortion...
it is about choice...
it is about family planning

the current legislation being considered in our nation's capitol goes even further...
it would deny poor women access to preventative healthcare.

Planned Parenthood is the primary source of preventative health care for our nation's uninsured or underinsured women... they provide pap smears and cancer screenings unavailable elsewhere.
Denying them the funding that is used to support small town clinics actually increases the public cost of their health care.

You may think calling this a war on women overstates the issue... but the health and welfare of our nation's women .. and the children they give birth to.. depends on the availability of primary healthcare...

I am not pro-abortion.
I am pro choice..
there is a difference

Lets not lose sight of the big picture...
if the Equal Right Amendment had been ratified...
the current round of punitive legislation towards women would not even be possible...

It's time to draw a line in the sand..

http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/get-involved/online-day-of-action/online-day-of-action.html

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

so sad this didn't find wings.

Posted 1 year ago #
anonyme
Member Profile

Me, too. JoB, you make some excellent points. Expect this issue to be dragged to the forefront for it's divisive hysteria value as the campaign year begins. Funny how we don't really hear about it otherwise, isn't it? This is an issue of privacy and a woman's right - not to choose abortion, specifically - but to choose what happens to her own body. Ironically, the same political lobbies that would deny a woman the right to choose would also deny access to health care for the mother (including birth control or pre-natal), or support for the child after birth.

Posted 1 year ago #
redblack
Member Profile

i actually tried to craft a reply to this yesterday, but was struggling because you've pretty much said it all.

as a man, i do what i can - like donate to NARAL.

but more importantly, i think you should know that "i got your back."

then again, this isn't about me.

Posted 1 year ago #
2 Much Whine
Member Profile

This is a tough one JoB. I think the topic is too controversial for many people and an entry (or a series of postings) in a blog (even the best blog in the world) will not likely change an opinion one way or the other. But, just to stir the pot a bit. . . . .although I agree 100% with a woman's right to choose, and I don't believe men should have a say one way or the other on her ability to control her body, I would argue that equality does not enter into the equation. If a woman gets pregnant, she and she alone has the right to terminate that pregnancy. If the woman wants the child she can have it. If she doesn't, she can terminate the pregnancy. The man has no equal say in the process. If the man doesn't want the child and the woman does, guess what happens. There is no "equality" in that decision making process. Of course, in a perfect world, every child is wanted and the issue becomes moot but this world is far from perfect so there are men that have been paying child support for 18 years for a child they didn't want and they had no say at all as to whether the child should or should not have been born. I realize it was usually at least 50% their fault for creating the baby in the first place but whether the baby is born or not is 0% their decision. Is that right? Is that wrong? It is what it is. Please note that no snarks were harmed in the creation of this message.

Posted 1 year ago #
2 Much Whine
Member Profile

I just re-read your post and I apparently missed the point. I think the reason the posting didn't find wings is because it is hard to disagree with the notion that cutting funding to Planned Parenthood is just wrong. At least it is hard for me to disagree. Maybe some of our "red" neighbors might have different thoughts. I guess what I'm saying is that I agree with the principles of your post but just felt like being feisty with throwing out a little bunny trail of sorts.

Posted 1 year ago #
Cait
Member Profile

Job... we may not agree on everything but the lack of feedback on here doesn't surprise me. You managed to say it all. NO argument here. You preach it, sista.

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

2 Much Whine...

it is easy for me to show you in terms of what is happening today where a lack of equality hits the proverbial pavement...

even if you believe that abortion is wrong...
and you believe funding basic women's health care through planned parenthood makes more funding available for birth control and abortions..

after all.. it is already illegal for them to use govt funds to provide abortions..and i think birth control..

it is difficult to believe that the personal conscience of a pharmacist gives them the right to deny filling a legal physician's prescription for a patient...

and yet in many states... the law states that the rights of the pharmacist to uphold their moral convictions trump the rights of the patient to access to legally prescribed medications.

In some states the "conscience law" specifies the morning after pill... but in others it is a more general law covering birth control medications and in some it doens't specify the medication at all.

Whose rights are more equal here?

