Brooks and his Roe-Colored Glasses
Brooks and his Roe-Colored Glasses
All sorts of people and parties have been blamed for the conservatives’ reckless threat to go nuclear in the Senate. But New York Times op-ed columnist David Brooks reveals that at the root of all of this is…the Roe v. Wade decision. Like a kneejerk radical conservative, he attempts to blame all our political problems on the infamous Supreme Court decision, contending that “Unless Roe v. Wade is overturned, politics will never get better.”
While you’re shaking your head in confusion, let me explain his logic: By removing the abortion issue from the legislatures, Roe “suppressed that democratic abortion debate the nation needs to have.” As a result, all battles over judges are really battles over abortion – no matter what people say.
Mr. Brooks will have to excuse those of us who find it hard to believe that hard-lined conservatives feel justified in trashing a 200-year-old Senate tradition because of their belief that a single Supreme Court decision is illegitimate and must, at all costs, be overruled. The Roe decision has hardly stifled debate over the abortion issue; joined only recently by gay marriage, Roe is often all we hear when the right needs an example of “what’s wrong with our country.”
Moreover, if abortion were left to the states, we’d hardly end up with the nice, middle of the road approach that Brooks would lead us to believe. The Center for Reproductive Rights predicts that if Roe were struck down, 30 states would outlaw abortion in short order. Even now, with Roe still technically in place, states have done a dandy job of regulating abortion almost out of existence: 87% of United States counties do not have an abortion provider. And Congress has certainly done its part to help. In just the last two years, Congress has passed three major bills related to abortion and has several more in line.
If Brooks took off his Roe-colored glasses, he’d see that the Supreme Court decision was actually a victory for proponents of limited government. It effectively states that there are some areas that government should not regulate (or should regulate only minimally) and abortion is one of them. Instead of castigating abortion as the downfall of minority rights, perhaps he should attack the real culprits – those who seek unchecked majority rule regardless of the issue. And he can start with those trying to go nuclear.
- Jessica Arons
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Brooks would do well to learn about the Supreme Court cases that really changed the trajectory of the nation.
It is interesting to see where his conservative friends stood on those rulings…
April 22nd, 2005 at 12:23 pmIt’s interesting how much they hate and fear women. The Catholic church historically controlled every aspect of womens’ lives and burnt some 5000 or so who were seen as, “too intelligent, too close to nature, too learned” and etc. I’m sure ultra-conservatives would love to bring back the book of the Witch’s Hammer, which had the previously mentioned set of guidelines. They demonized women and nature, both of which included sex. Today’s ultra-conservative assholes are doing the same thing in order to control all of us!
If people are alienated from nature, science, sex and their own bodies, then the alienators have complete and total control. That is their hideous goal.
April 22nd, 2005 at 12:31 pmAbortion has killed about 20 million women in the US since 1973. Just to give you a different perspective.
April 22nd, 2005 at 12:58 pmTony – unless you cite your source, your input is as worthless as your post. I for one don’t believe you.
April 22nd, 2005 at 1:11 pmEven the most extreme pro-life site I could find only had 44 million abortions being performed since 1973 — according to you almost half of those women died…
April 22nd, 2005 at 1:23 pmI think your statistic is extrmely inflated. I’d like to see you back it up.
(40 million abortions) x (approx 50% being female) = 20 million.
April 22nd, 2005 at 1:43 pmhttp://www.michaelberube.com — go read it. Kicks arse.
April 22nd, 2005 at 2:11 pmYou are being openly dishonest. What do you expect from us, appreciation of your lack of character and honor?
You remind me of bush43 and his entire leadership.
April 22nd, 2005 at 2:14 pmHow am I being dishonest? I’m just offering a different perspective.
April 22nd, 2005 at 2:25 pmWow, that’s a new tactic. We’ll have to watch for that in future propaganda. Misleading us into thinking abortion has killed 20 million PREGNANT WOMEN, not 20 million FETUSES WITH TWO X CHROMOSOMES. You’re a piece of work.
How about this?
http://www.safemotherhood.org/what_is.htm
“Six million women have died needlessly in pregnancy or childbirth” in the past decade.
And as for the actual PREGNANT WOMAN mortality rate, “Since 1972, a total of 362 women have died from legal abortions compared with 93 from illegal ones.” From
April 22nd, 2005 at 2:29 pmhttp://usconservatives.about.com/od/abortion/a/abortionstat.htm citing CDC data.
Don’t bother with Tony. It is obvious where he stands. However, I think I understand where Brooks is coming from. This right wing thing all started over roe vs. wade. While we may have very good arguements to voting Democrat, there are many people who will vote for Republican control forever if Roe stands. It is their prime issue. The original plan was to get ahold of the courts to be able to overturn the law. That is still the plan by right wing churches. They have added other issues: gay issues, white supremacy issues and other hot buttons for the “fundies”. I don’t think it is the priority for the bushies. Their priority is money and power. Put they are playing the game very well to make it look like they care regarding the so called culture of life issues. Our hope lies in waking up the majority of American people to what is happening. The bushies are doing a good job of helping us with the illegal war, failing economy and lies.
April 22nd, 2005 at 2:42 pmWell this is kind of an abortion thread, so as much as I find Toy’s statements dishonest, he can say them. We just wish he would be completely clear as to what he is saying rather than what he thinks makes a better sound bite.
Listen Tony, I have good Republicans in my family that support a womans right to an abortion. It isn’t just democrats. Yea, I know, those republicans are being very quiet now, well I can’t help them there, that is up to them.
Here is why I don’t feel abortion is murder early in a pregnancy. I don’t believe a fetus is ensouled until late. When? jesus, I can’t give you a date. I am comforatable with anything in the 1st trimester. So you may disagree with me, but to me, it isn’t murder, it’s removal of a cluster of cells.
