Forum Thread

Women's marches 2018

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 31 - 36 of 36 Prev 1 2 3
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Lucas Wrote:

    But I think more Americans disagree with you…

    Schmidt,

    It depends on the aspect of abortion being discussed. Many pro-abortion advocates frame the procedure as one that is entirely divorced from all moral considerations. After all, if children in the womb are not human beings, then destroying them—even en masse—is no more morally problematic than carving out cancerous cells. It is simply a nonissue. However, the data we receive from survey respondents reveal that many Americans experience a kind of moral ambivalence about abortion. They do not want to overturn Roe, but they are willing to institute laws that will steer women away from having abortions (e.g., mandating the viewing of ultrasound images, notifying husbands, and having doctors discuss alternatives to abortion with patients). Moreover, their reasons for allowing abortions to take place are unequivocally rooted to moral dilemmas, such as protecting the life of the mother or preventing the future suffering an infant with a terrible disease or disorder.

    As such, they disagree with the argument that it is morally unproblematic to abort children simply on a whim—a sentiment that clearly rejects the opinion that children at the embryonic and fetal stages of development have zero claim to the considerations of personhood. This is evident in the results showing that respondents do not think a woman should have an abortion simply because she does not want the child, even if she is only in her first trimester of pregnancy. Even the zygotic stage appears to be one at which respondents’ moral concerns remained active, with there being a virtual tie over the question of whether to permit females of any age from having access to emergency contraceptive pills.

    Again, I want to stress that my position is not that there is a groundswell of support for the specific goals of an organization like Personhood USA; however, neither is there a groundswell of support for the Planned Parenthood et al. position that children in the prenatal stages of development are utterly devoid of moral status. This is crucial to understanding the debate over abortion.

    Below are links to a number of survey responses collected by Gallup. Red highlights indicate a conservative preference; blue highlights indicate a liberal perspective.

    Survey Results 1

    Survey Results 2

    What we are discussing is the women's constitutional right to have an abortion as per the "due process clause" of the 14th amendment. Likewise North Carolina's law forcing women to view ultrasounds before having an abortion was found to be a violation of their First Amendment rights. See Right to Abortion? It discusses Roe v Wade, the law of the land.

    The courts have decided. In any case, in the above surveys, I wonder what the results would look like if they only surveyed women. Since biblical days it's always been the premise amongst some religious folks that men have dominion over women. See the biblical passages below.

    1 Timothy 2:11-15

    Ephesians 5:22-24

    However, we have moved on from biblical days, and I maintain that a woman has a right to choose. Any surveys made with the biblical premise that men have dominion over women are misleading.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I, too, am hopeful. I am especially hopeful that bunches of these marching women will be elected to office in 2018.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/data_stats/a...

    About 1.2% of pregnant women get an abortion, and make the decision extremely quick upon learning they are pregnant. I suspect those who ponder their options, decide to have the baby.

    Vast majority of women never chose to have an abortion (or even consider it), so the issue is primarily about the small percentage that find themselves unexpectedly pregnant and make the decision to terminate their pregnancy.

    If it were illegal I wonder how the laws would handle women going on vacation out of country and coming back not pregnant. I would think right-life movement would consider it to be the same as taking a baby out of country and having it murdered.

    The "What if" scenarios are practically endless.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    I absolutely can't understand why to even to discuss this. A woman's body is her "own"; she can do with it whatever she wants, even get tatoo's. No one should dictate that. No "bibles', no churches, no government.

    Even in the animal world (where we come from) they attack or eat their siblings; why does the church not stop that?

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:

    For the pro-lifers, I extracted this message from Bill Moyers FB page:

    A Catholic Nun on What It Really Means to Be Pro-Life

    "I do not believe that just because you're opposed to abortion, that that makes you pro-life. In fact, I think in many cases, your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed. And why would I think that you don't? Because you don't want any tax money to go there. That's not pro-life. That's pro-birth. We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is." - Sister Joan Chittister

    This defines my impression (rightly or wrongly) of so many Christians who are on crusade to overturn Roe v Wade based on their sense of morality. They're ideology is not cradle to grave, but rather womb and deathbed only. Everything else in-between is tough shit.

    Love this, spot on. As a female with some pro life tendencies in my early years that fought internally with my larger tendency towards a stronger, more socially liberal side, this exemplifies perfectly my current position on this issue. Many years to get here, though, after much internal struggle.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Regardless of whether Trump wins or loses, women will be marching in the streets again.

    In the unlikely event that he wins, you'll have a repeat of 2017, when the "pussy riot" took to the streets to protest the election results.

    Image result for pussy riot hat

    If he loses, you're going to see an outbreak of joy similar to what happened when Obama won his first term in 2008.

    The Boston Globe had this to say yesterday:

    Another historic gender gap is likely as Trump flails with women in polls

    Donald Trump owes his presidency in large part to men, and especially white men, who decisively backed him over Hillary Clinton four years ago even as a majority of women voted for her. But it’s women who appear to be on his mind as he contemplates national polls that show him consistently eight percentage points or more behind Democrat Joe Biden, driven in large part by Trump’s deficit with female voters.

    When Trump won in 2016, it was with the support of 52 percent of men but just 41 percent of women, according to exit polls — an 11-point gender gap that was tied for the largest by a presidential candidate in four decades. Polls suggest this year the gap could be even larger.

    Once he is out of office, and no longer protected by "the sitting president" rule, the "elephant in the room" is going to bite him in the ass.

    A full 26 incidents of “unwanted sexual contact” and 43 instances of inappropriate behavior were detailed in a book, All the President’s Women: Donald Trump and the Making of a Predator, which drew on over 100 interviews — many exclusive — and added to a list of nearly two dozen women who had previously accused him of sexual assault or misconduct.

    You may remember that a judge recently ruled against Trump in a defamation suit brought by a woman he raped years ago.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-sexual-assault-allegations-all-list-misconduct-karen-johnson-how-many-a9149216.html