Choices and Rights

Navigation

User login

Online users

Rick
Bert
Matthew Green
chad360
JT
Arts From The Heart
Ehver Green
Dylan Carlson
OperaGirl

Support OlyBlog

OlyBlog is run by volunteers who care about Olympia. If you like what we're doing, make a donation:

OlyBlog is powered by:

Who's new

FREDDYF
ekdrake
Ash
turpin
Lloyds Apple

Choices and Rights

Submitted by rkbronco on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 11:23am.

My wife sent this email to a list of friends and family.

I think its a great reminder that there are groups and individuals out their actively working to take away our choices and our rights.

She wrote "Our rights to our bodies were taken away before, and it CAN happen again. Please spread awareness, and vote so that our sisters, nieces, daughters, goddaughters and granddaughters can protect themselves."

Here is a picture she took this this morning to show how low they will stoop.

WTF

rkbronco's blog

Thos numbers have got to be

Submitted by Norm on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 11:26am.

Thos numbers have got to be off.

The abortion number is

Submitted by Ehver Green on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 12:25pm.

The abortion number is pretty close. 365*3600 = 1,314,000. The terrorism number only encompasses 9/11 in NYC (also very close).

Which did you think was off? The terrorism figure should be much higher - once you include Iraq.

Uuuuuuhhhhhhhhh............

Submitted by Maehren on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 12:48pm.

I am wondering if the point of this blog was missed...? I think it is safe to say that this guy's sign is ridiculous - to say that aborted fetuses are the same as 9/11 victims, or holocaust victims is ludicrous, is it not? And more to the point, these (obviously ignorant and thoughtless) people are attempting to rob women of our reproductive rights. So many people think that we are safe with Roe vs. Wade in place, but....... we aren't. We should educate ourselves and be merry (and wary) through a battle that will never end.

Right, I forgot

Submitted by Norm on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 1:16pm.

If they disagree with you then they are obviously ignorant and thoughtless. Why the hell do I even click on these threads anymore? They aren't about discussion they about bad-mouthing the enemy and taking no prisoners.

Wasn't it Rob that said there is no difference between the neocons and the liberals? I'm thinking the same thing about the pro-life and pro-choice folks at this point.

Violence

Submitted by paisleyboxers on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 1:21pm.

Violence is a big part of life. It's not nice and it will probably never stop.

Exploiting painful memories for the sake of promoting a peaceful cause is pretty disgusting, when no other options are presented with big bad ugly signs.

it's a little hedonistic to specialize in a knowledge of a type of violence for the very sake of promoting it graphically to gain shock value.

For example, people asking for the end of war on the bridge have hopeful signs and messages of an end. They're not showing pictures of their children and siblings maimed in war.

Friendblog: None are known to exist since bloggers don't have friends.

Oh Norm....

Submitted by Maehren on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 1:54pm.

I'm not trying to change their minds, I'm simply asking them to mind their own business. I have no problems with a person who has no interest in having an abortion... I have Bigtime problems with a person who wants to put a blanket over us all. I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings, but again, I feel like the point was missed. By saying "ignorant and thoughtless" I was implying that by comparing abortion to terrorism or the holocaust, these peops were clearly not thinking about a bigger picture - if you think I am wrong, that's okay with me, too. If you agree with them, that is also fine. If they (or you) think abortion is wrong, I can appreciate that, but I can't dig on being told that I must march to their drum, believe in their God, make choices (or not be given a choice period) based on their morals and values, etc. etc. etc. Again, sorry if my previous comment harshed your mellow, but as long as I'm still allowed to speak my mind, I will do so knowing that there will be people who agree, people who disagree, and people who straight up don't get what I'm saying.

Just a lack of....I don't

Submitted by Norm on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 2:00pm.

Just a lack of....I don't even know at this point. You don't have to apologize to me, I appreciate it but really not needed. I have that some problem that you do, unfortunately it happens in reverse for me. I have a problem with not being able to see ships in my hometown because some "people" might incite violence if they show up. So it's deemed dangerous to bring them in. I have a problem with people who are all about choice, but when it comes to consequences for those choices they flip out. People that feel their opinion of how the military/police department should operate because of how they feel, not realizing that many people disagree with them, the people who are in control for the most part.

The way I see it, that ignorant and thoughtless guy on the corner is just speaking his mind. I don't agree with him, but I'm not going to call him thoughtless and ignorant just because I disagree with something that he is passionate about.

Tell me, should we not mourn the dead fetus'(or children if you want to) that die due to abortion like we do other victims of killings? That's where my pro-choice basis starts to waiver.

We aren't so different...

Submitted by Maehren on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 2:32pm.