April 22nd, 2005 at 3:13 pmMy perspective (with the links to back it up)… the leading cause of death for pregnant women and one of the leading causes of death among all women is murderâ€â€by a spouse or boyfriend. I would like for Tony and his “pro-life” friends to deal with that. I bet you’d be surprised at how far the abortion rate would drop if women pregnant or otherwise were safe from their loved ones.
My first concern is for women who are viable outside the womb, then we can worry about the yet to be born.
http://my.webmd.com/content/article/31/1728_75217?src=Inktomi&condition=Home%20&%20Top%20Stories
http://www.napanews.com/templates/index.cfm?template=story_full&id=522CBF82-C9E9-4877-9B16-74C782A43C29
April 22nd, 2005 at 3:20 pmkindness: What about the first day of the second trimester? Is termination at that point OK?
Also, a child’s heartbeat starts at 22 days after conception.
April 22nd, 2005 at 3:57 pmTricia Lay- because some men have killed some women, abortion is a good idea? Because some cars have killed some women, abortion is a good idea.
April 22nd, 2005 at 4:30 pmTony-
April 22nd, 2005 at 4:34 pmYou are WAY more concerned about a mindless fetus the size of a goldfish than you are womens’ freedoms to control their own destiny. 22 days after conception is NOT a child but an undeveloped fetus with far less feelings and consciousness than an adult woman. It is questionable whether or not a 22 day old fetus has emotions at all, much less thoughts! Of course what do you care about that? If men LIKE YOU could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament. Walk a mile in somebody elses shoes before you judge–oh wait! You can’t get pregnant! You can’t walk a mile…well then it’s not your concern and you should leave the choice up to women!!!
What if a law was passed that made it an abortion legal only in cases of rape, incest, or threat to the mothers life (and i’m sure a few other circumstances that i’m not thinking of). And to make illegal all “convenient” abortions – those that are just unwanted as not to “disrupt” the life of the mother. Does that seem intolerant or unfair?
April 22nd, 2005 at 4:38 pmCheryl, i think i need to take issue with your argument on a principle level. Everyday people have a “will” for other people, who by definition they are not. For example, a teacher having a classroom rule that dictates what an 11 year old should do. The teacher is not an 11 year old, even though she once was – the world is a differnt place now. She in essence has a will for another person. Is that true?
April 22nd, 2005 at 4:45 pmThe teacher however can understand the world of an 11 year old and will probably make right assumptions of such a world and speak her values into it. So, I argue, a man, on some level, can understand the world of a women. Because we are not autonomous what women and men do affect us all. I believe most people shoud be able to speak into most situations what they see as “best”.
April 22nd, 2005 at 4:49 pmDoes that seem intolerant or unfair?
YES because men who cannot get pregnant, will never have a 9 month pregnancy with morning sickness or a 36 hour delivery that is more painful that anything most men will ever experience in a life time. Plans for education, career and more can be put on hold or just destroyed by a pregnancy. Again, men like you would enjoy taking away a woman’s right to choose her own desting and control over her own body. I don’t suppose men like yourself will become sterilized or use other methods of birth control so that a woman’s future is not ruined. Of course not! You are more concerned about some fetus with the size and intelligence of a goldfish than you are about an adult conscious human. All this concern over fetus’s is a mere unconscious desire to control the destinies of women. So I and many other progressive women say to such men, “Butt out! “
April 22nd, 2005 at 4:51 pmSo now are women to be equated with 11 year old children who need a daddy (like you) to tell them what to do with their futures? Your analogy is flawed and shows your bias toward women as being children, unable of decision making without some godlike man as yourself.
April 22nd, 2005 at 4:54 pmI didn’t mean to come off so strong. I’m sorry if you view as a man obsessed with controlling the destinies of women. Yet of course i have a judegemnt as to what is best for the destinty of man kind. Is that not true of everyone?
April 22nd, 2005 at 5:00 pmYou, for the sake of what is good for mankind, fully support abortion. Is that true? You dont just support it for fun, there is a good end to the means.
I feel like you saying men cannot be involved in the discussion stifles the diolauge. As i said, we are not autonomous.
It is insulting and shows your extreme bias that you dare equate adult women with 11 year old children. I suppose you as a man in god’s image should have complete control over the destiny of women….and all the rest. So adult intelligent women need “a teacher” preferably someone like yourself or Bush, Frist, or Delay to rule over us. Why don’t you just admit to an unconscious (?) desire to control womens’ bodies and be done with it.
April 22nd, 2005 at 5:00 pmIf a woman doesn’t want to get pregnant, then it’s pretty simple–don’t have intercourse. Now rape is an exception and so allowances can obviously be made. So if you have plans for education, career, don’t have intercourse. You CAN control your own destiny.
Also Cheryl, I’m curious as to when you draw the line for allowing an abortion…how many weeks?
April 22nd, 2005 at 5:04 pmI didn’t mean that to be direct symbollism. Its just an example of one persons will over others. Maybe a professor/universtiy students. I don’t mean it to authoratative but open to discussion.
Do you see it as a battle of men or women?
April 22nd, 2005 at 5:09 pmWhat about pro-life women?
oops men over women not men or women
April 22nd, 2005 at 5:10 pmsorry i have to go, thank you for the thoughts.
April 22nd, 2005 at 5:12 pmTony-
According to your “logic” men and women, husbands and wives are reduced to the following 2 choices.
I can just imagine you practicing priestly abstainence over concern of making your partner pregnant!
Your Choices regarding sexuality:
1) Abstain completely.
2) Deal with a new baby every year until your partner’s menopause.
If you don’t abstain completely or have at least 15 children by the time you’re 30, I’d call you a hypocrite. Or do you have different standards for yourself and women—that would figure.
