Young women who voted for Bush:

[scottxyz]

You're gonna miss Roe vs. Wade!

[Anarcho-Socialist]

1. You're baby-making machines now

[Malva Zebrina]

9. Yup, your uterus is a vessel

and it belongs to bloviating fat men who make laws out of their fear of your blood and sexuality.

[Doohickie]

55. An option would be gone but

Most women aren't running around having casual sex and getting knocked up, are they?

If they are, perhaps a dose of responsibility for their actions (not to mention the fathers) is what is needed.

I consistently vote Democratic, but to say overturning of Roe v. Wade will affect the majority of women is just not true. It is a fringe issue that should not be affecting national races.... either way.

Despite what movies and TV say, AMERICANS DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO HAVE ALL THE SEX THEY WANT WITHOUT REGARD TO THE CONSEQUENCES. People who feel otherwise get what they deserve, in my opinion. Sex is great, but it is a genie that is best left in the bottle until you are fully prepared to do whatever you can to make the other person's dreams come true for the of your lives.

[Bridget Burke]

61. All those sluts running around having sex.....

And none of them are having sex with you.

Poor man.....

[Doohickie]

66. Married 20 years, thank you.

One partner in my life, and guess what: It works just fine.

When nothing else works, resort to ad hominem attacks, eh? I thought that was a freeper tactic.

[Pithlet]

80. Because it works for you

You think you can tell anyone one else, let alone everyone else how often they should have sex, and what you feel the consequences should be if they don't behave as YOU think they should?

Heaven help us from the likes of you. We've come too far.

[CornField]

63. Here's what you obviously don't get

Roe v Wade is the tip of the iceberg. It's step one... first on the agenda. Next they target all the birth control methods which serve as abortifants -- including birth control pills, IUD and numerous others.

[Doohickie]

68. That is a valid point, and...

...is far less alarmist than the rest of the thread. It may lead to an erosion of reproductive rights, but overturning Roe v. Wade in and of itself does not mean the end of the world.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

73. Obi says, "again?"

[ismnotwasm]

76. Hey, look

I know abortion sounds like a single issue, but it's really not. Do you have the right force me, as a woman, to bear a child? Responsible sex or not. I know what you are saying, but I believe you completely miss the point of Roe vs Wade. I used to tell certain men don't stick your dick into anything that you don't what to have your baby. (Language these particular Neanderthals understood)when they began to talk about "sluts" or "stupid cunts" or some of the other lovely language women are subjected to. It's not an equal world, we still are the baby makers, and we still need autonomy over our bodies. And it's not just "American" culture. There are plenty of other cultures wear women are expected to bear one child over another. They die young. Yes, we all need personal sexual responsibility. Do you know why certain religious denominations object to certain forms of birth control? Because to them, life begins when the sperm meets egg. In medical terminology, life begins when fertilized egg is implanted in uterus. Overturned Roe vs Wade would open a can of worms that no one wants to look at or address. Do you have any idea how many fertilized eggs are frozen for infertile couples? Is there any difference between that and an abortion obtained, say, by an HIV positive crack whore? If the crack whore has the baby, is she in the moral right, rather that those selfish baby seekers who have egg after egg fertilized and frozen just so they can hope to have a "child of their own"? Just my two cents, and trust me, a very, very SMALL sample of the multiple issues involved here. Sexual responsibility would not stop the need for abortion.

[Doohickie]

78. Good post

And good food for thought.

I am personally against abortion as I think it is a terrible thing. However, I recognize that, as a man, it is not really my place to tell a woman what she can or cannot do with her body.

To me, abortion should be a medical procedure; i.e., a method for dealing with pregnancies that are medically problematic. It should not be used for birth control. This is my opinion, my view, only, and I don't expect others to necessarily agree.

The way to bring my views about, however, is not to make abortion illegal. It is to educate, to reduce the avoidable conditions that lead to abortions, and to improve the economic lot of the maximum number of people possible to make sure "unwanted pregnancies" become more rare.

It is idealistic of me, I know, but the point is that catching the problem at the end, when a girl is pregnant, is the wrong time. It needs to be addressed starting before a girl is even old enough to get pregnant, before a guy is even old enough to get a girl pregnant. Repubs talk about family values, but TRUE family values means passing down the values, through both word and example, to our children such that they understand what is right and wrong and make the proper choices. We want our children to be happy, but when we are divorced and miserable, what roadmap have we given them?

Bottom line for me is that I don't like abortion, but rather than reducing it by making it illegal, it should be reduced by attacking its causes. Our society is too lazy for that, but we need to try.

[iverglas]

79. can you cite your authority?

"Despite what movies and TV say, AMERICANS DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO HAVE ALL THE SEX THEY WANT WITHOUT REGARD TO THE CONSEQUENCES."

May I now say that you don't have the right to have all the pizza you want without regard for the consequences?

What the fuck exactly would that mean, anyway?

No one has the "right" to do anything without regard for the consequences -- that's meaningless (but quite telling) burble -- and no one is saying that s/he does have such a right.

I mean, really. Is someone saying that women have the right to have all the sex they want without getting pregnant?

Fuckin' duh.

The consequence of having sex is SOMETIMES pregnancy. I don't hear anyone saying that women have a "right" not to have that consequence.

The consequences of being denied the ability to terminate an unwanted pregnancy are quite another thing. And THOSE are the "consequences" that you and your ilk want women to suffer.

