News Stories

[Vexx]

Ah, but whether that is fair or not, I get "judged" by the behavior of other people who look like me. Those "bad examples" of my pigment often mistakenly assume I think like them (I've been in far too many situations over my life where someone says or does something repugnant assuming I agree with their attitude because I'm the same skin color). I've been called very interesting names by some in my life when I would remark on the beauty of a woman of different color. I'd rather not repeat them.

And yeah, I've known racists of all colors
1: one of my high school friends who was black would have us drop him off at the end of the block because his dad would go through the roof if he knew his son was hanging out with white/yellow/brown people).
2: a few of my wife's family (japanese-american) are so anti-black/brown its impossible to even begin a discussion on politics or society around them.
3: when the Vietnamese/Hmong/Cambodian immigrants arrived on the Gulf Coast in the 70s/80s, black/white/brown folks treated them quite poorly.

So, basically I call "dibs" on smacking anyone who makes me look worse in the eyes of others

[Urzu 7]

Tennessee Abortion Bill Would Make Abortion Providers' Names Public, Require Releasing Detailed Info Of Women

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1363410.html

A new bill moving through the Tennessee House of Representatives would require the state to publish the names of each doctor who performs an abortion and detailed statistics about the woman having the procedure, which opponents worry will spur anti-abortion violence in the state.

The Life Defense Act of 2012, sponsored by state Rep. Matthew Hill (R-Jonesborough), mandates that the Tennessee Department of Health make detailed demographic information about every woman who has an abortion available to the public, including her age, race, county, marital status, education level, number of children, the location of the procedure and how many times she has been pregnant. Each report would also have to include the name of the doctor who performed the procedure.

This is just bullshit. Obviously a bunch of republicans are pushing for this (most of them men) because they want this to be a means for people to terrorize abortion clinic staff and women who get abortions. The republicans, they care so much about human life in the womb, but after that, they don't really care about you unless you are a conservative Christian GOP'er.

I'm pro-life, but making abortion illegal isn't a good thing. Women will turn to unsafe ways to prevent child birth (forced miscarriages via hard drinking and hitting one's stomach, coat hangers, etc.). This bill, if passed, will just lead to more religious nuts terrorizing and even killing abortion clinic personnel and women who get abortions.

Most of these laws cropping up that are "Christian laws" forgo people's rights and logical arguments against them for piety, and based on ideas that a big percentage of Americans don't ascribe to. That isn't right.

[Zakoo]

Hahaha.

Men being a woman must not funny in certain states. Between having your womanly rights defiled in a democracy or defiled in a theocracy, I wonder what is the worst huhuhu.

[Xagzan]

Originally Posted by Urzu 7

Tennessee Abortion Bill Would Make Abortion Providers' Names Public, Require Releasing Detailed Info Of Women

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1363410.html



This is just bullshit. Obviously a bunch of republicans are pushing for this (most of them men) because they want this to be a means for people to terrorize abortion clinic staff and women who get abortions. The republicans, they care so much about human life in the womb, but after that, they don't really care about you unless you are a conservative Christian GOP'er.

I'm pro-life, but making abortion illegal isn't a good thing. Women will turn to unsafe ways to prevent child birth (forced miscarriages via hard drinking and hitting one's stomach, coat hangers, etc.). This bill, if passed, will just lead to more religious nuts terrorizing and even killing abortion clinic personnel and women who get abortions.

Most of these laws cropping up that are "Christian laws" forgo people's rights and logical arguments against them for piety, and based on ideas that a big percentage of Americans don't ascribe to. That isn't right.

Not sure what to call that except a Pro-terrorism bill.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Zakoo

Hahaha.

Men being a woman must not funny in certain states. Between having your womanly rights defiled in a democracy or defiled in a theocracy, I wonder what is the worst huhuhu.

I can't really guess: they could more freely protest in the democraty but the theocraty's actions are less hypocrit.

[Urzu 7]

Publishing that information is really just making hit-lists available. People pushing for this bill can't really fit the label "pro-life".

And funny how the right is so anti-abortion and then they are also totally anti-welfare. Hey guys, guess what, welfare actually helps many people in need from going under, and that includes millions of kids. I guess a bunch of people from the right only care about children when they are in the womb, afterwards it is a different story.

And they say they hate 'intrusive big government' but then they are trying to have the government intrude on people's lives for reproductive rights, sex lives, love lives, right to wed, etc.

[Ithekro]

The idea is that to protect in the womb fulfills the "go forth and multiply" ideology. What they do after they are born is not their concern...only that the multipling happens as commanded.

[Urzu 7]

Spread forth and multiply doesn't apply in today's world. Such is one dangerous thing out of many when people try to deal in absolutes and abide to their holy book at all times, no matter what.

[Ledgem]

Originally Posted by Urzu 7

Tennessee Abortion Bill Would Make Abortion Providers' Names Public, Require Releasing Detailed Info Of Women

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1363410.html

I understand that to people who feel that human life is created once a sperm fertilizes an egg this is a matter of murder of innocents. That's a big deal, and I respect that they're trying to stand against what they perceive to be a grave injustice. It's unfortunate that we can never prove when life truly begins, because that would probably settle a fair amount of this conflict given that many people do not believe that life starts anywhere near that point (myself included).