I note that the only No Choicers who have spoken out are men. How worried you are about the poor hapless embryo the size of the period at the end of this sentence. The concern over a thoughtless, unconscious fetus with the size and intelligence of a goldfish is interesting. I also will consider you a hypocrite if you do not adopt at least 10 so called unadoptable crack and HIV positive babies to back up your concern over the plight of the fetus!
April 22nd, 2005 at 5:15 pmOption 3) If you are not open to children don’t get married, or practice Natural Family Planning, in which abstinence is practiced during a woman’s fertile period.
Please answer my previous question:
April 22nd, 2005 at 5:21 pmWhen you draw the line for allowing an abortion…how many weeks?
Wish I could continue here. A last argument: I don’t see how killing a baby 1 minute before birth is any different than killing a baby 1 minute after birth. They are the same person!
April 22nd, 2005 at 5:29 pmThe usual conservative drivel…by people who have found the absolute truth and want to impose their religious view on others, especially women…
Of course, these are the same people who only care about “people” before being born, or when they’re about to die! The time in between is left up to social Darwinism!
Look, trying to communicate with someone who doesn’t accept reason is fruitless. Especially those who are anti-science (and the scientific method), and readily accept dogma/myths/superstitions as facts.
April 22nd, 2005 at 5:38 pmTony-
So a couple who want to be married but do not want children should not have sexual relations? How very sick. Or practice only natural family planning which places 100% of reproductive burden on women and is not completely effective? So you say only to women that if they have sex, they must become pregnant!
Do you practice priestly abstainence? Or are you a father to a new baby every year? Or do you just dump the responsibility of so called natural planning on your partner, and if this faulty method results in pregancy—well then, do you have a baby for every other year of sexuality? If you do not apply your strict sexual rules to yourself for your entire life, you are a hypocrite of the worst kind.
I will not answer the weeks question only because you hold that up as a kind of test; it allows you to demonize the woman who believes in having more weeks than you would approve of!
I still contend that your over concern over the embryo or mindless fetus exhibits an unconscious (?) desire to control the bodies and destinies of women. Other wise you might be going on about something important like the 4 of every 10 boys or 6 of every 10 girls who are sexually abused by the age of 18. Or you might be more conerned about the plight of children who are unadoptable for reasons of Hiv, and etc. You should have about 10 of them to support your apparent concern over the fetus, and then you will be too busy to argue over the control of womens’ bodies! Amen.
April 22nd, 2005 at 5:43 pmTony,
Due to my body’s unusual hormonal makeup my menstrual cycle (none of this fertile period bullcrap, if you’re gonna preach about it let’s talk about menstrual cycles) is very irregular. Should I then never have sex?
April 22nd, 2005 at 6:06 pmTony, I told you why I felt my position was completely moral & that is why I am OK with it. You throw garbage back. I don’t care what you think. I just don’t want you to dictate your twisted morals to me. Sorry but you aren’t willing to hear what I am saying, only what your objections to other points of view are.
Sucks to be you.
April 22nd, 2005 at 6:06 pmThank you witch and kindness! It seemed like I was the lone woman on the side of choice battling 2 MALE antichoicers!
I think No Choicer men should just stay out of this issue because men who cannot get pregnant, will never have a 9 month pregnancy with morning sickness or a 36 hour delivery that is more painful that anything most men will ever experience in a life time. Plans for education, career and more can be put on hold or just destroyed by a pregnancy. I said this earlier, but of course they didn’t want to get it.
I don’t think ol’ Tony thought about anything I said; he’s too concerned with controlling us in the name of his god. The poor, poor embryo and fetus is his 2nd excuse, while ignoring more important issues involving beings that actually have consciousness!
Sucks to be us having to deal with assholes trying to remove our choices in life……
April 22nd, 2005 at 6:16 pmCheryl,
Hang in there, kid. It’s all ok.
Witchy wisdom: sometimes it’s just the simplest things that’ll undo what’s been done.
April 22nd, 2005 at 6:18 pmThank you, Andros. The voice of reason.
Having worked in the legal field for many years, I have seen many sad things. The saddest are unwanted children — neglected, bruised, beaten, starved, abandoned, sold, or killed. Education is one of the keys. Birth control is another. Abortion is not convenient, but it is sometimes necessary. A woman knows best her own abilities, finances, temperment, and life situation. Men can voice their opinions and wishes, but the women have final veto power.
April 22nd, 2005 at 6:19 pmThis issue more than almost any other drives ‘em out of the woodwork.
& Just like what Frist is doing this weekend, their argument against us boils down to “they aren’t people of REAL faith”. I understand that some of us have faiths and views of the world/universe/god that are different from others. But you don’t see me forcing my beliefs on them. I just don’t want them to try to force their constipated views on me.
Having said that, I think we all have a right to our own opinion, which is equally valid for all of us. Try to remember that freedom loving people out there.
April 22nd, 2005 at 6:46 pmFirstly, the key issue that many anti-choicers ignore is that being pro-choice doesn’t mean you *like* abortion or that you think everyone should have them. In an ideal world, women would never be raped, never be molested by family members, never be pressured into unsafe sex by boyfriends, be educated about all methods of birth control, *HAVE ACCESS* to all methods of birth control, and — as a result — almost never have to deal with un unplanned pregnancy. However, in the cases of an unplanned pregnancy that the woman cannot carry to term, it is not up to me, the government, or any segment of society to decide what that woman should do. That extremely personal decision is not for anyone to make except for the woman in consultation with her doctor and whoever else (family, friends, boyfriend,etc) that she seeks advice from.
