Daily Kos

pro-choice extremists can go to hell w/poll

by Groper

Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:14:43 AM PDT

Everyone who tells me that I can't be pro-life without hating women can go to hell. Everyone who flames me or tries to tell me what a horrible hipocrit I am can go to hell. Everyone who tells me to shut the fuck up and get out their face because I hold a different viewpoint can go to hell riding a thorny broomstick.

Yesterday, in a diary about women's issues, I made a post regarding how other women's issues are being eclipsed by abortion, which has somehow become the end all be all of women's issues. In this post, I menationed that I am pro-life. I think it's wrong. But that's me. I never said that the dem party should compromise on the issue, or even that the laws should be changed in any way. I'm pro-life.  And what do I get for having a different viewpoint? All kinds of angry people telling me how much I hate women.

This is the kind of shit that drives most people away from progressive politics. We only have two sets of ideology to pick from, dem or repub, and if you don't fit into the mold perfectly, the "hoilier than thou"  will hound you until you start thinking the other side isn't so bad.

If you can point out anywhere on this blog that I've supported changing the laws, let me know. If I said that the democratic party should compromise on the issue, point it out to me. If you can give me real reasons why I can't support women's rights and be pro-life ant the same time, I'll gladly listen to them, but if all you can do is repeat over and over again at various volumes that I can't be pro-life and pro-women at the same time, then go to hell. Just becuase it's a core part of your belief system, doesn't mean it's axiomatic to everyone else.

I happen to be pro-life. I happen to think that abortion is wrong and irresponsible. But that's my own persoanl choice. It comes from my own personal experiences. Everone I know who's had an abortion, or whose girlfriend has had an abortion, has regretted it later. They've all realized to late what they had done. That's why. BUt I've never advocating changing the laws, or that abortion should be illegal.

Here's a small sampling of what happens when you have a difference of opinion on dKos:

It was your hypocritical assertion that you can be pro-life AND support women's rights and issues at the same time that pissed me off. -eugene

Shut the fuck up and get out of my face. -firedoglake

Please go join the Republicans; they need to replenish their liberal wing. -wytcld

drop the "pro-life" label. It is PROFOUNDLY insulting to your brother and sisters on the left who support abortion rights -tmo (my brothers and sisters on the left have al but banned me from the site because of this one position on this one issue)

But for the life of me cannot understand why, as  a pro-life person, do you feel the need to impose your personal morality on everyone else? -scott (For the record, I never said anything close to that.)

Abortion to the right means no BIRTH CONTROL at all... The right for Married couples to birth control. Get a friggin' clue pal... you are being played-Felicia
Thanks for putting words in my mouth and claiing other people's beliefs as my own. I was wondering exactly where I stood on abortion, and apperantly I'm anti birth-control too.

You are wrong when you say you and be pro-life and pro-women's rights. You have to pick one or the other.-eugene

I have to say, for a bunch of supposed liberals, their is an incredible amount of intolerance on this ebsite for people who don't fit into the mold. I'm the first to admit that I would fail many litmus tests o this blog, but that'll happen when you're locked into an either/or way of thinking. We're all victims of our stupid two-party system.

Poll

abortion, can we agree to disagree?

69%66 votes
6%6 votes
24%23 votes

| 95 votes | Vote | Results

Tags: (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 233 comments

  •  Green chile stew with pork (3.62 / 16)

    INGREDIENTS:

        - 3 pounds boneless pork loin, cubed
        - 3 tablespoons peanut oil
        - 3 stalks celery, chopped
        - 2 tomatoes, chopped
        - 7 green chile peppers, chopped
        - 4 cloves crushed garlic
        - 4 cups chicken broth
        - 1 (10 ounce) jar prepared green chile salsa
        - salt to taste

    DIRECTIONS:

       1. In a large skillet over medium high heat, brown the pork in oil, doing so in 2 to 3 batches.
       2. Place the meat in 3 to 4-quart covered casserole and add celery, tomatoes, chilies, and garlic.
       3. Add about 1 cup chicken broth or water to skillet pork was cooked in, stirring over high heat to scrape up browned bits on bottom and bring to boil. Add to pot with enough additional water or broth to barely cover the ingredients. Cover and simmer until stew is thick and meat very tender, about 1 1/2 hours. Add salt to taste before serving. If stew is not hot enough, add a bit of jalapeno salsa.


    Blind faith in your leaders, or in anything, will get you killed. -- Bruce Springsteen

    by Plutonium Page on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 10:54:04 AM PDT

  •  Wait. (3.83 / 18)

    Let me get the popcorn.

    -9.63, -7.03 Rage, rage against the Lying of the Right

    by Maryscott OConnor on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 10:54:44 AM PDT

  •  All I want to say is... (4.00 / 6)

    ... you're cute when you're mad.

    by Bob Johnson on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 10:55:44 AM PDT

    •  oughta be a poll option n/t (4.00 / 2)

      by Hprof on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 10:57:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  um...thanks, i guess.... nt (3.28 / 7)

      Donald Driver for Wisconsin - Senate 2008 (Feingold for President)

      by Groper on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:03:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Sometimes you just gotta' air it out (none / 0)

        Been there many times... as others here will attest.

        by Bob Johnson on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:07:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  SOmeone said it already (4.00 / 20)

        But I'll expand on it.