As far as the military goes - we Need a military. I disagree with the protests that happened at the port. GW sent our guys over there, and they need q-tips and tp and bullets and stuff, right? Yes, they signed up to be in the military, but they should also be able to rely on their boss to not be a complete fuckwit. Anyway, my point there is that, if our troops have to be in Iraq because of orders from above (HAH!), I want them to be able to care for and protect themselves. In a way, yes this guy is just out there supporting his cause - but does he have to pollute the street with those kinds of pictures? It hurts my heart every time I see some poor lady try to explain to her child what they are doing out there. I wonder what the response of the public would be if I was out there protesting circumcision, holding giant photographs of freshly hacked baby penises, or huge posters of uncircumcised penises with a caption like "God's Plan" or something. I don't believe in circumcision, but I'm not going to go trying to outlaw it, or make people feel bad about it. I don't believe in animal cruelty, but I'm not going to go giving children nightmares because I can't get my point across any other way. Anyway, I don't know that people "should" grieve the loss of their fetuses, but I do know that the vast majority of women that I know that have made this difficult choice Certainly did not make it maliciously as some kind of rabid baby killers, and most women grieve over it for a long time. A lot depends on how much support they have, what the reason was for making that choice (of which there are Many) etc. I think it is up to the individual. There is no perfect system - in order to protect women's health, keeping abortion legal and safe is a Must. There will be women who "over-use" it, but again, that really isn't any of anyone's business. If it's a matter of "God" each of us has to answer to our own beliefs.

Wait

Submitted by Maehren on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 2:35pm.

Sorry, I don't disagree with the protests at the port, I disagree with trying to keep troops from getting their supplies. Ah, clarification.

Who says that an abortion isn't mourned?

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 3:40pm.

I don't think there is a woman alive that woke up one day and said "I think I'll have sex today and get pregnant so that I can go through the process of an abortion."

I can't begin to imagine what a difficult decision this would be for any woman. I think that there is definitely a period of mouring that takes place, but it might be a very private issue.

I don't notice that person having a sign of a mushroom cloud over Hiroshima that talks about hundreds of thousands of innocent (that's right.....CIVILIANS, not soldiers) that died.

http://thurstonblog.blogspot.com/

Larry

Submitted by Norm on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 4:50pm.

Here we are........................................................here is your conclusion. See how far apart they are? Far enough apart that I'm betting you had to jump.

I said, "Tell me, should we not mourn the dead fetus'(or children if you want to) that die due to abortion like we do other victims of killings?" I didn't say they weren't mourned, I was asking a question which I think some folks would say "no" to. Not all folks, and certainly not 99% of women that end up making this hard decision. DON'T put words in my mouth, particularly on this subject.

My whole point with the question, is that I can understand this guy. I don't like his sign, I don't think he should be able to make a decision like this for a woman BUT, if I thought I could save a life (which I believe this guy believes he can do, for whatever reason) by standing on a street corner with this sign, I would be do it. I don't think the guy should be ridiculed for it, I don't think he needs a pat on the back either, but referring to him as ignorant is no different than referring to the pro-choice protesters as such. Last I checked Ralph's still doesn't sell planB, and planned parenthood still performs abortions. Obviously neither side is meeting their intended goal.

Norm

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 5:57pm.

Maybe I'm a little slow on the uptake of your sentence structure, but your rhetorical question certainly came across as a position of not stating that there IS a mourning on the part of a woman that has to face the abortion choice.

Pardon me if I misunderstood

http://thurstonblog.blogspot.com/

You are correct

Submitted by Maehren on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 4:05pm.

Women don't have abortions because they are crazy murderers or because they get some kind of kick out of it. If that was the case, I wouldn't feel the same way about it. Wouldn't a poster of Hiroshima victims be just as irrelevent? I think that is your point, but I'm not sure. I mean, civilians were killed in 9/11 also, but it doesn't make them more like aborted fetuses to me than the boys that were killed at Pearl Harbor. Abortion isn't a plot. Women aren't having abortions to gain power or money, to get revenge, or because some book or imaginary man says they should (as far as I know....) Don't get me wrong, I don't think you have said anything offensive, I just wanted to clarify.

Absolutely, Maehren

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 8:51pm.

My point in this whole rhetoric war of the words is that those that claim "pro-life" will justify killing if they can call the dead people "collateral damage".

Myrtle, I subscribe to your thinking.

http://thurstonblog.blogspot.com/

How about a picture of 3600 poor children begging?

Submitted by Myrtle McFertile on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 8:35pm.

How about a picture of a homeless mother with several children and no job, no husband, no home? How about a picture of an orphanage full of neglected children? (3600 a day won't be adopted out.) How about a picture of bruised, beaten kids whose mothers are overwhelmed and unready for parenthood? How about a picture of a kid with suppurating sores who has no healthcare?

