Pressing the "HOT" button

[partlyscot]

Sorry if I came on a bit strong. I don't know anyone personally who "encourages" abortions.

My attitude is we should do all we can to reduce them, and the best way to do that is Protect vulnerable girls and women. Institute thorough and freely available sex education. Provide birth control for free or at low cost, including the morning after pill when you make a mistake or suffer rape. Educate boys in treating girls with respect, and to understand no means no, not maybe.

[moonshadow]

My attitude is we should do all we can to reduce them, and the best way to do that is Protect vulnerable girls and women. Institute thorough and freely available sex education. Provide birth control for free or at low cost, including the morning after pill when you make a mistake or suffer rape. Educate boys in treating girls with respect, and to understand no means no, not maybe.

^ THIS



BTW, I have corrected the word. Thanks for calling it to my attention. That totally slipped me and I must have proof read that post at least five times...

[Uncle Al]

Educate boys in treating girls with respect, and to understand no means no, not maybe.

This SHOULD APPLY to how girls treat boys, too
It's a two-way street Men are not always the aggressor
It is known that men have been raped by women, too.

Just my $.02 worth

Uncle Al

[Freedomforall]

Moon I would like your thoughts on my comment.

[denimini]

Generally it is a right to choose issue, which is important. Strange that some folks demand the right to choose their religion which in turn is against other's right to choose.

[Faldaguy]

by partlyscot » Sun Sep 19, 2021 8:36 pm

Sorry if I came on a bit strong. I don't know anyone personally who "encourages" abortions.

My attitude is we should do all we can to reduce them, and the best way to do that is Protect vulnerable girls and women. Institute thorough and freely available sex education. Provide birth control for free or at low cost, including the morning after pill when you make a mistake or suffer rape. Educate boys in treating girls with respect, and to understand no means no, not maybe.
Top

Many years ago my wife wound up as the Conveyor for three rather diametrically opposed groups in Salem [interestingly "Salem" comes from a religious derivation roughly meaning "peace"]. The groups: Right to Life; Planned Parenthood; & a group upholding the "seamless garment" concept that takes a view more like Carl expressed when wondering about support for capital punishment or war --- anyway, one would expect this to have been a rather explosive and useless undertaking. What was being 'tested' was a bit of communication theory about "Common Ground", the idea being most of us usually have a lot more in common than we do differences.

This group met a couple times a month for several months, and did come up with a long list of things they held in common about abortion -- such as wanting better health care for women; and outcomes for kids; fewer (or no) abortions. They also had different ideas on how to achieve some of their goals -- BUT, they learned to talk to each other, to listen, to explore, to understand all parties to the conversation were human and caring. Surprisingly, the then heads of PP and RtL ended up being bosom buddies frequently dining and socializing together!

This does not address Moon's question of "why" abortion is such a biggie in today's politics; but it goes to his initial appeal to be civil on a "hot button" issue; and to Partlyscot's reiteration of thoughts that women's groups have been pushing for decades. (I recall those almost exact words from a Graduate Psych of Women class I took over 30 years ago.) I might ask why is it so damn difficult to employ those ideas, including U.A's comments about the other side of the coin. And while we practice being civil and seeking common ground, let us avoid the abyss of black and white thinking -- our choices are not "either/or" but include the vast arena of grey along the spectrum.

[moonshadow]

Moon I would like your thoughts on my comment.

I saw your comment and planned to make a comment, but as this thread started to get going, I got called into work.

I plan to attend to it when I get home this evening (assuming I get home at a good hour, yours is a lot to unpack and I'm wanting to be on my laptop with a proper keyboard rather than my phone with its autocurrupt)

[rode_kater]

Hmm, for me the main consideration is something I haven't seen mentioned. The issue isn't (for me) whether abortion is legal or not. Abortions have been done for millennia, you can do it at home. The issue is access to medically safe abortions. If you make it illegal people will find another way. Around 1910 it was estimated that 2000 illegal abortions per year happened in Amsterdam alone, 25000 per year in NL by 1962. Not all of the mothers survived, and of those that did some were wheelchair bound for the rest of their lives. And yes, I'm biased. I value the life of a women whom society has already invested a considerable amount of resources over a foetus that is not viable by itself.