        When you say "pro-life" -- especially in the company of liberal left-wing pro-choice people -- we hear, "pro-criminalization."

        It's that fucking simple. So come up with a new term to describe yourself and your liberal friends who think abortion is murder but are okay with that so-called murder being legal, and we'll embrace you all, hypocrites or not.

        And, frankly, if you think abortion is murder and still think it ought to be legal, then you ARE a hypocrite. If someone believes abortion is murder, then they ought to behave as such and do what they can to eradicate it. And no wimpy "exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother," either. Murder is murder regardless of the method of conception or the saving of another life.

        See what I mean? This issue is fucking VOLATILE, man, and you can't expect to prance into a liberal blog and announce yourself as "pro-life" and be welcomed with open, non-judgmental arms.

        Stop whining and figure out what you really believe. Then find a way to articulate it. You're going to need it if you intend to continue attempting to debate people about the abortion issue.

        -9.63, -7.03 Rage, rage against the Lying of the Right

        by Maryscott OConnor on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:10:28 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  shaking my head (4.00 / 2)

    You had your say last night, they had theirs--we really don't need to have it repeated.

    I'm sorry if your feelings were hurt, but there's not really any value added here.

    by Hprof on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 10:56:04 AM PDT

  •  Is that it? Is there more? (4.00 / 12)

    Your complaint is that you were beat up in a political argument? And you think this is the way to address the lack of civility in contentious discourse?

    Are you kidding?

    by Kagro X on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 10:57:16 AM PDT

    •  the point is (3.50 / 6)

      that it wasn't a poltical agrgument. It was a bunch of peopl flaming me for having an opposing viewpoint without bothering to check what exactly my viewpoint is. THe point is, until we learn to treat those within our ranks with some sort of respect, even if they don't agree with us, we're going to keep losing seats in the senate and house. People agree on with us on most liberal issues. WHat people don't like is the elitism that comes from the left. If you're from the south, if you are religious, if you are pro-life, if you happen to think invading Iraq was a good idea at the time, the left has made it very clear that you are not welcome here.

      Donald Driver for Wisconsin - Senate 2008 (Feingold for President)

      by Groper on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:01:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  *snort* (3.50 / 4)

        fucking hilarious.

        ...if you are pro-life, if you happen to think invading Iraq was a good idea at the time...

        My dear, pro-life does not equal invading a sovereign, unarmed nation and causing the death as many as 100,000 civilians. Do you see the hypocrisy in labeling yourself "pro-life"?

        This is what I cannot stomach from the right-wing, so-called moral values crowd. The hypocrisy.

        "If you are what you say you are...a superstar...then have no fear, the camera's here." lupe fiasco

        by pacific city on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:05:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm not trying to equate the two (4.00 / 2)

          and I din't see anything in my post that implied that. Take the time to read it, and then think again. WHat I said was that if you hold nay of these positions that are unpopular around here, you are made to feel very unwelcome. Hell, lookt at the poll. 20% told me to go join the republicans, that I am not wanted in teh democratic party, because I don't believe in abortion.

          Donald Driver for Wisconsin - Senate 2008 (Feingold for President)

          by Groper on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:27:10 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Were you surprised? (4.00 / 5)

        Part of living in a big tent is knowing when not to light it on fire.

        You can't really have been involved in Democratic politics for any length of time and not have known where your comments were going to lead. And before you start in on your right to make those comments regardless of what they provoke, take a step back and re-read what you just wrote in this diary.

        Is it really the case that you are not welcome here? Or are they saying that the "Nazis can go to hell" thing isn't?

        This is just silly.

        by Kagro X on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:10:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Oh, please... (none / 0)

        I'm from the south and am even a Christian (although of the intellectual/mainline variety), so there goes at least half your assertion.  If you thought invading Iraq was a good idea at the time, then you may want to reevaluate your critical thinking process, simply because that was a bad call for reasons that should be obvious by now.

        And I guess I'm an elitist, although neither my education (a mere bachelor's degree from a state school), nor my income (decidedly middle-class), nor my social standing (nonexistent), would indicate that.  If I'm an elitist by virtue of my thought processes, well, I'm not going to be ashamed of that.  

        "Conservative principles" are marketing props used by the Conservative Movement to achieve political power, not actual beliefs. -Glenn Greenwald

        by latts on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:45:28 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  of course it was a political argument (none / 0)

        It was one in which you had a chance to state your views and did so (I'm assuming) to the best of your ability.  

        A lot of people disagreed with you, some of them in very strong language--which has been pointed out, should not come as a surprise.