Secondly, anti-choices love the myth of abortion-on-demand. Please, people. I hate to break it to you since you love to vilify women so, but a woman can’t waddle into a women’s clinic 8-1/2 months pregnant, slap her hand down on the counter, and declare, “Oops, I changed my mind.” It doesn’t work that way. Late-term abortions are performed under strict control and in most cases performed when the deformities of the fetus may render the mother infertile if carried to term or in the case of the mother’s life being in danger (for example, if she must undergo chemotherapy and cannot carry to term).
Thirdly, just saying that people shouldn’t have sex doesn’t work. If you look back through history — before women were able to have any say over their reproductive rights — plenty of women still became pregnant in situations where they could not care for the child. Only then, the results were much worse than what occurs in a system with legal abortion. Infanticide was rampant. So rampant that in fact many societies had names for the kind of ghost that would come back from a baby left in the snow (often because to keep that baby would sentence others in the family to death by starvation due to lack of food.) The worst example, and I wish I could remember the date of this newspaper, was from a London paper in the late 1800s. I found this with a professor in college while doing research on a different topic, but this story stuck out for it’s chilling nature. (And I know that some will scoff at this story because I dont’ have the date to cite, but I do swear it was true and I’m sure research would find it again but I dont’ have access to the Stanford library this moment.) The article in the paper cited how Scotland Yard was going to be posting additional watchmen along the Thames at night to prevent a problem that had occured during the previous summer where a drought had brought the Thames so low that barges could not pass *due to the number of infant corpses that clogged the river in certain stretches.* It is a grisly and horrible image, but it shows the dark side of a society where human sexuality is vilified (but of course still engaged in) and women are not given access to birth control/abortion and then vilified for having children out of wedlock. I personally do find throwing a living or dead newborn into a river to be a much worse situation than allowing a woman access to birth control that prevents the pregnancy or allowing that pregnancy to be terminated before the fetus is viable. Human nature and history shows us that sex will always happen and unplanned or unwanted pregnancies will always happen. It is the support and choices we give women to prevent or deal with these situations that shows what kind of society we are.
April 22nd, 2005 at 7:02 pmZookeeper, if the “other side” were more reasonable, we could find common ground, as in reducing unwanted pregnacies and, in extentio, abortions. We could also make it easier for people to adopt kids.
April 22nd, 2005 at 7:04 pmBut, I believe we are in a great divide–some of us are cosmopolitan, pro-science, pro-choice, and for a modern open, telerant society. While others want to turn the country to the Dark Ages. Education is very, very important, but an education that opens minds, not indoctrination, not superstitious. Yet, in this 21st cent. we have people who oppose science, are biggots and are motivated primarily by fear and make decisions on pure emotion not reason.
As for abortion, only a woman knows how hard it is to have one. Not an easy choice, but we shouldn’t become a society (like the former eastern block) where women used abortions as birth control.
The Church, men, conservatives, and other sexually uptight, misinformed, intolerant people are not comfortable with human sexuality–a very natural thing. (after all, we’re all here because of sex).
Every person should have the proper sex education and access to birth control. Those who find sex dirty and repulsive, they can keep it to themselves and help all of us by not procreating!
I have to blame the church for screwing up human sexuality and giving thousands of generations of people a perverted view of sex and a life of regrets, fear, intolerance, and bargaining.
As a man I would like to say this. Whenever the debate over abortion comes up in conversation I always have the exact same response. If I got pregnant I don’t think that I would be able to go through with an abortion and if someone that I was with got pregnant I would probably urge her not to have one. However, in the end the fact is that I will never be pregnant and therefore if a woman ultimately decides that an abortion is right for her it is none of my business. This is not a public issue, it is a private issue that each woman will have to reconcile with herself and her own beliefs.
April 22nd, 2005 at 7:54 pmNone of you Lefty Marxist’s out there get it. Roe v. Wade is about States rights. I’ll even admit some Republicans don’t get it either.
April 22nd, 2005 at 8:33 pmTry reading the Constitution(No it is not a living and breathing document) it states quite clearly why we have States rights. Our 50 states are almost like seperate countries within the United States. If you don’t like the Laws or Taxs of the State your in, pack your shit up and move to a state you like better. This should be the same regarding Abortion. All of you nut’s that worship at the shrine of killing unborn children can live in some enlightened State like Calif. or New York and Hick’s like me and Tony can live in the Podunk Bible Belt.
You Lefties are continually trying to tell the rest of the Country how we should think because you think you know what’s best for the rest of us.
Get off your soapbox, ride your bike to your favorite co-op and thank God(sorry, thank yourself) that you live in the Greatest country on God’s(yes Jesus Christ) Green Earth.
If any of you need another lesson on the Constitution let me know.
Thanks Pat, I coulnd’t agree with you more. And I assume that those of us that also believe in states rights and and that the constitution is not to be messed with can also count on your support to defeat the federal marriage amendment.
April 22nd, 2005 at 8:46 pmYes, you can count on me to support that. I am currently in strong favor in my own state to come up with a bill to be voted on that would make marriage only between a man and a woman. The way God ment it to be.
April 22nd, 2005 at 8:53 pmI can respect that. It’s one thing to have a view and to work to implement that in your own community. It is an entirely different thing to try and tell people 1000 miles away what they should do in their community. I may not agree with your view but I respect you for not trying to impose it on me in my home.
April 22nd, 2005 at 9:37 pmWhich God? Oh, excuse me, your god is the right one…. and, not only that, you surely know what He thinks! Hmmm.
Wanna know the difference between you and us? We can allow you to do as you please for yourself, but you want us to live OUR lives the way YOU wants us to.
Oh, by the way, if you think it’s state rights, then did you protest the Repubs interference in the Schiavo case? (Florida had settled the case). And, who’s kissed your religious ass by proposing federal laws to prohibit states from recognizing same-sex marriages?