Or, what I'd prefer, how about a picture of people walking into Planned Parenthood to get birth control without getting hassled? How many fewer condoms is PP giving out during the 40 day vigil? How many women are too intimidated to go in for reproductive health care and contraception? How many more abortions will be caused by the pro-lifers ridiculous strategy of shame and intimidation?

whats funny...

Submitted by eregular on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 9:05pm.

is many "pro-choicers" are vegan or against eating veal or some other stuff like that. They'll be the first one to rant and rave about cruelty to animals.

Its amazing how a baby cow is more important than an unborn human child in the eyes of many.

I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but I do have an intelligent point to make. When is a child "viable" outside a mothers womb? I don't think many people are pro-partial-birth-abortions anymore. I could be wrong but I don't think any of you bloggers support an 7-8 month old child having its brains sucked out.

I think the viability of human children changes every few years....you always hear some story on the news or in time magazine about how a 21 week or 19 week old child was able to survive outside of the womb.

So how are we going to decide when a child becomes "viable". How long before mechanical wombs exist allowing a few week old child to survive outside of a womans body?

many who believe in prochoice scream about "a womens reproductive rights". You have to understand that those who are in the prolife camp aren't trying to take away your rights, they are just concerned about the soul of the unborn child. of course i don't want to argue the existence of the soul on this blog comment. And your soul aswell because you were once an unborn child.

aha

Submitted by Rob Richards on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 9:40pm.

"many who believe in prochoice scream about "a womens reproductive rights". You have to understand that those who are in the prolife camp aren't trying to take away your rights, they are just concerned about the soul of the unborn child. of course i don't want to argue the existence of the soul on this blog comment. And your soul aswell because you were once an unborn child."

Exactly. Again religion takes a matter of personal choice and turns it into a crusade. Why can't people mind their own effing business and worry about their own souls? My ass burning in the fire won't affect theirs.

but!

Submitted by eregular on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:19am.

The belief of interconnectedness is common. Therefore your "ass burning" does affect theirs. It maybe idiotic to say but, "what if they aborted einstien?" or something like that. What if some of our global problems would have been solved by people who were not allowed to be born? Also "What goes around, comes around" is found throughout the world.

Believing in punishment for wrongdoing doesn't make you "a crusader". People make controversial signs like that because they honestly believe they'll be doing some good if they prevent even one abortion.

It kind of a love thing, like they love children and think they should be born and live, even if there is a chance that their life might be terrible because of poverty.

Just because I learn towards pro-life doesn't make me an idiot. It doesn't mean I'm going to "start a crusade" or support bombing abortion clinics or killing abortion doctors. I also believe that its not the law/government's responsibility to have its hands in the issue.

I disagree

Submitted by Myrtle McFertile on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 7:16am.

I don't think the "pro-lifers" really care about soul of the unborn child. I believe that if this were the case, that if they were truly driven by compassion, they would do at least two things differently: One, they would do everything possible to help women avoid abortion. They would make sure women had accurate information about their fertility cycle and how to to use birth control to prevent pregnancy, and then they would ensure access to birth control, rather than block the entrance of Planned Parenthood. Second, if they really cared about the soul of the unborn child, they would continue caring about the soul of the born child, and would ensure that young, poor, emotionally immature and impractical women who bore children were given a great deal of assistance in the difficult task of raising them. This assistance, ideally, would take the form of inexpensive or free health care for the child, mentors to help with parenting skills, low-income housing, low-cost or free quality day care, and subsidized educational and vocational training. Are the pro-lifers working to make any of these things happen? Why no. The liberals are.

word

Submitted by Rick on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 9:25am.

When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion. -C.P. Snow

Of course they Conservatives are doing those things.

Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 9:42am.

The component you have left out is personal responsibility. All kinds of charities both secular and religious are on offer, but you can't force a person to use them can you? There are networks of people who volunteer time to help others, from the local PTA's to church charities. How much more information do you need there to be available concerning reproduction? How many websites, books, health pamphlets, doctors, nurses, health ed classes are required before you would be willing to concede the information you lament as being unavailable, is actually on offer? C.

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

Your statement itself is very irresponsible

Submitted by Myrtle McFertile on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 9:53am.

Surely you're not that naive, Tschida. Surely you must know that conservatives have worked very hard to BLOCK medically accurate information about reproduction from being available, prefering that "abstinence only" sex education (which studies have shown leads to a HIGHER abortion rate) be taught in schools. Any information about birth control that's on offer, is there in spite of the pro-lifers, not because of them.

Because Conservatives (and not all of them at that)

Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 10:00am.

Think that sex education should be taught in the home doesn't mean that the information is not readily available does it? So I ask again how many sources of education on the matter must be available before you would admit that it is in fact readily available? C.

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

This is ridiculous

Submitted by Myrtle McFertile on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 10:06am.

I am not going to argue with you. Go find a dog to kick.

