I'm not saying I think feminazis exist, at least not in large quantities. I'm saying she does a good job of showing that frothing-mouthed feminists want equality, not to shackle men the way that women have been shackled.
And if it helps, I ranted about that term and "reverse racism" just for you and kadath.
Thanks so much for sharing. I really need to catch up on my current events. I just can't believe the shit that Obama is saying! I think it's time for a revolution.
I am not happy with Obama - he doesn't go far enough for me, and I'd much rather write in Kucinich or someone else even more radical. However, I am concerned that if I don't vote for Obama, that enough people might defect from the Democratic party to let McCain take the win. On the other hand, perhaps that's a risk I should be willing to take in order to get what I really want - long term change from the stagnant 2-party system.
Our (pretty damn bad) voting system needs to change in order for us to have a viable more-than-two party system, it seems to me.... I don't think I've heard of another viable suggestion for making our party system change.
I saw very little that was rational in there. I saw a lot of expletives and anger masking condescension, though. "The Aegis of Conscience" is something that should be denigrated? When it comes to issues like this, conscience is ALL that we have. Conscience isn't easy and conscience isn't some magical universal truth we all share.
The usual disclaimers apply here, as whenever I talk about this issue. I support abortion rights. I just hate it when pro-choice people smear anti-religious bigotry around while acting as if they were the only ones allowed to call the other side bigots. The pro-life side is not filled with people who begrudge you your existence, though as always there are some assholes in the world. The pro-life side is filled with people who struggle with the complicated moral issues involved and have come down on the opposite side from you. That's all that's going on.
Yes. This is not a philosophical debate. This is a moral issue. Moral issues are what happen when philosophical debates spill out of the classroom. It is real. That makes it ten times as complicated, and makes it ten times as urgent that we show real respect to the other side. The people on the other side have good reason to think that abortion is murder. If you knew that someone was going around killing their children, you'd do everything you could to stop them, right? Because this is the real world and real people are being harmed.
Now, my religion tells me (I am an Orthodox Jew) that the life of the mother should be protected first, especially in the first trimester when the status of the fetus is particular unclear. Their religion says something different, and we should try to show a little consideration for their approach, while working as hard we can to defend our own position.
To my mind, showing a little consideration for their approach means not requiring them to use contraception/abortion if they do not want to. And if they have a problem providing it, they should stay out of working in medical fields where they might be asked to
( ... )
So here's something that doesn't seem to have been considered yet (with a large amount of TMI): I have tried a multitude of pills, shots, therapy, and solutions to keep dead tissue in my ovaries from building up and bursting rather then being simply flushed out like it should be, and the only thing that works to prevent excruciating pain, nausea, and a high possibility of infection that can be solved only by a radical hysterectomy and intravenous antibiotics is the simple birth control pill. (Holy run-on sentence batman!) So I can avoid that by taking "the pill" now while still living with my parents, but if I want some independence that right now can be achieved only through SSDI and medicare I could be legally denied treatment despite not being able to get pregnant anyway simply because it is intended as a contraceptive? Am I reading that correctly?
Yep. And you can also be denied the Pill or Depo-Provera shots if you're on Accutane since it causes such horrible birth defects that anyone on it is required to use two forms of birth control.
FWIW this HHS thing (if legit, current sources are all talking about a "leaked" document and not anything that HHS is actually coming out and saying) technically is not a law or anything, it's just suggested guidelines for when pharmacists and doctors are "allowed" to deny you medication based upon their "conscience." So it's not technically related to medicare. But what's worse, is it's tangentially related to ALL pharmacies, so if adopted it could affect you NOW, not just if you were on medicare.
Comments 20
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
But yes, naamah_darling is fantastic in her rants.
Reply
And if it helps, I ranted about that term and "reverse racism" just for you and kadath.
http://zandperl.livejournal.com/511666.html
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
The usual disclaimers apply here, as whenever I talk about this issue. I support abortion rights. I just hate it when pro-choice people smear anti-religious bigotry around while acting as if they were the only ones allowed to call the other side bigots. The pro-life side is not filled with people who begrudge you your existence, though as always there are some assholes in the world. The pro-life side is filled with people who struggle with the complicated moral issues involved and have come down on the opposite side from you. That's all that's going on.
Reply
This isn't just some philosophical debate taking place in a classroom. This is harming real people.
Reply
Now, my religion tells me (I am an Orthodox Jew) that the life of the mother should be protected first, especially in the first trimester when the status of the fetus is particular unclear. Their religion says something different, and we should try to show a little consideration for their approach, while working as hard we can to defend our own position.
Reply
Reply
Reply
FWIW this HHS thing (if legit, current sources are all talking about a "leaked" document and not anything that HHS is actually coming out and saying) technically is not a law or anything, it's just suggested guidelines for when pharmacists and doctors are "allowed" to deny you medication based upon their "conscience." So it's not technically related to medicare. But what's worse, is it's tangentially related to ALL pharmacies, so if adopted it could affect you NOW, not just if you were on medicare.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment