Democrats need to drop their pro-choice stance

I agree, it's sick. story

I don't like how smaller groups take hold of a party and promote their views as though the whole party backs them.

 

I agree with you on some of these points girl.

The Democrats have lost touch with their supposed base. The poor and the minorities. Many of them didn't even vote because they know nothing will change for them.
Liberals need to stop being condescending and accept that some lifestyles are different. They are proud to be rednecks, let's face it. We need to give them some leeway as to their lifestyles. We are not necessarily superior. I know some humble, good and hardworking rural people.

 

YES

Not necessarily. But when is the last time you heard a pop star or Hollywood actor (other than Mel Gibson) - or for that matter, any person famous for anything other than politics or religious intolerance - protesting the "homosexual agenda"?

You're a dumbass. At least get your facts straight before you post them on here and get humiliated.

Umm...Good genes? Good upbringing? What the hell kind of question is that? How should I know?

Yes I've been to Alabama along with most other states. And while not all of the stereotypes are true, the people are very intolerant and closed-minded when it comes to anything that doesn't match their religious views.

Perhaps they're the poorest in the nation because they wish to turn back the clock to the Puritan age, thus leading to a brain drain where all their intelligent citizens just want to get the hell out.

 

LOL Ashawn i love you girl!

 

annoying lil mosquito...

 

I just read an article, and that may be what Democrats need to do in order to win back some votes. Bush got about 45% of the Hispanic vote, which is tradtionally Democrat. Democrats have to realize that most hispanics are Roman Catholic, and that moral stances are very important to them, that is why so many Hispanics voted for Bush this election.

 

Well, I know I said dumping the pro-choice slant would kill the party but I have a secret that I haven't been able to tell people.

When I look very hard inside myself, hard enough to consult my inner voice; it tells me abortion is basically wrong. This has caused me a great deal of consternation.

I know outlawing it could lead to horrible things like back alley abortions and children suffering in poverty, but take away those factors and I cannot think of anyway it is right. Somebody convince me otherwise, please? Perhaps if I am presented with a persuasive argument my inner voice will change it's mind: my life would be easier if it did.

It is really hard for me to hold this belief inside myself at rallies and among my pro-choice friends, but I am afraid my secret is becoming cancerous. I become a bit angry when I hear women talk about "the right to chose" and the "right to control their own bodies" for me, these are not persuasive arguments.

That aside, I do not think that a poor woman who has no other option is wrong in having an abortion, I think the society is wrong in allowing both situations to occur in the richest country in the world. I wonder if more abortions are conducted under Republican or Democratic governments, as republicans are geniuses at producing the enviroment that abortions are more likely to occur in.

I do not believe in any way that gay marriage is wrong, but I think the solution to the problem is simple. Allow any two people to have a "Civil Union" and whether or not is is called a "marriage" can be left to the individual and his/her church.: it's only fair.

 

Because a few cells growing in a womb are not in any way the moral equivalent to a human being. Those cells cannot think or feel pain, and are not aware of their own existence.

 

Then again, this callousness becomes indefensible, in light of the gruesome reality of abortion:

http://www.priestsforlife.org/resources/photosbyage/index.htm

http://www.priestsforlife.org/resources/photosassorted/index.htm

http://www.priestsforlife.org/resources/dc/index.htm

 

Once again, an appeal to emotion, completely devoid of any reason whatsoever.

 

By the way, Kandahar's assertion about fetal pain is patently false:

http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/fetal_pain/index.html

 

Huck:

Can you ever provide a link to information that supports your assertions that ISN'T a blatantly biased "pro-life" site? People might take you more seriously if you could cite some unbiased science-based sources, rather than the NRLC or a group of priests.

Just a thought....

 

Ellis,

The Priests for Life pages contain nothing but pictures. Are you trying to claim that they're all fake? The NRLC page contains links to expert testimony before Congress and medical journal articles. Try actually dealing with this information instead of smugly dismissing it.

 

Not claiming that at all, but it IS a possibility, I guess. (wouldn't be the first time that the clergy tried bullshitting people) But at the very least, they are all handpicked to promote a specific viewpoint arrived at through religious faith, rather than impartial analysis.

It IS quite troubling that every picture I looked at was "authenticated" by the SAME pathologist, Abigail Allen. A search on Dr. Allen shows her "work" being cited by a slew of pro-life extremist sites, but NOBODY ELSE. Has she published in any peer-reviewed journals? What are her qualifications Re: early fetal development? What are her personal views on abortion?

Again, a "cherrypicked" collection of testimony and articles that support their predetermined position. Did they present ALL the testimony that was given, or ALL the medical journal articles published (or a meta-analysis thereof)? I didn't think so....

I AM dealing with it by considering the source. Just as I won't accept information about a political candidate from "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth", or "Free Republic", I won't be expecting unbiased analysis of the ethics of abortion from the "National Right to Life Committee" or "Priests for Life", any more than you would from NARAL or Planned Parenthood.