Yeah facts suck...

Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 10:07am.

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

I like facts

Submitted by Rick on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 10:19am.

Because Conservatives (and not all of them at that) Think that sex education should be taught in the home doesn't mean that the information is not readily available does it?

Yes, as a matter of fact. It absolutely does. It results in pressure on schools to restrict curriculum, and limit access from other organizations who could provide that education.

So if you can't teach it in school it is not readily available?

Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 10:23am.

Do you really believe what you are saying? How about some of the following sources; parents, library, doctor, internet, heck even planned parenthood? Those are not readily available? C.

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

Public policy works best...

Submitted by Rick on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 10:56am.

...when it's not hit or miss. Accurate, detailed information about reproduction and birth control should be at the core of the health curriculum in every school.

I agree...

Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 11:06am.

If that is what the parents in a particular school district want. If parents choose to have a curriculum based on abstinence, they should have that choice as to how their children are educated. Regardless the information is readily available often in school and certainly out of school. To suggest that it is not readily available is simply untrue. C.

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

As has happened several times in the past...

Submitted by Rick on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 11:13am.

...no one said it wasn't available. You made that part up. What MM said was that education should be the top priority if you care about life, and that some try to block that information. Both these statements seem true, and you haven't contested them. So who are you arguing with?

Actually it was you and Mertle McNugget who said it.

Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 1:56pm.

"doesn't mean that the information is not readily available does it? Yes, as a matter of fact. It absolutely does." My Question, your answer.I am not arguing since I don't need to argue the facts because they are clearly obvious. It was you who started the downward convolution and changing the subject only to come to some kind of conclusion you don't know who I am discussing this with. Why would you even say something after making the quote I referenced? C.

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

'cause...

Submitted by Rick on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:19pm.

...you seem to be stuck on something that you made up. It's possible that the information is "out there," yet not disseminated in an effective manner (i.e., taught in school), blocked by people who cause the exact opposite of their goal (i.e., more abortions). It pays to understand the consequences of your actions.

Do you even know what your talking about?

Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:34pm.

First of all it is you who disagreed. Not the other way around. Then you said it was available. Now it is not available enough. You have been wrong every time. The information is available. It is easy to get, easy to access, and takes no more than a trip to the library, or access to the internet, or a trip to the library where you can access the internet. That too hard? Go to a doctor. Just about any family practice or internal medicine doctor will help you out. To cold out side for you? Take a look in the phone book for some numbers to call. Ask your parents, and be honest. How many solutions are necessary before you are honest when it comes to the availability of sex education? What more do you want? Oh.... you want to demand a particular curriculum be taught in the class that suits your agenda. C.

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

You're not helping youself.

Submitted by Rick on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:40pm.

Being jerk just takes away from any message you have to offer.

When all else fails call names.

Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 3:31pm.

Anything to get off topic I suppose. C.

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

BS Rick. If people want to

Submitted by Norm on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:43pm.

BS Rick. If people want to find correct information it is not hard to find. How much more available does it need to be? Should we cram it down kids throats at school? What happens when the kid isn't paying attention, or flunks sex ed, then what?

You either don't want to get pregnant, and are willing to figure out how to stop that from happening (not tough) or you don't give a shit and you end up 17, a soon to be Dad w/ your 15 y/o girlfriend. If you don't want it run down to PP and get it taken out. Don't act like it's some huge f'ing conspiracy to populate the world.

Thanks for that...

Submitted by Rick on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:53pm.

...black and white thinking, Norm. That really helps.

Sometimes life is exactly

Submitted by Norm on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:55pm.

Sometimes life is exactly that. People try to muddy things up and make all kinds of gray shades. Why not simplify?

You really think that?

Submitted by Rick on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:56pm.

Rick

Submitted by Norm on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 3:01pm.

You communicate with children, right? What do you do when you have a child who gets overwhelmed by tons of decisions? You break it down, right? If the child can't choose which toy they want, you grab 2 of the toys they were looking at and they only have 2 to decide from now. You've eliminated that overwhelming stress of numbers (I had a brother like this growing up). couldn't/shouldn't the same be applied to life?

Didn't we have some discussion about liberals loving gray areas?

Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 3:32pm.

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

teen pregnancy went up when schools started giving out condoms

Submitted by eregular on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 12:51pm.

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/1998/jul/98072201.html critize the source, but this isn't the only study... "A U.S. Congressional Quarterly report indicates a significant increase in sexual diseases and births among unmarried teenagers, the National Center for Policy Analysis reported today. Furthermore, "the federal government is spending $39 billion a year to support families begun by unwed teen mothers, according to Advocates for Youth." Experts say the trend reflects greater sexual activity at a younger age. Seventeen percent of 15-year-old girls were sexually active in 1995, compared to 3% in the 1950s"

Do you have any comparisons

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 1:45pm.

