by matttbastard
“Calm down ladies and let teh menz tell you how to talk seriously about reproductive freedom.”
My delightfully sarcastic and trivial homegrrl fern hill murders a Progressive ally unambiguously disassociates herself from Woodley’s insipid Sister Souljah moment.
bastard.logic 
Yeeeah.
Wow am I ever fucking sick of being patronized by men who think they know what the fuck they’re talking about.
LikeLike
Whoopsie meant to edit out one of those ‘fucks’ in there. LOL I am in a foul mood. That tends to happen when your rights are being threatened, by those who are supposed to be ON YOUR SIDE. I guess we are finding out who the real progressives are this year, hey?
LikeLike
Sorry. Like I said, I’m in a foul mood. Git 1 and Git 2 aren’t actually threatening my bodily autonomy, per se…just cozying up with those who are. Seems to be going around lately.
LikeLike
The guy caved. He did a post on how he was pro-choice, got a few comments from anti-choicers, and he caved.
I’ve never seen anything so lame.
LikeLike
How about the way Wabbit hopped on out after getting his wittle tail in a fluff cos teh feminazis are so uncivil?!
“At least SHE gives me COOKIES!”
LikeLike
Priorities.
LikeLike
Ideological straight-jacketing is doing damage to BOTH sides in that debate, though I will admit that the ridiculous “God hates you for having abortions although He is totally ok with the death penalty” pro-lifers are doing way more damage to our side than saying things that are merely snarky, like “fetus fetishist,” does to yours.
We feel we’re fighting for human lives; you feel you’re fighting for human rights. These are both noble aims and can have a noble resolution.
LikeLike
Dynamic, we also feel we are fighting for human lives – women’s lives. Pregnancy is not alway easy peasy for women. There are conditions in which a pregnancy could kill a woman. There are situations in which certain medications taken by the mother or father could cause severe birth defects. There are also situations in which a child just shouldn’t be brought into the world. Who gets to decide? The government? No. This choice, which I assure you is rarely made lightly or glibly, needs to stay in the hands of the woman and her doctor. And it if is made illegal again, it is women who will die – pregnant women. Because desperation will drive them to the back alleys again whether abortion is safe and legal or not.
LikeLike
Dynamic: “These are both noble aims and can have a noble resolution”
… and the “noble resolution” would be that if you don’t agree with abortion, you have a right to not have an abortion… or use contraception, or have sex outside of marriage, or any of the other items on the authoritarian laundry list of control.
But never assume you have any right to dictate how others conduct the most intimate areas of their private personal lives. You don’t, you never will, and on that there is no compromise.
LikeLike
[quote]Dynamic, we also feel we are fighting for human lives – women’s lives. Pregnancy is not alway easy peasy for women. There are conditions in which a pregnancy could kill a woman. There are situations in which certain medications taken by the mother or father could cause severe birth defects. There are also situations in which a child just shouldn’t be brought into the world. Who gets to decide? The government? No. This choice, which I assure you is rarely made lightly or glibly, needs to stay in the hands of the woman and her doctor. And it if is made illegal again, it is women who will die – pregnant women. Because desperation will drive them to the back alleys again whether abortion is safe and legal or not.[/quote]
Before I go any further, I should outline my stance – I am no bible-thumper in this regard. I believe that human life is already protected under the law (see: murder, manslaughter legislation) and that human life begins, in every reasonable, quantifiable, scientific way, at conception (ANY other “beginning point” is by definition arbitrary).
THAT SAID – I also believe that no human life is MORE valuable than any other.
So I accept your premise that in situations where a mother’s life is in jeopordy (and those situations remain all too common) it is the role of neither myself nor the government to decide which life is “more valuable.” Only the woman in question can decide that. And yes, that absolutely includes rape – mental trauma is every bit as life threatening as physical.
So you see, we are likely not very far apart at all interms of how we’d like to see the law applied.
What I cannot abide is a callous disregard for applying that protection equally to all – woman and child. Just as it is not my right to decide that the child’s life is more valuable than the mother’s, so it is not your place to decide that the mother’s is more valuable than the child’s. It is illegal to kill a 1 year old, but it is perfectly legal to kill below the age of nine months (unless they’ve been born prematurely, in which case they’re now qualified for the rights that are supposed to be inalienable to all human beings).
Leave abortion legitimate – back alleys are no places for abortions. Leave it in the hands of doctors and women. But make sure we’re protecting the rights of ALL involved – not just the ones who are able to vote. Murder is murder, regardless of age – and adoption surely deserves at least as much government support.
LikeLike
JJ – “But never assume you have any right to dictate how others conduct the most intimate areas of their private personal lives. You don’t, you never will, and on that there is no compromise.”
You and I, as citizens of this nation, have [i]already agreed[/i] to limit the most intimate areas of the conduct of our own lives and the lives of others. Murder is [i]already[/i] illegal. Extending that protection to people of all ages should hardly be controversial.
I very much respect opposing opinions and I will be the first to admit – I can very possibly be wrong. Anyone can (such is being human). Please read over my stance above and consider your response in light of that information – I’m open to changing my position and I’m open to new information and ways of thinking, and I know as fellow progressives you are as well. I feel that’s important to clear up because you’re likely used to the “you are going to Hell!” variety of pro-lifers and that’s not what you’re dealing with here. It is important to distance myself from them; other than being pro-life I share none of their regressive beliefs, and I also don’t suck. I promise.