        You're also leaving out a lot of the context for caliberal's diary--there have in fact been many diaries on this site in the last 2 months suggesting that the Dems need to moderate/compromise/cave-in on abortion.  That's what inspired her diary.

        Your position is much more common--and much less courageous--than you acknowledge.  You had your chance to state it last night, and you've done nothing to strengthen it with this diary.

        by Hprof on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:59:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Can we still flame Lieberman? (none / 0)

        Just checking.

        by Bob Johnson on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 01:30:41 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Hey (none / 1)

    I'm pro life too, you cannot expect everyone to agree on the abortion issue, at least I don't. but hey some people demand we all agree or leave the party.

    Peer2Peer Distributed Social Networking

    by Lucian on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 10:58:56 AM PDT

    •  To the exit with you! (none / 1)

      ...

      by Bob Johnson on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:02:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  And your French-sounding surname! (4.00 / 3)

      ...

      by Bob Johnson on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:04:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  But again what do you mean by "Pro-Life" (4.00 / 5)

      The hard-core anti-choicers would have to outlaw all abortions and most non-barrier method contraception because they prevent the attachment of a zygote to the uterine wall (this includes "The Pill").

      So what would you outlaw as an anti-choicer?

      What would the penalties be and who would be punished?  Remember if you believe that life begins at conception then in theory an abortion is equivalent to pre-meditated murder punishable Federally and in many states by the Death Penalty (how ironic, huh?).  The woman would be hiring a "hit man/woman" (the doctor) to carry out the murder (murder by hire another capital offense in many jurisdictions).

      How would you handle miscarriages, would they have to be investigated by the police?  Not too far fetched if abortion is illegal then many women would be claiming that they "just had a miscarriage" to mask the crime.

      Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

      by dvogel001 on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:15:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm anti abortion (none / 0)

        Don't try to reframe me as anti choice. I'm not exactly that stupid. I'm very calculated.

        Anti abortion meaning I don't support abortion. How difficult is it to understand that I dislike abortion and that it has nothing to do with the law or with birth control?

        I'm for birth control, take the pill, use a condom, I just don't want abortion used as birth control.

        Peer2Peer Distributed Social Networking

        by Lucian on Fri Jan 14, 2005 at 07:11:30 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Actually... (3.66 / 3)

    YOU can go to hell.

    "The only time my prayers are never answered is on the golf course." -- Billy Graham

    by PowerChord on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 10:59:14 AM PDT

  •  As long as you're not (4.00 / 17)

    inclined to outlaw abortion, then I have no problem with your personal disapproval of it.  I manage to disapprove of tons of things, from smoking to elective c-sections, without thinking that my opinions should be policy for three hundred million people, although obviously ;) the world would be a better place if it were run according to my preferences.

    However, you may want to make some distinctions between your personal positions and your political ones-- there aren't really that many authoritarian liberals here, but even left-libertarian types are going to be put off by someone using the political terminology of the right.  And for quite a few of us, while we would love to see universal family planning that left abortion as a seldom-necessary option in the event of birth control failure, consider bodily autonomy to be a core freedom, not an incidental one.

    "Conservative principles" are marketing props used by the Conservative Movement to achieve political power, not actual beliefs. -Glenn Greenwald

    by latts on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 10:59:58 AM PDT

  •  I AM going to hell. (4.00 / 3)

     I'm being buried facedown so I can see where I'm going.

     And I'm sure I'll meet a LOT of people there. Even some who post here.

    The cake is a lie.

    by Anderson Republican on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:01:26 AM PDT

  •  The problem is you have to define what you mean... (4.00 / 11)

    You know I think all of us are "Pro-Life" but not in the definition of the anti-abortion movement.

    We all wish that there would be better and more accessible birth control options and education to make abortion not as necessary.

    We all also wish that people in the Anti-Abortion movement were half as concerned about babies, children and parents as they were about fetuses.

    The other problem is that the end definition of being purely "anti-choice" does necessarily include many of the non-barrier methods of birth control that inhibit the attachment of a fertilized egg to uterine wall is in the purest definition an abortion and would be as illegal as going to a clinic.

    In the end if you are saying you are pro-life but you believe in the rights of people to make their own decisions (and that you would not choose for yourself) then you are in-fact pro-choice.  The pro-choice movement has been successfully tagged as the pro-abortion movement by the right-wingers.  I am fervently pro-choice but I do not know anyone who is pro-abortion.

    So that is my 2c

    Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

    by dvogel001 on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:01:30 AM PDT

  •  well, you might get further... (4.00 / 9)

    among us liberal progressives if you dropped the insulting right-wing framing by using the fundie term "pro-life". This implies that people that who are pro-choice are somehow pro-death.

    "If you are what you say you are...a superstar...then have no fear, the camera's here." lupe fiasco

    by pacific city on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:02:16 AM PDT

    •  You hit it. (none / 0)

      Pro-choice means women get to make up their own mind about whether or not to have an abortion. Pro-Life usually means against abortion for everybody. If the diary author is against abortion for them and for women being allowed to make their own decision, they are really Pro-Choice. If you believe Roe vs. Wade should stand, than you are Pro-Choice. Perhaps somebody needs to find a better label for themselves.