We the progressives believe in choice and responsibility, but you don’t. You want others making decisions for you, and want to impose your religious views on the rest of us. I don’t care if you gay, religious, atheist, from Mars, black, yellow, green, sexually repressed, live in fear, bargain with your god, whatever…. Keep it to yourself. If you’re so sure that you’ve found the universal and absolute truth, good for you. Let us live our lives, in any state we want, and let us enjoy our lives they way we seem fit for ourselves.
But, that’s too much for your insecurities. You want a world filled with your own kind only. Your most red states are backward, anti-science, pro-superstition, intollerant. If Jannet and Jane can’t get married, it fills you with joy because you think it protects marriage… Of course, you react with emotion not logic. Care to guess where you have the highest rates of divorse, abortion, teenage pregnacies?????
April 22nd, 2005 at 9:51 pmBut, don’t let the facts get in the way of your good story…..
Nikkiho,
April 22nd, 2005 at 9:56 pmAlong these same lines. I hope you are against all Federal hate crime legislation. Not only for the reason of States Rights but also for the basis that there are already ferderal and state laws for assaulting or murdering someone no matter what race or sexual preference they may have.
No thoughts, no matter how unthinkable they may be, should be against the law unless they are acted upon. Thoughts can’t be legislated only actions can be.
And I also will respect anyone who doesn’t try to impose their racial or sexual agenda in my home.
I love this, you played right into my hands. I knew some self righteous leftie would be pissed off at me having the nerve utter the word God or Jesus. Thanks for helping me prove how intolerant and insane you people get over a couple of words. If you actually read what I wrote I never tried to impose my God on anyone, but once again someone on the left can’t handle the word GOD.
April 22nd, 2005 at 10:05 pmNow on the topic of marriage. Everyone has the same rights in this dept. Every man has the right to marry a woman and every woman has the right to marry a man. So it’s quite obvious that once again the left wants special laws for their very special friends.
Thanks for helping me prove how intolerant and insane you people get over a couple of words. If you actually read what I wrote I never tried to impose my God on anyone, but once again someone on the left can’t handle the word GOD.
Compare with:
Get off your soapbox, ride your bike to your favorite co-op and thank God(sorry, thank yourself) that you live in the Greatest country on God’s(yes Jesus Christ) Green Earth.
Don’t get me wrong, but isn’t that latter sentence in the imperative? As in I am ordering you to go thank my God?
Just sayin’.
April 22nd, 2005 at 10:18 pmClarification. I should thank myself for living in YOUR God’s earth?
April 22nd, 2005 at 10:18 pmNotice how they avoid answering the facts? They’re a confused lot. They sound like Rain Man….
April 22nd, 2005 at 10:37 pmWitch,
April 22nd, 2005 at 10:37 pmNow you’ve made it all clear. If I utter the word God or say that I believe in Jesus that means I am ordering you to worship. If only it were that easy.
You won’t be able to understand this, but in Christianity it is your or my choice to believe. To be honest I don’t care what you believe just don’t tell me I can’t express myself in public while your wearing your “I had an Abortion” T-shirt at your local NARAL rally.
This of course brings into play the favorite phrase “Seperation between Church and State”. If you actually read the Constitution you will not find this phrase anywhere. The phrase was written by T. Jefferson in a letter he sent to a church leader. In the 30’s or 40’s a Supreme court judge decided to use this letter in a case and ever since the Left uses this phrase at their leisure.
Isn’t it amazing what you can learn by reading something besides the NY Times.
Brooks does have an interesting point. I don’t know why we can’t have national referendum on this and other issues. I believe it is time to redefine democracy now that we have so many advances in communications. However, I suppose with electronic voting we can have the potential for fraudulence, as has been suspected in the past election.
It is not always clear what truth is. Money and influence control our news, entertainment, and education. People join cliques,clubs, and organizations that can skew their minds to a certain way of thinking. Adults become convinced they have the truth cornered, but their sources are perhaps quarter truths or outright lies. The democratic party is in trouble. It does not represent the interests of the powerful. And yet working people(the vast majority), who would be better served by the party that represents the working class, are voting REPUBLICAN. Why is this?
Media control (as mentioned)
Democratic party betrays itself by ignoring the rights of the most innocent and defenceless group (the unborn).
Instead of making alliances with people of religion, the democratic party chooses to make alliances with the homosexuals and the militant feminists.
Now on progressive talk radio (which I listen to because they expose the right for the lying cheating bastards that they are) I have to be annoyed with emphasis on cristo-fascist death cult and similar baloney. Of course there are some wackos out there. But most Christians did not want this war. Certainly JP2 did everything in his power to dissuade Bush and company. Even Pat Buchanan was highly critical of Bush. People of money wanted this war and you know who else. But nobody dares say it. Yes, the power group having 4 letters starting with J.
For {kindness}
April 22nd, 2005 at 10:46 pmHow can a first trimester be a clump of cells, and a third trimester be a human being? Lucky for you, you had mother who thinks different than you do. Remember your life is a gift, you did not make yourself, and you are more than just a bunch of cells. Think on it for more than a few seconds.
Witch,
Now you’ve made it all clear. If I utter the word God or say that I believe in Jesus that means I am ordering you to worship.
No, Pat. If you order me to worship, that means you are ordering me to worship.
http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Imperative_mood#Imperative_mood
April 22nd, 2005 at 10:56 pmAndros,
April 22nd, 2005 at 11:05 pmMaybe you should read what you wrote, Rainman.
To be honest this is all becoming very boring.
What is the main difference between the Right and the Left? Moral Relativism.
Sorry to throw such a lofty term at you on the left but it’s quite simple. I believe most things are black & white, right & wrong. Where you on the left think everything is grey. You can not see the difference between our Military killing terrorists and the terrorists killing innocent people. You just see it all as killing and then want to know why the terrorists want to kill us. I just want to kill the terrorists because their the bad guys. You see no difference between killing a baby and killing a convicted murderer.
