I call BS on the idea of moderate pro-lifers.... like moderate KKK.

[TLM]

"Hey just because I got the hood and robe and burning cross, it isn't fair to lump me in with those guys who bomb churches and lynch people." - Moderate KKK Guy.



I'll tell you why I call BS on this idea of moderate pro-lifers.

A person who doesn't like abortion, but wouldn't ban them or overturn the law, is pro-choice. I would point out one can be very anti-abortion, one can hate abortion and wish to see it gone forever, and still be pro-choice.

To be pro-life means you want to overturn the law, and ban abortion.

For these people it is not about life or saving babies, that's why they kill doctors, bomb clinics etc... because the truth is that preventing an abortion is as easy as giving out a condom. Yet, you'll notice the vast majority of those who want to ban abortion, also are wildly against sex education, contraception, and birth control. Because it's not about the fetus. It is not about preventing abortions.

The real issue motiving these Christian extremists is... CONTROLLING WOMEN. That's what this is ALL about, controlling women... primarily by controlling their sexuality. These right wingers would love nothing more than to slap a burka on every woman in the US, but they can't. So instead they seek to impose their view of how women should be permitted to behave, by using the law to shape a system that imposes consequences on those who don't conform to their behavioral standard.

In other words, they feel a sexually promiscuous woman should be punished for that sinful behavior with venereal disease, unwanted children, poverty, and marginalization. But unfortunately for them, things like condoms and abortions, prevent many from suffering the outcome that extremist Christians feel they should suffer for their behavior.

It is a way of controlling behavior... and it is failing. More and more women are escaping this role that the Christian right has sought to impose on them. Education, birth control, and contraceptives have allowed countless women to become sexually liberated and to take that power away from the religious extremists.

There are no moderate pro-lifers... just as their are no moderate burka supporters.

To be pro life is to want to impose an extremist religious view on women, strip them of their rights, and force them to behave the way some religious terrorists demand they behave.

There is no difference between pro-lifers and the KKK or the taliban... all use terror and violence to force their extremist interpretation of their religious bullshit on everyone else. They seek to impose their way, and when people refuse to conform they resort to murder.

A pro-lifer is by definition an extremist.

[EndersDame]

1. those are people are just plain facist

[TerryRay]

2. I have

to disagree...I dont think every person that is pro-life believes that to control women. Some honestly believe that abortion is murder, that life is created at conception and not birth. Not everyone of the pro-lifers believe violence is the answer. IMO your statement would be like saying all muslims are terroists. Neither are true, and both are blanket statements. Just my two cents

[EndersDame]

3. "Pro lifers" are imposing their personal and religous beliefs on other people

that aint cool in my book. I can respect peoples belief but when it crosses over into them making medical decisions(that are personal hard and potentially life threatening) for me we have a problem.

[TerryRay]

5. Oh I agree

with you..I am not saying someone who thinks abortion should be illegal is right, I just dont think every pro-life person is ok with killing doctors and bombing abortion clinics. I know a few who just truly believe that abortion is murder, they dont go extremist, they dont do anything radical, but they are pro-lifers.

[EFerrari]

4. As soon as someone says they're pro-life, you know you're dealing with an extremist.

Because there is no "pro death" position. No one celebrates abortion.

So people who say they're "pro life" are forwarding right wing distortions.

Those people are anti women's health and are too cowardly to say so.

[TLM]

9. you forget...pro-lifers are almost always pro-death

I've yet to meet a pro-lifer who wasn't also a huge supporter of war and the death penalty.

[EFerrari]

11. But they call it patriotism and justice

not war and murder.

[willing dwarf]

19. Well meet me then

there's a whole lot of people like me. We embrace the culture of life and see life and life giving issues as natural.

I think it's entirely possible to be wholly pro-life, actively anti death penalty, anti-war and anti abortion and at the same time to be strongly for the right of every woman to choose for herself. It's about maintaining a positive culture for life. Emphasis on "for."

[tavalon]

24. The right of every woman to choose for herself

You are pro-choice. Calling yourself pro-life is using the right wing framing.

[willing dwarf]

29. No, you need to see beyond their framing

Why should let someone else define me? Your argument is exactly the one that made the left abandon the term "liberal." If we let others define us, we are doomed. We need to express our own defintions of who we are, in words and in our lives.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TLM]

36. Do understand the meanings of the words being used?

"I think it's entirely possible to be wholly pro-life ... and at the same time to be strongly for the right of every woman to choose for herself."

Then you do not understand what these words mean.

Pro-life by definition means that you oppose a woman's right to choose for herself.

What you describe is not someone who is pro-life... but someone who is pro-choice and doesn't like abortion.

Again you might as well argue for the existance of the non-racist KKK member.

Pro-life = religious extreamist.

[Recursion]

128. That depends

And you're letting the religious extremists frame the argument; don't surrender the language to them.

Pro-life by definition means that you oppose a woman's right to choose for herself.

Only if you choose to accept the right-wing framing of the issue.

There are people who are pro-choice because they believe the law is an ineffective instrument for ending the practice of abortion, but still very much want to see that practice ended.

[Recursion]

127. Umm.. ever heard of Catholics? NT

[Rage for Order]

48. I disagree

"As soon as someone says they're pro-life, you know you're dealing with an extremist.

I disagree with your assessment. Many (most?) Americans do not follow the issues as closely as those of us on DU follow them. As such, most people only think of the abortion issue as either "pro-life" or "pro-choice". Many Americans haven't heard the attempts by either side to change the language of the debate - pro-abortion, anti-choice, etc.

Now, if someone actively follows politics and still refers themself as pro-life then I would be more inclined to agree with your assessment.

[EFerrari]

51. By the same logic, most Americans don't feel the need to tag themselves.

They will say they don't approve of or are against abortion. They will not pull out a ready-made name for that position.

[Rage for Order]

52. Maybe so

Of course, how long have we heard the terms "pro-life" and "pro-choice" in the media? In addition, think of all the bumper stickers stating the same thing. I guess it would depend on the manner in which the question was asked. "What are your views on abortion", versus "Would you consider yourself pro-life or pro-choice".

[EFerrari]

54. Our media is soaked in right wing terms.

That's for sure.

[cali]

91. codswallop. there are people who are against abortion being legal

who hardly qualify as extremists. they don't engage in heated rhetoric like the OP or Operation Rescuites. They don't endorse violence and they work within the parameters of the law. I strongly disagree with them. I'll fight against them, but they're not all extremists.

[TLM]

6. A fantasy.....

"I dont think every person that is pro-life believes that to control women."

You might as well say you do not beleive every member of the KKK is racist.


The pro-life agenda is to control women, to mandate allowable sexual behavior. To be pro-life is to support this agenda.


"Some honestly believe that abortion is murder, that life is created at conception and not birth."

And yet oppose contraceptives and birth control and sex education... which reveals the true motives behind their positions. If reducing abortions was their real goal, they'd be the most prolific supporters and promoters of birth control.

"Not everyone of the pro-lifers believe violence is the answer."

And not every member of the KKK killed a black person... does that mean they were not members of a terrorists hate group that used violence, fear, bombings, and murder to impose their social views?


"IMO your statement would be like saying all muslims are terroists."

Nope, that would be accurate only if I had said something like, all Christians are pro-lifers. Many Christians are not pro-lifers, just as many Muslims are not terrorists.

[TerryRay]

8. Not every

Christian group is agianst contraception...They might not want it brought into school( I think they are wrong), but not everyone of them are 100% agianst it. I was in a church as a teen that openly taught that when push comes to push being protected during sex was the best route for teenagers.

And I disagree with your statment:

Nope, that would be accurate only if I had said something like, all Christians are pro-lifers. Many Christians are not pro-lifers, just as many Muslims are not terrorists


you said all pro-lifers want to control women..I disagree..and I stand by that saying all pro-lifers want to control women is like saying all muslims are terroist. Your making a blanket statement when you say

To be pro life is to want to impose an extremist religious view on women, strip them of their rights, and force them to behave the way some religious terrorists demand they behave.

your saying ALL pro-lifers A. are religious and then B are EXTREMIST. I know for a fact that is not true because my sister is atheist, does not believe in any religion of any kind, yet is pro-life. She does not condone killing, or violence on abortion clinics and certanily does not want to control women or oppress them or punish them for their sinful ways( since she does not believe in the idea of "sin")

[REP]

10. Anecdote is not the plural of data

Saying you know someone who claims to be an atheist and anti-abortion does not disprove the OP's assertion. Maybe this person you say you know really does think precious preborn poppets are more valuable than living, breathing women (and she'd never be in that position, no, not her!) based on some poorly thought out rationale. Whatever. You haven't made your case. ALL anti-abortnoids - ALL - are extremists. Wanting to outlaw a safe medical procedure is extremist.

[TerryRay]

13. so because

someone disagrees with you they have poorly thought out rationale? Because someone falls on another side of an issue they are extremists?

And my sister is not the only atheist agianst abortion..just do a search you will find a few groups like the The Atheist and Agnostic Pro-Life League

and not every pro-lifer is an extremist built on violence in fact there is agroup called the Pro-Lifers Against Clinic Violence and Pro-lifers for peace heck there is a subset in almost all race, sex, religion and such who are agianst abortion such as the Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians..are they all violent extremist wanting to control women and punish them?

