lillypaddle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Sep-13-11 07:10 PM
Original message |
Thom Hartman & "pro life" |
|
I was listening to Thom this evening (rebroadcast from this morning) - and I was surprised to hear him continually referring to anti-choice people as "pro life." Not only that, he seemed to justify many of the anti-choice people as democrats who are in favor of health care for all, and other liberal ideas, thereby somehow deflecting some of the negativity that should go hand-in-hand with anti-choice people.
Frankly, I was taken aback. I like Thom, & listen to him frequently. I hate it, though, that he appears to give legitimacy to those who are anti-choice because they supposedly support other liberal tenets. If one is against a woman's right to choose, they don't deserve a free pass in other areas. Pro-choice is absolutely non-negotiable, and it is disturbing that someone as intelligent and progressive as Thom would give a free pass to those who are not pro-choice. Please let Thom know that (1) referring to these people as anti-choice is the preferred method of description. (2)If someone doesn't believe that a woman has the right to make decisions about her own body and destiny, it doesn't matter what else they believe in ... they are NOT deserving of a pass.
|
Ineeda
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Sep-13-11 07:25 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Non-negotiable for me, too. It's the first thing I look at in a candidate.
|
patrice
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Sep-13-11 09:11 PM
Response to Original message |
2. So, if someone would, for example, support an end to wars, or Medicare for all, or |
|
strong environmental regulations, we are not permitted to validate that support if they aren't Pro-Choice too . . .?
It is possible to be up front and known for one's own position on issue X, while collaborating on issues Y and Z.
|
lillypaddle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-15-11 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
it's possible to collaborate on other issues, but the way he said that "people of good conscience are pro-life," when he was referring to those who are anti-choice - it just sounded very dismissive of the whole issue. And there seems to be a strong trend to going backward these days. I've seen talk about birth control being made illegal. With the right wing nut jobs, I just think we have to be very careful how we frame our talk.
Sorry so long to reply to you. Got busy, work, etc.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 07:28 PM
Response to Original message |