Pro-choice already is the "big tent" (duh!)


15 comments posted
Actually I think we are considered "pets"

Now is not the time to start offering up constituents as bargaining chips to gain territory.

We are just a few pet bunnies, out of the bunny hutch for some reason. They will rope us and ride us... LOL soon, soon, soon. We re so wayward! They are sure if they abuse us again and again (cannot catch the fast moving bunny pack!) that we will return home... to die in some Right Wing Pro life Democratic ditch.

Not this cat.

Marisacat... Liberal Street Fighter

anonymous lurker's picture
Posted by anonymous lurker (not verified) on 28 September 2005 - 11:44am

yeah you know that's exactly what Kos seems to be doing. fragging. I hope someone at NARAL begins fragging back. I have to assume Kos is now the online-front man for the Democrats for Life momement inside the Democratic party. Otherwise why keep scratching the broken-record diaries on NARAL? And using Amy Sullivan as some kind of example? that's just BRILLIANT (and opportunistic).

Kerry's campaign paid quite a bit of attention to Amy Sullivan, (get me values!!! values!!!!) look how far it got him. Gotta good idea there.

bayprairie's picture
Posted by bayprairie on 28 September 2005 - 1:56pm
I've got a modest proposal

for kos. Since kos believes we should vote for anti-abortion candidates because women's rights will be protected no matter who gets elected, he should take the responsibility for proving that's true -- he needs to go to each one of the anti-abortion candidates and get them to pledge that they won't vote for any anti-abortion or anti-birth control legislation or against any pro-abortion or pro-birth control legislation.

AndiF's picture
Posted by AndiF (not verified) on 28 September 2005 - 2:16pm
Is a pledge enough?

Politicians violate promises all the time. I imagine that if castration were the "pet cause," there'd be a lot of clamoring for some things as non-negotiable.

OPW -- other people's wombs.

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 28 September 2005 - 2:22pm
Actually, I'm all for

chemical castration of any man who is anti-abortion; let him put his erection where his mouth is (or, eventually, might be).

Anyway, the point of the pledge isn't so much about the politicians as it is about kos who keeps telling us that god's in her heaven and all's right with the world but doesn't seem the least bit interested in actually making an effort to provide tangible evidence. And of course if a politician made that pledge and violated it, at least we wouldn't have to hear about the fucking big tent again.

AndiF's picture
Posted by AndiF (not verified) on 28 September 2005 - 2:43pm
You're right. We should be

You're right. We should be killing as many children as possible. That is the only solution, or maybe the final solution. Only vote for pro-abortion candidates.

Dale's picture
Posted by Dale (not verified) on 6 October 2005 - 9:12pm
Gee, Dale, you got me

How could I have missed that if someone is against politicians meddling in private medical decisions, that person is "pro-abortion"?

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 6 October 2005 - 9:17pm
Ah, but the private medical

Ah, but the private medical decision is if one will slaughter a child in utero or not. The "pro-choice" line tries to cover-up the fact that the choice is between life and death. Choice sounds nice and fuzzy but it hides a horrible truth.

Dale's picture
Posted by Dale (not verified) on 7 October 2005 - 5:39am
Nobody is forcing you to abort a pregnancy

And that's the point.

As for calling a zygote/embryo/fetus a "child," that's your superstition, your mythology, your belief. And it all seems so clear cut to you. But there's a person involved here -- a legally recognized person -- and she is the woman who's pregnant, whose body you seem so intent on controlling, invading with government force, siezing control, occupying.

Legally and practically, life begins at birth, and everything up until that point is the woman's body, the woman's choice, the woman's decision, and no man or government has the right to make her into their breeder slave.

Your truth is just your truth. You are welcome to it. But don't try to impose it on everyone else.

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 7 October 2005 - 8:18am
Your truth?

Isn't truth true regardless of "whose" truth it is?

If something is true then doesn't that truth apply to everyone equally?