[tavalon]

26. I will never personally have an abortion

I had too many miscarriages and would never thumb my nose at my deity in that way if she chose to place a baby in my womb. I hope and pray that I don't ever get pregnant again (and I use birth control every single time). That said, I will defend any and every woman's right to choose for herself around abortion and if it ever becomes illegal, I will learn how to do abortions myself so that I can help women attain safe, if not legal, abortions.

I am pro-choice and very sure of my own choice.

I do not believe in the death penalty and I don't believe that our young people should be sent to wars to die for rich people's sins. I have a strong affinity for and belief in life but I am not, as the fundamentalist whackadoos would say pro-life. And BTW, neither are you. You already said you believe in a woman's right to choose. You are pro-choice, just as I am.

[TLM]

12. I don't believe you...

"your saying ALL pro-lifers A. are religious and then B are EXTREMIST. I know for a fact that is not true because my sister is atheist, does not believe in any religion of any kind, yet is pro-life. She does not condone killing, or violence on abortion clinics and certanily does not want to control women or oppress them or punish them for their sinful ways( since she does not believe in the idea of "sin")"


If she wants to ban abortion, she seeks to control women and strip them of their rights. They are one in the same.

If she simply doesn't like abortions, but wouldn't deny women the right to have one, she's pro-choice, not pro-life.

This statement is 100% true and accurate...To be pro life is to want to impose an extremist religious view on women, strip them of their rights, and force them to behave the way some religious terrorists demand they behave. Because it is an extremist religious view that women should not have control over their own bodies, reproductive organs, and sexuality. This is the view promoted by ALL pro-lifers, by definition.

A non-religious extremist pro-lifer is like a non-racist white supremacist...

[TerryRay]

14. Well

As I mentioned earlier

I guess the Atheist and Agnostic Pro-Life League and the Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians are a couple of examples of non-racist white supremacist

[TLM]

40. Yeah and I'm sure those group have membership numbers in the dozens

"I guess the Atheist and Agnostic Pro-Life League and the Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians are a couple of examples of non-racist white supremacist"

I didn't say there are no white supremacists who claim not to be racists... I'm saying they're full of shit.

Just as the groups you listed are more than likely facades that are full of shit.

An atheist and agnostic group that's promoting a policy based in religious extreamism? A gay and lesbian group that supports removing women's rights?

Either you're full of shit, or they are.... or both.

[tavalon]

25. Yep, that's the dirty little secret here

They aren't even pro-fetus. The fetus is merely the tool they use to punish the evil woman who had sex and got pregnant.

[get the red out]

21. Then why are they anti-birth control if they don't want control of women?

Not just for themselves, but they want to outlaw it for everyone! That's their next step and all you have to do is Google to see lots of their web sites where they discuss it. They consider BIRTH CONTROL the same as abortion.

How long before they consider a woman having a job the same as abortion, or a woman getting an education the same as abortion, or a woman having sex outside of marriage the SAME AS ABORTION?

If we let these creeps start down the slippery slope they desire we will all get fucked then arrested for the fucking they gave us!

[armyowalgreens]

87. My sister is pro-life and pro-birth control. In fact she on birth control.

That throws a wrench into your argument doesn't it?

Don't just assume that all pro-lifers have the same exact ideology.

[tavalon]

23. And anyone who believes that should never, ever have an abortion

And they should do everything in their power to empower women to be able to have other choices. But, a person's right to not have an abortion stops with their own body.

[REP]

7. They may not all be Christians, but they're all extremists

I am so tired of listening to apologists for this terrorist group and their back benchers. If they don't like abortion, they don't need to have one. Their interest in the sex lives of others would be hilarious if the outcome wasn't so serious.

[cali]

15. I completely disagree.

there are people who believe that the law should be overturned peacefully. they don't advocate any violence. they don't use hate speech. they con't advocate against birth control.

I can't believe so many people here refuse to admit that. I disagree with those people. I'll work against them, but I'm not willing to lie and say they don't exist and they're all radical murderous extremists.

You sound just like the fucking wingnuts who insist there are no moderate muslims.

[Posteritatis]

16. There's also people who just don't agree with the law but acquiesce to it anyway

There's rules out there that I dislike to one extent or another but either understand the reasoning for, or accept that my dislike is too subjective to build some sort of policy around. It's probably the same for every legal position out there both just and non-.

Legalized abortion definitely isn't one of those in my book, to be sure. A friend of mine needed one to save her life a couple of years ago, and I can't argue with the result. (And sweet merciful christ on a fiery pogo stick did she ever catch hell from some antiabortion zealots over it, despite knowing the score. One of them was an evangelical atheist, no less; I totally fail to understand that.)

[armyowalgreens]

18. +1

My entire family is pro-life. But they aren't extremists.

[TLM]

63. The pro-life position is extremist....

To seek to remove a womans right to control her own body is extremist.

There is no moderate striping of women's rights... just like there's no moderate slavery or moderate rape.

[armyowalgreens]

77. They see abortion as murder. You have to look at it from their perspective.

They see abortion as murder and that no one has the right to murder.

I know it seems crazy to you, but do you get it? This isn't an extreme position. It's held by millions of people.

[Hepburn]

100. Let me clue you:

To see abortion as murder IS an extremist position.

[armyowalgreens]

103. No it's not. Look up the definition of extremist/extreme/extremism

And then think of how many millions of people support the idea that abortion is murder.

If an idea is widely accepted by a good portion of a population, it is no longer extreme.

In the US, it is not an extreme idea to believe that abortion is murder. There are millions and millions of religious people who believe that.

[Hepburn]

120. Let me get this, OK?

Because A LOT of people support a position, that means it cannot be extremeist. That's your position?

Here's my reply: Bzzzzzzzzzt...wrong answer.

There were a lot of Nazis, too, who thought exterminating Jews, Gays and Gypsy was just fine. Guess that is not an extremist position according to you, right?

:eyes:

[get the red out]

22. Every effort toward overturning Roe v Wade

Is a step toward the religious right's main goal, ending birth control and women's independence. If they are supported in the first step, the next will just be easier.

They would love to overturn both Roe v Wade and Griswald. They want both and to support them in overturning Roe is to give them a boost toward getting Griswald overturned.

You can't dance with the devil and think you can control how far he goes. Anyone who wants to overturn Roe v Wade is supporting people who will do anything to end women's rights in this country, they are kidding themselves if they think otherwise.

[cali]

27. so what? I disagree about as strrongly as possible with those goals-

though I know you're wrong about all anti-abortion people being anti-birth control. It's just bullshit to say that "they're all dancing with the devil".

Let me be even clearer: People who peacefully advocate and work toward overturning Roe are simply engaging in legitimate political activity and exercising their first amendment rights. and there's not a damn thing wrong with that.

[get the red out]

28. They support the anti-birth control people

By supporting the overturn of Roe v Wade. I did not say that they personally were anti-birth control, they are probably just not thinking.

The "devil" is anti-birth control and they are dancing slow and hot with him, period.

Of course they have the right to protest women's rights, they can support all the evil assholes that want to make women into second class citizens that they want, and stick their heads completely in the sand and pretend they aren't working toward making the lives of all women more difficult. They have that right, I never said they didn't.

But they are supporting the worst anti-women's rights people in this country, they can pretend their support of overturning Roe isn't about that, but in the long run it is.

In this country, we have the right to be as ignorant of facts as we want to be, we have the right to support horrible people, and we have the right to indirectly support people that would just love to destroy all the freedom we hold dear. They have the right to do that!

[cali]

31. you have provided opinion, not evidence. Yes, some people who oppose legal abortion

and want Roe overturned oppose legal birth control. How many? I don't know. And you haven't provided any evidence that it's a majority.

[get the red out]

33. You can ignore them and stick your head in the sand

That's fine. I don't know "statistics", but the core group of anti-choicers are after Roe and Griswald. Stick your head in the sand and whistle Dixie for all I care. It is good that so many people understand what is at stake here. Hopefully the anti-choicers won't win and it will all be a moot point. But falling back on the old "provide statistics or you are wrong and I am right" is a lame argument when so much is at stake.

But what is the point? You would prefer to believe anti-choicers are harmless. Your business. People that actually support reproductive rights understand the connection. I really wish you were correct, I loose sleep over the fact that you are absolutely wrong and birth control rights are very much in the cross-fire.

And of course the anti-Roe people don't think about all the women who would die in botched abortions if it were overturned have a right to their lives do they? Do those sweet innocent souls think there was no abortion prior to reproductive rights and all babies were loved and wanted and blessings and sunshine to all? Harmless my ass. Bunch of miserable hypocrits who sooth their souls by not delving too deep into reality and don't give a flying fuck about any "life" but their own pure sweet existence. Selfish, simply selfish and unintelligent.

http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2006/03/20/anti_contraception/index.html

Here is a link to an article in Salon back in 2006 that talks about this issue.

[cali]

50. no, I believe there are some rabid anti-choicers who fit the definition of terrorists

just as their are some rabid Islamic groups that fit that definition. Taliban, anyone? And it's fucking laughable that anyone here would insinuate that I'm anti-choice and moronic to the point of drooling idiocy. I'm so sick of stupid fucking people who broad brush groups I could puke and puke and puke.

