Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
RandomNumbers
RandomNumbers's Journal
RandomNumbers's Journal
May 16, 2019
I wonder, if every time we see an unhinged comment on social media that blares about "baby killers", we responded with a blare back about "woman killers", would that at least start to get some attention to the side effects of these policies?
I've noted elsewhere that I think the people driving the chattelization of women, are in it for the increased control they get from creating increased dependency. Nothing will get through to THEM. But THEY aren't the majority, they are just the instigators. Convince the majority that the "cure" (banning abortions) is actually worse than the "disease" (some women having abortions). Then maybe we turn this tide.
The article has much more and is well worth the read. I've chosen a couple paragraphs below, but you really should go to the link and read the whole article.
Call them what they are: woman killers.
Subject line is my takeaway from this excellent article.
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/features/a10033320/pro-life-abortion/
The article words it a little differently, but it comes down to that, and I agree:
If anti-abortionists are going to keep calling pro-choice people baby killers, then it’s time to start referring to them for what they are: people who would kill women.
At the very least, they are people who will stand by cheerfully, smugly, while they enact a system that leads to 14-year-old girls drinking rat poison.
That is unconscionable.
At the very least, they are people who will stand by cheerfully, smugly, while they enact a system that leads to 14-year-old girls drinking rat poison.
That is unconscionable.
I wonder, if every time we see an unhinged comment on social media that blares about "baby killers", we responded with a blare back about "woman killers", would that at least start to get some attention to the side effects of these policies?
I've noted elsewhere that I think the people driving the chattelization of women, are in it for the increased control they get from creating increased dependency. Nothing will get through to THEM. But THEY aren't the majority, they are just the instigators. Convince the majority that the "cure" (banning abortions) is actually worse than the "disease" (some women having abortions). Then maybe we turn this tide.
The article has much more and is well worth the read. I've chosen a couple paragraphs below, but you really should go to the link and read the whole article.
But then, don’t we have it so much better than so many other countries? Well, in terms of women’s reproductive health, not especially.
The Federalist makes an argument that women should not be dressing up to protest restrictions on abortion in Ohio because, “To compare restrictions on abortion… to the abuses many women still suffer around the world today is both intellectually insulting and downright dishonest… In Saudi Arabia, women aren’t allowed to drive, wear makeup, or clothes that 'show off their beauty.'”
Pretending that women should remain quiet on the topic of their rights because women have it worse in other countries is absurd. We do not live in other countries. This argument should carry all the weight of a C student, who, when told to do better by their parents, replies by shouting, “I could be getting Fs! I could be shooting heroin into my eyeballs!” Which is to say, it should carry no weight at all.
The Federalist makes an argument that women should not be dressing up to protest restrictions on abortion in Ohio because, “To compare restrictions on abortion… to the abuses many women still suffer around the world today is both intellectually insulting and downright dishonest… In Saudi Arabia, women aren’t allowed to drive, wear makeup, or clothes that 'show off their beauty.'”
Pretending that women should remain quiet on the topic of their rights because women have it worse in other countries is absurd. We do not live in other countries. This argument should carry all the weight of a C student, who, when told to do better by their parents, replies by shouting, “I could be getting Fs! I could be shooting heroin into my eyeballs!” Which is to say, it should carry no weight at all.
May 9, 2019
Please go to the link to read the entire article.
Disclaimer: I truly am undecided and will support the Democratic nominee in the General Election.
Politifact: Was Joe Biden a climate change pioneer in Congress? History says yes
This article fact-checks a statement Biden is making on the campaign trail. But it's also an interesting (and sad) look back at how badly we as a nation have whiffed on the climate change issue; when people like Biden and Gore, and Jimmy Carter with the solar panels on the White House, have been raising the alarm for literally DECADES.
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/may/08/joe-biden/was-joe-biden-climate-change-pioneer-congress-hist/
...
Paul Bledsoe, a former Clinton White House climate staff member who is now a strategic advisor at the Progressive Policy Institute, told us Biden deserves his due.
"Without question, Biden was among the earliest supporters of climate change action in Congress," Bledsoe said. "His 1987 bill was focused on forcing the Reagan Administration to establish a wide-ranging White House Task Force on Climate Change, a critical action that in fact was not taken until the Clinton Administration, so it was both prescient and influential on long-term policy."
Our ruling
Biden said, "I’m one of the first guys to introduce a climate change bill, way, way back in ‘87."
There had been some high-profile hearings about climate change on the Hill, as well as a non-binding resolution prior to Biden’s proposal. But he is credited with introducing the first climate change bill.
We rate this True.
Paul Bledsoe, a former Clinton White House climate staff member who is now a strategic advisor at the Progressive Policy Institute, told us Biden deserves his due.
"Without question, Biden was among the earliest supporters of climate change action in Congress," Bledsoe said. "His 1987 bill was focused on forcing the Reagan Administration to establish a wide-ranging White House Task Force on Climate Change, a critical action that in fact was not taken until the Clinton Administration, so it was both prescient and influential on long-term policy."
Our ruling
Biden said, "I’m one of the first guys to introduce a climate change bill, way, way back in ‘87."
There had been some high-profile hearings about climate change on the Hill, as well as a non-binding resolution prior to Biden’s proposal. But he is credited with introducing the first climate change bill.
We rate this True.
Please go to the link to read the entire article.
Disclaimer: I truly am undecided and will support the Democratic nominee in the General Election.
Profile Information
Gender: Do not displayHome country: US
Member since: Sat Jun 4, 2005, 09:56 AM
Number of posts: 17,595