Aren't you trying to impose your view (that the unborn aren't valuable human beings) onto Dale? Aren't you telling him and other prolifers to accept your view or shut up? Doesn't sound so tolerant.

When does the life of a human being begin scientifically?

Jivin J's picture
Posted by Jivin J (not verified) on 7 October 2005 - 12:06pm
Your religious views are not germane

You have a woman who's entitled to full rights over her own body, and the government has no basis to invade anyone's body. Neither do you.

A new person's life begins when the doctor has cause to write out a birth certificate.

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 7 October 2005 - 3:13pm
Bill Maher, as repugnant as

Bill Maher, as repugnant as he is, is at least honest enough to recognize that it is a human life that is being snuffed. He was recently on Larry King and said, "You know, that is something I must say that bothers me a lot. I am more sympathetic on the abortion issue than I am on most right wing socially conservative issues, because you know, you don't have to be religious to be against abortion. I do sort of understand what they're saying. If you've ever seen a sonogram, you know, you could see something that's emerging as a human being in there. And we are sort of reaching in and killing it. I'm just not against that."

Amazing that you think that as long as the "lump of tissue" gets everything except the "lump of tissue" that amazingly resembles a human head out of the vagina it is okay to jab scissors into the base of the skull and vacuum out the brains. However, if the entire "lump of tissue" is lucky enough to completely pass through the birth channel and gets a birth certificate than at that point it transforms into a human being.

Dale's picture
Posted by Dale (not verified) on 7 October 2005 - 4:43pm
Birth is indeed amazing

That is the moment when a baby is born, when a baby starts to breathe, when a baby becomes a separate being.

You're phrase "lump of tissue" is cute, but irrelevant. What's important is that there is a woman involved here -- something that seems to elude pro-criminalization arguments. And as long as the woman is doing the breathing, the woman is doing the eating, the woman is doing the defecating, the woman is doing the living, then it's the woman who decides what happens to her own body.

Maybe it's just something you cannot understand. But I daresay that if men were routinely rendered sterile before puberty, there would be no unwanted pregnancy and thus but a fraction of a need to abort a pregnancy. Men could undergo reconnection of their testes when they gain the consent of a woman to conceive. And this small inconvenience, which is much much less than 9 months of pregnancy and childbirth, on balance would involve much less disruption of individual lives.

So in the name of stopping abortion, are you willing to put your balls on the table?

I didn't think so.

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 7 October 2005 - 5:20pm
They wouldn't even need the

They wouldn't even need the reconnect. their sperm could be frozen and held until it was necessary. I suggested this once on another board and got called Dr. Mengele. Ha! Haven't I learned not to mess with a guy's tackle, even by suggestion? Women can be controlled by bc methods that carry deadly consequences (ie, the pill) or by preventing abortion and forcing them to carry and that's perfectly fine. But don't mess with the men!

Reach in and jab with scissors? How often does that happen? Why does every abortion look like that? That's a 3rd trimester abortion and I argue that those abortions are b/c of dangers to a woman's body or problems with the fetus and not just because she got that far and got bored. Are these the abortions that are so important to those who are against it?

I wish RU486 was in every home. as long as no one knew you took a trip to a specific doctor, it's not an abortion.

gballsout's picture
Posted by gballsout on 10 October 2005 - 6:56am
i said this before

and I'll say it again.

Anti-choice women need to give up their wombs in these times of dire need. They can take up the fetus and carry it to term and then make certain the child gets a good home. Preferable theirs b/c even if they can't afford it and want another child or feel inconvenienced in any way, that's not important. They have no excuse whatsoever not to care for the child and raise it.

next, I want to further science so anti-choice men can show off how unintrusive it is to carry a fetus to term by actually carrying them to term and again, raise the child.

This is my new anti-choice solution. And everybody's happy, right? Right?

gballsout's picture
Posted by gballsout on 10 October 2005 - 7:17am