[saracat]

44. Like tere is nothing wrong with dicriminating about race if that is your opinion

and you are peaceable about it? Sheesh. This is discrimination against women. And it is wrong, no matter how that "opinion" is expressed.Funny how issues with race are considered a moral wrong but issues with "gender" are political! And there is a lot "damn wrong with that"!

[cali]

86. sorry, that's as stupid a comparison as there is.

and I'll fight for a woman's right to choose until my dying breath.

[defendandprotect]

66. Absolutely, they're after birth control . . .

Anyone who isn't familiar with that should catch up --

In fact, the Vatican has a huge investment in the abortion war ...

if abortion is acceptable, then all Vatican birth control arguments are null and void!

[hfojvt]

84. it's GriswOld, not GriswAld.

George Griswold 6 Nov 1574 and Dorothy James 10 Jul 1581 are the ancestors of perhaps 1/3 of all Americans. That family is huge.

The case was also Griswold vs. Connecticut. Connecticut had a law banning contraceptives from 1879 until it was declared unconstitutional in 1965. I might like to throw out Griswold as well. How does a law stand for 86 years and then suddenly become unconstitutional? Why couldn't the people who opposed that law in the 1950s, when my parents were using birth control, over-turn that law legislatively through democracy?

How many other states had such laws? Were my parents breaking the law when they used contraceptives in the late 1950s in South Carolina? (Apropos of this thread, a funny story from that time. My parents got married on 26 December 1957. My dad's oldest brother got the family together to drive from Wisconsin to Washington DC to attend the wedding. My other uncle was going with his girlfriend (who he later married in 1959). She was 20. Her parents were not gonna let her go on this trip until they learned that my grandmother was also going, and would be able to chaperone. Imagine parents ordering around a 20 year old daughter today, or trying to. My parents were not going to have music at their wedding, but it happened that my future aunt was a church organist and she volunteered to play for their wedding.)

[me b zola]

34. It IS hate speech when they want to interject themselves into my health care decisions

Well, I'm beyond child bearing, but I have 3 grand daughters. When someone speaks out attempting to limit the type of health care that they can receive, then they are involved in hate speech.

[dem629]

38. You're diminishing the existence of actual "hate speech" by exaggerating here.

[me b zola]

57. Women are not smart enough or moral enough to make medical decisions for themselves

That's not hate speech? Bugger off.

[TLM]

59. Stop being an apologist...

"there are people who believe that the law should be overturned peacefully. "

Which is like saying you believe that slavery should be reestablished...peacefully.

Just because you clumsily tack the word "peacefully" on the end of a statement about removing women's rights, doesn't change the reality that position represents. There is no peaceful pro-life position... to be pro-life by definition means you seek to strip women of their rights and their control over their own body.

There is nothing peaceful about that, no matter how hard you try to sugar coat it.

ALL pro-lifers wear this shame, not just the ones doing the killing. Just like all KKKers wear the shame of lynching and church bombings, even if they're not the ones who tied the noose or lit the fuse.

"You sound just like the fucking wingnuts who insist there are no moderate muslims. "

And you sound like the Germans who deny the Holocaust happened because they are ashamed of their culpability in the atrocities. Because what you are doing is trying to expand the scope of the discussion, by dishonestly acting as if I'm talking about all people who do not like abortion or all Christians, as a means of invalidating a point which is directed far more specifically at pro-lifers.

Perhaps you have reading comprehention difficulties, but I was very clear about what group I am talking about, what their agenda is, and why defending them is disgusting on any level.

There is no such thing as peaceful pro-lifers... just as there are no peaceful KKK members. Both groups have goals and methods that are the antithesis of freedom and peace. They wish to use fear and terror to impose their view...a view which demands the oppression and denial of rights to a group of people. How can you call that peaceful and not vomit in your own mouth?

[armyowalgreens]

78. Oh get over yourself TLM. You aren't an intellectual god.

From their religious perspective, they see abortion as murder. And murder is wrong for mostly everyone. So they see abortion as horribly wrong.

From their perspective, women don't have the right to murder their unborn "child". And that is how they see it. Simply because they are against abortion does not mean they are against womens rights.

I live in a house full of pro-lifers and none of them are against womens rights. In fact my mother and sister are both extremely empowered women. They simply have religious convictions that make them believe that abortion is not a right.

I live with them. I know what they are like. They are incredibly peaceful in their protest. The most extreme thing either of them have done is my sister wore an anti-abortion shirt to school one day. That's it. They don't want doctors killed. They don't want buildings bombed. They just want abortion to stop because they see it as mass murder.

You are doing exactly what you claim to not be doing. You are stating that anyone who believes abortion is wrong and should be illegal is somehow against womens rights. You have no such basis for that argument. You are acting like a fool.

You seriously need to get a hold of your ego.

[TLM]

101. Read you own words...

From their religious perspective, they see abortion as murder. And murder is wrong for mostly everyone. So they see abortion as horribly wrong.

And trying to impose your religious views on others, and force them to abide by your religious rules...is called religious extremism. What part of that are you not getting?


"You are stating that anyone who believes abortion is wrong and should be illegal is somehow against womens rights."

"They simply have religious convictions that make them believe that abortion is not a right."


Like saying they aren't against civil rights...they just have a belief that blacks are only 2/3rds of a person.

"I live with them. I know what they are like. They are incredibly peaceful in their protest."

That would be their protest aimed at seeing women striped of their right to control their own bodies, based on the extremist notion they have the right to force others to abide by their religious views.


Again what part of there is no peaceful removal of ones rights to control ones body, didn't you grasp? Just as there is no peaceful slavery.

[armyowalgreens]

105. All religions attempt to impose their views on others.

That isn't extreme. It's a fundamental part of religion. If you believe that your religion is correct, that means all others are incorrect and should be thrown out.

Which is why I despise all religion.


People literally thought that blacks were subhuman. They were ignorant to reality just as pro-lifers are ignorant to reality. That doesn't make mean they have underlying motives, which you so gloriously claim to know about but have yet to present evidence supporting your claim.


OH MY FUCKING GOD. This is like talking to a 5 year old.


Okay I'll try ONE LAST TIME. Maybe you didn't read my post below.

Pro-lifers do not believe that there is a right to having an abortion. They believe it is ethically wrong. They are not trying to take away womens rights, they honestly believe that women have never had the "right" to have abortions and that they are simply adjusting the law to how it should really function.

THAT IS IT. I'm finished. You are beyond help.

[TLM]

107. LOL!!! The logical backflips are great....

"All religions attempt to impose their views on others. That isn't extreme. It's a fundamental part of religion.


All religions that seek to impose their views on others are fundamentally extreme.

"That doesn't make mean they have underlying motives, which you so gloriously claim to know about but have yet to present evidence supporting your claim."

No, the underlying motives mean they have underlying motives...and one can rather easily observe this by simply looking at how the behaviors contradict the rhetoric. And i already pointed out the birth control issue as a clear illustration of that.


and speaking of the reasoning of a 5 year old...

"They are not trying to take away womens rights, they honestly believe that women have never had the "right" to have abortions and that they are simply adjusting the law to how it should really function.

So if you beleive blacks aren't human, then trying to reestablish slavery isn't taking away civil rights?

Are you really presenting that as some kind of rationalization for why pro-lifers don't want to take away rights... because they believe that the rights shouldn't have been established and protected by laws, so they're not really repealing the rights by repealing the rights... they are just forcing people to obey their religious views in a peaceful non-extremist way... or they'll have you sent to prison and charged with murder peacefully??

You can't sugar coat a bullshit philosophy.... you just end up with sugar coated shit.

[cali]

83. an apologist? cheney you, bud. I wrote a piece the other day

and got shit for being "militantly pro-abortion". Now I'm getting shit for not using a broad brush. life around DU and certain simplistic little black and white thinkers surely can be trying. yes, there are peaceful anti-choicers. sorry, but that's just a fact. tough shit if the likes of you doesn't agree. President Obama spoke at ND. Father Jenkins who invited him is anti=choice. So are many of the students who gave him a standing ovation. You want to equate them to the KKK, I'm going to call you on your hate and stupidity.

[TLM]

106. "yes, there are peaceful anti-choicers....."

"yes, there are peaceful anti-choicers....."

No there are not... no more than there are peaceful rape advocates or peaceful slavery supporters. You can not support a violent goal that violates the rights of a whole group of people, and claim to be peaceful simply because you do not personally act out violently in support of that violent goal.

The act of having your right to control your own body taken is a violent violation, that's possible only though oppression and force. To support that is by definition not peaceful.

The fact is father jenkins and those anti-choice students support a goal that is violent and abusive, the removal of rights from a group of people... that they can behave in a civil way doesn't change that fact.

As I said, many members of the KKK never killed anybody or bombed anything.

Doesn't change their shared stigma.

[willing dwarf]

17. Speaking as a person who pro life and pro choice...

I say male extremists have defined this debate for too long. I am pro-life, but I believe the decisions about terminating a pregnancy should be a woman's own right to choose. I am a woman who had an abortion, and only several years later did I come to understand that I had taken the life of my unborn baby. I grieve the choice, but I would never take away any other person's right to choose. Only after I had a baby did I come to understand fully that my abortion was wrong.