We don't generally call this sort of thing "consequences". We call it "punishment".

Women indeed do have the right to have all the sex they want (and can get without taking it from someone else), just as you have the right to have all the pizza you want (and can get without taking it from someone else).

You deal with any consequences of your pizza-eating, and women will deal with any consequences of their sex-having. Women won't stop you from going to Weight Watchers if you get unhappily chubby, and getting cardiac surgery if your arteries clog up. And you don't stick your nose into women's choices about any consequences of their sexual activity. And everybody will get along just fine.

That's kind of how liberal democracies work, you see.

[Doohickie]

92. I still think that if you don't want to get pregnant,

Don't have sex!

There is more to sex than getting your rocks off. It is perhaps the most powerful, yet misunderstood, form of human communication. When consenting adults consent to sex for different reasons and scenarios (e.g.: HIM: Oooh, she's hot; I wanna piece of that.... end of story; HER: If he has sex with me it means he really really loves me!)

It should not be used as a recreational drug.

To do so diminishes its value. In my experience, the more partners a person has had, the more baggage they carry regarding sex.

[iverglas]

93. and I still think that if you don't want to get chubby

... don't eat pizza!

There is more to sex than getting your rocks off. It is perhaps the most powerful, yet misunderstood, form of human communication. When consenting adults consent to sex for different reasons and scenarios (e.g.: HIM: Oooh, she's hot; I wanna piece of that.... end of story; HER: If he has sex with me it means he really really loves me!) <... yes? ... what then?>

Yeah ... and if you once tasted coq au vin, you'd never want pizza again. There is more to food than filling your face.



To do so diminishes its value. In my experience, the more partners a person has had, the more baggage they carry regarding sex.

Sweetie, "it" -- my sexuality -- is mine to do with as I please. Just like your appetite.

I won't make any laws compelling you to upgrade your taste in food, and you don't make any laws compelling me to upgrade my taste in sex.

I won't even make nasty comments in public about how your penchant for pizza demonstrates your moral worthlessness, and how something oughta be done about oinkers who go around shovelling pizza into their faces at every opportunity. Let alone suggest that if those wanton pizza-eaters don't like the gut they develop, or the heart condition that results, they should just suffer the consequences and not be expecting to be permitted to have corrective surgery.

And any baggage that either of us ends up carrying around will be ENTIRELY OUR OWN BUSINESS.

I have to ask what you think all this pontificating about how your sex life is better than somebody else's has to do with the subject of women's reproductive rights, and the political commitment to protecting those rights?

People like you can proclaim "I'm pro-choice!" all you want -- but what you're DOING is giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

Agreeing with the enemy that its cause is righteous has just never, ever struck me as a good way of defending one's self or anyone else against its depredations.

If you are pro-choice, you will keep your opinions about women who choose abortion to yourself.

If you insist on delivering them aloud in public, you will be making it plain that you are not interested in protecting women's rights.

It's as simple as that.

[Doohickie]

100. Cool! You're just like Bush:

"You're either for us or against us!"???

[iverglas]

104. aren't you a sweetie?

Cool! You're just like Bush:
"You're either for us or against us!"???

Such disingenuousness. Such demonization of the adversary. Such anti-democratic discourse. (Gosh ... who is being like Bush?)

There's nothing incorrect or distasteful about what Bush SAID, of course. It was what he MEANT that was problematic.

His message is that no one can be "for" the US unless they agree with his definition of what that MEANS, and with his pronouncement as to what anyone who is "for" the US must DO.

It's entirely possible to argue, and make a very good case, for the proposition that one can be FOR the US and still be AGAINST Bush's definition of what that means and what must be done.

I haven't seen you make any case at all for how one can be FOR women and still express contempt for women in public.

It's just one of those irreconcilable contradictions, as far as I can see. But you go ahead and take a shot at it, if you like.

Meanwhile, I see you saying that you're "for" women ... but I don't see any evidence of that statement being, um, accurate.

[deadparrot]

2. It doesn't matter if we voted for him or not.

They ain't gonna ban it just for * voters.

[BayCityProgressive]

5. we have lost this issue so badly

I am staunchly pro-choice but we need to educate peopel on this issue. I know TONS of people who voted Bush just on this issue alone. None of them knew abortion was actually up!

[Swamp Rat]

10. Right

Jenna or Barbara can fly to France, Costa Rica, or wherever to have "the proceedure" done.

[Wapsie B]

17. The twins would just

happen to take a "vacation" overseas. Same way with many of the kids of the aristocracy. To all repug women out there, go to hell. You voted for him. Now suffer along with the rest of us. Daughter or sister or niece or cousin or granddaughter gets raped, tough shit. Carry the seed of the rapist in your wombs.

[sallyseven]

23. Or they can have their appendix out

like one of the girls did last year or so.

[DemBones DemBones]

26. Young women actually do have to have their appendixes out,

or have ovarian cysts removed, or even gall bladder surgery. It's unfair to assume that every time a young woman is hospitalized or has outpatient surgery that it is pregnancy-related.

[leesa]

43. I agree. Or if they do, it will be re-instated later. It simply does not

fit with their other eugenics plans to reduce the world's population by billions. Why add more people to the mix when they are trying to depopulate the world?

[WindRavenX]

3. most young women have taken reproductive rights for granted

Including access to birth control, be it condoms or more importantly, the pill.
I am a 19 year old female, and it is ASTONISHING that so many women do NOT realize that OUR rights are in SERIOUS jeopardy.