Let’s get all Obama on this and find some common ground. :)
LikeLike
Dynamic, thank you for your reasonable response, which is indeed quite unusual for an anti-abortion person. While I agree with you to some extent that one human life is no more valuable than another, I draw the line at that life being born (or viability, w/o tubes, incubators, and 3 months of neo-natal hospitalization). I really do feel that until viability, the mother’s life does have more value than the fetus. And, that being said, I do have a close friend who has had to have a late-term abortion, due to an extremely traumatic health issue with her unborn child. Regardless of my personal feelings on abortion and fetal viability, the entry of the soul into the body, etc…the government should NOT get to decide. You have said that there are situations where it should be an option. Therefore, abortion must remain legal and between the woman and her doctor, and if the situation warrants it, her family. I don’t consider it murder, and if some people do? Well nobody is forcing, or even encouraging them, to have one.
Those of us firmly on the pro-choice, women’s rights side of this issue have put up with being called murderers,baby killers, Nazis, pro-death, etc, for 35 years now. We’ve been harassed, harangued, stalked, and some of us have been victims of violence or murder. Is it any wonder that we’re fed up and not playing nice anymore? The kind of dialogue we’re having right now is more rare than ever. Why? Because most people agree that even if they would never have one themselves, they want abortion to remain safe and legal. And those that want abortion to be legal in some circumstances – I want to know who gets to decide what circumstance. The government? Will a 13 year old girl who’s been raped by a family member need to go to court to prove she’s been raped before she has access to medical care to terminate the pregnancy? Will a woman who already has 6 children and just can’t handle another need to beg a judge to give her permission? What about a severe schizoprenic who keeps getting pregnant (I personally have seen this situation)? See, this is where restrictions are a problem. This is why it must remain legal. Because the woman who is pregnant is the only one who can be trusted to decide.
LikeLike
I should clarify:
“The kind of dialogue we’re having right now is more rare than ever. Why? Because most people agree that even if they would never have one themselves, they want abortion to remain safe and legal.”
For most people, it has already been decided by law and they are accepting of a woman’s right to choose an abortion, whether they like it or not. There’s nothing much to discuss. The ones making all the noise are the radical factions who shoot doctors and post dead fetus (mostly stillborn) pictures on the sides of trucks and on their websites. They demand ‘dialogue’ but it has been proven time and time again that there is NO dialogue to be had with them – just ranting and gory pictures. So, now, to show the utter absurdity of their fervent position, and their inability to even consider anyone’s human life but a zygote or an unborn fetus, we mock them, by useing their hyperbolic tactics and language to do so. And we’re not stopping anytime soon, no matter how many times the big strong daddys of the blogosphere try to scold us and send us to bed without any supper.
LikeLike
Thanks Prole, that was well reasoned and well written.
I think that arguing over the legality of abortion is faily moot at this point, as you’ve pointed out – the simple fact is that it is the law of the land, and that’s not likely to change.
Your concern over who gets to decide the situations in which an abortion should be legal is valid, and it’s something I’d like to think over quite a bit more. I think it’s a very strong argument.
Conversely, I think that your valuation of a mother’s life over an infants based purely on age is the weakest link in your argument. Defining a human being by scientific principles forces us to admit that a zygote with 46 unique chromosomes is a developing human being – a development process that does not end at birth but rather continues for decades. Any other deliniation of “humanness” opens up a slippery slope of redefining humanity based on arbitrary principles, something to be avoided if history is any guide.
In other words, I think we both can learn – and have learned – quite a bit.
To get back on topic, I think you’ve adequately proven to me that restraining the language of hyperbole wouldn’t help your cause, at least not until my side learns to do the same; let’s hope that day comes soon.
Til then, let’s at least try to keep the hyperbole funny. :lol:
LikeLike
Dynamic – see, we’re showing ’em how it should be done, hey?
I’d like to explain further since you have brought up what you think is the weakest link in my argument.
“Conversely, I think that your valuation of a mother’s life over an infants based purely on age is the weakest link in your argument. Defining a human being by scientific principles forces us to admit that a zygote with 46 unique chromosomes is a developing human being – a development process that does not end at birth but rather continues for decades. Any other deliniation of “humanness” opens up a slippery slope of redefining humanity based on arbitrary principles, something to be avoided if history is any guide.”
Now, this is going to all depend on what you mean by “value”, when having to measure who’s life has more of it, the mother’s or the fetus she’s carrying. The way I see it is this: that woman who is pregnant, has already been on this earth for at least long enough for her to become fertile. Meaning, she has parents, maybe siblings. Quite probably friends who love her. Maybe she has a husband or lover. She may already have children. The way I would measure her value as opposed to that of the fetus is by how many people would be emotionally hurt, if not devastated, by the loss of her (due to pregnancy, childbirth, or otherwise). The fetus, IF it were wanted, and if it were lost (due to miscarriage, abortion, or otherwise), would be mourned, certainly (or not) by the parents for the loss of its potential. A developing fetus is potential. It could turn out to be a Beethoven, or an Ed Gein. You don’t have any way to know, of course. So. If I have to weigh the value of the mother against the value of the fetus, I’d say the mother has more value due to her relationships to other people already, not the potential of. I hope I’m making sense.
Let me put it another way. If my sister were pregnant, and something horrible happened where there were only 2 choices – terminate the pregnancy, or my sister dies. I would want them to terminate that pregnancy. (The Catholic church and most anti-abortion people see it differently, I know.) I would be emotionally crippled by the death of my sister. So would her husband, our mother, all her aunts, uncles, cousins, friends. The loss of the baby, though it would be painful and tragic to us, wouldn’t even compare.
So you see, it’s not about age, but the value of a life to the people intimately involved with it. And that is another thing that should not be mandated by the government or someone else’s church.
“Til then, let’s at least try to keep the hyperbole funny. :lol:”
Whaa, you don’t think “zygote zealot” is funny? I think it’s a scream! ;-)
LikeLike