Pro life women like me have been able to find and maintain a tenable middle ground based on our own personal experience. It's not simply "an opinion" it's far more real than that. I condemn the men, any men who try to say what is right and wrong on this issue. It's not up to you. Get out of it!

[cali]

20. it sounds like you understand that your experience is not every woman's experience

I had an abortion and haven't any regrets and didn't after I had a child. I don't believe I took a life. Thanks for understanding that women have a range of emotional reactions to an abortion.

[willing dwarf]

30. That's it exactly!

I never expected at the time I had an abortion that I would ever feel differently about it. But when I did, I didn't want my politics to effect my real experience. Denying the sadness of a choice I made would have been worse for me than hardening myself and claiming that the situation was one size fits all. -- We're not going to be able to move on in this whole debate if people hold hardened positions and won't be honest about their feelings. -- And the horror of the murder of Dr. Tiller has made the extremes more extreme.

[TLM]

73. OK...one more time....

"I would never take away any other person's right to choose."

Then you are pro-CHOICE. While you may hate abortion, you hold the value of individual choice and liberty as more important. You may feel abortion is wrong, but denial of ones rights is worse.

That makes you pro-choice.

To say you are pro-life is to say you support the banning of abortion... it's pretty much the main leg in the idealogical stool. Pro-life doesn't mean you think life is precious. Not in this context.

When people who are pro-choice call themselves pro-life because they don't want someone to think they love abortions, they lend a false legitimacy to this core of religious extremists in the pro-life movement. And again I mean the people who seek to outlaw abortion and take away a woman's right to choose... by law or by murdering doctors.

And by the way, the notion that ones authority and control over ones own body is absolute, is a genderless issue. Thank you for the suggestion, but I'm not going to stay out of it.

Your views on this issue may stem exclusively from gender, mine do not. My views on this issue are based on the notion of individual liberty, and the idea that a person's body belongs to them absolutely. Abortion is but one aspect of this underlying issue.

[Th1onein]

32. I am a pro-lifer/anti-abortionist

I am also against the death penalty, for exactly the same reasons. And a pacifist for the same reasons.

You CAN be pro-life AND a leftwinger. And it has nothing to do with religion. These people that kill are just killers. They use religion as an excuse for their hatred, and for their killing. If Tiller's murderer were not a "Christian," he would have killed someone else for another "reason." He's just a killer, that's all.

[TLM]

61. So you seek to remove a woman's rights over her own body?

I just want to make sure before I say what I am about to say, that you do indeed seek to overturn roe v wade and take from women the rights over their own bodies?

I see a lot of people who either fail to read or fail to understand that pro-lifers are not people who support life... pro-lifers are the people who seek to BAN ABORTION. This idea seems to confuse some folks who may be operating on a different definition than the one I very clearly and intentionally laid out in my OP.

So operating under the assumption you read the OP and understand what's actually being discussed in this thread when the term pro-lifer is used...

"You CAN be pro-life AND a leftwinger. "

No you can't... as the removal of rights over ones own body is a direct contradiction with "leftwinger" values. To argue that removing a woman's right to decide what happens to and inside her body, is somehow in line with "leftwinger" views show that either you are totally ignorant of what "leftwinger" views are, or you're just plain old talking out your ass.

"These people that kill are just killers. They use religion as an excuse for their hatred, and for their killing. If Tiller's murderer were not a "Christian," he would have killed someone else for another "reason."

Really... we are talking about the same Christians who brought us the crusades, inquisitions, witch burnings, pedophile priests etc. and you are saying that an otherwise rational person isn't getting any negative influence from the retarded 2000 year old middle eastern death cult they worship? There is no period in the history of Christianity, that wasn't drenched in blood. But no big deal, because they'll just apologize for it in 200 years, right?

I would argue that the very act of being a religious person, who is not only willing to believe something based on faith and not fact, but to WORSHIP something based on faith... is irrational. Religion inherently appeals to weak-minded and easily manipulated people. For fucks sake Christians willingly call themselves sheep and an invisible man in the sky, their shepherd.

Religion appeals to the weak minded person... then tells them how the invisible man wants them to behave... I think it is a little more than simply an excuse used by those who would kill anyway, it's a catalyst. Religious extremists use religion to seek out, manipulate and motivate people to commit acts of terrorism as a means of advancing their goals. An abortion clinic bombing is the modern equivalent of a burning someone to death for heresy. This sort of "i'm gonna kill him for god" mentality is nothing new. It has always been the backbone of religion...do what I say because god's on my side, or I'll kill you. The spirituality aspect is window dressing... the real structure is acquiring money, power, and control.

And the abortion issue is part of the control aspect of religion. It is pretty simply really... if you're telling people you have the authority of god, and god demands people behave a particular way, you can't have your flock seeing people who do not follow what you claim is god's mandate, living happy productive lives. So you decide to impose consequences. Their book may say don't judge and don't kill, but I've met very few Christians that weren't overjoyed to do both.

[Th1onein]

67. I am absolutely anti-choice AND a left winger

Now, you can choose to put your own spin on that. But remember: it's YOUR spin.

I think that abortion is murder. And I am NOT a Christian, have no particular religion, and don't know if God even exists. Religion is not why I am anti-choice. I am anti-choice because I am pro-life. Period. Same reason I am against war and the death penalty.

And, by the way, you are not the sole arbiter of what makes up left wing values, nor is the pro-choice movement. One CAN be pro-life/anti-choice and be a leftwinger.

Oh.....and one more thing? Personal attacks, such as "you're just plain old talking out of your ass"? Those aren't allowed on DU.

[TLM]

72. LOL are you also simultaneously pro-women and pro-rape too?

Being anti-choice means you are not left wing... like saying you support the reestablishment of slavery but support individual liberty.

"I think that abortion is murder. "

Then you also do not comprehend the definition of murder... murder requires personhood. You can no more murder a fetus than you can murder your foot or any other living part of your body.

However it is hardly realistic to expect ration foundations for an irrational belief.


"And, by the way, you are not the sole arbiter of what makes up left wing values, nor is the pro-choice movement. One CAN be pro-life/anti-choice and be a leftwinger."

No one can't... denial of ones rights over their body is not a left wing value by any standard. Just as slavery is not a left wing value, nor rape.

Apparently you feel that if say a 9 year old girl is raped and impregnated, she should be forced to be a brood sow for her rapists child. There is nothing liberal, or peaceful or kind or caring about that position. That position is bone SOLELY of a sick desire to control women and deny them control over their own bodies.

It is insulting for you to attempt to count yourself among the liberal left, when you openly profess beliefs that are so contrary to what liberalism and the progressive left stand for.

You are no more a left winger than Fred Phelps is a crusader for gay rights.


"Personal attacks, such as "you're just plain old talking out of your ass"? Those aren't allowed on DU."

Then report me, and see if the mods agree that saying you're talking out your ass is a personal attack or an attack on the flimsy foundations for your argument.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

75. That's completely assinine and incredibly offensive.

[TLM]

80. I agree, to claim one is both liberal and anti-choice is asinine and incredibly offensive.

Hence my comparably asinine and incredibly offensive analogy.

[cali]

95. actually, legally you can murder a fetus. Shoot a woman who's 8 months pregnant

and kill the fetus and you could well end up being charged with murder.
And anyone who doesn't see the difference between a fetus in the last trimester of pregnancy and a foot, is talking out of their ignorant asshole. And comparing a DUer to Fred Phelps? you are a real piece of.... fill in the blank, sweetie.

[TLM]

113. What isn't Fred Phelps peaceful?

He hasn't shot anybody right? According to the apologists here for pro-lifers, that means Phelps has no culpability or blame, when some violent extremist attacks some homosexual because he believes god hate him.

Phelps supports removal of rights from gays, just as pro-lifers support removal of rights from women. In fact isn't Phelps a big pro-lifer himself? If someone wants to share his brand of views, thats their decision.

If that being pointed out is so painful...perhaps one might want to rethink who they team up with in the big pro-lifer hate tent.

"And anyone who doesn't see the difference between a fetus in the last trimester of pregnancy and a foot,"

I notice note you had to add additional criteria regarding what trimester... are you unable to address the argument I actually made? Or can you only argue against what you make up and add to what I actually said?

" Shoot a woman who's 8 months pregnant and kill the fetus and you could well end up being charged with murder."

Charged, sure...but convicted and that conviction being upheld all the way to the supreme court... not so sure. Usually when one sees a fetal murder charge, it is also because the mother was killed, so the murderer isn't exactly likely to get anything overturned. I'm unaware of any case where only the fetus dies and there was a full charge of murder that was upheld.

Also the primary element you overlook is the will of the mother...again based in her right to control her own body. Terminating a fetus against a mother's will is essentially the same as forcing a woman to carry a fetus to term against her will... with regard to personal liberty.

[Th1onein]

114. You are obviously trying to start a fight.

Do you really think that that furthers your point? I don't.

Once again, you are not the sole arbiter of what is leftist and what is not.