 

Why don't you e-mail Priests for Life with these questions? I've directed some skeptical questions to them on other matters and found them quite responsive.

That's a total copout. You're still ignoring the information instead of engaging it.

You could also learn more about fetal pain by researching fetal surgery:

http://www.fetal-surgery.com

I wouldn't hesitate to debate specific factual claims by NARAL or Planned Parenthood.

 

Democrat or not Democrat, I will never give up my pro choice stance. I was very impressed with the man that posted to say that he doesn't like abortion, and is an adoptive parent, but didn't wish to mess around with any womans uterus. My first comment to pro lifers is how many of the unwanted children have you adopted this year?? I never understand how they can scream for justice for the poor murdered babies but never do they turn thier heads to look at the horribly over crowded foster care system. Do most women give up thier babies as newborns?? NO! Several fucked up years down the road is when the government gets to take over. Then they get bounced around in an overcrowded and grossly unsuitable foster care system. I always wonder how many prolifers have ever been an unwanted child?? What is more, I sure as fuck don't want some man, or woman for that matter, that i've never laid eyes on, to have the ability to tell me that I must carry a baby to full term no matter how I may feel about the baby, the pregnancy, or the circumstances I am bringing the child into. Nor do I want anyone to have that kind of power over anyone else. I could never personally have an abortion, but that is not the point. We are already an overpopulated world, with miserable unwanted children everywhere. If you want to "save" a baby, go to your local foster care system and adopt a few out of the seemlingly neverending supply. I agree with you that abortion should not be used for birthcontrol and that there ought to be alot more education than there is today. We ought to have better affordable health care so more women could seek methods of birthcontrol. Like I said, I could never personally have an abortion, but I would never ever presume that I know better than another woman, what she should do with her body. And it is her body. Pregnancy is such a difficult thing. How in the world could anyone want to force another person through such a thing if she didn't want it?? What would become of society then. What would women do if they didn't want to have babies, back to back door abortions in hotel rooms with women left to bleed to death on the floor?? It is a very difficult issue, but i believe it to be a personal one for every man and woman. It is not my place to choose for anyone else, and certainly isn't anyones elses place to choose for me!

 

I'm with you. I would guess that many other "Democrats" feel the same way. The party has allowed a minority of feminist extremists to define the whole Democratic party's position. At least the commonly assumed position. Therefore we all get branded as the "morally loose", as "baby killers". I don't like it one bit. Also as I've said many times, our party helps to lessen the number of abortions. We believe in education, whereas the republicans don't, they prefer to naively believe that if you don't teach kids how to have safe sex, they won't have any sex at all! It's ridiculous. Yet democrats never point that out, they merely spout off about "it's a woman's body" etc.

 

So you must believe that a fetus is not a "life", not a "baby"? What if the father wanted to raise the child, it is his baby too right? No one can help how the reproductive biology of humans is arranged. Women carry the child, it's not a man's fault, although many feminists like to blame men for everything. The bottom line is this, if you don't want to have a baby, don't get pregnant.

"Poor murdered babies"....I can sense the sarcasm and it is just sick. Do you have any sources to back up your claims btw....."only pro-choice people adopt"? right....

So a foster child would be better off dead?? Is that what you're saying?! Do you think they wish they'd been aborted?

You do have the right to not have a baby, it's called not getting pregnant. It's not about your body, your uterus. There is a life in there, separate from you. If pictures of bloody casualties of the Iraq war move you, then so should dismembered fetuses. No one has the right to end someone else's life. It's really simple.

If she "didn't want it", why is she pregnant? Are we supposed to feel sympathetic because "pregnancy is a difficult thing"? Is that a good reason to kill someone? Pro-choice people are selfish, that's all it comes down to.

 

**

Abortion Thread, Page 28, 277, Post on 27/08/04

Is abortion right or wrong, well I’ll tell you one thing it is repulsive, but then so is war and dropping bombs when it is known that many will kill totally innocent men, women and children. But many of the Christian right that shout the loudest about being against abortion are often the ones that defend such actions as being for the ‘greater good’.

In my view war can be necessary but I also think that all other practical avenues that might avoid it must be explored. The other thing with war is that if it is threatening or is needed then the circumstances and problems that have mean it is imminent have been overlooked or ignored.

So to me if there is a bloody conflict it is it is never glorious and a time for waving flags it is a failure and we should feel collective shamed. I think the same of abortion. But that doesn’t mean I would not necessarily support a war or an abortion.

So like conflict, shouldn’t we be asking why it has got to such a repulsive point? What can we do to limit or stop the seeming necessity of the action.

This is where the anti-abortionist seem to me to show the paucity of their argument which seems to be based on the idea that since they (and in many cases their religion) says it is wrong then it must be stopped. When it comes to the social, economic and cultural problems that cause the large amount of abortions in the US they don’t seem to have many realistic ideas.


**