      I am Pro-Choice, but would like to see abotion used rarely. I think this would best be accomplished through sex education and a strong push to solve many women's issues, such as spousal abuse, low cost daycare, pre-natal support, and the like.

      Signature Impaired.

      by gttim on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:41:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I agree and disagree? (none / 0)

        And if anyone is still paying attention to this, I'll likely get some arguements. I think Roe v. Wade should stand, I don't think people should have abortions. If someone really wants an abortion, they'll find a way to make it happen, legal or not. This is the statement that will get me in trouble: I think the choice part of things happens when you have sex. You choose to proceed knowing full well what the consequences may be, either a baby or an std of some sort. It's a cloudy issue since in saying that I'll be accused of saying women shouldn't get to choose what happens to their body. I guess in my mind, with my religious background, they're making that decision when they do the deed. I actually am in support of birth control, I guess I see the issue as one having to do with responsibility. Personal opinion(s).

        by galapogos on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 01:04:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  And the women... (none / 0)

          who conceive during a rape?

          They didn't get choice then, and you'd have them not have the choice to terminate?

          -9.63, -7.03 Rage, rage against the Lying of the Right

          by Maryscott OConnor on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 04:30:37 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Hah (none / 1)

            I am for the exceptions like that, she didn't have the choice in that case. Of course, I also think...what's so wrong with adoption? I know it'd be horrid carrying around a reminder of what happened for 9 months though. It's a very messy issue with no really really right answer.

            You can say I'm a confused and ignorant hypocrite if you'd like. And I'd more than welcome hearing an opinion from the complete opposite side that doesn't just question mine, but puts forth their side.

            by galapogos on Fri Jan 14, 2005 at 04:35:40 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  When I walk across the road.... (none / 0)

          I am not making a personal choice to get hit by a truck. However, if I do, I don't want the governement telling me I cannot get healthcare because I made a choice to walk across the road.

          Sometimes unintentional shit happens. Sometimes rubber are defective. Sometimes the pill may not work. Sometimes women get raped, by strangers or family. Sometimes kids in schools are never taught about how a female actually gets pregnant. If you make a choice not to have sex, good for you. You do not get to make that choice for everybody else. In my opinion neither you, nor the government, should get to make a choice about a woman's reproductive system at all.

          Your religious morals, and legal rights of women, are not the same thing.

          Signature Impaired.

          by gttim on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 07:15:56 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  my (weak) rebuttal (none / 0)

            But I don't think my religious morals are the thing that decides you get pregnant from having sex. If I were arguing from pure religious morals, I wouldn't believe in birth control, premaritial sex, and a bijillion other things. I don't think morals and laws should be the same thing, as I said above. My religious morals say no abortion ever, my personal morals, as stated above, said that I believe it should be legal, but it should happen very rarely.

            I don't think your comparision is really the same. Let's see, maybe if you decided to walk across an expressway during normal (not slow) traffic and you got hit by a car, you'd still get healthcare, but wouldn't you take responsibility and think damn I was an idiot for thinking I could run across traffic and not get hit?

            And this is an outside question having nothing to do with my arguments. I'm not looking for an argument, just more information. Even if a kid doesn't know how you "make a baby" from sex ed, wouldn't they learn a lot from movies, tv, their friends, etc? I just don't know if there is way to be completely sheltered from sex? I can understand them believing "myths" and misinformation though.

            by galapogos on Fri Jan 14, 2005 at 04:45:33 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  One reason (none / 0)

          that women think that men don't understand the choice thing is that men so rarely have sex they haven't consented to.

          But it happens all the time to women. I'm not even talking about rape. I'm talking about women who,  on more occasions than men will ever know, have sex to be polite, to avoid an argument, because it will be less exhausting than refusing.

          Think about a woman with young kids and a small baby, terrified of yet another, libido at a low ebb, for whom sex is still painful, worried she will lose her partner if she doesn't keep him happy with sex.  

          I guess in my mind, with my religious background, they're making that decision when they do the deed.

          Think about it again.

          And when, despite the sex, she loses him anyway, and finds herself pregnant, what choices does she have now?

          by Febble on Fri Jan 14, 2005 at 05:31:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Actually... (none / 1)

            I'm a woman. I'm not sure if you were assuming I'm a man or if you were just stating something.

            Now I'm going to use a crappy comparison that doesn't really fit. Say I used to steal things with my S.O. and I was fine with that, but I almost got caught once and now I don't want to do it anymore, but he still wants me to help him lift things. I decide to go along with the idea instead of refusing to do it, it's easier than fighting with him and possibly losing him. If I get caught should I still face the consequences even though I was just going along with it out of politeness? Or the better question, should I speak up knowning that my partner should respect me and what I want to do with myself and my future?

            Another question, if you're saying the woman is giving up choice, knowingly, in the first part of your situation, going along with sex when she doesn't really want to, and therefore allowing the man to have control of her reproductive system...I think you see where I'm going with this.