Just because I am anti-abortion does not mean that I am "pro-rape." And I think that you know that and are just being facetious. If a nine-year-old is raped, obviously it would be one hell of a threat to her physical health (to say nothing of her emotional health) to carry that child to term. But, in most cases, my rights end where yours begin and vice versa.

If we had a society that truly revered life, unwanted pregnancies would not be that much of an issue because these new lives would be celebrated and pregnant women would be given the support that they need, no matter what circumstances they were in. Before, during and after the child was born.

I think that women (and by the way, I'm a woman) have plenty of choices for birth control and we should, as a society, protect women from getting pregnant in the first place, with education and birth control. I'm not some kind of nutcase that thinks that birth control is some form of abortion or that birth control should be outlawed because it prevents pregnancy.

It is not simply a matter of a woman's choice. The child's life must be taken into account as well. I think that personhood begins at conception. And, if that is true, then that person has the right to live and we have no right to take that life.

I think that there is a balance that must be achieved, between a woman's right to control her own body and her child's right to live. Simply because I come down further on the side of the child's right to live does not mean that I am "pro-rape" or against women, or some kind of flying rightwing nutcase.

And, while we're discussing the issue of pro-life--where do you stand on capital punishment? I bet you're all for it, right?

[REP]

74. What you 'think' is not a good basis for law

And the Klan can be lefties, too, since you can apparently be for taking away rights and progressive. Who knew?? Thank goodness we have special, special people like you to help us figure these things out.

[cali]

93. I couldn't disagree with you more strongly. I don't think abortion is murder

I've had an abortion. I'm grateful that it was safe, early and legal and that I got compassionate care. I don't want anyone controlling women's choices about reproduction. That said, I do not think that all those who oppose legal abortion are evil extremists. I'll fight like hell against what they're pushing, but I won't call them an extremist unless they demonstrate that they are. I can tell the difference.

[KittyWampus]

108. Abortion is killing a fetus. Most often, a viable fetus that would gestate and become a person.

As someone who had an abortion, I was fully aware I was killing a fetus and stopping a chain of events that would lead to an individual person.

[TLM]

126. Potential for viability and potential for life....

is not personhood.

If you buy a dozen eggs, should they charge you for a dozen chickens?

[McCamy Taylor]

35. If a pro-lifer is anti death penalty then I take their concerns more seriously.

[dem629]

39. Even people who are anti-death penalty, anti-war and anti-abortion?

That's a pure pro-life position.

[TLM]

41. It would be rare, truly rare....

to find someone who is anti-death penalty, anti-war and anti-abortion... AND wants to remove a woman's right to choose.

Without the desire to overturn the law... they are not pro-lifers, they are pro-choice.

[dem629]

42. I know several people who have this view.

Yeah, it's anecdotal and I don't expect there to be too many, but it exists.

[Th1onein]

47. I am against abortion and I don't think a woman has the right to choose.......

EXCEPT when it's her life or the baby's life. Rare or not, I am against all three things: war, abortion and capital punishment. And I am NOT a Christian.

[TLM]

68. I don't think a woman has the right to choose...

"EXCEPT when it's her life or the baby's life."

So you do not beleive a woman has the right to choose what happens inside her own body... and yet you think you have the right to choose for them? How do you sleep at night with that kind of hypocrisy brewing in your head?

But this is a great example of exactly what I'm talking about when i say pro-lifers are not moderate and not peaceful. Your words show that it is within that sickening arrogance... that ease with which you would deny a woman control over her own body, that we see the seeds that when fertilized with religious extremist bullshit, grow into people who think it is OK to deny people the right to live.

You beleive, just as Dr. Tillerman's murder believed... that you have the right to deny someone control over their life and body.

There is no peaceful version of this belief. No moderate version of this goal.

Pro-lifers who do not kill doctors are no different than KKK members who do not tie nooses.

[Th1onein]

124. My views are sowed of seeds that are fertilized with religious extremist bullshit?

Are you serious? And, because I am pro-life, I am not moderate and not peaceful?

Really?

First, I have to say that I think that you are a very, very good writer.

But your logic skills need to catch up with that. Logically, you have no basis for assuming the things that you are apparently assuming.

I have told you, during our exchanges, that I am a pacifist, and therefore do not believe in violence in any but in the most dire of circumstances. I have told you that I am not a Christian and that am not sure if I am agnostic or athiest.

Yet, for some reason, you can't seem to put these facts together and realize that there is anything but your own black and white way of seeing this world and the people in it.

That is very unfortunate, both for you and for the larger group of which you purport to belong.

[cali]

97. how the fuck do you know? Put up or stfu.

[deaniac21]

43. I always love it when I see a well stated nad researched

scientific essay. Thanks for the education!

[omega minimo]

45. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5767293&mesg_id=5767293

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=5763397

[Raster]

46. Don't call them pro-life. They are not. They are ANTI-CHOICE!

[Quantess]

53. Yes. Anti-choice.

"Life" has very little to do with it.

[NeedleCast]

49. Ridiculous

[Tesha]

55. Well argued! That'll convince them! (NT)

[Odin2005]

56. Brainless Black and White thinking.

My co-worker Duane, one of the nicest people I know, is an extremist comparable to the KKK and the Taliban to you? Go fuck yourself.

[me b zola]

58. Are you married? Have daughters? Sisters? Mom?

So "the nicest people" you know believe that women are not smart or moral enough to make health care decisions on their own. If any of the women in your life are ever so unfortunate enough to need to seek an abortion, be sure to check in with your "nice people" first and get their stamp of approval before your loved one seeks medical care that can save their life. I'm sure the morally superior "nice people" will prescribe the best possible medical care for your loved one.

Nice, morally superior people, nice.

[TLM]

76. If they seek to remove women's rights over their own body...

Then yes, that is very comparable to the KKK and the Taliban. Both of which also seek to deny rights to groups of people though oppression, fear, and terror.

[cali]

98. let me echo your directive to the op

[Qot]

60. Love the fetus, hate the child

[LAGC]

62. Yep.

They are all "pro-life" while its still part of the mother's womb, but once its popped out of the oven, they could care less what happens. How many of them do you see them adopting unwanted children? Let alone what they think of "public assistance" to down-and-out unwanted/abused/neglected kids thrown away by mothers who never wanted them in the first place? Hypocrites.

[defendandprotect]

64. Pro-Life = murder your political enemies . . .

[cali]

99. stupid bullshit. Father Jenkins, President of Notre Dame

is someone you idiotically just swabbed with your broad brush, genius. He invited Obama to speak at ND graduation. You really think he wants to kill Obama.

It doesn't get any stupider than your comment. pathetic. freaking sick and pathetic. YOU are what you hate. exactly.

[defendandprotect]

65. Remember, this is the GOP's "pro-life" movement . . .

[Kaleva]

69. I think many are a mixture of the two-pro-choice and pro-life.

The hard line pro-life position is that all abortions should be illegal even in the case of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is at stake. The hard line pro-choice position is that a woman ought to be able to have access to a legal abortion, if she were to decide to have one, at anytime during the pregnancy and for whatever reason. From the polls I've seen, only a minority support either extreme.

[defendandprotect]

115. Calling "late term abortion" an extreme is ....

as uninformed as would be calling an appendectomy extreme.

ALL of these late term abortions must be approved -- first of all because they
are dangerous to the life of the pregnant female. That's something you should work
on understanding.

Late term abortions are usually done because something has gone wrong with the
fetus -- quite often a hugely enlarged head. There are many other problems that
develop which do harm to the pregnant woman.

For anyone so ignorant as to suggest that a woman decides late in a pregnancy to
just up and have an abortion because she's in the mood for one is to be grossly
uninformed!

Again, late term abortions are a danger to the life of the pregnant female and are
done only for the most serious of reasons.

Unfortunately, we've permitted religious extremists to have the floor for too long --
spewing their lies and anti-female propaganda and creating this distorted view of
this medical procedure.

Again -- these abortions have to be pre-approved. In themselves, they represent a
danger to the woman. They are done because a medical remedy is required to aid
the pregnant female.

[dorkulon]

70. I'm pro-choice but this is just asinine.

"For these people it is not about life or saving babies, that's why they kill doctors, bomb clinics etc" -- This is a false premise. Most (virtually all) pro-lifers do not do these things, nor would they. You might as well say all Muslims are suicide bombers. Stupid, period.

[TLM]

79. Again...your argument is faulty...

"For these people it is not about life or saving babies, that's why they kill doctors, bomb clinics etc" - This is a false premise."

No it's not... it is a very valid and sound premise that the real motivation for these people isn't preventing abortions or preserving life, but rather mandating behavior. Murder is hardly pro-life.


"Most (virtually all) pro-lifers do not do these things, nor would they."

Most members of the KKK did not personally murder anybody. They simply counted themselves in the ranks of those who did routinely murder and bomb to push their anti-freedom agenda with violence, fear, and terror.


"You might as well say all Muslims are suicide bombers. Stupid, period."

That would be stupid, which is why you are using it to broaden the scope of these comments to dishonestly make it sound as if I am addressing a wider group than I am. As I said in the OP... I'm addressing those who seek to remove rights and not simply those who dislike abortion.

[armyowalgreens]

82. Oy Vey TLM. I need to take you step by step through this?

Okay.