If you weren’t so self absorbed you would see that things really are black & white.
But here’s the real reason your a moral relativist. You want to do what ever makes you feel good without taking responsibilty for your actions. Therefore you don’t want to be involved with people or an organization that will hold you accountable for your actions. And what better way to hold yourself accountable than following Natural Law, which was written by who, God. Uh Oh there’s that word again.
And here’s where it all comes together. The Founding Fathers based the founding of this Country on Natural Law and the belief in God. “We hold these truths self-evident, that all Men are created equal,that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.”
God Bless America
I agree, your pointless arguments are boring! You’re not saying anything new or adding anything to the discussion…except to tell us that God wrote natural law (and your proof is?!!)
The founding fathers spoke of a natural god, not the Christian God (your God)… and they understood religion in quite different terms than you do. Jefferson, the writer of the Declaration of Independence wrote extensively about the subject… Dare to research it?
As for the US Constitution…it does not mention God once!
I don’t understand why you’re so keen on throwing God at us!!!! If you know the truth, rejoice and just leave us alone to discuss the issues using reason, not God this the Bible that…
Oh, speaking of the Bible, just reading it (I mean really reading all the parts) you’ll see how moral relativism has applied been applied! I mean, back in biblical times you, a woman, wouldn’t even dare to speak against me, a man! Unless, of course, like your absolute truth is good for ever and ever…. Wanna buy some slaves?
The main difference is that you want us to believe and act your ways… It bothers you that we don’t see your angels and don’t believe your superstitions…. We don’t care whether you accept our version and we don’t care if you don’t accept our ways. You see, you need God for comfort. You’re afraid. You’re not sure of yourself and want constant and “higher” confirmations of your actions…. I’m sure you’re into the bargaining game too…. you know, “please God I’ll do this or that for you so you will take care of me”…..
Fear, bargaining, and not using the mind your God gave you to think independently, question, lead an examined life. I know, it’s easier if you don’t think…
April 23rd, 2005 at 12:18 amWow, Rainman your Drivel becomes less comprehensive as the night goes on. It is amazing how often you pukes miss the point. This Great country of ours was founded for many reasons. One of which is freedom from religious persecution. Not to be free from religious expression.
April 23rd, 2005 at 12:47 amNever have I wrote that you have to worship or believe in my God. But you and your ilk always throw that agruement in the face of any christian when all we’re doing is expressing ourselves. Which is more offensive me speaking of God or you in a Gay Pride parade walking down a public street with your ass hanging of your leather chaps screaching the latest crude queer chant.
You certainly try to sound informed, but your very transparent. But now that I think about it you have probably been informed(indoctrinated) by some left wing professors. Or, maybe you have watched to many Michael Moore movies. Which ever the case try reading the Dec. of Ind. and the Constitution you might come away with a different perspective if you really try.
Talk about not adding to a conversation, you must have a DNC or Move-On.org talking point hand book in front of you right now wishing you we’re Al Franken behind the Air America mic.
By the way I’m a man. Isn’t is rather narrow minded of you to think I’m a woman just because my name is Pat. Is Andros short for Androgynous. Just curious.
All of you are missing the big picture here. Religion is modern mythology. I am sorry to burst your bubble Pat but Jesus or Joshua ( Sorry to tell you this but Jesus was a Jew). Jesus was the first Progressive, he fought against the Jewish Orthodoxy. During its time and even now the Orthodox Jewish religion was and is oppressive to its people. Jesus seeing this oppressiveness decided to change all of this. He talked about FREE LOVE, he talked about removing the power from the Rabbis and placing it within the people, the whole you can save yourself bit. It was only after his death that the people who followed him used his struggle and finally his death to gain power by creating the current structure of the Christian Catholic church. Also I doubt you fully read your own Book Pat, yeah its called the Bible and In Exodus 21:22-25 we read that if a man accidentally kills a pregnant woman, that man should be condemned for committing murder. However, if he only kills the fetus – that is, if she miscarries – he is not condemned for murder. Clearly, then, God does not consider the pre-born fetus as being the same as a human being, in which case the Commandment of “Thou Shalt Not Kill (a human)” does not apply.
April 23rd, 2005 at 3:12 amnow on your comments about being indocrined by left wing professors, HA. listen right wing ideaology is just that Pat ideology, and if there are more professors who teach “libralism” I hope you know that liberal comes from liberate. anyway if more people agreed with you they would want to teach your ideas and beliefs, but you are wrong there is nothing about it. I am sorry, its just the plain truth, I am not trying to be “elitist”, it comes out that way because there are no emotions through type, only emotions that you read between the lines. Look instead of fighting with us why dont you do some research and realize your true enemy are the heads of the corporations. The people in power also dont represent you, they are using you and your types to fight against us ordinary people about stupid things. Why not fight against the corpos who are polluting our food supply with mercury which causes more fetal problems and deaths then abortions? why not fight against the corpos who have killed millions of innocent people and children ( full grown children ) in other countries just so we could have their natural resources? The war in Iraq was over the oil, think of the oil as beer, ok? I bet youve been to a kegger party right? well who has the power during that party? if you said the person pumping the beer then you are correct, same thing with the oil. But i dont expect you to believe me or listen to me, you will find some way to make it so that the truth, more exactly your truth will be that i am lying, that we all are lying. But if you could do yourself a favor and for 5 minutes out of your time each day research these people whom you feel respect you and represent you you will find hypocrisies and evil more so than us lowly liberals. there was a man in the republican party who just married his gay lover, this after he fought hard to outlaw homosexuality, rick santourums wife had a miscarriage and he brought his dead fetus home with him to show his children, tom delays own father died because tom delay and his family didnt put him on dialisis. there is so much hypocrasy that you my friend are just getting your news from little sound bytes and if you are by any change watching anything or reading you are reading propeganda not from the government but from the companies that own the news.
