So who wants to argue with these fundamentalist wackos? (Re: Women's right

[Jack Schitt]

s)

Check this post out that I just read on another forum:


I wouldn't worry too much about the abortion issue. Whether the liberals like it or not, Roe v. Wade is in the stages of being overturned. It's only a matter of time before some sanity is restored in America.

The thread can be found here: http://uplink.space.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=freespace . Scroll down and look for the thread that's titled "The Christian fundies are at it again..." You'll have to register, but it's free.

I'm giving up over there tonight. I'm going to get a brain hemorrhage if I keep arguing.

Godspeed.

[Gelliebeans]

1. this people are ridiculous to fight with

save your sanity and don't bother.

[Dookus]

2. Why bother?

I spent years as an abortion-clinic escort. I fought these people constantly. I quickly learned the only point of arguing was for the enjoyment I got out of it. It is impossible to change their minds.

Similarly, they could never change MY mind.

[izzie]

6. I do not see Bush pushing it. I think they like it as a vote getter.

The Bush clan were all for letting women do as they liked until Father had to sell out to get on the ticket with RR. So they all moved over to that side. It is no real belief it is a sell out on their side.He has pretty much had the power to fight it for 4 years and did not make a move. He put out the late term one to keep his base happy.Few of those are done.

[Dookus]

9. Oh I agree entirely...

I've said for 20 years that the right has absolutely NO intention of actually doing anything about abortion beyond making minor trims around the edges.

They care about abortion as a vote-getting issue, not a problem that actually needs solving.

[Union Thug]

3. Fundies aren't worth debating.

They are fantasy world dark-agers. Don't waste your time.

[aquart]

4. The response is:

Yes, the pro-prostitution lobby of middle-aged white men is about to ensure itself a steady supply of desperate teenage girls forced to leave their homes in disgrace and go to places where they have no family, friends, where they are met at the busstop by people who regard them as prey.

When you see a man starting a paunch and yelling against abortion, ask him if he's used prostitutes, he's so eager for more.

[EnfantTerrible]

5. I received this letter yesterday and tried to start a thread about it

but had no luck. Chim's not wasting any time. We've got to make some noise on this issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
President Bush has announced his intention to appoint
Dr. W. David Hager to head up the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA)
Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee. This committee has not met for
more than two years, during which time its charter lapsed. As a result, the
Bush Administration is tasked with filling all eleven positions with new
members. This position does not require Congressional approval. The FDA's
Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee makes crucial decisions on
matters relating to drugs used in the practice of obstetrics, gynecology and
related
specialties, including hormone therapy, contraception, treatment for
infertility, and medical alternatives to surgical procedures for
sterilization and pregnancy termination.

Dr. Hager is the author of "As Jesus Cared for Women:
Restoring Women Then and Now." The book blends biblical accounts of Christ
healing women with case studies from Hager's practice. His views of health
care are far outside the mainstream for reproductive technology and modern
gynecological practice. Dr. Hager is a practicing OB/GYN who describes
himself as "pro-life" and refuses to prescribe contraceptives to
unmarried women. In the book Dr. Hager wrote with his wife, entitled "Stress
and the Woman's Body," he suggests that women who suffer from premenstrual
syndrome should seek help from reading the bible and praying. As an editor
and contributing author of "The Reproduction Revolution: A Christian
Appraisal
of Sexuality Reproductive Technologies and the Family," Dr. Hager appears to
have endorsed the medically inaccurate assertion that the common birth
control pill is an ortifacient (causes abortion). We are concerned that Dr.
Hager's strong religious beliefs may color his assessment of technologies
that are necessary to protect women's lives or to preserve and promote
women's health.

Dr. Hager's track record of using religious beliefs to
guide his medical decision-making makes him a dangerous and inappropriate
candidate to serve as chair of this committee. Critical drug public policy
and research must not be held hostage by anti-abortion politics.
Members of this important panel should be appointed on
the basis of science and medicine, rather than politics and religion.
American women deserve no less.

There is something you can do. Below is a letter to be
sent to the White House, opposing the placement of  Hager. Please copy all
the text of this message and paste it into a fresh email; then sign your
name below and
SEND THIS TO EVERY PERSON YOU KNOW WHO IS CONCERNED ABOUT WOMEN'S RIGHTS.

Every 100th person please forward e-mail to [e-mail]

I oppose the appointment of Dr. W. David Hager to the
FDA Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee. Mixing religion and
medicine is unacceptable in a policy-making position. Using the FDA to
promote a political agenda is inappropriate and seriously threatens women's
health.
Members of this important panel should be appointed on the basis of science
and medicine, rather than politics and religion. American women deserve
no less.

[The_Casual_Observer]

7. No argument. God is on my side.

I have just as much proof as they do.

[Zinfandel]

8. Roe v. Wade WON'T be overturned. They have ALL branches of government

and could have easily submited legislation to try and overturn it. They haven't.

