Skip to main content

View Diary: Gallup "Pro-Life" Abortion Poll: MSM Fudges Results (POLL) (82 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  In the event that question is literal (0+ / 0-)

    Here is why I received (rather than presumed, since it was based on specific and concrete interaction rather than whole conjecture) your tone as angry.  I have boldfaced for words, syntax or punctuation that connoted anger to me:

    What does birth control have to do with contraception?

    I bet Obama wouldn't bring up birth control EXCEPT in regard to abortion.  I bet he would not counsel even one person to carry a pregnancy to term and give the child away for adoption.  He's a deep thinker; he wouldn't want to be responsible for that woman's lifelong fears, worries and longing for the child she gave away.

    Thats why I see it as just pander, i.e., that Obama wants everyone to like him.

    There is no "common ground."

    No doubt you believe yourself to be a well-meaning person but that "sad consequences" phrase is actually a creepy intrusion on the privacy of other people.  It is not up to you to find their situations "sad."  They are just living their lives with a right not to be moralized over by you or the President or other well-meaners.  It probably hurts your feelings to say that but its the essence of America for some of us.  

    As I said above, I do not think President Obama would ever bring up contraception EXCEPT in the context of abortion.  If he thinks contraception is a good thing, then he could advocate for it with no reference to abortion.  But he would not do that.

    But there you go again - "inexplicable anger"  !!!!!

    If you don't like change, you're going to like irrelevance even less. - Gen. Eric Shinseki

    by dmitcha on Sun May 17, 2009 at 04:13:24 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Thats not anger (0+ / 0-)

      Its discussion; its my opinion.  I think its very civil and polite whereas your responses began attacking me personally as "sad" and then as "inexplicably angry."  

      •  Discussion and opinion (0+ / 0-)

        form your intent and your content.  Tone is separate, and that is what I responded to.  And to intentionally parse, I did not describe you as sad or angry, I described something that you expressed as such.  (It is the difference between telling a child "You are a bad kid" and "That was a bad thing you did.")  Still, if you considered your writing to be polite but my writing to be a personal attack, our communication is so far apart that we will agree to disagree.

        If you don't like change, you're going to like irrelevance even less. - Gen. Eric Shinseki

        by dmitcha on Sun May 17, 2009 at 06:13:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site