[jean]

7. 11 states voted to deny GLBT the right to marry and this should

be a red flag to young women.

[WindRavenX]

12. here's the thing

A majority of "conservative" young women do not consider birth control to be a bad thing. They take it for granted. They do however, do not like gay rights :puke:
It's really sickening.

[jean]

16. well, they're willfully ignorant fools, aren't they? Good thing we have

magnificent, intelligent, activist young women (and young men) on our side.

I'm with you though, the ignorance of these women is overwhelming.

[WindRavenX]

19. yup

It boggles my mind sometimes. I think they're very selfish- they want the freedom to enjoy sex, but demonize gays and lesbians for the same thing. Very sad.

[KitSileya]

20. Yeah, it certainly boggles the mind.

As do their giggling claims of "I'm not, like, a feminist." It's not that I don't believe them, they aren't feminists, as I doubt any one of those air heads would start protesting at the mistreatement of another women, but it's galling nonetheless. Our mothers fought long and hard to gain the rights we enjoy today, and now the moment they live an entire life without having to worry about it, they ridicule being a feminist? Gah! There's a saying in Norwegian that I sometimes think is spot on - "woman is woman's worst enemy."

[DemBones DemBones]

25. We have that saying in the U.S., too. nt

[KitSileya]

27. And having worked in pretty much all woman work environments,

I can attest that it's true. They don't give their own gender an inch, and that's very sad. One of the reasons we're living in a patriarchal society is that men do just that.

You do get very discouraged, and feel tempted to say, well, if they voted for Bush, or not at all, the heck with them. They don't need our help. The problem with that, of course, is that all this legislation the fundies are salivating over will hit women who voted for Kerry as much as it will hit them.

[FizzFuzz]

53. oh geez, I've come across that type right here!

"Oh I have a good job in a mostly male profession, but I'm not bothered by sexist insults like some of the more sensitive members of my gender."

Shit, that's classic minority group bootlicking to the group in power.

Wonder how she managed to get a job in a "male profession" in the first place?

I'm not inferring this woman is anti-choice. But the ignorant attitude and wilingness to step on other women in order to share superior guffaws with the guys....I've been there (in high school and college), I know what it sounds like.

[Dorian Gray]

81. I never experienced that

but lots of my friends work in the financial industry. They deal, every day, with ribald jokes and such. Not directed at them. They don't care. I would. I wouldn't work in that industry, but I don't think that they are necessarily licking the boots of the people on top. Some of them have mouths on them like truck drivers, themselves, with very perverted senses of humor. And they are in a position of power themselves in those companies.

Just saying, it's not always about ignoring the problem. Sometimes, women just don't mind a dirty joke or some terrible language being bandied about.

Now, one of these friends was DIRECTLY harassed by a superior. She put her foot down and took it to human resources. The man was fired, too.

[kitkatrose]

33. Try this one on.

"I don't like abortions, but if I got pregnant unexpectedly, I'd get one." :wtf: Said by a classmate about 2 years ago. I don't recall if she said she'd support making them illegal, but I think it was implied in her tone. :puke:

[SoCalDem]

56. Birth control will be next.. They do this stuff in stages.

Republicans have always thought..long term.

The rich old geezers who run the party want woomen to go back to being June Cleaver..

And as always, it;s a two front attack..

some of the men want women out of the workforce, so the men can have all the good jobs again, and women can go back to being secretaries & receptionists

other men want women to be totally dependent and subservient, with a passle of little kids..staying home baking cookies and making him dinner..

Control of reproduction does not fit their grand plan.. more republicans..lots of them.. women who have outside the home jobs do not produce lots of babies..

[Doohickie]

75. Although I support progressive policies such as equal pay for equal work,

I honestly think that Rosie the Riveter was one of the causes that led to the general moral decline of the nation. This gave women more power economically (a good thing, right?) and hence the power to more freely divorce (sometimes justified, sometimes not), and also led to the advent of two-income families being the norm. This has led to a generation of children being raised by people other than their parents (day care, etc.) which means inconsistency throughout their childhood as day care providers come and day care providers go. It is possible to raise a family on a single income, but too many of us are expect too much from life and need all the trinkets that come from having two incomes. The current economic trends are bringing us to the point that increasingly two-income families are not only the norm but are becoming a necessity, which means more and more kids will grow up largely unsupervised.

Something that arose out of our nation's most critical need two generations ago and was heralded as a good thing (and, in the interest of fairness, is a good thing) but has contributed to the decline of the family.

The bottom line, I think, may be that with freedom comes responsiblity. We've been really good at exercising our freedoms, and only so-so at the responsibility part.

[Pithlet]

84. You like that word, Responsibility

You say that a lot. In this particular post, it seems to mean that women didn't think of the consequences for men when seeking equality. Poor men, having to deal with the womenfolk coming out of the kitchen and nursery. We should have thought of THEIR feelings, first. Moral decline apparently means men losing the right to make all the decisions. Which has led to the "decline of the family". You're a real piece of work straight out of the 50's.

[Doohickie]

86. Maybe I am

and maybe that's the point I'm trying to get across: There is a viable constituency within the Democratic Party that is not minority, not gay, not feminist, etc., that nevertheless feel the policies of the Democratic Party are best for our country.