            As to your last question, what choice does she have now? What choice would she have had before she got pregnant again. Even if she hadn't gotten pregnant again, that's a horribly tough situation. I think she still has the same choices as every other pregnant woman. I'm not saying it will be easy, but there is no easy in that situation. Hopefully she has a strong network of family and friends that are willing to help her out. Unfortunately, there are quite a few people that don't.

            I will keep thinking on this though, and thank you for making me think again.

            by galapogos on Fri Jan 14, 2005 at 05:46:08 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yes, I did think you were a man, (none / 1)

              sorry, but I was also addressing my comments to any man reading the thread!

              I do know where you are coming from.  I am a catholic myself.  We had a family friend who had kidney disease (before dialysis was available) and who had four children.  Each time she became pregnant her life was at increasing risk.  My mother, who was her physician, told her that she would not survive another pregnancy. She wouldn't use contraception because she was a catholic. She did not want to refuse to have sex, because her husband had an affair whenever she did. She also did not want a divorce, also because of her wish to adhere to catholic teaching. And of course she would never have an abortion (it had only just become legal then anyway). Eventually my mother persuaded her to go on the pill, "because it might help her medical condition" (my mother was good at Jesuitical argument) and her health improved.  But her husband by this stage wanted to marry someone else.  So he poisoned her.

              This is not directly relevant to your point, but it might help you see where I am coming from. She was a good woman, and we loved her.

              I have come myself (because of a neuroscience training) to believe that consciousness arises well after conception, but some time before birth, so I make a moral gradation (not a distinction) between early and late abortion. I believe that the later the abortion, the more compelling the reasons have to be to be morally justifiable.  I am pro-choice - I just believe that the choice becomes weightier the later the pregnancy.  I think the vast majority of pro-choice people would agree with me, although I may be wrong.

              The reason I am pro-choice, even for late abortions, is that the moral complexities of whether to have sex, and, if pregnancy results, whether to have the baby, can be so complex, that the only morally acceptable role for the state, is to ensure that abortion is "safe, legal and rare".

              by Febble on Fri Jan 14, 2005 at 06:33:37 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  yeah, and the username 'groper' adds a nice (none / 0)

      warm feel too.  

      But hey, that framin' crap aint all it's cracked up to be.

      Sharing and Caring are for Commies! They should be illegal. Drop by and support the Human Agenda

      by k9disc on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:57:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Because (none / 0)

      Some people who are pro choice are also pro abortion and anti adoption. Those people are pro death. I'm talking about the ones who view abortion rights as birth control instead of as a protection.

      Peer2Peer Distributed Social Networking

      by Lucian on Fri Jan 14, 2005 at 07:17:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Deal with it (4.00 / 12)

    It's an emotional issue. It's a critical issue. It is OUR BODIES you're talking about. It's the most personal and gut-wrenching decision a woman has to make about their own body, their self-determination, and the direction of their life.

    You're going to get flamed when you post things that demonstrate a lack of understanding of the centrality of this issue in women's lives. You venture into that territory, wear an asbestos suit.

    "There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty." - John Adams.

    by mcjoan on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:02:21 AM PDT

    •  THe war in Iraq is an emotional issue too (1.00 / 4)

      and I'd appreciate it, for the sake of my best frend serving in Sadr city, if you would stop being so anti-war, as it is profoundly insulting to our soldiers fighting overseas.

      Of course I posted something demonstrating a lack of understanding of the centrality of this issue in women's lives. THat was the whole point of the post. WHy has this one issue become so central, when compared to other things like women not being able to leave the house without their faces covered, or forced genital mutilation, or all of the other horrible things that are happening to women, why is abortion numeral uno when it comes to women's rights? I know that you all might disagree, but I see abortion as a way to get out of the consequences of having sex. Whatever your frame, that is the point of getting an abortion. It seems to me that a)the feminist movement would get a lot more recruits if they tried a little harder to reach out on other women's issues like equal pay for equal work, etc. and b)the Dem party would get a lot more recruits if some many of us didn't have elitist attitudes.

      Donald Driver for Wisconsin - Senate 2008 (Feingold for President)

      by Groper on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:14:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  what??? (none / 0)

        where exactly was mcjoan anti-war in her comment?

        "If you are what you say you are...a superstar...then have no fear, the camera's here." lupe fiasco

        by pacific city on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:17:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Whaaaaaaaaaaaaa? (none / 1)

        and I'd appreciate it, for the sake of my best frend serving in Sadr city, if you would stop being so anti-war, as it is profoundly insulting to our soldiers fighting overseas.

        I hope to fucking GOD you are being IRONIC in this statement. But I have a sick feeling you're NOT.

        Oh my fucking GOD. You'd APPRECIATE it if I'd STOP BEING SO ANTI-WAR because it's INSULTING to soldiers???

        Please, please tell me you're being ironic.

