Some things just need no explanation. Ask me again why I voted for President Obama—
I am still amazed that a party that calls for smaller government and less government intrusion feels they have the right to interfere with reproductive issues. Don’t even tell me abortion, the interference starts long before that…it starts with birth control.
The real binders of women are those people who still think it is appropriate to legislate restrictions that apply mainly to women.
Only when women have full control of their own reproduction will they have full economic equality. Until then, there will be an invisible glass ceiling.
So that’s how stupid the left is to incorrectly interpret a simple sentence? If that’s all it takes to win your vote then God help us.
SA,
To actually debate you would debase me as a woman. So I will simply say, it isn’t about “binders”, its about suggesting that government can AND should dictate what a woman does with her vagina.
The audicity of the right to blather on about small government is simply laughable when they would vote to have dominion over the very right for a woman to control her body.
Having birthed two wanted children when I CHOSE, not YOU, NOT the government, I know how life changing it was, emotinally, physically, and financially. Yeah, I vote to control my vagina, and I vote for on behalf of all the other women in this country who deserve to control their own economic destiny.
The role of the government is to protect innocent life. Pro-life people consider that gov’t should protect the unborn. And so, the debate is…yes it’s your vagina. And its the baby’s life.
So, instead of talking about a war on women or government intrusion…. talk about the actual debate. Furthermore, why is it that its ok for the left to demand gov’t intrusion, but not the right?
Notice…I’m not arguing for either side in this statement. I’m stating that the argument is not about gov’t intrusion but is a more basic argument that will not end.
And speaking as a formerly UNWANTED surprise to a distraught mother with issues, I, for one, am perfectly happy that abortion was NOT legal in 1962 in Louisiana.
There is simply no debate. I dont put zygotes on the same par with sentient adult women.
Is protecting innocent human life in the Constitution? Didn’t think so.
Quit whining about left and right. Plenty of Republican woman are pro-choice and use contraception and are putting on blinders to ignore this part of the platform.
I guess you missed the part about don’t tell me abortion…
That has nothing to do with contraception, glass ceilings or defunding planned parenthood or funding abstinence only sex ed for young people.
Cargo, you don’t own ‘unwanted surprise.’ I expect my parents weren’t ready for me either. I expect they would have probably liked to have had some time to be a couple. They had planned to travel. Didn’t happen.
Woulda coulda shoulda…what if. I find the argument sophomoric. I put it right up there with the big what if we hadn’t dropped the A -bomb..my father would have gone to japan and might have been killed and I probably wouldnt be here to say woulda shoulda coulda….
The government’s job is to protect born individuals, not zygotes.
@Moon-howler
Apparently asking reasonable questions is considered “whining.” And no…I didn’t miss the part about “don’t tell me abortion….”
I simply ignored that because I disagree. It doesn’t start with contraception. One can legally get that anywhere.
Didn’t say I owned anything. Just expressed my gratitude.
“The government’s job is to protect born individuals, not zygotes.”
And so…you have staked your position. Unborn children have no rights.
There. See. That was simple.
And that is the argument being played out. Other people disagree with you. Including some courts that have convicted killers of murdering unborn children when said murderer killed the mother.
Of course, if you want to just limit the powers of government to things found in the Constitution….I’ll play that game. Please…show me where abortion is a constitutional right? Or any number of other supposed rights and governmental powers. I’m all for limiting the fed’l gov’t power to the enumerated powers.
btw, if you’re interested, a resource on state abortion laws: http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_OAL.pdf
This wasn’t an attempt to convince you to vote for Romney or anything. I understand that you guys are “one issue” voters on this. I commented on this to point out that TWO lives are involved, not just one vagina.
Unborn fetuses have rights as outlined by Roe vs Wade. That is established law. What ever happened to Rule of Law?
No one is forcing an abortion on anyone.
You moan and groan about erosion of rights and yet would deny women the most basic of rights.
Apparently you need to go back to biology 101 and check out what sideshow Bob is trying to do, along with VP Candidate Ryan. The personhood amendment would define personhood from the moment of fertilization. That knocks out nearly all chemical contraception.
Don’t try to worm out of defunding Planned Parenthood or any of the other programs that provide contraception for those who cannot afford it.
In the meantime, don’t try to foist pregnancy on any woman. If your mother had you then it was because she wanted you in the long run, not because abortion was illegal. Women have always found a way, often at great risk to themselves.
Using your reasoning, I guess I should be grateful to the A-bomb.
You are free to have your own opinions. There is no brain police. However, this blog is not really a very safe place to express those opinions.
Why isn’t it a safe place? We’ve discussed this before. That’s done. I didn’t advocate for anything in my post.
