Quote:
Originally Posted by Vexx
Anti-choice versus pro-life ... because pro-lifers are also very often "don't care after you're born" types (raise the hypocrisy flag).
|
I had a very good discussion with another user on this forum about abortion via PMs. The conclusion we reached was that "anti-choice" was a bit incendiary, because it implies that these people are against a woman's right to choice about a number of things. What they're really against is abortion. Hence, "anti-abortion" is a more accurate term that also shouldn't immediately put any person who is anti-abortion into a totally defensive, upset (unreasonable) stance. (Although I agree with you that "pro-life" is a term that is a bit self-serving, as it implies that the opposing side is "anti-life," and only demons and psychopaths would be against life. The magic of words.)
Back to politics, has anyone been following former governor of South Carolina Mark Sanford? This was the guy who totally disappeared from office for a few days without leaving a word, such that even his aids didn't know where he was. It then turned out that he was in South America, seeing his mistress, cheating on his wife. That's pretty ballsy, not to mention totally irresponsible, amoral, unethical, and just poor behavior overall. Well, apparently the guy is even ballsier, because he ran for a seat in the House of Representatives in the same state.
And amazingly,
CNN is projecting that he's going to win this race.
I'm really surprised. The guy exhibited poor judgment and poor behavior, and he might win - he's doing well enough to
likely win? Was his opponent that bad, are South Carolina voters that forgiving, or do people just have really, really short memories?