Reply With Quote
I am suggesting that they are opposed to abortion and can choose not to partake. I am glad that they have the opportunity to take advantage of being pro-choice, it would be horrible if they had no choice and were forced to have an abortion.
Are you suggesting some of the women who answered "Pro-Life" are actually not opposed to abortion but could, just as easily, be classified as "Pro-Choice?" I would think the poll construction would have considered that.
The way I read your statement is that all "Pro-Life" women are opposed to abortions and that there may be a percentage of "Pro-Choice" women that oppose abortion but wouldn't oppose it if someone else made the decision.
Because, to read it the other way, I would have thought the pollster would have labeled the smaller group as "Pro-Abortion."
I am suggesting that they are opposed to abortion and can choose not to partake. I am glad that they have the opportunity to take advantage of being pro-choice, it would be horrible if they had no choice and were forced to have an abortion.
I think this should also lay to rest the canard that opposition to abortion is somehow a manifestation of some "War on Women." When 46% of women oppose abortion, you can't just explain it away as "Internalized Oppression," like someone in this forum did yesterday.
So, as I was saying, there's a larger percentage of women who oppose abortion than favor it.
"there's a larger percentage of women who oppose abortion than favor it."
many of who have had abortions, or their mothers, sisters, daughters, friends have had abortions.
And?
they are all in the same camp, some chose one way, some chose another.
Well, I guess maybe you are correct, it is a little disingenuous to group them in the same category since, although one group is happy to have been able to choose their path (being against abortion), they really don't want to extend that courtesy to others. Yet many of them really aren't pro-life either so that is also a disingenous moniker... Ok, so I guess we can call one camp Pro-Choice and the other camp Anti-choice, or we could go with the inclusives versus oppressives? Eh, I think so we don't politicize it too much, we should go with the former.
Come on, you can't possibly think that this is a real argument or adds ANYTHING to the conversation can you?
This is probably true at a personal level, but change the question to "do you want to force your choice on other women?" and that majority crumbles.
As someone already stated, the pro-life movement is mislabeled. It should be called the no choice movement.
I think you're wrong. I think the 46% on under the "Pro-Life" banner believe abortion should be illegal.
Except that those who hold that position believe abortion takes the life of an innocent child. That's not a choice that should be condoned.
In any case, claiming opposition to abortion is either a manifestation of the "War on Women" or "internal oppression," doesn't appear to be true.
In fact, self-identified conservatives number less than the percentage of women who are opposed to abortion. That means Independents and maybe a few Democrats (Likely Catholics and African-Americans) hold that view.
As important is that of the women in all political camps, Democrat "Pro-Choice" women seem to be the most strident about their position.
Bottom line, it's a losing issue for Democrats and I'm happy they've turned their convention into a referendum on the faux "War on Women."
It was ing hilarious when Dennis Miller called Sandra Fluke the "Moan of Arc" on Leno the other night.
The problem with the label is that many people who call themselves pro-life actually are not. First, of course, are those who support the death penalty. If you are pro-life because you oppose the taking of life, then you should be against the death penalty. In some senses the death penalty is even worse because the state is killing someone in your name. In abortion, the state is not forcing it upon anyone. Before anyone chimes in with the whole innocent life bit, if you are pro-life then you support life period. Life does not have degrees of value. If an embryo is life, then so is a criminal.
Most of all, however, pro-life means you are for something-- not simply against abortion. It means that you are for all things that support the value of life- such as feeding the starving and providing health care to the sick. In reality, if you take in all the issues that encompass supporting life, the Democratic party (yes I said it) supports more of them than the Republican party.
You won't get Yonivore to admit anything any Republican has said or done as wrong.
Republicanscandonowrongitis has infected large swaths of the country, or so I hear.
I haven't seen you in a while, have you been mainlining MSNBC? I heard that you put those things in your eyes to keep them open so that you wont miss any msnbc.
I'm happy with the term "Anti-Abortion" but, for reasons that are beyond me, "Pro-Life" is the term used to describe people that are opposed to abortion. Talk to the labelers, not the Anti-Abortion crowd.
And, you're being disingenuous to suggest the "Pro-Life" moniker has ever included the death penalty discussion.
That idiot Akin was wrong.
George W. Bush and most other conservatives are wrong to continue the asinine war on drugs.
More like Obamaisa ingdisasteritis.
The point was still valid. There is no scientific question that the death row inmate is viable before he is killed.
What do you think it says about the Republican party that this guy seems to hold a fairly common view that not only has no scientific evidence to support it, but the scientific evidence we do have directly contradicts it?
What about the Republicans who think the earth is only 6,000 years old?
What do you think of them?
well, a lot can happen in 6000 years
True.
Yonivore and other right-wing extremists being honest and/or fair, won't be part of that set of events though.
The points not valid. The label "Pro-Life" was created in the context of the abortion debate as a counter to "Pro-Choice." If you want to drag capital punishment into an abortion debate, you can relabel me (and, most probably other "Pro-Life" advocates) as "Anti-Abortion."
Actually, I don't think it's a "fairly common view" that a woman's body is capable of "shutting down" the conception process in the case of rape.
I think Akin's statement is inaccurate and was a stupid thing to say.
I also think Akin's statement was a butchered way of expressing an idea that is a bit more common (if not "fairly common") that acute stress can prevent conception.
His idiotic remark about "legitimate rape" causing a woman's body to "shut down" the conception process is probably born of the idea that acute stress can prevent conception.
Still, he should have never opened his mouth. And, I certainly don't ascribe to the notion that abortion should be avoided because the woman's body takes care of the conception in cases of "legitimate" (probably meaning forcible) rape.
So, No, I don't think Akin's statement is a commonly held view by anyone -- Republicans included.
I think they're wrong.
...and then there's this:
Anti-Obama Abortion Ad
Why didn't they use a much more representative obese, inarticulate, red-neck Wal-Mart People in a trailer park?
Are they all the result of failed abortions?
I suspected, but didn't know for sure.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