1. The KKK was a violent organization that people joined and were valid members of. They supported a doctrine of violence and hatred.

Pro-lifers are not all part of a group that promotes violence. They are not all members of an organization. In fact a vast majority of them are members of nothing. The only thing that ties them together is that they think abortion is ethically wrong.

The KKK does not equal pro life position. Sorry bud, it just doesn't. If you don't understand that after a dozen people have told you, you are NEVER going to get it.


2. Most people are against abortion because they believe it is murder based on their religious convictions. I have experience dealing with thousands of pro-lifers over my life and almost every last one of them is against abortion because they believe it is murder.

what you are doing is "speculating". Do you know what speculation is? Making assumptions without evidence. Stop that. It makes you look bad. If someone tells you they are against abortion because it's murder, you can't just say "I bet they're actually against it because they want to regulate behavior". You aren't a magical wizard that can read peoples minds. Sorry.

3. No one is dishonestly making analogies in here. The ones I have read have all been perfect. Simply because you say they are dishonest does not make it so. In fact, I would expect YOU to say that because if it was honest and true, you would look like a buffoon. And being that your ego is the size of a 747, you just can't handle being made a fool.

[TLM]

88. I disagree...

"1. The KKK was a violent organization that people joined and were valid members of. They supported a doctrine of violence and hatred."

You mean a doctrine that sought to strip people their rights, and used violence and terror to advance that agenda?

"Pro-lifers are not all part of a group that promotes violence. "

Yes they are... the act of taking away someones control over their own body is a violent act.

All pro-lifers who support the removal of rights from women over their own bodies, support violence against, and oppression of, women on the most fundamental of levels.

You do not remove ones right to control their own body peacefully or moderately.

"They are not all members of an organization."

Depends on how you define organization. A terrorist organization is often made up of numerous cells or groups working independently. That how the KKK was set up and that how anti-abortion extremists groups are set up. The KKK was not structured like a single organization, run from the top down. Rather it was made up of many local groups, all working towards the same basic goals, with little or no specific direction. Some more violent and more extreme than others. Leadership in the KKK and their public face was mostly ceremonial.


"In fact a vast majority of them are members of nothing. The only thing that ties them together is that they think abortion is ethically wrong."

No, what ties them together is they think that they have the authority to take away someones right to determine what happens to and in their own body. To say you are pro-life is to count yourself a member of a group that collectively seeks to remove a woman's right to control her own body. Just as to say you are KKK means you count yourself among a group that seeks to strip rights from minorities. Both groups have some violent extremists and many other people who never killed or bombed anybody.


"The KKK does not equal pro life position. "

Both boil down to denial of rights... human rights... rights of control over ones person. Both groups, KKK and pro-lifers, seek to strip rights from people and both groups contain extremists who will use violence and terror to advance that agenda. Both groups have ultimate goals that are irreconcilable with liberty and freedom.

Next?

"2. Most people are against abortion because they believe it is murder based on their religious convictions. I have experience dealing with thousands of pro-lifers over my life and almost every last one of them is against abortion because they believe it is murder.

what you are doing is "speculating". Do you know what speculation is? Making assumptions without evidence."

I think the pile of corpses might be pretty good start for that evidence...


" Stop that. It makes you look bad. If someone tells you they are against abortion because it's murder, you can't just say "I bet they're actually against it because they want to regulate behavior". You aren't a magical wizard that can read peoples minds. Sorry."


Actually I can, and it doesn't take a mind reader to spot ulterior motive. Maybe it seems magical to you, but it is in fact often very easy.

For example... many were told and believed we went to Iraq for WMDs... but then some of us must have used these magical mind reading powers you mention, and somehow were able to discover that it was actually a war about oil.

Should I say ta da or something, since that was apparently something you consider magical?


"3. No one is dishonestly making analogies in here. The ones I have read have all been perfect. Simply because you say they are dishonest does not make it so. "


Of course my pointing out that it was dishonest is not what made it dishonest. No more than my saying the sun is warm, makes it warm. What made the analogy dishonest was that the scope of the statement in the analogy far exceeded that of my statement. I made a specific point of detailing the specific group I was addressing, and the analogy disregarded that in an attempt to dishonestly portray my comments as being directed at a far larger group.

Either dishonesty or really poor logic.

And I'm not going to bother with your personal attacks.

[armyowalgreens]

94. I'm going to try one last time to explain this to you...

1. Pro-lifers who are religious believe that there is no right to an abortion because it isn't murder. They don't believe there ever was a right

BECAUSE IT IS MURDER.

They aren't trying to take rights away from people. They believe that women do not have the right to an abortion because, to them, abortion is murder. To them, there was never a right there to be taken away in the first place.


2. "That how the KKK was set up and that how anti-abortion extremists groups are set up."

Good job TLM. You actually made a valid point here. However, my point is that mostly everybody who is pro-life is not part of anti-abortion extremist groups. How do you not get that? How is this not clicking in your brain? Do I need to draw some sort of chart for you? Would a visual help?

The KKK in its entirety is a violent terrorist group. The pro-life movement is not any organized group and is not violent. It is one ideology within a group of people with different whole ideologies. I think you need to look up the definition of group...

And while you're at it, look up the definition of extremist because you honestly have no clue what that word means. If a view is adopted by a very large amount of people, say a large chunk of a population, it no longer is "extreme". To say that pro-lifers are extremists is just like saying gay marriage advocates are extremists. In fact I'd be willing to bet that more people are pro-life than pro-gay rights.

Also while you're at it, look up the definition of violent. Because that is another word that you do not understand.


3. I believe the "pile of bodies" you are referring to is actually fairly small and in no way represents the actions of the entire fucking pro-life community. If pro-lifers were going out in mass and killing doctors, then maybe you'd have a point. But that has not happened yet so your point is a stupid one and completely false.


4. We can say that the Iraq war was for many things other than the stated objective. We can do that because of EVIDENCE. E-V-I-D-E-N-C-E. Do you know what that word means? Clearly you don't because you think you have evidence that suggests that all those pro-lifers out there are lying through their teeth. It's something I've never seen. Please sir/ma'am, grace me with this wisdom you have that I have never come across. Apparently the entire world hasn't come across this but you, oh genius of mind reading.




5. Oh don't start back tracking now. You said this...

"A pro-lifer is by definition an extremist."

"To be pro-life means you want to overturn the law, and ban abortion.

For these people it is not about life or saving babies, that's why they kill doctors, bomb clinics etc..."

and then you said this


"I made a specific point of detailing the specific group I was addressing, and the analogy disregarded that in an attempt to dishonestly portray my comments as being directed at a far larger group.


Do you know how many millions of people are pro-life? Do you how large a "group" you attacked? I don't think you honestly understand the magnitude of your claims.


So please, spare me the bullshit. You are painting them with a brush the size of a compact car. Your comments portray you as a pretentious prick. Good job.

You are about as honest as con artist. Those analogies made perfect sense and you simply cannot admit it.





And now I'm done. You have embarrassed yourself enough in here and I'm sure everyone knows it. I don't want to spend another post trying to teach you anything. If you haven't gotten it by now, you are never going to get it.

Good night.

[defendandprotect]

118. "Religious" beliefs also hold homosexuals to be an "abomination" . .

"Religious" beliefs hold women as "inferior"

"Religous" beliefs hold that Jews are "unsaved" and must be converted to Christianity

"Religious" beliefs say that members sin if they use birth control


Hi One Last Time . . .

1. Pro-lifers who are religious believe that there is no right to an abortion because it isn't murder. They don't believe there ever was a right

BECAUSE IT IS MURDER.

They aren't trying to take rights away from people. They believe that women do not have the right to an abortion because, to them, abortion is murder. To them, there was never a right there to be taken away in the first place.

You seem to be rather naive about organized patriarchal religion -- they are indeed unable to
control their own members in regard to birth control and abortion -- and therefore they are
seeking government influence in order to do so by criminalizing abortion.

Also keep in mind that "god"/Nature has given women every means thru plants -- which are our
drugs -- to prevent pregnancy, to end a conception and to end a pregnancy -- and to prevent
fertility permanently if that is desired. RU486 is based on one of those plant models.
Unfortunately, much of the plant material and information about these remedies have been
destroyed by patriarchy.

Re "pro-life" in groups or not . . . what we are saying is that the object is to impose YOUR beliefs on others.
Three of every four women in America have an abortion by the time they are 45 years of age -
decisions made individually according to their own right to decide and their own consciences.
You have failed so far in your battle to change the law.
That's why we are seeing a renewal of the "pro-life" murderous rampage and I'm not sure that
this is the end of it or a new beginning.

Evidently, we don't understand that "pro-life" murder of a doctor is violence????

"Pro-lifers" are not going out in masses to kill abortion providers . . . they are simply
encouraging those who will. See O'Reilly and Limbaugh.

Again . . . Catholic women have abortions at the same rate as any other women.
Does that make them "pro-lifers" -- ?

Catholic women and families use birth control at the same rate as any other women/families.
Does that make them "murderers" ?
Keeping in mind that the pill is often an abortiafacient?

The moment you suggest your support for organized patriarchal "religious" beliefs,
is the moment that you make clear to the world that you are biased against females --
and that you are supporting a religion which works against the interests of women in every way.