You can degrade me and tell me I don't belong in the Party, but what good would that do? Maybe the more prudent line of action would be to figure out what it is that I actually like about the Party and its policies, and vigorously pursue them (perhaps even at the expense of "social freedom" issues such as abortion, gay marriage, gun control, etc.) I know there are more people out there like me, that are probably "just barely" Republican. If the Democratic Party could find a way to appeal to them, it may be possible to actually expand our base constiuency. Not all middle-aged, white males are rabid fundies; many of us are live-and-let-live types who don't see race as a big issue one way or the other, who aren't crazy about abortion rights but recognize a woman's right to choose, who like hunting but recognize we don't need assault weapons to bag a deer, who are more worried about the economic security of our families than whether we will be raptured tomorrow.

The Republicans purposely put issues out there to polarize, and the Democrats react strongly (and in my opinion stupidly) to those challenges. The resulting lines in the sand that are drawn encourage people to make election decisions based on one or two hot button issues than on those issues that make the most sense for the overall good of the country or the best interest of the person casting the vote. The Republicans have managed to to marginalize some groups, and those groups assert their rights by getting very "in your face" about issues that are key for them.

Is there a place for Moderate White Upper-Middle-Class Heterosexual Christian Married Guys in the Democratic Party? I'm one; I think I belong here. Yet every day I see people here on DU attacking Christianity, attacking heterosexuals, attacking men, attacking anyone who earns a decent living, etc.

I stay with the Democrats because I don't believe concentrating the majority of the wealth at the top of the economic scale is a good thing. I think that in a society such as ours, there are adequate resources to support the population and it is incumbent upon those of us with more to help take care of those who have less. This is supported by my Christian faith ("...whatsover you did for the least of these, you did for Me.")

This, election after election, is what drives my vote. I don't think I am unique. So how do we attract this kind of voter?

[Pithlet]

87. Just because you call yourself a member of the Democratic

Party does not make you immune from criticisms of your outdated sexist viewpoints about the feminist movement. I don't care who you vote for or what party you affiliate yourself with. I'll be damned if I'll let equal rights for anyone become a compromise issue to win or keep votes. If your affiliation with the party is so fragile that you can't stand to hear arguments against your positions, then how committed are you, really? Certainly there are issues where compromise is appropriate. Politics is about compromise. But, you can only go so far before you might as well join the other side, because there is no discernible difference between the two. It doesn't matter if you stop fighting, or never fought to begin with. The result is the same.

[Doohickie]

88. You just totally missed my point

My position is not so fragile. And I am not against reproductive choice. I am not crazy about using it for birth control, but like I said earlier I expect others to disagree with that stance. I AM against making it a primary campaign issue. I think it alienates other men that are more or less like me. Hot button issues are largely based on hypothetical situations. Abortion, gay marriage, death penalty... it's easy to make a case that makes the progressive side of the argument look ugly and immoral, and the Repubs have done a very good job of that.

I don't think the Dems will win any further elections by highlighting their positions on those issues, because the Repubs have made the other side popular. However, for most of the people voting, they are HYPOTHETICAL. Most of us have not had direct contact with abortion, gay rights, or the death penalty. When you have to deal with them on a first-hand basis, you realize they are much more complex than a simple party position implicates.

For instance, whether a guy is for or against abortion can be swayed when his daughter has a problem pregnancy. Even the strongest pro-life advocate would want to save his daughter's life, in most cases (and the few that wouldn't change are extremely hard-core).

[Pithlet]

91. I totally got your point.

You just told me I didn't, but then completely reiterated everything about your point that I addressed.

I did not say your position was fragile. It's very obvious it is not. You're the one who insists that wacky notions about equality are hurting the party. That the platform on women's issues are alienating men who are like you. That sounds like a forceful, impassioned declaration for the Democratic Party if I ever heard one.

No, I'm not saying your position is fragile. I'm saying that if women's rights is too heavy for you to stay with the party, then, let's just say I won't be weeping and gnashing my teeth at your leaving. I do believe the party can survive without you; I'm sorry. And I do believe that your insisting that we abandon an issue as important as equality is not a shining example of Democratic principles. Call me crazy.

[whosinpower]

98. Rosie the riveter caused moral decline??!!???

So - you would rather that women would bow their heads meekly and go back barefoot and POWERLESS back into the kitchen, be quiet, meek little housewives...is that how it is?

There are a few flaws to your theory - the most obvious being that a great many women would happily stay home and raise the kids IF the man got a job that payed well enough to provide for his family. We all know that a two income family is crucial just to make ends meet in a vast majority of households today.

While I would agree that the traditional nuclear family is in peril - women having jobs is not the cause. The cause is economics. We see it every day as good paying jobs with benefits evaporate to India, China. We see a wealth of poor paying jobs that cannot sustain a family. You know this. It is grossly unfair to blame Rosie the riveter on this decline of the middle class.

We cannot go back to the 1950's. And, as a female, I wouldn't want to. I don't want to be powerless over my health and welfare. I don't want to be powerless to work and get paid to do so. My body is MINE. Look - if you want to eliminate abortions as birth control - here is a solution - every single boy at thirteen years of age would be required to undergo a mandatory vasectomy. After that child grows up, gets married and can prove that he is able to provide for his family - can undo the procedure. I KNOW you will not like that solution.....but in all fairness, what you ask of women is not that different.

[Doohickie]

101. No, I would not rather than women bow...blah, blah blah....

There are a few flaws to your theory - the most obvious being that a great many women would happily stay home and raise the kids IF the man got a job that payed well enough to provide for his family. We all know that a two income family is crucial just to make ends meet in a vast majority of households today.

Yes, there is where it has come to: the two-income family, with mothers working outside the home, has become the norm. In a way, you support the point I am trying to make: That many mothers would prefer to raise their own kids, but because two-income families are now standard, it is increasingly impossible for them to do so. I would say that this trend toward the two-income family becoming the norm started with Rosie the Riveter.

While I would agree that the traditional nuclear family is in peril - women having jobs is not the cause. The cause is economics.

And part of the shift of economic reality is the fact that so many families now have two incomes. Women having jobs is part of that cause.

We see it every day as good paying jobs with benefits evaporate to India, China. We see a wealth of poor paying jobs that cannot sustain a family. You know this. It is grossly unfair to blame Rosie the riveter on this decline of the middle class.

Rosie didn't single-handedly do it, but I really think the women's rights movement took a huge step forward in terms of economics with Rosie the Riveter.

We cannot go back to the 1950's. And, as a female, I wouldn't want to.

Hearty agreement there. Nevertheless, I think that trying to figure out how we got to this point is part of finding solutions to the aspects of today's society that we disagree with.

I don't want to be powerless over my health and welfare.

And I realize how important this is. But think of it this way: Rosie the Riveter led to many changes in society. Some good, some not. Among the good changes is the increase in control women have over their lives economically, politically, etc. But in liberating women from the household, the rearing of children has suffered, both through increased divorce rate and the advent of the two-income family. I am not saying to throw away the gains, but rather to recognize the problem and it's roots and try to make appropriate adjustments. Maybe such an adjustment would be some sort of subsidy/incentive such that day care workers are compensated for keeping the same kids year after year so that the kids have some stability? I don't have the answers, but I think it is important to look for them.

I don't want to be powerless to work and get paid to do so. My body is MINE. Look - if you want to eliminate abortions as birth control - here is a solution - every single boy at thirteen years of age would be required to undergo a mandatory vasectomy. After that child grows up, gets married and can prove that he is able to provide for his family - can undo the procedure. I KNOW you will not like that solution.....but in all fairness, what you ask of women is not that different.

I am asking for sexual restraint from BOTH genders. I have two teenaged sons and have given them the birds-and-bees talk. There was a healthy dose of discussion of birth control (primarily condoms), but also a plea to try to abstain for as long as possible. I think it was a good thing that the first woman I had sex with was my wife. I don't know that I planned it that way from the start, but it has worked out well. I don't expect both of my sons to do so and try to get them to think about what they are doing or not doing, and to at least have enough sense to use condoms.

Many people I talk to about the subject say they wish they would have waited for their spouse to lose their virginity; very few, in my experience, say they wish they would have had more partners. Very often past partners are the stuff of broken hearts and emotional scars.

I am sure those who have different experiences will argue, and that's fine, but I think the world would be a better place if there was more love and less sex, instead of the other way around.

[SoCalDem]

57. oops. I duped

:)

[slor]

4. Do not forget...

about all that silly clean air and water too!

[Stargleamer]

11. Yeah, everyone knows dirty air and water

are just what a developing fetus, er, rather, "unborn child", needs.

[Randi_Listener]

6. To those young women

Fuck off, shitbags.

Wanna cry about a pregnancy you don't want? Eat shit and talk to Fuckface.

[Union Thug]

8. and don't forget, girls, you're worth less on the market than men!

Get used to it.

[JI7]

13. most young women did not vote for him

those who did are probably anti choice.

[tandot]

14. And say bye-bye to birth control and sex education

and if you dare to have pre-marital sex, you'll be burned at the stake or stoned to death.

[Quetzal]

15. This picture comes to mind....

[Carolinian]

18. Enjoy your stay at the Uwed Mothers Home. You can make up any

name you want for youself.

I understand white male babies are in high demand these days, so just keep 'em coming girls. It's good for the economy.

And if by chance they don't get adopted by the upper crust, Bush can sure use them to fight the wars he's got planned. So keep 'em coming girls. Y

You know the GOP philosophy - you deserve what you get.

[exsoccermom]

21. Seriously, we have to make sure our young women are covered

We need to ensure that they have access--by hook or by crook--to reproductive services. Most of our young women can't afford to leave the country. They have to have means of obtaining birth control products and services. Pharmacies refusing to fill prescriptions for birth control products is just the tip of the iceberg.

[Carolinian]

22. Agreed. We need a strong leader and we need to unite now.

[Carolinian]

24. First we need to recognize that any freedom that is overextended

becomes a negative. We see this in raising our children and it's also true with adults. Girls, if you don't want to get pregnant, TAKE RESPONSIBILITY, and use protection. If you are not protected, DON'T HAVE SEX. It's that simple. We are not going to continue having the choice of abortion if it is used as "birth control" and not just as "crisis intervention". The number of abortions per year is staggering and repulsive, even for this pro-choicer.

[DemBones DemBones]

28. Amen to that. I've been saying it for 15 years or more. nt

[Cleita]

31. I am really hoping you are rather young. You are not pro-choice IMO.

If you are raped, you don't have time to TAKE RESPONSIBILITY. Also, I remember a married friend of mine with three children, who found herself pregnant again because the available birth control at that time didn't work. She wouldn't have another baby. She was very determined and she wouldn't have another baby. She did a home abortion and nearly killed herself. So doesn't the DON'T HAVE SEX commandment come in conflict with the wifely duty commandment?