Unable to take abortion head-on, laws like this are clearly an effort to set up roadblocks to abortion. It's a valiant effort for something that they believe so strongly in, but what bothers me about it is the effort that is going into it. Do we not have other issues that we should be uniting to work on? Of all the issues facing the country, is abortion really a high-priority one? If we want to talk about death and suffering, how about we deal with people whose state of living is not up for debate?

[Urzu 7]

I'm pro-life, but like I said, making it illegal is a bad idea for the health of many women, and this bill, in its effort to reduce abortions, will only lead to violence and death anyway. This isn't the first bill of its kind from the bible belt, either. Really, a lot of "pro-life" people really don't care when abortion doctors and women who get the procedure are killed by anti-abortion fanatics.

Hopefully the bill doesn't get passed.

[Ledgem]

Originally Posted by Urzu 7

I'm pro-life, but like I said, making it illegal is a bad idea for the health of many women, and this bill, in its effort to reduce abortions, will only lead to violence and death anyway. This isn't the first bill of its kind from the bible belt, either. Really, a lot of "pro-life" people really don't care when abortion doctors and women who get the procedure are killed by anti-abortion fanatics.

Hopefully the bill doesn't get passed.

I think it's admirable that you're pro-life ("anti-choice"), yet you're looking to the health of others. I presume you recognize that even if we create laws against this, because there is no consensus that this is truly murder, people are going to do it anyway. If that's the case, what good is it to sweep it under the rug?

I am curious, though... if you're pro-life, how do you reconcile with the idea commonly held by "pro-lifers" that each abortion is no different than killing an innocent person; that unborn children are being denied the rights that they deserve?

[Urzu 7]

I think once people are able to detect a baby in a womb, it is the beginnings of a human life. It isn't clear cut when a human life begins in the womb, but I believe it is definitely there earlier in the pregnancy, and doesn't count as a human life only until late in the pregnancy.

"If you're pro-life, how do you reconcile with the idea commonly held by "pro-lifers" that each abortion is no different than killing an innocent person?"

I agree with them. But even then, making it illegal will come with problems and some women will hurt themselves (possibly even die) by trying to avoid child birth. I may not agree with abortions, but for many people who contemplate that decision or choose that decision, if isn't an easy thing for them. I know that to be true. And it is so much easier for me, a guy, to take that kind of stance on abortion then any women. It is something that women really have the most say in, and you have these controversial abortion bills coming from white dudes who don't really think of how it'd be like for so many women.

And if I don't agree with abortion, what does that mean? If I had a loved one that wanted one, I could try very much to convince them to have the child, but I just don't know how to handle a situation like that. It isn't me who is pregnant, so my say on the matter is never the primary one.

[Ridwan]

http://blogs.aljazeera.com/asia/2012...ed-their-names

This article, although short, contains more truth and knowledge that needed to be spread than most of the others I've ever read.

[synaesthetic]

Originally Posted by Ledgem

I understand that to people who feel that human life is created once a sperm fertilizes an egg this is a matter of murder of innocents. That's a big deal, and I respect that they're trying to stand against what they perceive to be a grave injustice. It's unfortunate that we can never prove when life truly begins, because that would probably settle a fair amount of this conflict given that many people do not believe that life starts anywhere near that point (myself included).

Soapbox time. Prepare your hard hats and raincoats.

The "pro-life" movement has little to do with saving lives or reducing suffering. Their primary goal is to take power away from women. It's not about morality or murder--these people are quite often more than happy to execute criminals and support wars where thousands are killed.

The "pro-life" movement is almost exclusively male and religious. They feel threatened by a woman's ability to choose whether or not she wishes to remain pregnant. They feel slighted that it is no longer solely their decision when a woman is to have a baby. They feel offended that women are now able to experiment with their sexuality, divorcing sex from procreation using birth control and other contraceptives. The feel furious that women will no longer meekly accept their role as breeding stock, fit for nothing but producing and raising children.

A zygote is not a human. An embryo is not a human. These are potential humans, but they aren't humans yet. They can't possibly be given the same rights as an adult human. Over 70% of fertilized eggs do not implant into the uterine lining and are either reabsorbed by the body or discarded by the body. Are we going to start convicting every woman for mass manslaughter because 70% of their fertilized eggs don't make it?

Look, the pro-life movement wants one thing and one thing alone. They want women barefoot and pregnant, preferably in the kitchen making them a sandwich. They don't want women CEOs, women engineers, women researchers and scientists, women politicians and lawyers and military officers. They want to strip women of any and all power by saddling them with children from an early age. Period.



My two cents. Take them as you will.

[Ascaloth]

Okay guys. Show of hands, who wants the Abortion thread revived?

[Ledgem]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

The "pro-life" movement has little to do with saving lives or reducing suffering. Their primary goal is to take power away from women. It's not about morality or murder--these people are quite often more than happy to execute criminals and support wars where thousands are killed.