I understand that a case could be made that this is not sexual discrimination because the pharmacist could be a woman...

but the medications denied are pretty much exclusively those whose only purpose is to prevent a viable pregnancy...

the huge irony here is that viagra.. the hours before pill... designed to enable men to maintain an erection and thus to create pregnancy... cause no moral qualms at all.

this is clearly discriminatory legislation...
which can't be challenged on the basis of equality
because the Constitution of the United States did not make women equal citizens... in fact, it had to be amended to allow them to vote.

The assumption of equality is a beautiful thing
but it won't stand up in a court of law :(

Posted 1 year ago #
AlkiRagdoll
Member Profile

This post is to the men and women that have children between the ages of 12 and 35. You need to teach your kids about what life was like for your mother and grandmothers. I meet too many young(er) people that have no idea about womens' rights and inequality. I hear too many teens and young adults take forgranted all that my mother and grandmother fought to move toward equality. Recently, I was apalled to hear my cousins two young 20s kids call each other the N word, and the daughter say that she shouldnt earn as much as her younger brother.... I have have no children, but try to communicate these issues to others, but find it so frustrating that most are not interested -- and have heard "it doesnt apply to me".
...
If you believe in these issues, when was your last donation to Planned Parenthood, NOW, or NARL?
..
We are still so far away from true equality, as evidenced by the continued afront on banning abortion and the lack of credible women professional and political leaders. Like others, I am anti abortion (for me) -- but also pro choice for everyone. You can argue all kinds of morality about abortion, but my right to choose should prevail. Choice for our reproductive rights is only one part of it. As long as the religous right feels that the abortion should be banned and worse yet, that the woman is subservient to the husband, women will never be equal. Unfortunately, we women are our own worst enemies. Think about learning to band together, teaching our children (particularly our daughters) more thoroughly about the issues, and fighting for equality - until then, it will remain outside our grasp.

Posted 1 year ago #
maude
Member Profile

I wanted to reply yesterday, too, but all I could have mustered was, "Yeah, what JoB said". Lame.

How do you suppose it is that women comprise over 50% of the population but we are still not universally equal? By shear numbers we ought to be able to demand it, no?

I suppose you take away enough women with religious beliefs against abortion and that does us in. Or the women who think they'd never consider it an option so maybe you shouldn't either.

Besides, it's not like that's the only function of Planned Parenthood, for crying out loud.

Posted 1 year ago #
celeste17
Member Profile

I signed up with planned parenthood when all this hit the news a few weeks ago. I receive updates via email and got one this morning. They have an open letter to representative Bohener for concerned citizens to sign. here is a link http://tinyurl.com/3mvn7qz

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

since the powers that be who control our nation's media are far more likely to publicize a handful of people who chain themselves in front of Harry Reid's office instead of hundreds of pro-choice demonstrators...

http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/get-involved/offline-actions/lobby-day-april2011.html

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

AlkiRagDoll...

i feel like such an old fart when i say..
"when i was a young woman"

but..
when i was a young woman
women died from illegal abortions
the children they didn't abort languished in children's homes
a woman needed her husband's permission to work
or to own property
or to make decisions about her children's welfare

yes.. we have made a lot of progress

but not so much that what a woman is wearing isn't reported along with her sexual assault.

or that women have the same opportunities as men
or that women are paid the same as men for the same job
or ....

it's time for women.. and the men who love women..
to just say no.

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

and past time for me to say thank you for restoring my hope.
you can feel very lonely in the midst of silence.

Posted 1 year ago #
datamuse
Member Profile

And abortions aren't the only target. Birth control pills and IUDs terminate pregnancies too.

Actually, this isn't quite true. Both of these things work by preventing implantation, as does the morning-after pill (which is just an extra large dose of birth control, and not, as some would have you believe, RU-486, which is the abortion pill). For instance, if you get pregnant while taking the pill (which can happen, though the likelihood is small), you can continue to take the pill and it won't terminate the pregnancy.

That said, JoB, I agree with you. The real issue here from my perspective is that the proponents of defunding Planned Parenthood are not being honest. Funding Planned Parenthood does not fund abortions. No federal funding may be used for abortions, as per the Hyde Amendment. But defunding Planned Parenthood does rob women (and men!) of needed services such as contraception, STD screening and treatment, prenatal care, cancer screening, and pregnancy tests. For some people, Planned Parenthood is the only health care they receive.