        -9.63, -7.03 Rage, rage against the Lying of the Right

        by Maryscott OConnor on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:19:01 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  yes (none / 0)

          I was being ironic.

          Donald Driver for Wisconsin - Senate 2008 (Feingold for President)

          by Groper on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:32:10 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  then WTF? (none / 0)

            was your point????????

            you are free to be as "anti abortion" as you please.

            When you start imposing YOUR principles onto other people is where you step over the line.

            It's because you appear to have stepped over the line to imposing YOUR principles and  YOUR choice (not that you actually have to make this choice) that so many Kossacks are offended and/or angry.   Apparently you don't want us to be able to make the choice for ourselves, and you want the Democratic party to STFU about the issue of choice.

            I am so totally not getting you and the others who claim to be "anti abortion" and yet "pro choice"

            by pitbullEmily on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 12:51:20 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  It's pretty simple (none / 0)

              Who really wants to kill anything? But if one is raped, incested, knows that they won't do right by the child for whatever reason it is a personal choice to abort or not. Hopefully you won't ever have to make the choice because it is a difficult choice to make. WE own our actions.

              "Time is for careful people, not passionate ones"

              by roseeriter on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 01:04:28 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  well (none / 0)

              a) I nevr claimed to be pro-choice. I did say that the democratic party shuoldn't drop the issue, or compromise on it, because it's a main issue that resonates with their base. How you took that and got "you want the Democratic party to STFU about the issue of choice." I dont know, but I'm guessing you didn't bother to read my post.

              I don't know where I appeared to step over any lines and tried to impose anything on anyone. I just asked a question and got flamed for mentioning that my view is different.

              I am so totally not getting you and the others who claim to be tolerant and yet try to shout down anyone who disagrees.

              Donald Driver for Wisconsin - Senate 2008 (Feingold for President)

              by Groper on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 06:52:09 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  WTF??? (4.00 / 2)

        How in any way shape or form does my post to you imply anything about my position on the war or our soldiers or anything else?

        If you have nothing more constructive to add to the debate, then I suggest you stay out of it.

        "There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty." - John Adams.

        by mcjoan on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:21:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think... (none / 1)

          he thought he was talking to me, because I made mention in another comment about the hypocrisy of claiming to be "pro-life" while supporting a war that has killed thousands of Iraqis.

          Of course, this must mean I am disrespectful of the soldiers even though my beloved husband is serving in Mosul and feels the same way I do about this war. That viewpoint is simply beyond the comprehension of so many people on the right.

          "If you are what you say you are...a superstar...then have no fear, the camera's here." lupe fiasco

          by pacific city on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:26:53 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  which is even more unacceptable (none / 0)

            It was bad enough to see this total non-sequitor comment misdirected to me. But knowing that it was supposed to be to you pisses me off even more. There are ways to debate these issues on this board. He hasn't learned how.

            "There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty." - John Adams.

            by mcjoan on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:33:59 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  I was (none / 0)

            I'm not serious about that comment. I should have put some sarcasm brackets around it. My best friend is in Sadr City, but I'm as anti-war as anyone here. He's more or less neutral about it. He sees it as just the next stop on the us military's path. We've been in military conflict with someone or another since the Korean war. THat's how long it's been since we've really been at peace.

            Donald Driver for Wisconsin - Senate 2008 (Feingold for President)

            by Groper on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:35:53 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  What about soldiers who oppose the war? (none / 1)

        Are they being profoundly insulting to "the soldiers?"

        As for the actual thread, these days I hear nearly as much about each of the other women's issues you raise as I do about abortion. It is only you who are claiming that the other issues are not important.

        Every good Christian should line up and kick Jerry Falwell's ass. - Barry Goldwater, 1981

        by Doug in SF on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:27:26 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Abortion... (none / 0)

        ...can also be an option for those who have been raped and victims of incest.  What about women who have pregnancies that endanger their lives?

        Not all abortions happen due to consentual sex.

        -8.88; -8.62 Republicans for Voldemort

        by kaus on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:30:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Women's rights (4.00 / 2)

        WHy has this one issue become so central, when compared to other things like women not being able to leave the house without their faces covered, or forced genital mutilation, or all of the other horrible things that are happening to women, why is abortion numeral uno when it comes to women's rights?

        Because, while those are admirable causes to take up, those are not issues that most American women face in their everyday lives. We are talking about domestic politics here -- the rights of women in America.

        I can leave my house with my face uncovered. No one I know has ever had to deal with the horror of female genital mutilation. But what if I am happily married, on birth control, and taking a medication that causes severe birth defects? What if that medication interferes with my birth control and I get pregnant anyway? Do you still think that abortion is "a way to get out of sex?"

        by Helen in MD on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:33:15 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  How about equal pay for equal work? (none / 0)

          How about the fact that we've never had a woman president, or that despite being a country that is %51 women, women do not hold %51 of congressional seats, womwen are not %51 per cent of the CEOs in our largest corporations, etc. Why abortion, and not these things? THat's my main question.