[Carolinian]

35. I'm VERY pro choice and I'm VERY much for taking responsiblity.

They can go hand in hand.

[iverglas]

67. and VERY MUCH for judging other women

and that doesn't go hand in hand with any kind of feminism.

Each one of the abortions that you find "repulsive" was a choice made by a woman who was probably a complete stranger to you, and yet there you sit, smugly calling her choice "repulsive".

Well I know what I find repulsive, and it just isn't quite the same thing.

"I'm VERY pro choice and I'm VERY much for taking responsiblity.
They can go hand in hand."

And whenever you locate another woman who is responsible to YOU for the choices she makes, you let us know.

[Carolinian]

36. I'm VERY pro choice and I'm VERY much for taking responsiblity.

They can go hand in hand.

[Pithlet]

83. Your definition of taking responsibility

Never forget that. We're not talking about doing homework or paying the bills. These are personal matters involving other people's bodies. THAT is where you are going wrong, assuming everyone else's definition should be just like yours, and everyone should behave just as you would when it comes to sex and relationships. I'm sorry but the "Take Responsibility Crowd" usually really means either "Do Only as I Would Do", or "People Should Be Punished for Their Actions". Or both. If people don't run their lives in accordance with what you think or believe, they aren't taking responsibility.

[Carolinian]

37. I understand there are 400,000 abortions per year. Need I say more?

[Cleita]

42. Yes, and they have increased in red states.

Makes you wonder why.

[iverglas]

69. I do believe you need to say more

Starting with an explanation of what business it is of yours what choices other women make about their own lives and bodies.

If the inferences you were drawing from the number of abortions per year (in the US, I assume you are meaning to say) were that far too many women do not have access to good methods of contraception, far too many women do not have the self-awareness and self-confidence to seek out and use the methods that are available to them or to make decisions about their sexuality that are in their own interests, far too many men continue to exploit women for their own purposes without regard for the women's welfare, far too many women are still in positions of personal, social and economic powerlessness in their relationships with men, or a few other things I could think of that might be actually good reasons for being concerned about the abortion rate, you might be saying something worthwhile.

Unfortunately, you appear to be saying that far too many women make choices that you disapprove of, and that something oughta be done about it. And that's nasty noise and nothing more.

[FloridaGuy23]

77. That line of reasoning is fallacious.....

You can not defend abortion by saying that women who are raped won't have a right to one.

Most abortions are used as birth control, nothing more. While there are some who are raped, there are also some rape victims who choose to carry their children to term.

Naturally, I believe my position on abortion is the best - the Government has no right meddling in medical procedures, other than ensuring that they are done safely. Personally, as someone who has witnessed the effects of an abortion first-hand, I would never, ever, ever let someone subject themselves to having one assuming I had any sway in the matter (ie, girlfriend, wife, or sister) without making my abhorration for the procedure well-known.

Just to reiterate, in case you're confused - abortion should be available as a medical procedure, on a personal level I will do everything I can to prevent women acquaintances from having them.

[Mandate My Ass]

82. Oh no, not confused at all

at a man who proclaims he would not let a woman of his acquaintance subject themselves to a legal procedure because he knows someone who had a bad experience.

Some women subject themselves to paternalistic authoritarian thinking which is much worse than availing themselves to a legal procedure which gives them reproductive freedom.

You're coming through loud and clear. Daddy knows best.

[FloridaGuy23]

85. Nice twist.....

I wonder if your world-view is similarly corrupted.

I did say that ultimately, the decision rests with the woman. I thought the freedom to express our opinions was one of the things you fought for? Or is this another case of only wanting to hear opinions you agree with???

[Mandate My Ass]

95. Speaking of corrupt views "Most abortions are used for birth control"

And you know this how?

It's a misogynist RW talking point, which cannot possibly be even known much less verified, to portray women as irresponsible sluts who care about nothing else but seeking sexual satisfaction at the expense of others.

When me and my girlfriends sit around talking we always discuss how we'd rather opt for surgical contraception even though there are so many easily available, preventive, cheap, unrisky methods out there. Get real. :eyes:

[VelmaD]

97. nice right-wing talking points

Did you see the sign over the door on your way in? :eyes:

[BlueJazz]

38. I think you need to get out more, Carolina Girl, and see how the

real world operates...

[Carolinian]

39. No need to be insulting. It's attitudes such as yours that feeds the

anti-abortion crowd.

Practicing self restraint and using common sense in sexual encounters is an adult action. If we, as a party, are supporting abortion because it frees young women to have random sexual encounters without consequences, then maybe I will rethink my pro-choice stance.

I know what the world was like before abortion was legal and I know the hardships brought on women as a result. That is why I have always resolved to support abortion.

I don't believe I'm saying this, but your post has just changed that resolve. Now, I suggest that women take responsiblity for their actions or THEY suffer the consequences INSTEAD OF passing the consequences on to the fetus. Time to grow up, Ladies.

[Cleita]

41. I didn't find the poster rude.

You just outted yourself.

I don't believe I'm saying this, but your post has just changed that resolve. Now, I suggest that women take responsiblity for their actions or THEY suffer the consequences INSTEAD OF passing the consequences on to the fetus. Time to grow up, Ladies.