Using the budget process to legislate ideology is reprehensible when either side does it, but it frankly staggers me that the representatives of one side of the debate appear willing to deny needed health care to millions of people, much of which is preventative and therefore cheaper than the eventual outcomes if such care is not provided, in order to score points with people who believe that their taxes are funding abortions.

Posted 1 year ago #
marianne
Member Profile

All of What JOB said.

I must admit that I am flabbergasted to see this all-out assault on Planned Parenthood and women's reproductive choice. If you had told me as the teenager I was in the 1970's that Congress would be trying so vigilantly to shut down Planned Parenthood I would have thought you were crazy.

Sad testament to the state of things these days. What hole did all of these short-sighted ingnoramouses crawl out of and how did they get so far??????

Posted 1 year ago #
redblack
Member Profile

<rant>

here's the thing that rubs me the wrong way:

why do evangelical/christian men vest themselves so heavily in this debate? they seem to be the [expletives] who ensure that this is a perennial issue in american politics - when it shouldn't be a political issue at all.

</rant>

Posted 1 year ago #
datamuse
Member Profile

Because they haven't gotten over the removal of obedience as a standard inclusion in the woman's portion of the marital vows?

It's an argument I've heard more than once.

Posted 1 year ago #
AlkiRagdoll
Member Profile

JoB - sounds like you and I are contemporaries. However, my message does not seem to have been understood. If women are not willing to band to gether (as another notes, we are a majority), if we are not teaching our children (girls particularly, but also our sons), and we are not willing to fight for what we need and want -- then why should men support the cause? I dont see women as wanting to convince anyone about much, other than a few. I regularly lecture my cousin (whose kids I mention) that she has done her counterparts and other children a real dis-service. My mother (born in 1926) managed to get a college education, and worked (because she wanted to work) her entire adult life. She rose in her profession and was an incredible role model for me. I was taught I could do anyting I was willing to work for -- and she was right, as I have achieved everything I pursued. She fought for equality, as have I, in an all male profession. I meet so few women who share that same energy. Until women are willing to work together, it is unlikely that we will be able to protect our reproductive rights. As I said, we are our own worst enemy.

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

AlkiRagDoll...

a young woman i know once spent nearly an hour explaining to me why she wasn't a feminist...

right after she finished complaining for twice that long about the good old boys network in her PhD program...

She didn't connect the two.

Too many women live in total disconnect...
they say it's not so bad... and fill their arguments with ambiguity

Ask a man if he thinks it's good news that his wages have lowered to become closer to women's wages
and you won't find any ambiguity in his answer..

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

datamuse...

"Both of these things work by preventing implantation"

i am afraid that too many in the right to life movement would think you are splitting hairs...

it seems the important factor here is whether the male sperm has invaded the female egg...

once that has happened..
any intervention is abortion...

if that isn't a wake up call for women ...

that the most important part of the process is a successful sperm..
the rest is little more than biological incubation...
something that not only any woman could do..
but should do...

nothing will.

i fear nothing will.

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

i ran across an interesting site this morning
with a lot of very real data...
some things i had never thought of before
like sick days broken down by race and gender..

interesting reading
there is worker data buried in there that might surprise you..
like the stats for the percentage of workers covered by paid sick days...
Washington is high.. at 60% :(

http://www.iwpr.org/publications/recent-publications

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

AlkiRagDoll...

this is for you.

i don't think anything makes the point you were trying to make as well as self assessed opportunity served with an acknowledged side of sexual harassment...

kbr.. named top employer by female engineers...

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/04/kbr-named-top-employer-women

Posted 1 year ago #
DP
Member Profile

I watched two Congressional responses to the budget impasse on C-SPAN yesterday. The first was by Democratic women in the Senate, the second by Republican women in the House.

The Democratic women claimed that Republicans are using the Planned Parenthood (PP) funding issue as an excuse to push their radical social agenda against abortion. The Republican women claimed the issue was about balancing the budget and lowering the debt.

I agree with the Democrats on this one. Republicans who say this isn't about abortion are either lying or kidding themselves.

On the other hand, there has been a little disingenuousness on both sides. Dems point to the Hyde Amendment and say that, by law, federal money cannot be used to pay for abortions anyway. Yet when a reporter asked the Democratic women whether the federal money given to PP was fungible (i.e., spendable on anything PP wanted to spend it on) they dodged the question.