April 23rd, 2005 at 3:41 ami made a mistake its not communion, sorry its confessional
April 23rd, 2005 at 3:42 amYou no good tree humping liberal. I bet you werent hit with a belt when you were a child. Jesus isnt a Jew. Jesus is a white man!!!!! corporations are good for us all, I bet you are Pinko comie too. Why dont you go to Canada or France, just get out of this country, if you dont like things then dont say notin. as the guy on fox says just shut up!
April 23rd, 2005 at 3:49 amDear Tony,
I commend you for standing up and speaking the truth. As an anti-abortion, adult, professional woman, I know how difficult it is for a man to be heard amongst angry women on this topic. I know, because I used to be one. But you must understand, it’s a change of heart that make a change on the abortion issue…No amount of talk could make me change my pro-choice stand. I used to vote based on that issue. It wasnt until I was able to let go of my pride and self indulgence that I realize I was victimizing another in the name of choice. Until that happens, until people give up the “me first” mentality, they wont acknowledge the precious life that is begun at conception. Because it cannot speak, it has no value. Because it cannot think like us, it has no value…life becomes a serious of what is valuable and what is not. I now know that life is indeed valuable, and sometimes, that life trumps my desire to do as I please. I changed, but it wasnt until it was too late.
April 23rd, 2005 at 4:12 amDear Locke,
Your paraphrase of Exodus is not exactly correct, and is also not interpreted correctly.
If in a fight amongst men, the pregnant wife is struck:
The striking man must pay any amount requested by the husband if the wife lives but miscarries as a result of the injury.
If the wife and child die then the strikers life is required.
I read this as: case one is not deemed a deliberate homicide, because the power of the blow is lesser. Not that the childs life has less value.
April 23rd, 2005 at 7:46 amI keep pinching myself hoping I will wake up from this nightmare of the righties believing all this crap that is being fed to them by the Repukes. Can they not see and understand that they are voting against their own self interests? Why is Tom Delay under attack about his unethical behavior? Because he is unethical! This administration doesn’t care about anything except lining their own pockets before they get voted out of office. Pat, just think about your own life – is it better since this administration has been in office? I’m betting, if you are part of the middle class, that it’s a whole lot worse. I know mine is. Bush and Co. is keeping the country off kilter by constantly keeping these issues that should be personal choices in our faces everyday so we don’t think about what is really happening to the economy, our health care system, etc. The top 1% of our nation makes more than the bottom 95% combined. Does that sound like compassionate conservatives to you? Just think with your brain and look at what’s going on instead of getting caught up in emotion.
April 23rd, 2005 at 10:27 amdemosthenes
You are an particularly ignorant person. I suppose you think the white race is superior based on you benighted belief that Jesus was white. People born in the middle east tend to be brown skinned. Many african americans believe Christ was black due to that region’s close proximity to Africa. I’m sure Jesus is looking down on you in pity for your obvious racial prejudice. And dude, read your Bible; Jesus was a Jewish man! Maybe you ignorant hicks are too busy pickn’ up yer next beer to read the good book.
April 23rd, 2005 at 11:22 amI suppose yer’ one a them nazi assholes or a kkk to boot. Burn any crosses lately? As the fox guy says, I think ya’ll should shut up; at least until ya bring yer IQ up a notch er’ two. I wish ya’ll would go away into yer own little hell/nation of your own making. Then ya kin beat yer woman and string up a few blacks and live happily ever after. Either that or I can’t wait till your so-called religious leaders ask ya’ll ta have some cyanide koolaid like the brainwashed lemmings ya are. Ok Bumpas?
Before I post i would like to ask if we could refrain from name calling. It’s not constructive and doesn’t lend itself to intelligent conversation. Let’s try to remember that we all have a right to our own opinions. Pat mentioned in one of his previous posts that those on the left get upset at the mention of god. I think he has a point there but I think it is not for the reasons that he stated. I think people just get tired of having god and the bible thrown at them by people that are not living what they preach. Now, I am not saying that pat is one of these people but there is an overwhelming majority of people that use the bible to condemn people when it is convenient for them. I have heard many many pasters, priests, reverends etc say that you can not pick and choose the parts of the bible that you want to believe. If this is true then it applies to everyone, not just those you are trying to condem. An example of this is when people try to use Leviticus against the gay community. Unless you yourself are living ALL of the codes in Leviticus you have no right trying to use it against someone else. That means keeping kosher, absolutely NO phisical contact with any woman during her menstral cycle and of course putting to death children that curse their parents. Unless you are following all of these codes you can not pick out one to condem others. Now many Christians say that Leviticus is old testament and has been updated by the new testament. Same rules apply, if you are going to disregard the old testament in favor of the new then you can not go back and grab the parts of it that are convenient for you at the time. Otherwise you yourself are picking and choosing and if it is ok for you to do that then it is ok for others to do the same. I think that is the reason why those on the left feel so frustrated. Not becuase they think that religion is wrong or that you should not beleive in God, Jesus, Allah etc. but becuase many many people USE the bible as a tool to condemn but don’t actually LIVE it themselves. That is hipocrisy and the arugument of a hipocrit is without merit and extremely frustrating. I think many people on the left are just tired of hearing “Do as I say, not as I do”
April 23rd, 2005 at 12:21 pmIn addition, Pat had mentioned that he is working to have legsiation passed in his home state to make marriage between one man and one woman. Is that not creating a “special” law to satisfy the desires of one group of people?