If access to medically safe abortions requires it to be legal, then so be it. Here is NL we took the suitably roundabout route where it was technically illegal but the medical profession had decided on their own rules and there were no prosecutions. Decades later in 1984 it was finally legalised (though decriminalised might be the better term) by one vote in parliament and since then considered largely settled. Not everyone is happy though, the law says it has to be a "medical emergency" but that is not well described and practice it's the woman that decides and the doctor has to be willing to do it, it's not a "right" per se. Some extreme Christian parties agitate every now and then, other parties think it should be made an actual right, but it's basically considered done, As you say, it's literally small fish versus the much bigger issues we need to worry about.

As for why it makes people excited, I'm not sure. It was a big issue here in the 60s and 70s as part of the women's rights movement but since then faded from view. It's in the category "you live your life, I'll live mine", is that what they used to call libertarian? Certainly the decline of the power of the Christian parties has prevented it flaring up. In Poland it's a big issue now, though I'm not sure why either.

[Jim]

I think it's a hot issue because it can so easily engage the emotions. If the embryo is considered a baby, then "killing babies" seems pretty atrocious. If the fetus is just a unwanted blob of tissue that harms the mother's health, then abortion restrictions are oppressive control over women's bodies. Many of the anti-abortion arguments focus on the fetus being able to act, feel, and have fairly well-developed organs. These certainly make us think of babies--some of the strongest anti-abortion folks are those who use to participate in them and had to count legs, arms, and head to be sure every part was out. I think a compromise is possible banning abortions except in extreme instances after 3 months or so when the embryo becomes a fetus.

[Sinned]

Moon, your wish is granted. I suppose that it is such a contentious subject that I thought I may be hacked to death. I suppose I should learn to trust you guys.

[Brad]

The act of getting an abortion is a very personal and difficult decision between a woman and her doctor. Government should not be involved at all. When I chose to get a vasectomy, I called a urologist and scheduled an appointment and had the procedure performed. There was nobody picketing the urologist's office when I entered, and no government officials having me jump through hoops. I've often asked those who would deny a woman the right to get an abortion if they are willing to support the baby in a good home until he/she/they are 21. I've never received a satisfactory answer to that. It seems that abortion is not the divisive issue that Moon states it is- rather it's more encompassing than just one issue- members of certain political persuasions will jump on anything that fits their narrow minded religious view of the world to harass those of another political persuasion. My idea of government is don't get involved in my life or my wallet more than necessary to operate a civil and safe society. Laws are not a strength of humankind, but rather a weakness. If people could treat each other with civility at all times we should not need laws. But we know that doesn't happen. Everyone is seeking too much power over silly stuff. Don't f*** with me and I won't f*** with you. It's that simple. What is someone's vested interest in seeing that a woman cannot get an abortion? Why are they involved at all? Answer- because they can and it's a power grab. It's like living under the Taliban or the Chinese Communist Party. Is that what we want in this country? Usually the same people who are so worried about unborn fetal tissue having rights to live generally are in favor of killing convicted criminals. So which is it- are they supporting life or not? They are hypocrites. I don't expect to get pregnant and need an abortion anytime soon so I don't have a horse in this race. But this is a step towards the direction of certain holier-than-thou morally superior (so they think) religious people grabbing power from us. The same people who will (rightfully) fight the Taliban will act like them here.

[moonshadow]

I understand what your saying Brad.

But I'll ask you to consider my perspective on this, not as someone who is loosely considered "pro-life" but from a political calculation.

