Kashkakat v.2.0
Kashkakat v.2.0's Journalreading these threads the last few days - wonder if there could be another option besides "pro-life"
and "pro-choice."
I think if I HAD to chose, I might call myself "pro-choice." However I understand and respect the views of some "pro-lifers" I know - just disagree wholeheartedly with who they vote for and their methods for attempting to reduce abortions are hateful and misogynistic.
I regularly yell at my religious right winger siblings and tell them - you are NOT going to eliminate abortions by telling people not to have sex. Thousands of years of human history have proven otherwise.
YESSSSSSSSSSSS pls can we make room for the view that one can be so-called "pro-life" AND pro-choice
at the same time. Its a somewhat nuanced view but I think its time that we get it on the table..... and hopefully then move on from there......?
It means I am not going to agree with you that abortion is "moral," but given the cultural realities I'm not going to stand in the way either or inflict any petty vindictive laws on women who chose it. I will however work like hell to ensure PP continues to exist and provide accessible and effective BIRTH CONTROL.. It means recognizing that abortion rates are lowest ironically where women have freest access to abortion and birth control. (Where abortion is highest is in countries where these things are LEAST accessible.)
It means advocating for effective, accessible and affordable BIRTH CONTROL and doing what I can to change the culture to one where people take responsibility for their sexuality and pregnancy prevention. One that does not tolerate, promote or accept rape.
It means I get to express my opinions andif the topic comes up in conversation, I get to say something like I believe the fetus is a human life and I get to tell you why I think that, and you say "ok that's interesting but I don't agree" and you don't call me names (like "republican"
or mischaractierize my position.
And I assure you.... I may think your view is not correct, but I wont hate you or call you names. I'm a pagan so I wont call you a sinner either LOL.
How many of yall read the article - tired of this either-or bs. One can have personal beliefs that
life begins at conception without being "anti-choice."
Spoze I could call myself anti-abortion and pro-life.... but I firmly believe that the way to eliminate most abortion is safe, effective birth control (developing new methods if need be - keeping sperm from egg is not rocket science). This is exactly how a so-called "prolife" candidate could be in support of Planned Parenthood, and a progressive. Statistics clearly indicate that fewer abortions are associated with women's rights incl. legal abortion and accessbility to birth control, and equality in educaiton and income.
And it would require more of a cultural shift that gets people to own and take responsibility for their own sexuality. I think the religious right is actually a CAUSE of so much of the fear and ambivalence in both men and women - that creates unwanted and unplanned pregnancies... The religious right's stupidity and fear around sexuality is just one of many reasons why I would never ever align with them politically, never in a million years.
IMHO, until a cultural shift happens, and given that there are different cultural and spiritual beliefs around the beginnings of life.... women should not be prosecuted or harrassed with vindictive requirments and should indeed be sovereign over her own body.
SO WHAT DOES THAT MAKE ME HMMMMM? A pro-life pro-choicer or what????????
Yeap, it's a rather nuanced view and I dont expect yall to agree or even understand it, but let's have it be part of the conversation. At the very least it should be possible to work together in coalition with people whose views are different from yours, on the things that you DO agree on.
No money - oh boo hoo. So get out there and make a passionate, cogent, devastatingly brilliant
statement on why we MUST get money out of politics. Crickets from Tim Cullen - this is the second time he pulled this stunt. A golden opportunity and he wimps out. No creativity about how to get out in front of the public eye. If theres one thing we should have learned from Der Drumpfenfuhrer, was that publicity can be had without spending $$$$. Age doesnt have anything to do with it.
WTF is wrong with these people. What does money have to do with anything. Feingolds early campaigns were successful bc he painted himself as a smart but friendly underdog operating his campaign from out of his garage. In contrast, his most recent run against whatizface - supposedly he had tons of money - and name recognition - but we heard nary a peep from him. I used to listen to both RW and LW talk radio and did not hear ONE ad. Not one. Heard LOTS of Rojo ads though. Did not hear him as a guest on any program.
We had tons of money for recall election - but where was it? I heard thatNatl Dem party raised tons of money for WI but spent it in other places - any truth to that rumor? Mary Burke had money - but nothing else really going for her, so a lot of good that did.
Have had it with WI Dem party and its apparent inability to start thinking outside the box. Just today I read some article in the local rag saying how we need some kind of mythical non-Madison dem to run for gov, preferably a woman. Hello? ?????? Name of Kathleen Vinehout ring a bell? Woman, rural, state senator? She has been shabbily treated IMHO - dissed and shunned by the Dem establishment who will never forgive her for having the audacity to attempt to represent a "prolife" Catholic rural district as a Dem. As a gov candidate during the recall election, she attempted to moderate her pro-life views as was appropriate for a state-wide office, but not good enough - she still cant get the "emily's list" seal of approval apparently.
This is EXACTLY the kind of person we need IMHO, someone who can bridge differences while at the same time passionately defending core Dem values - SS/Medicare, voting rights, etc. At this point I would vote for a Repub like Dale Schultz over some bland face whose main qualification is they have money.
Say what?
OK fine, call it a tax - it is in the generic sense of the word, though by design it was/is intended to something more akin to an insurance premium.
I think you may be confused by the phrase "gen revenue"? It doesnt refer to the entire pot of $$$$ going into federal coffers..........it means tax or other revenue that is collected by govt for general purposes, as opposed to a trust fund or entitlement which is paid into for specific purposes - eg workers comp, Meidcare, FICA, etc.
BTW, "entitlement" is not the bad work repubs make it out to be. It means simply that since you paid into it you are "entitled" to the benefits. As opposed to welfare programs, which must be allocated out of the general funds and is at the mercy of the political whims of the day.
Hate to break it to you but if youre saying SS is, or should be a welfare program coming out of gen funds - THAT is the right winger POV.
Now, to further confuse the issue there has been in recent years smaller amts of $$$ transfered from gen funds into SS trust fund (eg interest on loans taken out of SS funds) but thats a conversation for another day.
The point is - SS needs to be strengthened, not whittled away or defunded by diverting some $$$ to Wall Street or weakened or made into a welfare program.
All I can say is I wish I lived in the alt universe where AL GORE was president and the FICA funds all went into the lock box.
Profile Information
Gender: Do not displayCurrent location: Madison, WI
Member since: Sat Jan 7, 2012, 06:28 PM
Number of posts: 1,752
