23
   

American Conservatism In 2012 & Beyond

 
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 09:22 pm
@IRFRANK,
What about women who support abortion bans?

It's OK for them to tell women what they can and cannot do, or they merely the unfortunate victims of male brainwashing?

I love the ways you guys insist on characterizing it as a matter of male dominance over women, when there are just as many women with Pro-life positions as men.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 09:30 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
when there are just as many women with Pro-life positions as men.


I doubt that is true.
maxdancona
 
  2  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 09:35 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn, I am curious how hypocritical you are.

Do you have the same reaction to the "War on Christmas", "War on Religion" and such from your side of the spectrum?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 09:42 pm
@maxdancona,
Quote:
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
when there are just as many women with Pro-life positions as men.


Some people's perspective are just argumentative without much support or evidence for it. I'd like to see Finn provide some evidence for his assumptioins about
Quote:
just as many women with Pro-life positions as men?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 10:27 pm
@maxdancona,
I might have answered your question if it wasn't so insultingly leading.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 10:28 pm
@maxdancona,
Good for you.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 02:07 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

What about women who support abortion bans?

It's OK for them to tell women what they can and cannot do, or they merely the unfortunate victims of male brainwashing?


Nobody is suggesting they should be forced to have an abortion, but they think they should be allowed to force a woman to take a pregnancy to full term, even if she's been raped.

It's her body, it's her choice. That's the difference.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 09:38 am
@izzythepush,
Reread my post. I did not suggest anyone is attempting to force women to have abortions.

What about women who support abortion bans?

The argument has, by some, been framed as men telling women what they can and cannot do with their bodies.

The so-called White Male Patriarchy is a favorite target of the Left and the effort to introduce sexism and/or racism into every debate on every issue is pronounced.

As there are a vast number of women who favor abortion bans, I'm wondering what the folks who argue "It's not OK for men to tell women what they can do with their bodies," feel about the women who apparently are doing the same, and, by implication, challenging them on their fixation with gender as respects this issue.

Clear now?
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 09:42 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Fine. I will continue to think you are being hypocritically partisan on this issue.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 10:04 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
It's not alright for anyone to tell anyone else what they can do with their bodies, regardless of gender. You happy now?

Btw these religious extremists who make such a fuss about the rights of the unborn child, don't seem to give a **** about the rights of the born child. They're a bunch of hypocritical arseholes who shouldn't be given the time of day.
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 10:11 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
I think the "War on Women" is multi-faceted. The battle of privacy rights for women is certainly embraced by many on the religious right (both males and females). The battle of the glass ceiling against women falls under the bastion of a male-dominated corporate culture. Things are slowly changing in that regard, both in the corporate and national political arenas. Things are getting worse for women in the legislative push at the state level, particularly in red states.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 10:15 am
@maxdancona,
As if anything I wrote would have changed that.

I think I can live with the nature of your regard for me.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 10:17 am
@izzythepush,
So you don't think this is a man vs woman issue?

What rights of the born child do you believe the Pro-Life folks don't care about?
JPB
 
  5  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 10:20 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
If you believe that all things flow from God and that all events, good and bad, have a purpose in his plan, then it follows that you would believe that the child born of rape is part of that plan. It's hard to imagine the most secular of his opponents contending that the child bore the sins of the father.


I had to think about this for a while. As a secularist, no, the child born of rape doesn't bear the sins of the father. However, as a secularist, I reject his notion that his belief (all things flow from God) has a place in formulating legislation that the product of rape is a child and that said child must be born. An egg is not a child, a sperm is not a child, a fertilized egg is not a child, an implanted fertilized egg is not a child. Nor should it be considered one. The idea of embrionic "personhood" is a manifestation of the Christianists. Exposing them and defeating them from legislative power is time and energy well spent.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 10:32 am
@JPB,
I don't get Finn's argument here.

If someone believes something that I find both ridiculous and offensive, for example believing that rape is part of God's will, why should I care if this belief is sincere or not.

This is a stupid and offensive belief. Any politician who holds this belief deserves to be laughed out of public life.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 10:37 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
The right to affordable health care, a decent education and having enough to eat for a start.

If you want to live in a theocracy you can always move to Iran.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 10:52 am
@JPB,
JPB wrote:

I think the "War on Women" is multi-faceted. The battle of privacy rights for women is certainly embraced by many on the religious right (both males and females). The battle of the glass ceiling against women falls under the bastion of a male-dominated corporate culture. Things are slowly changing in that regard, both in the corporate and national political arenas. Things are getting worse for women in the legislative push at the state level, particularly in red states.