Cross your legs ladies, it's going to be a bumpy ride. You are again responsible for all the actions taken against your body with or without your permission. Nope, you aren't the victim here, they are, because you didn't cross your legs.

[Carolinian]

47. WHAT? You're saying 400,000 abortions due to RAPE? Get real!

And what the hell do you mean...I OUTTED myself?

[Cleita]

48. I didn't say

400,000 abortions due to rape. You did.

[Carolinian]

50. I do not believe a woman should be forced to bear a rapist's child.

Abortion should not be used as birth control but as a solution to a crisis situation. 400,000 abortions per year tells me that it's being used as a solution for wanton sexual activity.

[Mandate My Ass]

58. Abortion is always birth control

If you get one, you don't give birth.

So abortion shouldn't be used to reverse the consenquences of wanton sexual encounters, huh? Which kinds of sexual encounters meet your uptight criteria of acceptability. Boring sexual encounters? Non-orgasmic sexual encounters? Missionary position with lights out only sexual encounters? :shrug:

[Bridget Burke]

65. So, you remember pre Roe V Wade & are offended by "wanton sexual activity"

So, your age has made you sexually undesirable? Or is it your attitude?

[Carolinian]

89. Wanton=irresponsible. Why do you defend irresponsible sex?

[iverglas]

94. loaded question = absence of honest discourse

"Why do you defend irresponsible sex?"

Why do you assert (as the premise of this question) that someone has defended irresponsible sex?

Is your own position so weak and ugly that you have to pretend that someone else's position is weak and ugly in order to claim victory?

You know perfectly well what the issue and the point are. But let me spell it out for you.

First, let us clarify what we're talking about.

"Irresponsible sex" = "sex that Carolina Girl NC doesn't like"

You see, if you think you're going to get a whole lot of women hereabouts to agree with you that women who have abortions in the US engaged in sex that is, apparently by some kind of definitional exercise (since neither you nor we know what bloody kind of sex any of those women engaged in), "irresponsible", you're very wrong.

Ditto for the sex that any other women engage in. Where have you managed to acquire the notion that your opinion about other women's sexuality is worth a pinch of shit?

So here you go.

I, and undoubtedly a lot of others here, will defend anyone's right to engage in whatever kind of sexual activity s/he wishes. (Of course, we won't get sidetracked by somebody pretending to think we're talking about abusive or exploitive or non-consensual sexual activity, I'm sure.)

I won't defend the practice of spouting vicious and indecent nonsense about other women on discussion boards. BUT I'LL DEFEND YOUR RIGHT TO DO IT, remember?

[Carolinian]

102. You didn't read the entire thread. Having sex without protection

is irresponsible unless you intend to get pregnant.

I'm not going to spell it out again and I'm finished with this thread.

[iverglas]

105. that's a good one

"You didn't read the entire thread."

And you know that ... because you're looking over my shoulder seeing which posts in the thread show as unread? Then you must need new specs, my friend. I read the entire thread.

"Having sex without protection
is irresponsible unless you intend to get pregnant."

Gosh, how convenient for you that you're "finished with this thread", eh? Otherwise you might have to answer the question *I* asked -- when did other women become responsible TO YOU?

Eating pizza every day is irresponsible unless you intend to have a heart attack.

And the question remains: SO THE FUCK WHAT? When did anyone else's personal life become YOUR BUSINESS?

Never, that's when. Adults are "responsible" to themselves for what they do in matters that affect themselves. Your assertion of "irresponsibility" is no more than a juvenile effort to get your own way in matters that are none of your business.

To quote someone nearby: it's time to grow up.

[Carolinian]

90. Bridget, you need to examine your morals.

[iverglas]

96. my goodness!

"you need to examine your morals."





Well ... if there were an even slightly black kettle in the vicinity ...

[sadiesworld]

107. "So your age has made you sexually undesirable?"

Nasty stuff.

[MidwestMomma]

45. Wow, one poster on DU has made you change your resolve to support

abortion.

That was one hell of commitment to pro-choice.

[Carolinian]

46. Yes. One post did it. How old are you?

[AwakeAtLast]

52. Do rape and incest victims have to grow up?

I hope not, because they have enough to deal with without having to bear a child in which they had no control over its creation.

Do 11, 12, and 13-year-olds have to grow up? They are just children. This is not a black and white issue where you can toss off such a pat answer.

[Carolinian]

54. Don't hide the abuse of abortion behind valid cases. First,

practice responsible sex.

[jmc777]

60. Self control isn't a bad thing. n/t

[Midlodemocrat]

70. No birth control method is fool proof.

..if you are opposed to abortion, don't have one.

[iverglas]

74. true colours

They're never far below the surface of much of the "pro-life pro-choice" crowd.

"Time to grow up, Ladies."

Say no more, eh? Ye sluts and harlots, ye shall suffer the consequences of your actions.

Well, actually, ye shall suffer the consequences of the self-righteous wrath of the Carolina Girls of the world.

Because after all, that's what being compelled to maintain unwanted pregnancies and have unwanted children actually is. It just isn't the consequence of sexual activity at all. No more than bleeding to death is the consequence of crossing the street.

In our society, if you get hit by a truck, you get to seek medical attention, no matter how stupidly or recklessly or "irresponsibly" you jaywalked.