Do you have any comparisons to Pioneer Days when women were usually married for years and already had a little brood started by the time they were 18?

Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals.
Peter Viereck, Yale Professor

Don't flatter yourself

Submitted by Myrtle McFertile on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 1:53pm.

Your "facts" don't frighten me; your trollish manner sends up a red flag that you delight in wasting time in pointless arguments. I don't hope to change your mind, and I can see very clearly that you have no interest in implementing measures that will bring the abortion rate down.

you are incorrect ever heard of crisis pregnancy center?

Submitted by eregular on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 12:48pm.

My mom used to work at a crisis pregnancy center. All they do is try to help women through the hard time they are having and try to convince them to give the child up for adoption if nothing else.

http://www.thecrisispregnancycenterct.org/

Do some research eh?

"All they do is try to help women..."

Submitted by Myrtle McFertile on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:05pm.

Sure about that? It seems that they also disseminate misinformation (who cares about science when you've got faith, right?) and harass and mislead frightened pregnant teenagers. That's not really the kind of help I had in mind.

This is typical.

Submitted by Phil Owen on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:20pm.

CareNet advertises all over the billboards in Olympia as a "crisis pregnancy center". They advertise their free pregnancy tests and ultrasounds... but they don't advertise their anti-abortion stance (well... they do advertise that to donors, but not to customers).

They lure in unsuspecting young women, and if those women divulge their concerns about being pregnant, they get dragged to a back room to watch terrifying videos and to get talked into carrying out the pregnancy full term.

This kind of dishonesty and disregard for women in crisis shows the true colors of "CareNet" type pro-lifers. They couldn't care less for life.

The Canaanite's Call

So it's better to end the

Submitted by Norm on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:39pm.

So it's better to end the life growing inside of you than to learn wtf they are going to do to you to extract that life? Ignorance is bliss?

Ignorance is bliss, indeed.

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:42pm.

Ignorance is bliss, indeed. That's the exact quote someone used in response to my RDOS post on Funky Winkerbean's cancer arc.

Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals.
Peter Viereck, Yale Professor

poor Funky

Submitted by Rob Richards on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:47pm.

I wish it would have been those Family Circus kids instead.

I'd like to see Jon back

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:56pm.

I'd like to see Jon back over Garfield in the driveway. Or Snoopy's beagle instincts kick in while he tears Woodstock to pieces.

Dude

Submitted by Norm on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 3:02pm.

You are morbid

LOL

Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:41pm.

Those intimidating octogenarians!

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

Everytime I mention my

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 10:55am.

Everytime I mention my nephew who was born at 26 weeks nobody responds, because then they have to justify killing somebody that age or older. And, as always, not one pro-choicer stepped in to say that the picture was something they support doing, or support a woman choosing to do. As always if a blankets thrown over it and eyes are kept tightly shut we can tell ourselves it's something else.

Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals.
Peter Viereck, Yale Professor

I think no one responded...

Submitted by Rick on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 10:57am.

...because no one is really sure what you're asking.

He was born at 26 weeks.

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 11:13am.

He was born at 26 weeks. Many in the pro-choice movement say fetus' at that age or older are not viable lives and should be aborted if the mother wishes.

He was plenty viable the day he was born, capable of feeling pain. He didn't acquire his senses merely by passing through the birth canal.

So I guess the question is A) do the Pro-Choicers really think an infant at that stage of gestation is just a "thing" which it's alright to terminate, B) Do they still want to claim that the fetus' don't feel it when they're chemically scalded or sawn into pieces while still alive, C) Would it have been okay to terminate him after he was already born, since some of the pictures these people are up in arms over show fetus' that were older than that.

Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals.
Peter Viereck, Yale Professor

I don't know anyone who holds those views

Submitted by Rick on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 11:19am.

Could you please say more about where you heard these things?

Rick, please, for crying out

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 11:34am.

Rick, please, for crying out loud.

Not one person invoking "women's rights" is saying that abortion should be limited to the first trimester when it's mostly dealing with clumps of cells. The fact that the offending pictures even exist is enough proof that it's being done when the child's at a viable age. There's plenty of testimony from women who saw the results of their choice and immediately knew they made the wrong decision(maybe that's why curtains and blankets are used more often.)

Partial-Birth Abortion (or whatever the sanitized medical abbreviation is, D&E I think) is done up through the ninth month. I'm sure you are aware of the grisly details this involves. Yet when word got out it was about to be banned the pro-choice crowd threw a fit saying their rights were jeopardized.

Either lives are viable at that early period, or not. If all types of abortion should be legal up through the ninth month, then women should be able to euthanize their preemies. When a pregnant woman is assaulted or murdered the death of her fetus shouldn't be considered a separate count of murder (they can come up with a new law, Termination without Consent)

Otherwise it's having your cake and eating it too.

Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals.
Peter Viereck, Yale Professor

Some facts for you...

Submitted by Rick on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 11:55am.

...from Wikipedia:

In 2003, from data collected in those areas of the United States that sufficiently reported gestational age, it was found that 88.2% of abortions were conducted at or prior to 12 weeks, 10.4% from 13 to 20 weeks, and 1.4% at or after 21 weeks [...] Similarly, in England and Wales in 2005, 90% of terminations occurred at or under 12 weeks, 9% between 13 to 19 weeks, and 1% at or over 20 weeks.
A 1998 aggregated study, from 27 countries, on the reasons women seek to terminate their pregnancies concluded that common factors cited to have influenced the abortion decision were: desire to delay or end childbearing, concern over the interruption of work or education, issues of financial or relationship stability, and perceived immaturity. A 2004 study in which American women at clinics answered a questionnaire yielded similar results.
Another American study in 2002 concluded that 54% of women who had an abortion were using a form of contraception at the time of becoming pregnant while 46% were not. Inconsistent use was reported by 49% of those using condoms and 76% of those using the combined oral contraceptive pill; 42% of those using condoms reported failure through slipping or breakage.

A couple of things seem evident in these stats. Late-term abortions are rare. Women who have abortions do so for responsible reasons. Finally, most were using some form of b/c when they became pregnant (although there is still a lot of ground to be made here, if only there were more education about reproduction).

Thus, abortion is a bad choice among many bad choices -- it is not anyone's preferred solution. Sometimes it is the least-bad choice. I don't know anyone who would justify it on its own -- removed from the real-world choices that women have to make. That's why your questions don't really make sense.

They make sense to people

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 12:07pm.

They make sense to people who actually have some sense. (might not've been a nice response, but neither was brushing me off with "you don't make sense")

If the stats are accurate then they're good for what they are. It still doesn't negate the fact that fetus' at a viable age can still be legally terminated with no reason necessary, and it especially doesn't negate the fact that they are capable of feeling what's being done to them.

Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals.
Peter Viereck, Yale Professor

Well, I think too often we

Submitted by Ehver Green on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 11:57am.

Well, I think too often we get hung up on "our" rights. Others have rights too. Even unborn babies. Too often this concept is lost in the battle to secure "our" rights. Me, me, me! And more me!

How about anyone who supports ...

Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:05pm.

Mid to late term abortion.

Here is democratic candidate Hillary Clinton's voting record http://www.ontheissues.org/Hillary_Clinton.htm#Abortion

Here is democratic candidate Barak Obama's voting record http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm#Abortion

Here is John Edwards record on abortion http://www.ontheissues.org/John_Edwards.htm#Abortion

That is an example of people who hold those views.

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

I don't think that the

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 11:38am.

I don't think that the decision to abort is just cut and dried, regardless of term of gestation. Furthermore, to abort at the 6 month period would definitely enter into some very critical issues - I'm suggesting life or death.

I'm glad your nephew is safe, healthy and loved, but unfortunately, the decision to abort or not abort at that point in pregnancy usually references to something critically wrong.

Consider him a miracle and understand that not every issue is a miracle in the making.

http://thurstonblog.blogspot.com/

If it could be restricted to

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 11:48am.

If it could be restricted to Life and Death moments that'd be one thing. I'd probably still disagree, but that'd still be one thing.

The law doesn't restrict it to Life and Death. She can choose in the 35th week to terminate and not even need a reason. That's the other thing.

I wonder (and this isn't really a response to your comment, I'm just throwing it out for all) if a woman can choose whether or not she wants to carry a child, and she can use her current financial state and planned future as a reasonable excuse, then how come the father doesn't have the right to decide whether his financial state or planned future can be jeopardized by the birth? Women have all the power here, and it's one-sided. If the father is excited for the kid, planned this day in advance, is financially stable and would be a good father, she can terminate just to spite him. Meanwhile, if he's living paycheck to paycheck, in and out of trouble with the law, suffering from depression, living in his car, she can decide to keep the baby and send the State and the Law after him to grab all the money they can off of him.

Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals.
Peter Viereck, Yale Professor

The law doesn't restrict it

Submitted by Norm on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:37pm.

The law doesn't restrict it to Life and Death. She can choose in the 35th week to terminate and not even need a reason. That's the other thing.

You sure about that? I haven't looked at this state, but "late-term abortion" is regulated by individual states apparently, and is open to interpretation but allowed by the supreme court. I havent looked at WA's but there are states out there that don't allow it past a certain point.

Some do, some don't. Same

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:39pm.

Some do, some don't. Same with Capital Punishment. Same with school Corporal Punishment. Same with paying State Income Taxes.

Some states do some things my way, but they'll do other things against me which I could've had gone my way in the state I first fled from.

Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals.
Peter Viereck, Yale Professor

abortion, mandarin style

Submitted by Rob Richards on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 9:50pm.

Woah

Submitted by Maehren on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 11:40am.

Pardon me, but um.... the information that you might get from those sources, ESPECIALLY the internet, your parents, your doctor, and the library, is likely to be a load of crap. I guarantee you, when I get pregnant, I will have my baby at LEAST one week before most doctors would ESTIMATE because their old system doesn't really mean much of anything - at least if you believe that not every woman's cycle is exactly the same. My parents? HAHAHAHAHAH! I certainly am not going to advocate believing whatever you find on the internet. And check the dates on those library books! I finally got health insurance, and I was SO excited that I didn't have to go to PP anymore - always a long wait, or someone waiting out front to get in my business - so I selected a female doctor in my Regence network who came highly recommended by several women I know. Alas, when I went to see her, she informed me that I should take pills to regulate my cycle, that my ideal weight is 127 lbs (I'm 5'6 FYI) and that she would be happy to remove the "unsightly" calcium deposit under my left eye. I told her, "My cycle IS regular, it is just longer than "normal", I look like a supermodel at 150 lbs, and I wasn't aware that my little tiny white spot under my eye a. existed, and b. was unsightly, but regardless, calcium deposits do not need to be removed." She essentially told me it was HER job as my doctor to tell me what was what. And by the way, her opinion of my methods of tracking my cycle was not great, even though it has worked like a charm. My point is, I have had to work very hard to acquire the information I have, as it was not available from the sources listed above. We all have opinions, but what are the facts? And who can we really trust to deliver them? Another point - while I HATE animal cruelty, I am not a vegetarian. I have standards as far as the meat I eat, basically I will not eat meat from an animal who has been caged, tortured, pumped full of hormones, forcefed and killed inhumanely. I recognize the food chain, and I don't think that it is wrong to eat another animal, as long as we respect that the animal's energy was taken from it and given to us. Same thing with carrots, now that we're on the subject. I also think that I should have a choice whether my fetus can survive in a robot or not. DANG! I can't get my paragraphs to separate in here. I must not be as smart as I thought.

And...

Submitted by Maehren on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 11:43am.

Although I certainly would not have a third trimester abortion, I am not going to assume that it is my duty to tell another woman that whatever reason she might have for doing such a thing doesn't matter. It's called "none of my (or your) business." Ever heard of it?

Hey!

Submitted by Maehren on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 12:27pm.

Where'd all those comments come from? Sorry, the last one I read was from Tschida or whatever at 10:23 am. I'm sticking to choice. Unfortunately, it is not a perfect system (like I said) but in my opinion it is the best way to keep women safe and the number of unwanted children down, at least for the moment. There are so many different circumstances that can come up, everyone has a personal story (like me) and to leave it open to choice gives everyone the opportunity to do what they feel is best for them and their unborn children. We don't have to be mean. That is never My intention at least. It's D+C. You know I dig you Merwyn.

Aww, shucks. Good to see you

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 12:31pm.

Aww, shucks. Good to see you and RK over here at Olyblog.

Say, if both of us get drunk enough to slur do our names sound identical?

Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals.
Peter Viereck, Yale Professor

What happened to live and let live?

Submitted by eregular on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 1:05pm.

Fertility rates are dropping in all "first world" countries around the world. What about the countless couples who wait years for children to adopt?

what about....

Submitted by Rob Richards on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:08pm.

What about all of the kids here in abusive foster care situations waiting to be adopted? We all want little babies, and if we can save them from another country then we score even more liberal points to show off at wine tastings and garden parties in the south capital neighborhood. My imaginary hat goes off to my friends that adopt teenagers or pre-teens from our own community who are classified as "troubled" or "dangerous" and give them a better life, that's really admirable.

Rob's cynacism aside...

Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:11pm.

I agree with him about parents who adopt older kids. It is hard emotionally trying work. I also personally know a woman who fosters and adopts special needs children, of various ages. It is a massive undertaking and worth appreciating. C.

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

nooooo

Submitted by Rob Richards on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:15pm.

I love YOU more.

Good question.

Submitted by Maehren on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 12:54pm.

We should try it sometime!

Imagine if Olyblog, like

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 1:56pm.

Imagine if Olyblog, like Democracy Now, was a daily public affairs show on KAOS. Since all the information's audio I could imagine

"Are we talking about Merwyn or Maehren?"
"You mean there's two Merwyns?"
"No, they're two different people."
"I'm talking about RK's wife, that's Merwyn, right?"
"Have you seen Maehren's picture on flikr, just do a search. I don't know what Tammy see's in him."

Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals.
Peter Viereck, Yale Professor

Pictures

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 1:09pm.