[defendandprotect]

116. It would have been more impressive had you called for the violent rhetoric to be stopped - !!!

Oy Vey TLM. I need to take you step by step through this?
Okay.

1. The KKK was a violent organization that people joined and were valid members of. They supported a doctrine of violence and hatred.

The Bible is a book of violence much supported by many "pro-lifers" --
The Vatican has been historically violent in its Crusades, tortures, introducing the
cross with the sword.
Note that many "pro-lifers" refer to abortion as "MURDER" --

Everyone has a right to their own thoughts and decisions on the issue of abortion -
they do not, however, have the right to prevent others from exercising their own
conscience in regard to abortion. Abortion is legal and necessary to the health of females.

The KKK, like so many other violent militia groups, often embrace "pro-life" themes.
In fact, Roeder was a member of one of these groups. Read what his ex wife has said
the effect was upon him -- obsessively anti-abortion.


2. Most people are against abortion because they believe it is murder based on their religious convictions. I have experience dealing with thousands of pro-lifers over my life and almost every last one of them is against abortion because they believe it is murder.

Again, as you make clear, this is a viewpoint sold to members of organized patriarchal religion. The very fact that any male or female would support such bias in spirituality as offered
by organized patriarchal religion is quite telling of a lack of respect for females.
As you obviously know, if abortion were "murder" women would be in jail. Is that where you're going with this?

what you are doing is "speculating". Do you know what speculation is? Making assumptions without evidence. Stop that. It makes you look bad. If someone tells you they are against abortion because it's murder, you can't just say "I bet they're actually against it because they want to regulate behavior". You aren't a magical wizard that can read peoples minds. Sorry.

Organized patriarchal religion has long sought to influence government in order to control society --
and their own members who often follow their own conscience in matter of birth control and abortion.
Indeed, just as many Catholic women as any other women have abortions.

I'd suggest that you plug into the Rachael Maddow interview with the former "pro-lifer" who was
familiar with what was going on at higher levels. I don't see how you could possibly condone the
behavior of O'Reilly or Limbaugh and the course and propagandistic nature of their rhetoric.

I think the first step to take in any discussion of the murder of Dr. Tiller would be to note
how inhumane and murderous the "pro-life" movement has become under the tutelage of Randall Terry and Operation Rescue -- and the other violent influences upon the movement.

And to call for that violent rhetoric to be stopped!!!

[PufPuf23]

71. Abortion is a personal decisom and a personal tragedy

No one would want to be in the situation on purpose and each situation is unique and unkniowable except too the woman and her her trusted advisors.

The "Pro-Life" organized movement should perhaps shift their moraal emphasis to th alreadty living IMHO.

[hfojvt]

81. you have certainly identified yourself as an extremist

yeah, laws typically try to control behaviour. Should we get rid of all of them?

Anybody who doesn't support or approve of sexual promiscuity is an extremist, eh?

[TLM]

92. I'm curious.... What Op did you read?

"laws typically try to control behaviour. Should we get rid of all of them? "

I fail to see where in the OP I said we should get rid of all laws? In fact I was very clear about the fact I was addressing the issue of using laws to deny someone control over their body.

"Anybody who doesn't support or approve of sexual promiscuity is an extremist, eh?"

Um I think I was rather clear that those who seek to control sexual behavior by removing a woman's right to control her own body are extremists.

[hfojvt]

117. most laws deny control over one's body

there are laws, for example, which prohibit you from putting your fist in my face. Is your fist not part of your body? Does the law not attempt to control your body?

You might say "but in that case, my freedom is ending where your rights begin." Your body is controlled or restricted when it interferes with somebody else's rights. First, then, what about seatbelt laws and laws against marijuana use or meth use and laws that prohibit a 20 year old from consuming alcohol, etc? Those only involve one person.

You might be against all those laws on some libertarian ground, but is everybody who supports those laws an extremist? Can you argue for or against those laws without demonizing your opponents?

Second, what about a baby's right to live? If a baby is born at 8.5 months, it becomes a protected citizen. Neither doctors nor the baby's parents are allowed to kill it, even if it is very sick, even with something like severe spina bifida which is likely to lead to a short life of great suffering for said baby.

However, seemingly a perfectly healthy baby can be killed at 8.5 months if it is still inside the mother's womb and she requests it. If it's not extreme to control people's actions with a baby born at 8.5 months, because of the rights of said baby, then it does not seem all that extreme to me to defend the rights of that same baby even when it is still in the womb. It almost seems liberal to 'defend the helpless'.

and for the second point

"Um I think I was rather clear that those who seek to control sexual behavior by removing a woman's right to control her own body are extremists."

No, it seemed to me that you equated promiscuity and "sexual freedom". Those people are bad, not because of HOW they try to control sexual behaviour, but because they want to control sexual behaviour in the first place.

[defendandprotect]

119. Nonsense . . . you have the right to suicide,

albeit only the right to a gun, knife, razor, rope . . . we are only reaching the point
where we have the right to humanely die, with dignity.

And an adult has the right to refuse medical care --

most laws deny control over one's body
there are laws, for example, which prohibit you from putting your fist in my face. Is your fist not part of your body? Does the law not attempt to control your body?

This is more faulty thinking . . . you might as well suggest that our traffic laws control everyone's "body."

And, pray tell, how is someone else's right to abortion interfering with your rights?

These are laws which communities support for the safety of all citizens.
These are not laws which INVADE SOMEONE ELSE'S BODY --
nor prevent someone else from self-defense against a fetus causing them to lose
future fertility or to face death.


Second, what about a baby's right to live? If a baby is born at 8.5 months, it becomes a protected citizen. Neither doctors nor the baby's parents are allowed to kill it, even if it is very sick, even with something like severe spina bifida which is likely to lead to a short life of great suffering for said baby.

However, seemingly a perfectly healthy baby can be killed at 8.5 months if it is still inside the mother's womb and she requests it. If it's not extreme to control people's actions with a baby born at 8.5 months, because of the rights of said baby, then it does not seem all that extreme to me to defend the rights of that same baby even when it is still in the womb. It almost seems liberal to 'defend the helpless'.

This sounds like straight out of the mouth of Randall Terry inanity.
Try to understand that late term abortion is difficult, not something that women run out to
do because they're having a bad hair day. Late term abortion is done for medical reasons.
Because the fetus is not going to live, because the fetus has an enlarged head, or other
problems WHICH ARE HARMING THE LIFE AND HEALTH OF THE WOMAN. These are pregnancies that
were wanted -- babies that were wanted. And you want to second guess the women and families
who are making these difficult decisions?

(Nor is it "Spina Bifida" which many babies live with -- and which there is some treatment for.
Btw, if you don't know it they have discovered back a few years ago that it is a lack of folate -
folic acid in its synthetic form - which is the cause of neural cord disorders.
That's fresh fruits and vegetables which some females have been getting too little of.
Also presume that our farming/fertilization methods are destroying the nutirional/vitamin value
of our foods. If you know any women, pass that information along. It may help someone avoid a
tragedy. Unfortunately, our FDA never conducted a campaign to alert women to that information.)

Again, even to admit to supporting and embracing organized patriarchal religious beliefs is
to admit to prejudice against females and their rights.

[hfojvt]

122. except there seems to be a problem with Tiller's records

Late term abortions, you say, are done for serious medical reasons. Yet, Tiller does not seem to have the paperwork to document those reasons in all cases. Not that I have gotten into the weeds on this, but even Democratic AGs Morrison and Six proceeded with cases against Tiller. I don't claim to have studied in that closely, but they do. I don't think a blanket defense of "no woman is gonna do this for trivial reasons" rings true. After all, don't some women abandon babies in toilets and dumpsters even after they are born? Even in states where you can do this at a hospital or police station with no questions asked.

"This is more faulty thinking . . . you might as well suggest that our traffic laws control everyone's "body."

And, pray tell, how is someone else's right to abortion interfering with your rights?"

Yes, traffic laws do control everyone's body. That's kinda my point. You have no right to keep your foot off the brake when there is a stop sign. My point being that, controlling a body or an action is not unique to the abortion issue.

Someone else's right to abort does not interfere with MY rights. It interferes with the rights of the baby being aborted.

Note, this is through the eyes of the anti-abortionists. I, myself, do not consider a two month old fetus to be a baby. However, I can see their point for the last trimester. I think you might have to be kind of extremist to not see their point for the last month of pregnancy.

"Again, even to admit to supporting and embracing organized patriarchal religious beliefs is to admit to prejudice against females and their rights."

Huh? Doesn't that apply then to Catholics like Kerry, Kucinich and Sebelius?

[defendandprotect]

123. Needless to say, anti-abortionists seem to have illegal access to medical records . . .

That's an interesting question about Tiller's records because it seems that some people
have gained access to them -- perhaps even O'Reilly? That would be illegal.

At any rate, whatever charges were falsely brought against Tiller, they have been dropped.
Didn't that recently happen only a week or more ago?

As Mrs. Tiller has told us, Dr. Tiller did abortions for Saudi Arabian females who were brought
here in order to avoid their being STONED TO DEATH by religous fanatics. Are you suggesting
that should have happened -- or that Dr. Tiller should not have helped them?