I’m moaning and groaning about the erosion of rights? Where have I done that? You’re the one that brought up wanting to find things in the Constitution.
Also, defunding PP is a straw argument. PP is just another private organization. It’s not entitled to a dime. Yes, it provides cheap contraception. But so do other places. But, again, you’re bringing in extraneous elements. I didn’t mention any of this.
Notice, that I didn’t advocate for anything, including the “personhood” amendment, nor can you find anything where I have advocated that. I just stated the debate at its most basic and what I’m grateful for, as per my mother’s statements.
Oh, and you should be grateful for the A-Bomb, at least as it concerns the invasion of Japan. We expected 1 million American casualties.
I had to come back to this topic one more time. I am very uncomfortable with a person wanting to protect innocent human life down to the point of fertilized eggs and zygotes and at the same time telling me I should be grateful for the A-bomb. That bomb killed at least 200,000 civilians, many of whom were innocent children. Women, old people, and children were targetted. Civilians.
Cognitive dissonance.
I have very ambivant feelings feelings about the A-bomb but to target a civilian population…not so good. Those people had far less control of the doings of their government that we do.
Well Cargo, that isn’t really what you did. You and I both know that. One little ” It’s the baby’s life” is a more than obvious way to sneak one’s personal opinion in. I just don’t think of zygotes and fertilized eggs as babies. Sorry. I am more of a viability kinda person. So cut the innocent act.
Now let me clarify one point. I don’t care what personal opinions people have on the subject of abortion or contraception for that matter. I care when they start turning a presidential election into a referendum on abortion. For those who think that isn’t what’s out there before us, I have a bridge for sale….
I care when they start attempting to turn their personal opinions into laws that affect the rest of us. Then I fight.
Actually, I have never stated how I feel on a personal level about abortion. I have on contraception. My abortion statements have been all about public policy and erosion of women’s rights.
Actually no, I don’t want to find anything in the Constitution. That is the job for the teaparty. You have brought that up many many times. You were just making up that it is the job of the govt to protect innocent human life. I just wanted a reference on that….
As for the A bomb, we can project any number of casualties that we want to suck the American people in to justifying their country really doing the unthinkable.
! million, 2 million, whatever. There wasn’t much of a Japanese air force left and almost no Navy.
I still remain ambiguous in how I feel about the A-bomb. I could argue either side. Is A-bomb worse than firebombing and burning people alive? I don’t know.
“Now let me clarify one point. I don’t care what personal opinions people have on the subject of abortion or contraception for that matter. I care when they start turning a presidential election into a referendum on abortion.”
MH and I are not on the same page regarding abortion – BUT we are totally in synch on this point.
As long as codified law is under attack, pro choice groups will rise to meet those attacks. We’ll stop if they stop the assaults.
Moon,
All I can say is ditto. The very people that give us crocidile tears about the defenseless unborn in congress are the very same people who want to cut the very services to those helpless children and mothers who are most in need. What a joke, only it isn’t funny. These are the same hyporcites that would end PBS and educational shows for those same at risk children, or end head start programs. These people only care about the unborn as long as they can use it as a means to control women. They are the ones that are women centered actually, not fetus centered. Their actions in congress SHOW us they don’t care about those poor women and their children as soon as the baby breathes its first breath. cut medicaid, cut SCHIP, cut headstart, cut PBS, cut cut cut all those “welfare” programs. Women with means will always find a way to end an unwanted pregnancy.
As was pointed out the other day regarding government income support (less Vet benefits) check the abortion stats in red states. Georgia, Florida, Arizona.. Granted California, Maryland, Massachusetts are very high but the stats are interesting.
Then again isn’t the religious right about moral bankruptcy? Can just wipe the slate clean, get a new spouse and kids and then be righteous about those living your former life?
@Lyssa, that sounds familiar.
I guess I just don’t need the government to set my moral compass.
Funny that people are so willing to turn this type of authority over to the govt.
When abortions are banned – the people of means (even those opposed to abortion on the outside) will find a way to have it. The people at the bottom rungs of the ladder will be those who will not be able to afford the abortion.
Like I said….
The debate is whether the unborn have any human rights. All else is beating around the bush. According to those here, and Virginia law, the answer is “No.” all the way to 24 weeks for any reason, including saving the fetus from a life of “poverty” and all the way if life or health endangerment.
I can even, almost, get behind the entire argument that its up to the woman…except that every time the discussion comes up, the idiotic argument that the “right” doesn’t care about children because they want to do “x” with money…and those “unwanted” children are destined to live in poverty unless they are aborted…. is dragged out once again. And so, it comes across as “abortion for convenience.” The argument presented is basically, “The GOP is heartless because they are against Democrat spending programs but, if they were for abortion, they’re OK…….”
Margaret Sanger would be proud.