 Blog For Free! Archives Home 2008 June 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2006 December 2006 October 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2005 November 2005 October 2005 February 2005 January 2004 December My Links Home TaBoo's Ezine Navigator The Greatest Maze Sudoku Tips and Tricks Joe User The Phallic Suggestion tBlog My Profile Send tMail My tFriends My Images Sponsored Blog 
|
posted by: PastorDave (reply) post date: 01.17.06 (1:21 pm) Taboo, I sincerely believe a person can be Pro Life/ Anti Abortion and not have the extreme understanding that you present. I do not want to outlaw abortion, but I do want it to be a decision for the state and not the federal governments. I do seek to convince others to forego abortion, but not with intimidation or illegality. I do believe in the use and distribution of birth control. I want to encourage adoption, and the very best of health care for unwed mothers. I want the church to embrace and love unwed mothers, not condemn and judge. Pro-life does not equate with Pro-nut! posted by: TaBooTenente (reply) post date: 01.17.06 (2:11 pm) thanks for the comment, dave. i have no problem with the pro-life perspective--i suspect there as many sub-perspective within the larger label, just as there are many grades within the pro-choice perspective. in fact, it seems to me, that if you were to take the most thoroughly considered aspects of both perspectives and removed them from all the rhetoric, then you'd actually have the same perspective. pro-choice doesn't mean pro-abortion. pro-life doesn't necessarily mean anti-abortion. pro-life folk who have their philosophies in order believe that abortion isn't the solution for unwanted pregnancies. pro-choice folk who have their thoughts well-organized know the exact same thing: abortion is a terrible solution to an unwanted pregnancy. so please do not think that i am the sort of liberal who keeps whining "why doesn't anybody understand?!" but i AM the sort of liberal who suggests that the world deserves more than a bunch of people waving flags without thinking out what they're supporting. my article/response was not intended as a blanket indictment of pro-life, but as a response to one particular article that was posted here. i am always up for this discussion--but people have to listen to themselves before they can make sense to others. tbt posted by: surrogate (reply) post date: 01.17.06 (3:56 pm) I love it when PastorDave makes the states' rights argument on this issue... that didn't work so well with slavery did it? It should never be applied to any situation involving rights of any kind. I've been making the sperm and egg argument for decades... It tends to fall on either deaf ears or ears that don't need to hear it because they intrinsically and intuitively understand it in the first place. As for the term "pro-life?" it tends to be a misnomer. There are pro-choice folks out there and anti-abortion folks. I'm pro-life as much as anyone... but I'm pro-choice. Pro-life, to me anyway, is simply a "Madison Avenue meets Jerry Falwell" term, intended to cast aspersions on anyone who trusts women. If you get a chance and are interested... check out my 11-9-04 post. I was just starting the blog and was trying to write every post "as Jesus" back then, but I think it was written quasi clearly. posted by: TaBooTenente (reply) post date: 01.17.06 (4:35 pm) i wonder how the "jesus reporting" thing went over here. i started the whole blogging thing at tabootenente.joeuser.com. ever popped into the joeuser site? joeuser has zero flexibility with blog templates, but it has a roaring forum system. and it's . . . er . . . a conservative place. check it out if you get the chance. by the way: "I do not want to encourage anyone to adopt laws or amendments because you think that's what I or Father would want. No offense, and thanks for the thought, but I'd rather the country be run by men and women of good will who don't use their faith as a scapegoat for their actions. "Oh, I'm anti-abortion cuz Jesus wants me to be." Fine. I with ya there. Appreciate it. But accepting what I teach, taught...whatever, is an individual thing to be accepted because I offered it... not because you accepted it and are planning on forcing others to accept it as well and especially when you have the "stones" to force your filtered vision of what you think I'd want on others." yeah, i especially liked that bit . . . it's the thing that continually keeps me coming back to these conversations. tbt |
|