For the sake of argument, let's suppose that PP keeps a separate account for abortions, funds it with private donations, and never mixes any federal money in with it. For a moderate person, that would be good enough. But I can see how that would NOT be good enough for someone strongly opposed to abortion.

Consider that every federal dollar given to PP is a dollar they don't have to get through fundraising . . . a dollar they can then divert from the general "women's health" account into the "abortion" account.

I'm not strongly against abortion, but if I were, I wouldn't want any of my tax money going to an abortion provider, regardless of what other services they provided.

I think the only way out of the moral crisis in the long term would be for Planned Parenthood to either spin off its birth control/abortion operation or to stop asking for federal money. But I don't see either of those options happening. And so . . . the crisis continues.

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

DP..

if an organization takes in say 100,00 dollars from private funds..
and 1 dollar from public funds...

and spends $2 on abortions
and the balance on family planning and women's health..

why on earth would anyone assume that the public dollar was used to fund abortions when there are 999,999 other dollars without a single string attached?

better yet.. when that public dollar is allocated to supporting small town health clinics where no abortions are ever performed..

why would anyone assume that the public dollar was used to fund abortions?

that's a simplification of the reality of exactly how planned parenthood works...

those federal dollars are the difference between keeping a smaller rural clinic open and closing it's doors...

and btw.. those are the cheapest health care dollars we spend... in spite of all efforts to consume every dollar given by the federal government in the administrative costs of double track bookkeeping/reporting.

not only do we get a lot for our dollar..
every public dollar we spend has a matching funds deal from the parent organization that knocks the socks off any other public health dollar.

imagine that.. and organization that actually adds to the bottom line for public dollars... instead of taking profit...

i can see why those who worship at the shrine of corporate profit might think that's unAmerican..

i just think it's a great deal for the taxpayer.

Posted 1 year ago #
redblack
Member Profile

DP: the problem is that republicans are trying to frame safe access to abortion as a lifestyle or birth control issue. the fact is that, while unpleasant, it's a legal medical procedure, and in many cases (don't have the stats) it's done out of concern for the health and safety of the mother.

it's important to remember that pregnancy itself is a women's health issue. if the mother can't provide herself with quality prenatal care - which often runs to five figures - the potential baby will suffer. so will the mother.

we can also cite other reasons for abortion, which usually involve rape or incest. we don't need to debate that here.

but whatever the reason, the constitution says that we, the people, will provide for society's general welfare. to the "i don't want my taxes to fund abortion" argument, i would say that the general welfare of our society includes the ability of women to have good reproductive health and prenatal care, no matter what their income level is. and if that means not bringing a baby into the world, so be it.

what's disingenuous is republicans trying to paint planned parenthood as an abortion clinic in order to make a stupid, selfish argument about the federal budget.

Posted 1 year ago #
dawsonct
Member Profile

It pisses me off that nearly forty years after door-belling with my Mom and brothers for the ERA,
women in our Nation, our Mothers, sisters, wives and girlfriends, are still essentially second-class citizens in their own country.

Posted 1 year ago #
datamuse
Member Profile

I'm not strongly against abortion, but if I were, I wouldn't want any of my tax money going to an abortion provider, regardless of what other services they provided.

There's plenty of things I don't want my tax money going toward, and yet it does.

I looked up some stats today when discussing this elsewhere. I can look for them again if anyone's interested, but the salient point is that abortion makes up something like 3% of PP's services overall. Whereas contraceptive services makes up around 35%--you know, the things you use so you aren't faced with the decision of whether to have an abortion in the first place. And over 50% goes for testing and treatment of STIs and cancer.

Yeah, I know. Funding ANY abortion, even indirectly, is bad, full stop. That's the argument. No problem, except that defunding Planned Parenthood would likely lead to MORE abortions, quite probably obtained illegally, due to the lack of preventative services they provide. And as Redblack says, it is a legal medical procedure, at least for the moment.

Posted 1 year ago #
anonyme
Member Profile

The tax argument is a good one. I don't want my tax dollars going to fund wars, but I don't see Congress fighting to allow me to "opt out" due to personal belief. Lots more people, including women, children and unborn fetuses are killed by war than by abortion. Oddly enough, the same folks who are pro-war also seem frequently to be anti-abortion. So, the fundie/conservative passion over the issue would appear to be more about control over women than genuine concern over the rights of fetuses. Add poverty to pregnancy (a not infrequent combination) and you've created a virtual cultural prison.