I'm curious, do you think that somehow it should be arranged so that there is rough equity between men and women in the number of corporate executives with a short period of time? If so in how short a time period and how?

Do you believe the Republican party is responsible for our male-dominated corporate culture?

Are they also responsible for our male domninate military leadership structure, and should be somehow forced or encouraged to produce gender parity?

I've not met or worked for a woman CEO, but I have no doubt there are some who are very capable, and I also have no doubt that there are women excutive who, if given the job of CEO of a company would do very well.

Most of the CEOs I've worked for or done business with are or were not very capable executives, and I have no doubt that women CEOs will, in general, match their performance. There is certainly no logical reason why a qualified woman could not perform well in the role of CEO.

As you've noted, progress in this area is being made, and while individual cliques of male executives within a corporation may resist the addition of a female to their ranks, they tend to resist the addition of any new member, irrespective of gender. New members mean new competition, and rightly or wrongly, they often believe a woman who has risen to their level actually has an advantage over them.

I don't think that classifying this as misogyny or characterizing the matter as constitituting a battle in a War on Women is reasonable.

As for the state level legislative arena in Red States, unless you can identify a Red State where men greatly outnumber women or where the women are the helpless chattel of the males, the women living in these states have a say in the makeup of their state governments, and so your characterization of "things getting worse" for women is entirely subjective, and entirely discounts the possibility that a large segment of the women in those states are in favor of local legislation.

No individual has the right to have the laws they prefer imposed on the state in which he or she lives. Just as many people have left states like California due to their displeasure with the political climate, so too can folks leave Red States for the same reason.

I've no doubt that you have found it objectionable when the federal government has attempted to force a one side fits all approach across the entire nation, when you strongly disagreed with the approach.

Before you go there (just in case it was on your mind to do so), the issue of abortion is not the same as the issue of slavery. Primarily because slaves didn't have the right to move to a state wherein legislation better suited their preferences (to greatly understate the situation).








Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 10:54 am
@izzythepush,
Your argument is absurd.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 11:07 am
@JPB,
Quote:
An egg is not a child, a sperm is not a child, a fertilized egg is not a child, an implanted fertilized egg is not a child.


Perhaps in terms of the definition of "child", but whether or not they are "human life" deserving of protection is a matter of opinion, not fact.
You are entitled to your opinion and it is widely shared.

You are even entitled to demonizing those who have a different opinion and that is a widely shared practice, but it does little to help create a lasting solution to the problem

Quote:
The idea of embrionic "personhood" is a manifestation of the Christianists.


What do you mean by "Christianists?"

In any case you're wrong. One doesn't need to be a Christian to believe that life begins with conception.

Quote:
Exposing them and defeating them from legislative power is time and energy well spent.


Exposing them as what? Christians? Pro-lifers? They're not keeping it a secret.

Defeating legislation you don't agree with and replacing them with someone who will promote legislation with you agree is worth your time and energy.

That's what they're doing...not waging a war on women.
JPB
 
  2  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2012 11:37 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Quote:
The idea of embrionic "personhood" is a manifestation of the Christianists.


What do you mean by "Christianists?"


"In recent years, Christianism (or Christianist) has also been used as a descriptive term of Christian fundamentalists, mostly in the United States, for the ideology of the Christian right, meant as a counterpoint to "Islamism".[2][3] Writing in 2005, the New York Times language columnist William Safire attributed the term (in its modern usage) to conservative blogger Andrew Sullivan, who wrote on June 1, 2003 [2]:
I have a new term for those on the fringes of the religious right who have used the Gospels to perpetuate their own aspirations for power, control and oppression: Christianists. They are as anathema to true Christians as the Islamists are to true Islam.
The liberal bloggers Tristero and David Neiwert used the term shortly after.[4][5] Sullivan later expanded on his usage of the term in a Time magazine column.[6] Uses of the term can be found dating back to the seventeenth century, but these are unrelated to its modern meaning.[2]" wiki

Quote:
In any case you're wrong. One doesn't need to be a Christian to believe that life begins with conception.


Show me someone who is putting forth personhood legislation that isn't a Christian and I might believe you.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/09/2022 at 09:13:28