Not only is it a political "hot potato" but no less mentioning...the republicans receive huge donations and get their masses out to vote with this issue.

Yes, they have made it more difficult for a woman's right to choose freely and will continue to do so...However, they really don't want to completely overturn it...or they would have tried by now. The Democrats use it the same way to bring out the people against nominated judges.

As far back as Reagan's first term, the Falwell's have said now it will be overturned. Why hasn't it been?

Gay marriages just DON'T bring out the same alliance that abortion does, (though, they will insist otherwise).

In so much as sooner or later they will have to explain why it's still legal when they have full control...Of course they will blame the democrats challenging their judges...not good enough.

So they play it well, and allow just enough democrats around to keep the status quo for their profiteering.

[Book Lover]

10. Well, whether conservatives like it or not

women will continute to control their fertility, as we have from the start of humanity. It's just harder now.

And as an aside, I don't get why the conservatives aren't in *favor* of BC. It's about responsibility, right? It's about control, right?

[Dookus]

11. From my years on the frontline of this battle

I am firmly convinced that it's not about abortion, it's not about control, it's about the idea that no sex act should go unpunished.

[Book Lover]

12. I hear what you're saying

As an ex-Catholic woman, I've heard it all... But it seems to me that changing the meme to "reproductive responsibility and rights" is the best way to make inroads on this issue. Then again, I still kinda believe in Santa Claus.

[Dookus]

13. what inroads need to be made?

The majority of Americans believe abortion should remain legal.

There hasn't been a poll in 30 years that indicates otherwise. We are on the right side of this issue - we need to stop apologizing for it.

[Book Lover]

14. Oh, let me clarify

I'd like to change the environment of the political discussion. Someday this will stop being a political football, used to divide.

Am I even making sense any longer? I'm soooooo tired.....

[Dookus]

15. no, you're making sense

and I understand. But I think we have to STOP being on the defensive on the issue of abortion. Somebody should ask the republicans straight out in EVERY campaign: Do you wish to outlaw abortion?

They do not. Bush has said he does not. We need to show these hypocritical opportunists for what they are. Almost NO republican, no matter how conservative, runs a campaign on outlawing abortion. They choose the most extreme cases and use those to incite emotion.

The so-called "partial-birth abortion" issue is a perfect example. I want EVERY politician who voted for that to come out flatly and state whether he or she would support outlawing abortion.

We need to go on the offensive on this.

[CindyDale]

16. If you want to argue . . .

These people are brainwashed into thinking this legal thing about abortion is more important than it is. It's been over-emotionalized. They are told that Democrats are baby killers, pro-abortion, etc. This is ludicrous to me, because personally, I'm not pro-abortion at all, not even remotely. (In fact, it always struck me as weird that the women I knew who had abortions tended to be the ones who would always say they were absolutely against abortion--before they got pregnant. There is no point in telling anyone that, though. They don't believe it.)

If you want to argue, the best way to "argue" is just to state the facts without becoming religious about it or opposing people's values.

For example, you can point out that the issue has to be worked on from a social angle rather than a legal angle if any good is really going to be done. The law won't stop abortions. A woman could get an "underground" abortion in the hospital right here in Florida before Roe v Wade. At the most, all she will have to do if it is overturned is to drive from one county to another.

When someone talks about waiting lists for adoption, you can point out that there are special needs children waiting to be adopted right now, 40 to 50,000. These may be children who were exposed to drugs during pregnancy, who are HIV positive, who are mentally retarded, who are emotionally disturbed. These are the babies for adoption who are most likely to increase if Roe v. Wade is overturned. How many people will open their homes to one or more of these babies?

It's a big job to take care of these kids. I knew of a couple who put enormous effort into raising their two adoptive children with special needs. The husband bragged about how great the boys were doing, the progress they had made, placed in classes for the gifted, etc. A few years later, as teenagers, the boys developed serious behavior problems and moved out of the home. Not long after that, one of the boys murdered someone.

The most effective solution is to solve the social and medical problems that damaged these children in the first place.

It's the principle that worries me, though. If the demagogues don't have abortion as an issue, they will just find something else to use as a wedge issue. People have to be educated about wedge issues in general.

Cindy

[da_chimperor]

17. How the FUCK do the fundies get off saying that abortion is 'not sane'?

That's un-fucking-believable! They are the insane ones that denigrate science and what we can observe for ourselves to be true whenever it doesn't fit their ideas of what is true! Sanity and fundamentalism are opposing fucking ideas! :grr:

[YellowRubberDuckie]

18. What the hell do the "elite" in this country care?

They will travel to Switzerland, Sweden or someplace to get their abortion. Its' just the people who REALLY NEED ONE can't get them. I wanna know how they are planning on paying for all the babies that are born after the ban. They don't want it to come out of their pockets.
Duckie