General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Being pro-life doesn’t make me any less of a lefty [View all]Mc Mike
(9,114 posts)you argue from the theoretical point of view of a rank-and-file 'pro-lifer'. The actual rank-and-file on that side double-think all ways, all the time.
The single cell zygote is incredibly hard to sell to the average American as 'a child, not a choice', but that doesn't stop the top level management of the movement from opposing hormonal contraception and the morning after pills. Management is the extremists like Randall Terry, James Dobson, Ralph Reed, and Ratzinger-'Benedict', on the organizing front. It's all the extremist repug candidates like Mourdock, Akin, Walsh, Romney Ryan, Tom Smith, Santorum, on the political front. It's the extreme propagandists like O'Reilly and Limbaugh on the 'news' front. All of them have pushed insane opinions with absolutely no resulting drop off or pull back from the rank-and-file membership. R & Fs 'keep their eyes on the prize' and keep backing these atrocious leaders.
By saying 'opposition to birth control is far less divisive', you're saying that the extremist leaders haven't swayed a significant portion of the population to adopt their view. But they have that view, and will do what they want, and the average follower won't stop following them. Roe v Wade was settled decades ago, but repugs never let a loss go. They wait, then come back and re-litigate it. They're doing it with Jim Crow, labor rights, Social Security, Medicare, trickle-down economics, and reproductive rights, right now. In order to consolidate their attack on women's rights, they have to say the zygote is a 'person'. They have to say there is no rape, there is no pregnancy from rape, rape is like bearing a child out of wedlock, 'god intends' pregnancy from rape, the electorate wants no exception for incest, pregnancy never threatens the mother's life, the pill isn't used for non-contraception medical purposes, you have to take a pill every time you have intercourse, all insane lies. The rank and file backs these swine, anyway.
But you say there's no mainstream movement to outlaw contraception. There's no actual 'mainstream' movement to outlaw abortion, either. Just a powerful group of fringe extremists with a double-thinking rank and file. When l'il bush got in, he campaigned on 'compassionate conservatism' and America staying out of world affairs. Everyone knew he was going to attack all social programs and go to war, everyone who was being honest with themselves. It wasn't just me who knew it, I'm not Nostradamus. During his swinish pro-life reign, I can't count the number of times individual Dems I talked to decried some horrible war move or draconian slasher attack on any program that helps the American people, and I said to them 'You knew he was going to do this when he got in'. Not to shut them up, but to commiserate with them on the awful truth of the issues. And they always agreed, they knew. But you don't know the actual impetus motivation driving-force thinking goals results and policy of the people in charge of your theoretical pro life rank and filer's movement. 2 + 2 = 4.
The attack on Sandra Fluke was a mainstream 'pro-life' attack on contraception, whether your theoretical rank and file pro-lifer agrees with the move, or not. The repug media, pols, religious leaders, movement leaders, all agreed and agree with it. The rank and file came out of it backing Fox, repugs, and the religious Right. I'm baffled by who your theoretical mainstream rank-and-file pro lifer can point to as influential to the movement but not on board with the anti-Fluke policy and goals, or what they could point to as something the movement has done besides the anti-Fluke attack, or the 18 zillion state and Federal level legislative attacks by repug politicians on women's rights, because the movement 'twisted' the repugs' arm. Oh, I forgot, the movement has done another thing. It spawned in-your-face physically threatening people who range all the way up to assassins, with wanted posters and national broadcasts against 'Tiller the Baby Killer.'
We'd be better off verbally hashing this out, or you could d.u. mail me for a back and forth, because this thread is getting huge.
But Tiller's murder is not a one-off for the 'pro-life' mainstream. The killer was well-involved with Terry and pro-life movements. After the murder, my former bishop, Wuerl, met with Terry in D.C. The mainstream pro life repug media, politicians, religious and movement leaders still have the same rank-and-file followers, and the same goal. To shut down the last abortion clinic providing life-saving service to women in the whole state of Kansas, though it's established law by the highest court in the nation that women have that right. Oh, the guy got killed. Women he treated may die. Too bad. 'Pro-life'.
I'm a Catholic, so it's ironic that you can counsel me to 'not tar all the members of the movement with the same brush', as your way of advocating for the movement the church inspires, and aspires to fulfill. If you're a Catholic and don't speak out against the movement, as a continuing rank and file member, you're culpably indictable of its worst acts. All members of religious Muslim sects that inspired violent attacks are to blame if they stay with that congregation and don't forcefully oppose that violence, in the precinct of worship and among coreligious. If I took your advice, and didn't speak against it, I'd be a theoretical mainstream rank-and-file Catholic pro-lifer, who could be tarred by the same brush and indicted for my religious extremist group's actions. Opposing the aims and moves of Zubic, Wuerl, and Ratzinger is the only way to stay untarred. You encourage me to get tarred by warning me not to tar others. Har dee tar har.