          Donald Driver for Wisconsin - Senate 2008 (Feingold for President)

          by Groper on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:42:43 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  HOw about... (4.00 / 7)

            because without reproductive freedom, the chances of women achieving those OTHER goals are NIL.

            -9.63, -7.03 Rage, rage against the Lying of the Right

            by Maryscott OConnor on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:45:51 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Or how about ... (4.00 / 7)

            The whole issue resonates for liberal women with control of sexuality, which is tied in with who we are.

            In history, we've been the harlot, the Madonna. The slut and and the sainted mother. Laws have been passed about what we can wear, where we can eat, what clubs we're allowed to join, if we can vote ... and it all feels like an extenuation of this historical control pattern.

            Women are often viewed as the "temptresses" who lead men into sin. Even today, look at what happens ... a woman gets pregnant, the man splits. She's looked down upon if she gets an abortion. She's scorned if she chooses single motherhood (the slut!), she's berated if she goes to work to support the child (not being a stay at home mother), she's berated if she stays home and needs public support to do so.

            To me, it's ALL tied up with the baggage of women bearing all the costs for sexuality -- and trying to control female sexuality like it's a dangerous, dangerous thing ... the downfall of "good" men.

            Bleh.

            by SusanG on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:52:28 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  How about (none / 0)

            letting women decide for ourselves what is most important to us.

            by Kansas on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 12:49:01 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  I've said it before (none / 0)

      and I will say it again. To any man, when you are able to conceive, carry and give birth to a baby THEN I will MAYBE listen to your positions on pro-life.

      I am pro-choice. I had to have an abortion and quite frankly it took me years to deal with what I had done. BUT, it was my choice and my body.

      If men want there to be no abortions then lets find a way for them to carry the fetus to term, nurse it, love it and educate it until its 18. I think you would hear less and less about it then!

      Frodo failed....Bush has got the ring!

      by Alohaleezy on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 02:39:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  So lets extend the "our bodies" issue (none / 1)

      Lets lower the drinking age to win the youth vote, and legalize marijuana. Lets make it legal to do anything you want to your body by making steriods legal for all non atheletes, lets legalize all safe medications which have no side effects and let people buy them over the counter.

      When you loosen drug laws you increase the freedom you have over your own body.

      However, if you don't agree to fight for freedom to own our bodies then you are just a pro abortion voter and you have no value to the party itself except on one issue.

      Peer2Peer Distributed Social Networking

      by Lucian on Fri Jan 14, 2005 at 07:19:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  If you're not anti-woman (4.00 / 2)

    Then why did you pick groper as your nom de plume?

    Join me at Strategy '08

    by zenbowl on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:03:12 AM PDT

    •  It's a nick name (2.00 / 6)

      It's a nickname derived from my last name. People have been calling me Groper since I was 13, including my friends parents growing up. Nothing sexual about it, other than it happens to be a shortening of my last name. Besides, even if it was a sexual thing, how is it anti-women? I've met plenty of women who also grope people. Are they anti-man?

      Donald Driver for Wisconsin - Senate 2008 (Feingold for President)

      by Groper on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:07:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You can't stretch your mind a bit (none / 1)

        and imagine what someone who doesn't know the neat little story behind your nickname might think of the "Groper" moniker?  Perhaps this is the source of your frustration in general: people are nameless and past-less individuals on the blogosphere.  Nobody knows who you are, and you're only going to be judged based on your written content and yes, perhaps, your name.  Because people have nothing else to work with.  Believe me, people assume that I'm either a pot-smoker or a 220 bowler based on my nickname, and I'm neither.  So, to my larger point, yes, people will think that Groper is an inappropriate nickname when discussing a women's rights issue.

        Join me at Strategy '08

        by zenbowl on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:18:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  no story, just a shortening (none / 1)

          like Kos is a shortening of Markos. I suppose people might think of it as innaproriate when discussing women's issues, but I'm not going to get another dkos account just for women's topics, and I guess I don't care enough to get a different name. My name is Groper, as much as it is Matthew. I rarely get called Matthew, always Groper. When I first signed up, I didn't think anythign of it, and I didn't realize how sensitive people get around here to the little things.

          Donald Driver for Wisconsin - Senate 2008 (Feingold for President)

          by Groper on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:39:31 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  doing fine up til "besides" - ouch (none / 1)

        by Hprof on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:22:28 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  what? (none / 1)

          I don't see how groping is a male thing, or an anti woman thing. Women grope. Groping is natural. It's fun. It's touching your partner in a sexual way. What was wrong with that?

          Donald Driver for Wisconsin - Senate 2008 (Feingold for President)

          by Groper on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:45:52 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Two words: Gro-pinator (none / 0)

            by Hprof on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:50:21 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  OK, here's the deal (none / 1)

            from the Oxford English Dictionary online: lots of subtle definitions of 'grope' as a verb, including "To use the hands in feeling, touching, or grasping; to handle or feel something", and "to search blindly, tentatively, or uncertainly".  