Posted 1 year ago #
Escondido
Member Profile

This just about says it all:

Lawrence O'Donnell on MSNBC
April 8th - Rewriting Lies on Planned Parenthood

http://thelastword.msnbc.msn.com/

Posted 1 year ago #
dawsonct
Member Profile

Anonyme, they also seem, by a very large proportion, to be pro-death penalty, pro-imprisonment, and anti education,
as well as against anything that would PREVENT an unwanted pregnancy, and therefore an abortion.

And these are also the same people who demand "personal responsibility" from everyone but the very, very wealthy.

Their seems to be a constant disconnect.

Posted 1 year ago #
anonyme
Member Profile

dawsonct, I totally agree. Include sex education in the anti-education stance. I've also had fundies tell me that only women are to blame for unwanted pregnancies, as men cannot be held accountable for giving into sexual temptation - and therefore are not responsible for taking care of the child they will not allow to be either prevented nor aborted. So much for "personal responsibility".

Posted 1 year ago #
odroku
Member Profile

With no regard as to my personal opinion on any of that, I just cannot fathom the stones it takes to say, "Sure, we'll agree to pass a measure to push enough money through to pay, say, the military, but only if you agree to defund particular services" and THEN to label any disagreement to such an idiotic proposal 'playing politics.' Adding riders to bills should be outlawed, post-haste. It's an awful practice.

Posted 1 year ago #
DP
Member Profile

I don't want my tax dollars going to fund wars, but I don't see Congress fighting to allow me to "opt out" due to personal belief. Lots more people, including women, children and unborn fetuses are killed by war than by abortion.

Right. That's a good argument, anonyme. Why are people who claim to be "pro-life" so gung-ho about war and capital punishment?

By the same token, I could our "pro-woman" Democratic Senators Murray and Cantwell: If you're so concerned about women's rights, why don't you vote to stop funding this war in Afghanistan that's killing women every day?

Or are the lives of American women the only women's lives that matter to the good Senators?

Like I said above, there's plenty of hypocrisy to go around on this issue.

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

if the pro-life movement
was actually concerned with the health and safety of the fetus...
they would be shoveling money at planned parenthood since that is where the women most likely to consider abortion as a family planning alternative get their reproductive and prenatal health care...
there is simply no way around the fact that a healthy mother is far more likely to produce a healthy child.

the truth is that all those sweet baby pictures are one heck of a smoke screen for legislation that has more to do with control than with any concern for life.

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

dawsonct...

i too am mad as hell...

Posted 1 year ago #
datamuse
Member Profile

DP: totally with you on that one.

Posted 1 year ago #
dawsonct
Member Profile

DP, maybe it is simply a show of support for our single remaining American industry and export, weaponry, death.
Imagine how many fewer enemies we could create if we built schools and clinics to educate and heal.

But cruise-missiles blow up and need to be replaced,
and the profits are greater for the few who are profiting off of America these days.

No bombing ourselves to peace, nor prosperity.
We won't create allies by killing their families.

Conservatives, are you REALLY worried about our National debt? If that were the case, rather than your paranoid obsession with homosexuals in love, a non-existent threat to your guns, or women making private medical decisions with their doctors, then you would be screaming at your representatives just as loudly to end our militaristic ways.

But militarism equals authority, and living under authority makes you feel comfortable.

Posted 1 year ago #
Ken
Member Profile

Time for this again:
Bob Altemeyer's - The Authoritarians

http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

dawsonct...

funny.. but building schools was pointed out as an alternative funding source for Afghanistan ...
right after we helped Osama and his friends boot out the Russians and handed the country over to the Taliban...

that idea was dismissed as irrelevant..

bombing with schoolbooks was apparently an idea before it's time
or ours for that matter

but that idea was floated for a single hope inspiring moment in our history...

and by a man who never met a weapon or a war he didn't like..

We can't change public perception about strength and the power of education soon enough...

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

casaboba...

As a young woman, i too traveled the world..
both inside and outside our borders...

i suspect the difference between your travels and mine
is that the currency i brought to my travels
beyond the intelligence i kept to myself
was my value as arm candy...

i was pretty enough and witty enough and thin enough and sexy enough and sported a gorgeous head of strawberry blond hair... the color women spent fortunes trying .. and failing... to achieve with what was then modern chemicals...