Ditto if you get pregnant, no matter how stupidly or recklessly or "irresponsibly" you engaged in sexual activity. Even if you could get a ticket for reckless screwing, you could not be punished by being compelled to do something that involves the risk to life and the massive limitations on liberty that are inherent in pregnancy. Cruel and unusual punishment, my friend.

It's amazingly unclear to some people, but the reason that women are entitled to make choices about their own bodies and lives is that women have rights. Other people really do have, and are entitled to exercise, their own rights as they see fit, unless and until someone comes up with a good reason for interfering.

Free and democratic societies really just don't accept anyone's racist, bigoted or misogynist opinions about someone else as a good reason to interfere in his/her exercise of his/her rights.

[Quill Pen]

103. Oh, there are consequences...

...but they can't be legislated. Increased risk of STD, I suppose, would be among them.

>>>If we, as a party, are supporting abortion because it frees young women to have random sexual encounters without consequences...<<<

Naw, actually. We're supporting abortion because it frees young women to choose if and when they will have children. And because there's an extremely strong correlation between societies with a high standard of living and high values on long-term livability, and those that allow women full access to family planning education and resources.

Abortion isn't what frees women to have random sexual encounters *gasp* :wow: without consequences. A free society is what frees women to have random sexual encounters, consequences or no, and there ain't a damn thing you can do about it. Or at least, gee, I sure hope not.

I'm a church-going, bleeding-heart, liberal Christian. The difference between us, Carolina, is that I don't think 400,000, or even quadruple that number, of my fellow Americans living a lifestyle I don't share is a tragedy. I don't feel that any of my neighbors are, *ahem*, flaunting their deviant and promiscuous sexuality in my face, to use a phrase I've oft heard from the venomously homophobic. The flushing of 400,000 clumps of tissue does not affect me one way or the other.

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bridget Burke]

64. Yes, and birth control never fails.

And that man you knew you could trust never shirks his responsibility.

And the pre-natal test results never show that you'll give birth to a monster that will live quite a while on life support.

[jmc777]

71. " a monster"....

......are you serious?

[Cleita]

29. They are going to miss more than that.

Like decent wages and good jobs.

[seraph]

30. Now your gynocologist can practice their love with you.

Oh my.

[Cleita]

32. Oh, well my gyn is a woman.

Oh and I'm post menopausal. Wow, think about all the sex you can have with no fear of pregnancy if you are creative.

[harpo]

34. young MEN as well

[The_Casual_Observer]

40. There will always be dirty back alley places or coat hangers.

just like back in the good old "moral values" days.

[Cleita]

44. We didn't have them for a long time did we?

If the Jesus people think that they are going to cow a bunch of women again, I have news for them. They will regret it.

[mitchum]

49. Gonna have to keep that baby Jody gave you while sweetie...

was fighting the "evil ragheads" in the desert

[neverforget]

51. Uterus = GI (Government Issue)

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

62. And even if you don't miss Roe vs. Wade

your daughters and granddaughters will.

They will curse your name for voting for this vile man.

[veracity]

72. Women were WARNED about this.......

But, the media downplayed the dangers, and Kerry, sadly, did not focus on the assault on women, here and abroad by the Bush administration. Horror is about to descend....

Flashback:
UNSEEN AND UNHEARD: THE GEORGE BUSH ONGOING ASSAULT ON WOMEN!
TvNewsLies - 18-Jan-2004


Believe it or not, there really is a bit of opposition to George Bush being broadcast on the media. If you listen closely, and look really hard, you might find discussions out there about some outrageous policy of George Bush. Somewhere, on off hours and primarily on public media, you might hear a lone economist challenge the Bush tax plan, a group of activists attack his disregard for the environment, or an angry senior argue the privatization prescription plans. If you listen even closer, somewhere, in the wee hours of the night, you might even hear the Bush War on Iraq bravely challenged. Well and good.

But nowhere, at any hour, and only minimally among the democratic candidates, is there any outcry about one of this administration’s most crucial and potentially disastrous policies: the George W. Bush ongoing assault on women! ......
http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/george_w__bush_s_assault_on_wo.html

Wear a Black Ribbon of Resistance!

[Mend]

99. As An M.D. I Can Tell You

their requests for abortions ALWAYS begins with "I don't believe in abortion BUT..." and follows with some "special" reason for their "very special case" which of course are the same reasons as everyone else. Fucking hypocrites (literally and figuratively). Hopefully we will continue Emily's list to provide our women with what they need no matter what happens to Roe v,

[iverglas]

106. you'll enjoy "The Only Moral Abortion is My Abortion"

... "When the Anti-Choice Choose", by the estimable Joyce Arthurs:

http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/anti-tales.html

In the spring of 2000, I collected the following anecdotes directly from abortion doctors and other clinic staff in North America, Australia, and Europe. The stories are presented in the providers' own words, with minor editing for grammar, clarity, and brevity. Names have been omitted to protect privacy.

"I have done several abortions on women who have regularly picketed my clinics, including a 16 year old schoolgirl who came back to picket the day after her abortion, about three years ago. During her whole stay at the clinic, we felt that she was not quite right, but there were no real warning bells. She insisted that the abortion was her idea and assured us that all was OK. She went through the procedure very smoothly and was discharged with no problems. A quite routine operation. Next morning she was with her mother and several school mates in front of the clinic with the usual anti posters and chants. It appears that she got the abortion she needed and still displayed the appropriate anti views expected of her by her parents, teachers, and peers." (Physician, Australia)

Lots more good reading there. ;)