Additionally, Dr. Tiller also did many abortions for young girls -- 10 and 11 years of age --
who were victims of incest and rape -- and often didn't even know that they were pregnant.
Are you suggesting that those young girls should have been forced to carry the embryo or fetus to term?

I don't think a blanket defense of "no woman is gonna do this for trivial reasons" rings true. After all, don't some women abandon babies in toilets and dumpsters even after they are born? Even in states where you can do this at a hospital or police station with no questions asked.

Obviously, again, you're willing to believe the worst about females.
However, consider these two facts . . . first, NATURE has given everything to do with childbearing
to women. Gestation - 10 months within their bodies -- breast feeding, generally the care of the
infant.
Additionally, NATURE has given females many ways to avoid pregnancy, to end conception, and to
terminate pregnancies and to finally totally end fertility if they wished thru NATURAL plants -- which are our drugs.
Much of that information/knowledge of these plants and the plants themselves have been destroyed
by patriarchy. In fact, RU486 is based on one of the plant models which prevents the fertilized
egg from embedding into the womb. In the South Seas, I think it is Papaya which is used by women
to do that very thing.
NATURE is pro-choice . . . and seemingly so is whomever you may believe created NATURE.

It is usually frightened young girls who abandon babies in toilets and dumpsters.
Girls who are in denial of the pregnancy. Many hide the pregnancy not wanting to upset their
parents or to be dishonored in the eyes of their parents. Many seek illegal abortions because
they don't want to "notify" their parents. Becky Bell was one of those victims of these
patriarchal laws. Certainly these young girls are not interested in having their circumstances
known -- they are in shock and denial. And, if legal abortion wasn't available, many more of
these young girls would die.


Yes, traffic laws do control everyone's body. That's kinda my point. You have no right to keep your foot off the brake when there is a stop sign. My point being that, controlling a body or an action is not unique to the abortion issue.

This is an excellent example of fanatacism. Yes, we ALL obey traffic laws. But we don't have
laws that demand that ALL males have vasectomies. OTOH, we do have a religiously-based fanatical
movement which is a war to prevent females from making their own decision about seeking an abortion or not.

Someone else's right to abort does not interfere with MY rights. It interferes with the rights of the baby being aborted.

A fetus has no rights. Are you suggesting that a woman with cancer should be FORCED to carry an embryo or a fetus to term? Or that a woman with a dead fetus in her body should be forced to surrender her life and health to that fetus because you think so?

Note, this is through the eyes of the anti-abortionists. I, myself, do not consider a two month old fetus to be a baby. However, I can see their point for the last trimester. I think you might have to be kind of extremist to not see their point for the last month of pregnancy.

It would be hard to differentiate between your thoughts on abortion and an anti-abortionists' thoughts on abortion. Pregnancies in the last trimester are done because the life and health of
the pregnant woman is threatened. AGAIN, ALL OF THESE LATE TERM ABORTIONS HAVE TO BE APPROVED...
BECAUSE THE ABORTION ITSELF AT THAT POINT IS DANGEROUS TO THE HEALTH/LIFE OF THE PREGNANT FEMALE!

It is "extremism" which suggests that wanted babies -- and most of them are wanted -- are aborted
in the last month of pregnancy. These are tragic cases decided by women, their doctors, and
their families. Not outsiders, as much as they would like to influence those decisions.
Are you saying that if you had a daughter or sister who was carrying a problem pregnancy that you
would insist or suggest that she should be FORCED to carry it to term?

Think of Gerri Santoro -- that's the woman who's picture you see on the floor of the hotel room
having died from a back alley abortion at 5 months of pregnancy. She had fled from an abusive
husband. At some point she fell in love with another man and became pregnant. Read her story and
tell me if at that time you would have condemned her? But, also try to understand that women will
always seek abortions -- or perform self-abortions -- even when abortion isn't legal. The only
difference is one day it could be your daughter or your niece or your friend who loses their life
because of an illegal abortion.

Rather I think it the work of the "extremist" mind to not defend and support the right of a 10 year old incest victim to abort a late term pregnancy her parents have just discovered.


"Again, even to admit to supporting and embracing organized patriarchal religious beliefs is to admit to prejudice against females and their rights."

Huh? Doesn't that apply then to Catholics like Kerry, Kucinich and Sebelius?

Yes, IMO, it does. Ted Kennedy is, of course, pro-choice as much of the members of that religion
are. And he has spoken out against the prejudice against females upon which the church is founded.
Indeed, the Vatican continues to refuse to acknowledge the full personhood of females as it
acknowledges the full personhood of males. Kerry is "pro-choice" and being aware of his wife,
Theresa, I presume he advocates and supports full rights for females within the church.
I believe they both support gay marriage. Sebilius, I'm not familiar with --

HOWEVER, it is generally my opinion that anyone contributing money to organized patriarchal
religions is contributing to the problem -- unless they are there to fight its teachings.


I'd also suggest that your comments seem disingenuous . . . a female with life experience would
bring more understanding to these issues. And, any male with a female in his life would readily
be familiar with much of what I am saying to you.

[hfojvt]

129. the source appears to be an expert hired by the former AG

http://www.cashill.com/regional/leading_psych.htm

"Obviously, again, you're willing to believe the worst about females."

About SOME females, yes. Lack of a Y chromosome does not automatically make a person a saint, nor intelligent or rational. Not in my experience. But what I believe about females is not quite as universal as your condemnation of those who have 'patriarchal religious beliefs'.

[cali]

85. This op is embarassingly wingnutty

it's the product of a simple black/white little mind and it sucks the big one. that it was written by a male is hardly surprising. YOU are an extremist and not a very sharp one at that.

[TLM]

89. And yet why is it...

that your response is the one consisting of little more than personal insults and sexist bigotry?

"it's the product of a simple black/white little mind...that it was written by a male is hardly surprising."

LOL wow that really does say it all doesn't it? Simple black and white hypocrisy.

If this is the quality of thought from the mind that disagrees with my position... I feel considerably validated.

I can change two letters in that statement and had anybody posted it, it would be deemed wildly sexist hate speech...

watch

"it's the product of a simple black/white little mind and it sucks the big one. that it was written by a female is hardly surprising. YOU are an extremist and not a very sharp one at that. "


So why is it not sexist bigotry and hate speech when you remove the "fe" ?

[armyowalgreens]

96. Validation comes from evidence, not from others reactions.

Now I know why you think you're right. You go around everywhere spewing this crap and everyone gives you a funny look and tells you to fuck off.

Apparently in your brain that translates into "hey I must be correct because everyone thinks I'm stupid".



:crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

[TLM]

111. Everyone? LOL!!! Far from it.... but do you find assumed group think comforting?

In fact my point was the only people who seem to vehemently disagree with my position, tend to do things like spewing hateful sexist bullshit or trying to rationalize their views and contradicting their first sentence with their second.

Anybody who would argue that someone doesn't want to take away rights, because they believe those rights shouldn't have been given in the first place, so taking them away isn't really taking them away.... I want that guy to disagree with me.

If someone espousing that kind of idiocy agreed with me... then I'd be concerned.

[cali]

112. look, Mister, I've had an abortion and YOU have never had to face that

choice. NO man has. So yeah, I think women understand the issue in a different way than any man ever can.

[cali]

102. bwahahaha. YOU fucking equate people on this thead with Fred Phelps

and Nazi apologists, and then you whine about being insulted and picked on? Too funny and too much congnitive dissonance. You're pathetic and hateful and not much different than those you rail against. shove it, dear.

[TLM]

109. I'm not whining at all...

I simply pointed out the nature of your comments, and the hypocrisy with which they were soaked... as well as the depth of thought reflected in your simplistic sexist bigotry.

I notice that you were unable to refute those points about the content of your post, and again simply resorted to more personal attacks.

"YOU fucking equate people on this thead with Fred Phelps and Nazi apologists,"

Actually the equivalences were drawn between arguments and positions... not individuals. But then the actual content of discussion seems to have very little in fact to do with the content of your responses.

[cali]

110. sorry, I don't think haters are worth much effort, dear.

I pointed out in my original posts to this thread that you're argument is fallacious- based on stupidity and lies. I don't know what the breakdown is among those opposed to legal abortion as to whether they use incendiary words and support violence. I do know that your premise that all do, is a pile of bullshit. It's simply not factual. YOU never responded to my point about Father Jenkins and the students at ND. Seems to me, you're far, far more of an extremist hater than Father Jenkins. I stand with Obama on this one.

[defendandprotect]

121. Note that Randall Terry told the "pro-life" extremists NOT to give an inch . . .

and from the language and display accorded in response to you, I can see they're

taking Terry's advice to heart!

From my point of view here, you're pretty much having a debate with "ignore."

Try it sometime!

[Glenda]

90. thank you for saying this n/t

[cali]

104. yeah, we need MORE stupid and hateful and ignorant on DU. n/t

[TexasObserver]

125. Disagree with your statement: "A pro-lifer is by definition an extremist."

That's absurd. There are many people who oppose the death penalty for the same reason they oppose abortion. They're Quakers. They're UUers. They're Catholic Nuns.

There are extremist pro lifers and extremist pro life groups. Calling all who oppose abortion extremist is inaccurate and self defeating. Be better than that.