Those attributes were my ticket to places and people i would never have had either the opportunity to meet
or the freedom to listen to their candid conversations..
inserting the random "isn't she cute" comment here and there that provoked thought.

and i was able to trade that card long past it's usual expiration date.

I am not downplaying that card because in the greater scheme of things it turned out that it was a good thing that i had more than my intelligence to count on since my illness makes expression of that unreliable...

but... I am proud to say that my daughter has traveled the world as well...

and even though she is a strikingly beautiful woman..
the currency she used has been the intelligence i was smart enough to conceal.

The difference in opportunities is what i fight every day to maintain for my children, my grandchildren, my great grandchildren
and millions of women i will never know.

The difference in opportunity is what feminism is about..
and why the pro-choice movement is so vitally important..

you may think that opportunities once earned can't be taken away..
but a little time spent in the personal writings of women that have recently emerged quickly disabuses one of that notion.

there was a time.. not so long ago.. that the dissonance created by being an intelligent woman in our society was medically treated by lobotomy.

If you have to count on someone else to give you rights...
you don't have any

Posted 1 year ago #
Anonymous
Member Profile

All this talk about womens's rights, yet no one even mentions the fetus whose LIFE is terminated.

Amazing.

Posted 1 year ago #
elikapeka
Member Profile

Well, T-Rex, that's really what it comes down to in this argument, is when does life begin? I don't believe that a collection of cells is a life. Now at some point that collection of cells becomes a person. When is that? Some may believe it's the moment of conception. I don't. And frankly, what I believe is not anybody else's business and what others believe is none of mine. This is a deeply personal and difficult decision that can ultimately only be made by the woman involved, hopefully with the support and assistance of the important people in her life and good, sound, unbiased medical advice.

Posted 1 year ago #
datamuse
Member Profile

What's amazing to me, T-Rex, is that you seem to think that none of us could possibly have considered that.

Because if we had, we'd have come to same conclusion as you indubitably have, right?

Posted 1 year ago #
AlkiRagdoll
Member Profile

T-Rex -- Many of us do not agree with you. To live, the cells would need to be viable outside of the mother. While personally, abortion would not be my choice, I have no legal, moral, religous, or intellectual right to require others to follow my belief. The God that I pray to is a caring and giving God, who would understand the difficult decision that a woman would have in a situation of unwanted pregnancy where she could not care for the child. My God would not condemn her for making such a difficult choice, but rather forgive her and society for placing her in such a position.

The Talaban does not believe in choice. Thus, I must equate your thinking to that of the zelots like the Talaban. The world needs a backlash against zealots, whether they be the Talaban or the "right-to-lifers".

Posted 1 year ago #
anonyme
Member Profile

Is any kind of life, no matter how empty or brutal, better than a potential one? I don't think so.

Posted 1 year ago #
Anonymous
Member Profile

Just glad my dear sweet mother choose life.

You may compare me to the Taliban all you want but I am pretty sure the majority of Chrisitan faiths do not support abortions either. I am not judge or jury in this debate, I just felt it neccesary to say what I wanted to say.
The biggest issue I have with abortions is the fact that it has now become a form of birth control in this world. I find that incredibly sad.

Posted 1 year ago #
datamuse
Member Profile

The biggest issue I have with abortions is the fact that it has now become a form of birth control in this world.

"Become"? I'd assert that, with so many modern options so readily available, it is less so now than at any time in prior history. But the question's pretty academic since reliable historical statistics are hard to come by.

Be that as it may, I fail to see how defunding an organization primarily concerned with prevention, prenatal care, and sexual health would decrease the number of abortions.

Posted 1 year ago #
chrisma
Member Profile

Yep. What datamuse said. [Like!]

Posted 1 year ago #
AlkiRagdoll
Member Profile

T-Rex: I am a christian, and most christians I know support choice (its not about supporting abortion - as most do not choose abortion).

I suspect, but have no facts, that abortion is rarely used as a form of birth control.

I fear that your sect of Christianity, like the Taliban (a sect of Islam), does not support choice.

Posted 1 year ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.

All contents copyright 2012, A Drink of Water and a Story Interactive. Here's how to contact us.
No photo reuse without permission.
Entries and comments feeds. ^Top^