The "pro-life" movement is almost exclusively male and religious. They feel threatened by a woman's ability to choose whether or not she wishes to remain pregnant. They feel slighted that it is no longer solely their decision when a woman is to have a baby. They feel offended that women are now able to experiment with their sexuality, divorcing sex from procreation using birth control and other contraceptives. The feel furious that women will no longer meekly accept their role as breeding stock, fit for nothing but producing and raising children.

I think this is an overgeneralization. I also doubt that it's what most of the "pro-life" crowd truly believes. It may have been the motive behind the "pro-life" movement (although even that is debatable), but I very highly doubt that it's what the movement is truly about. To say that it is without any stern proof is insulting to those who are "pro-life" and it really makes meaningful conversation difficult.

I talked with a few pro-life women about the issue. The core belief that they held is that the child is alive. To them, it is murder. The child is a human, so why is it being denied the same rights that every other human being has? I don't know whether they believe in the death penalty or not, but my guess is that they would claim that those receiving the penalty forfeited their rights by committing terrible crimes. An unborn child is the essence of purity, so what has it done to earn a death sentence?

I strongly disagree with that view. I don't see how anyone could equate an unborn child with anyone else, nor why an unborn child's rights (if you want to give them any) should take priority over the mother's. From a practical standpoint, the mother should always take priority. We can't have limitless orphans, and children who are orphaned are at a distinct disadvantage compared to children raised by a loving family. Society stands nothing to gain from that; it can't support it. The dialogue that I prefer to have is that I understand their beliefs and concerns, but from a practical standpoint, abortion is for the better. In a perfect world it would not happen or even be necessary, but this is not a perfect world.

However, just as I don't appreciate being called someone who is lazy and just wants handouts because I support social welfare programs, I doubt that "pro-life" people appreciate being told that they're really just pushing an agenda that makes women all about reproduction. It's the trendy thing in America now, to make the opposing view out to be total depraved villains, but it doesn't lend itself to civil discourse. In most cases I think that both sides have valid concerns, and we'd be better off if we listened to each other, discussed it, and accepted that we won't ever come to a full agreement on certain things.

(But I still maintain that if you don't like abortions, don't get one - but don't tell my wife what to do.)

[synaesthetic]

I know personal anecdotes don't amount to a hill of beans, but every pro-life woman I've met in my life (and I've met quite a few having lived as long as I did in the Deep South) was a textbook case of Stockholm Syndrome. It was blatantly obvious that they were "pro-life" because their husbands commanded it.

Those women who held their own opinion on the matter tended to run the gamut. I should note that being a part of the religious pro-life movement is not the same as being opposed to unnecessary abortions--opposed to abortion as a way to escape responsibility. These are incredibly rare, in any case, so it's not really much of an issue.

It's possible that a percentage of the pro-life movement believes strongly in their moral position, but having seen this stuff up close and personal during my years in the South, I'm going to err on the side of "god damn it humanity" and stand by my original soapbox statement.

[Kamui4356]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

I know personal anecdotes don't amount to a hill of beans, but every pro-life woman I've met in my life (and I've met quite a few having lived as long as I did in the Deep South) was a textbook case of Stockholm Syndrome. It was blatantly obvious that they were "pro-life" because their husbands commanded it.

Those women who held their own opinion on the matter tended to run the gamut. I should note that being a part of the religious pro-life movement is not the same as being opposed to unnecessary abortions--opposed to abortion as a way to escape responsibility. These are incredibly rare, in any case, so it's not really much of an issue.

It's possible that a percentage of the pro-life movement believes strongly in their moral position, but having seen this stuff up close and personal during my years in the South, I'm going to err on the side of "god damn it humanity" and stand by my original soapbox statement.

It seems to me that this is all part of an overall larger attack on liberal philosophy and secularism in the US. There seems to be a feeling on the right that the US is losing its position as a world power and the only way to prevent it is to go back to "traditional" values that they think made the US great. Of course that's all in their mind, as the US is still by far the most powerful country on earth, the values they're trumpeting weren't what made this country great, and only serve to hold us back as a nation. We didn't win the cold war because of God and capitalism, but good luck convincing the right.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Kamui4356

It seems to me that this is all part of an overall larger attack on liberal philosophy and secularism in the US. There seems to be a feeling on the right that the US is losing its position as a world power and the only way to prevent it is to go back to "traditional" values that they think made the US great. Of course that's all in their mind, as the US is still by far the most powerful country on earth, the values they're trumpeting weren't what made this country great, and only serve to hold us back as a nation. We didn't win the cold war because of God and capitalism, but good luck convincing the right.

Small note : a look at history will tell one that US "won" the Cold War by governance, trade and opportunities of human freedom.

Or rather, the USSR fell thanks to mismanagement, corruption and secularism.

[Ascaloth]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Or rather, the USSR fell thanks to mismanagement, corruption and secularism.

Erm. That last one quite escapes me. How did secularism cause the fall of the USSR?