            It is not considered sexual, though there is one definition that defines it as 'indecent'.  In everyday terms 'grope' is thought to represent invasive and unwanted, clumsy touching in an assaultive fashion.

            So if you grope your partner, I suggest you turn the lights on and/or get some confidence in the boudoir.  

            On Media Engagement

            by magpie02141 on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 12:12:41 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I didn't read the oxford dictionary (none / 0)

              when they were handing out nicknames (not htat I ever had a choice in the name. If I did, I deffinitly would have prefered something other than groper through my teenage years.) I've never really thought of it in an invasive assultive or unwanted way. It can be those ways, but usually not.

              Donald Driver for Wisconsin - Senate 2008 (Feingold for President)

              by Groper on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 06:55:55 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Steeer-ike! (none / 0)

      Outta here, I don't deal well with sites that condone racism.

      by fabooj on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:08:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  So where are you on choice? (4.00 / 7)

    When it comes to politics and public policy, the only real discussion is about choice. Who decides when life begins? What options are legally available to women? By saying you're "pro-life," you're not really saying anything about policy.

    Unfortunately, "pro-life" has become a more palatable euphemism for "anti-choice." Or, put another way, the government will choose for you: life begins at conception, no abortions allowed. I feel completely comfortable telling people I'm pro-life and pro-choice at the same time, but it always requires an explanation. Even though I believe life begins at viability, I could never presume to make that decision for others, and I certainly don't want the government making the choice for anyone. The shorthand for this issue belies its complexity.

    BTW -- I'm guessing you're a guy. "Groper" doesn't exactly sound like a female nom-de-plume. It might also hint that you're a misogynist, even if you're not.

    by Man is 5 on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:03:16 AM PDT

    •  PRO-LIFE (none / 0)

      Is forced motherhood/birth. Frame it as it is baby!! snark

      Frodo failed....Bush has got the ring!

      by Alohaleezy on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 02:44:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Grey area (none / 0)

      I have yet to be able to reconcile my belief that abortion is murder with a practical set of policies. Our whole system is broke, especially in regards to women's rights and place in society, and there are all kinds of reasons that just outlawing it would be disasterous (well, that's probably an exageration, but it wouldn't be good). To me, in an ideal world, abortion wouldn't have to be illegal, because noone would be having them anyways. Too bad we live in a real world.

      Donald Driver for Wisconsin - Senate 2008 (Feingold for President)

      by Groper on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 07:00:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  What about people who think the doctor should (none / 0)

      I never thought the government should choose anything. I'm for medical marijuana because I believe doctors should make these decisions. I'm not for abortion being made illegal, just like I'm not for drugs being made illegal, I think the decisions like these should be by the patient and doctor. If a patient wants to smoke pot, use steriods, and get tattoos on their forehead I don't really care.

      If a patient wants to have an abortion because they cannot physically or emotionally deal with labor, I have enough compassion to allow them to have the abortion even though I disagree with abortion. On the same note I'd promote adoption, and I'd stop talking about abortion. Instead of fighting for abortion like pro abortion people do, I'd be fighting to make adoption popular and keep adoption legal.

      Abortion is not going anywhere, legal or illegal its still going to happen. Adoption however needs the government to exist and I don't understand why people who care about women want to promote abortion which can harm the moral sanity of women. It's a stressful decision to make, morally, religiously, culturally, as it should be. I don't think its a decision women should choose to make, it should be a decision they have to make.

      I believe the way to prevent abortion is through moral, religious, and peer pressure. I'd simply voice my opinion to someone who wants an abortion and talk them out of it, just like how I'd talk them out of suicide. However just like suicide being illegal doesnt stop anyone, abortion being illegal wont stop anyone.

      Peer2Peer Distributed Social Networking

      by Lucian on Fri Jan 14, 2005 at 07:25:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  asdf (none / 1)

    If you were going to play with fire you should have put on your flame suit.

    Bush? He can't run one country and you expect him to run two?

    by ScrewJack on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:03:23 AM PDT

    •  I didn't think I was (none / 1)

      I didn't think that holding an opposing viewpoint was playing with fire. I was asking about abortions role in the women's movement, not whether it was right or wrong, and everyone jumps on me and starts making shit up. I don't mind real debate, but dKos patrons seem to be just as willing to build a strawman as Rush Limbaugh, only their not as good at it.

      Donald Driver for Wisconsin - Senate 2008 (Feingold for President)

      by Groper on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:17:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think you have misunderstood (none / 1)

        the pro-choice viewpoint.

        You are the one who has built a straw man, and called it a Nazi.

        by Febble on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:24:38 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  asdf (none / 1)

        OK, come on!  

        You actually thought you could go on a democrat driven blog and write a topic claiming an unpopular viewpoint and you never expected anyone in this wonderful blog to flame you?  

        I mean democrats are good people but seriously.

        Bush? He can't run one country and you expect him to run two?

        by ScrewJack on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 11:26:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well (none / 1)

          I expected some disagreement, although I tried t