Recently there was a church, forgive me for not remembering which one, it was a late night news story, that issued a statement saying that Cahtolic was not a true religion, Judaism was not a true religion and they went on to name a few others. Isn’t this in violation of judge not lest ye be judged? Would these people like their religion discounted by others? Remember, do unto others as you would have done unto you? It is these inconsistancies that has not only divided the nation but has also divided the religions. In the end floks it comes down to this. We are never all going to agree and nobody is ever right 100% of the time but we do have to co-exist. Lets get past our egos and work together. Disagreement is always going to be a part of life. What will ultimately define us as human beings is how we learn to resolve our differences.
Tony in posting #23
If a woman doesn’t want to get pregnant, then it’s pretty simple–don’t have intercourse. Now rape is an exception and so allowances can obviously be made. So if you have plans for education, career, don’t have intercourse. You CAN control your own destiny.
Anyone here get the impression that Tony himself “Don’t have intercourse”?
April 23rd, 2005 at 1:03 pmEveryone told me that demosthenes’ momma was a lousy lay, but I wanted to find out for myself. Damn, they were right!
April 23rd, 2005 at 1:13 pmAgainst abortion? Cut off your dick.
April 23rd, 2005 at 1:34 pmNikkiho
I agree with what you are saying-a very nice commentary. Once in a while though, a person like myself needs to rid myself of some angst and blow off some steam. Especially when dealing with someone like ol’ demosthenes-buddy. Then it can be fun to be sarcastic. It can be emotionally gratifying at such times to more or less say, “right back at ya.” As a women at risk of losing many rights to these facist lemmings, it sometimes feels good to lower myself to their id centered functioning!
April 23rd, 2005 at 1:35 pmLynai
While I feel for the saddness of your experience, you should not have the right to make that decision for the rest of woman-kind. As intelligent adults, we should be able to make our own decisions. If a woman does not value an embryo smaller than the period at the end of this sentence, she should not be forced by someone else’s judgement, like your own, to be pregnant. After raising an entire family, my grandmother at the age of 50 became pregnant and had an abortion. She did not regret it as she had with difficulty raised a family through the awful great depression and was very tired and more than deserved a retirement! Her children were all grown up, and she was ready to become a Grandmother, not starting all over with a baby at that age! You and especially ol’ Tony, should NOT be able to make decisions for other adults.
I still think no-choice men should not even be concerned about this issue as they can never be pregnant, and this will never concern their bodies. Since I don’t believe they can really be that worried over an embryo the size of a dot, it seems a very thinnly veiled desire to control women.
April 23rd, 2005 at 2:44 pmAs a male who can’t get pregnant, it seems to me that Andros’s comment that “if the ‘other side’ were more reasonable, we could find common ground, as in reducing unwanted pregnacies and, in extentio, abortions” is the key.
How can any honest man oppose abortion for women and not support every effort to alleviate the factors that drive women to get abortions?
If you want to have a public debate about abortion first establish sensible sex education, effective and available birth control, universal health care, reasonable child care, and a society that provides all its citizens a decent life. Then find some way to put males who don’t practice abstinence in the same boat as the women who don’t practice abstinence.
April 23rd, 2005 at 6:32 pmI hear ya Cheryl and I certainly know the feeling.
April 23rd, 2005 at 7:20 pmIf you want to have a public debate about abortion first establish sensible sex education, effective and available birth control, universal health care, reasonable child care, and a society that provides all its citizens a decent life. Then find some way to put males who don’t practice abstinence in the same boat as the women who don’t practice abstinence. Comment by Lee Russ
Well, that’s the crux of the matter. But, the problem is that the same people who oppose a woman’s reproductive choices also oppose sex ed, planned parenthood/birth control, and, yes, universal health care.
Like many other issues, there is an emotional reaction that leads to a rigid position, where rational arguments are not made, but name-calling is. If someone does not accept your right to live your life the way you want, even in “sin” and against their perceived morality, there is little common ground–for understanding and for co-operation.
On many occasions I had a conversation with those who oppose abortion and suggested that we all want to reduce abortions and unwanted pregnacies. But, because of their religious beliefs they didn’t want to hear about sex ed. condoms, etc…. which leads to a dead-end.
Besides, when they bring as “proof” or as an argument the Bible this, the Bible that….. then not much can be achieved if the other party doesn’t accept the Bible as the irrefutable universal truth!
Ah, well. We also have to realize that many discussions don’t take place in order to advance knowledge and understanding…. Oh, and shouting out the other side makes some people feel secure in their knowledge of being right!
April 23rd, 2005 at 9:42 pm< those of us who find it hard to believe that hard-lined conservatives feel justified in trashing a 200-year-old Senate tradition because of their belief that a single Supreme Court decision is illegitimate and must, at all costs, be overruled.>
In light of the fact that former Illinois Representative came out and stated that the driving reason for the impeachment of Bill Clinton was revenge for the forced retirement of Richard Nixon, I find it very easy to believe that the ultra right wing religious extremists would tarash the filibuster over the Roe v. Wade decision
April 24th, 2005 at 1:05 amThese are our nation’s darkest times. Corporations have bought our country and they hate women, patriarchy’s biggest threat. They are Machiavellian princes, using religion to deal with the uppity- woman problem, knowing when all reason and logic fail to justify male supremacy, gaaawd and the bible he wrote (The History of Evil Women) will.
Their liberal opposition is weakened because progressives are as testerical as conservatives at the notion of accepting partnership with women and being perceived as girlie men. The crises that will destroy freedom, indeed the entire planet, is The Masculinty Crises. Contempt for women is the worldwide religion.
Men don’t raise boys to be men, they raise them to not be women. Unless that changes we’re all going up in dick-shaped, mushroom clouds. Yee Haw.
April 24th, 2005 at 10:03 amAndros, #40 & #75 — BRAVO my articulate fellow poster!!
April 25th, 2005 at 3:00 pmhoodia gordonii
You are invited to visit some relevant pages about xenical diet pill weight loss pills
November 18th, 2005 at 11:25 pm