Rural regions, and my region in particular used to be HEAVILLY Democratic. In my conversations with local voters one thing is clear, these folks are fiercely pro-life, and understand the reason why... they honestly think they will burn in hell if they support a candidate who claims to be "pro-choice" as in their view, "abortion is murder". I'm not exaggerating. Drive around here, there are churches with front yards full of little crosses as a memorial to aborted fetuses, there are "pro-life" billboards and bumper stickers everywhere.

Everyone's point about capital punishment and the religious rights tolerance of it is an excellent point, yes they can be hypocrites. But, all that aside I have found in my conversations that many conservatives I speak with are open to some kind of a government takeover of healthcare, as many can agree it is insanely out of control.

I just feel like if the Democratic party would put the abortion issue on the back burner for now, they might score some of the more religious and rural voters and maybe... just maybe we can tackle some of the other major issues we have like the climate and healthcare.

The Democratic party can always come back to it later.

To to be clear, I myself AM NOT an "abortion voter". As I've said before, I couldn't really care less either way. But I know it matters to a lot of people on both sides, and I can't help but shake my head as everything else goes up in smoke while we hammer this one issue out.

I mean what's the worse that could happen politically? Do you think liberals are going to start voting for Trump and Ted Cruze to spite the Democratic party? Hardly. I'm not saying go out in a limb and declare themselves to be "pro-life", but maybe just lay off the "choice" rhetoric for a while, stop being the "party of baby killing" for a couple of election cycles and see what happens.

[moonshadow]

What is someone's vested interest in seeing that a woman cannot get an abortion? Why are they involved at all?

I really don't think it's that. I think that's what the [left] wing media paints rural voters as, but in my observation, rural voters have no issue with women's rights.

These people aren't the "pro-lifers" of your grandparents generation, they're on board with birth control, condoms, and many even the morning after pill.

No, they're perspective is that from the "unborn childs" point of view.

I respect the opinions and reasoning of the pro-choice people on this discussion, you make good points, but let's not paint pro-life people as "anti-womans rights". That's just not how it is. They're for the life of the unborn. And remember, many sincerely believe they will burn in hell for supporting pro-choice candidates. That's a tough nut to crack.

I will ask that we all keep that in mind.

Edit: corrected an "autocorrect typo"

[Sinned]

The take on all this is that you tend to only have an opinion on this when you are in a position where it becomes an issue. That is when you, or someone close to you, is pregnant and in a position where going to term and bringing up the child would be difficult. So that is probably why most of us, with the exception of Tom who handled the situation brilliantly, don't have a strong opinion.

[moonshadow]

The take on all this is that you tend to only have an opinion on this when you are in a position where it becomes an issue. That is when you, or someone close to you, is pregnant and in a position where going to term and bringing up the child would be difficult. So that is probably why most of us, with the exception of Tom who handled the situation brilliantly, don't have a strong opinion.

I think I'm failing to get my point across. We seem to keep coming back to this place where I'm not concerned with women's rights.

This is not the case.

Once again

Abortion doesn't really matter that much to me compared to other matters. Babies rights or women's rights won't matter much if we poison the air. I just want the issue SETTLED one way or the other so we can get on with other matters.

Like you, I don't really have a strong opinion on it either to the point where I about roll my eyes when every political discussion leads to abortion.

I'm annoyed that the two candidates for Virginia governor apparently spent so much time clashing over this on their first and likely only debate.

I'm annoyed because Appalachia is falling apart... we've got some real issues going on and we can't tackle any of them because it is clear the GOP has no interest in any social programs that would help and the Democratic party is head over heels obsessed with drilling home the notion that a fetus is just a bag of disposable chemicals.

Maybe it is... I don't know. But I do know one thing, we have some real issues killing actual air breathing people today and we can't do anything about it due to political gridlock thanks in no small part to the abortion issue.

It just bugs me.

I realize the pro-life people could just as easily back off, but when they are terrified of enteral damnation for doing so, I appeal to the left to be more practical and prioritize the issue.

The pro-life people are NOT going to bend on this issue. So where does that leave us as a whole?

Stalemate.