I've often wondered about the pictures used by the pro-life movement. I googled and found this website:

http://www.lifeandlibertyforwomen.org/truth_about_photos.html

http://thurstonblog.blogspot.com/

In response to what I read

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:06pm.

In response to what I read in the link

Misrepresentation

If the Rev. is lying then he's wrong. Even if what he's carrying really was a 20-week old stillborn it's showing what is being attacked during a 20-week abortion.

gestational age

It seems the bone of contention with that gruesome picture is what the actual age was. I'll believe that it's the later age, just as I'll believe that abortions happen at that age, and that I'll believe those are arms and legs I saw.

All other points on that site, concerning fakery of pictures and that bit about brainscans on the bottom I'll buy.

Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals.
Peter Viereck, Yale Professor

Completely different issue

Submitted by Maehren on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 1:15pm.

To Expect a woman (and a man for that matter) to choose to have a baby because someone Else wants the baby is lame. There are plenty of kids out there that need to be adopted, more than enough to go around to those who wish to adopt. People waiting to adopt children is not a problem that is a result of abortion. If we could just stop screening those danged adoptive parents... I agree that it would be nice if it didn't take so long, BUT I have never adopted a child, or attempted to, and I am unfamiliar with what goes on there. I do know that we are not short on orphans and unwanted kids.

Abortion

Submitted by Norm on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 1:56pm.

Legal or not, it will always be the issue that makes olyblog look crazy.

Thank you for the link

Submitted by Maehren on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:04pm.

I will say, those pictures do hurt to look at. Death is a very difficult concept to wrap your brain around, and I struggle with it here and there. I guess what it comes down to for me, is that it is not the deceased who is affected, but those left behind who try to comprehend what has happened with no knowledge of what happens next (after life I mean.) I always tell my husband that I want to die first, because I think the hardest position would be to live without your true love. I know this is selfish, and it basically means I want Him to be the one that suffers, but when I say it, what I mean is that I love him so much that I wouldn't want to live without him. People touch our lives, and when they are gone, their absence is felt, including an unborn fetus when it is aborted. You can ask almost any woman and/or man who has ever been party to such a decision, or anyone who has had to make the decision to pull or not pull the plug on a spouse, mother, father, child, or even anyone who has had to have their dog put down. Sadly, not everything in life is wonderful, and sometimes NONE of the options you have seem like the right thing, or even if you feel like you Are doing the right thing, it still hurts. We work with what we have, and hope that one of the things we have is support when we make our decisions. We also have to trust that time heals. Well, YOU don't have to, but that is how I feel about it.

The only people working to get the abortion rate down...

Submitted by Myrtle McFertile on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:12pm.

... are the "pro-choicers." By promoting birth control. These "pro-lifers" who block medically accurate sex education and try to limit access to birth control are RAISING the abortion rate. Apparently because they LOVE having something to bitch about. Despite being pro-choice, I would like to see abortion become unnecessary. And that will only happen through better education, better health care, and better access to birth control. Those crazy pro-lifers who think people should stop having sex in order to lower the abortion rate are living in a fantasy -- a weird, sexually repressed fantasy. It's not going to happen. If you weird pro-lifers were doing it right, you'd understand why.

If you can get away with

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 2:33pm.

If you can get away with making a blanket statement like that then I should get away with saying Pro-Choicers just want to rut around with no responsibility. Both extremes are offensive.

I know for a fact I'm not the exception to the rule in being Pro-Life while believing we need accurate free or low-cost birth control, sex education in the schools (and without any compromise to the knowledge taught), and universal healthcare. I'm also not alone in thinking religion needs to be kept out of the law.

I agree that there are wingnut whackjobs who identify themselves as Pro-Lifers. There's probably people with some screws loose on the other side too. Enough with the overall generalizations.

Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals.
Peter Viereck, Yale Professor

Ok, my suggestion

Submitted by Norm on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 3:11pm.

And I'll probably piss off all sides here, but it's just a suggestion.

First, Healthcare should be government sponsored and free. Everyone should have it (cept illegal immigrants, and maybe people who've smoked all their lives and now have breathing problems) and yes taxes are going to get raised to get there. We have too many stupid people in the world that won't take care of themselves though and it makes me sad to know they are suffering.

Second, with the first in mind, create better sex education (here's where I piss off the pro-lifers) and make it mandatory in school. Against your religion? Homeschool your kids you schmuck! Teenagers are already making stupid mistakes, maybe we can cut down on some of those mistakes.

Third, make birth control readily available. Put condoms under the universal health care plans and make them "good" condoms. The green yellow ones frequently broke when I was in school...or so the rumor went ;) . IF this puts Trojan out of business, well I'm incredibly sorry but your condoms are too expensive anyway. Make the pill/shot/iud/whatever free and easy to obtain so all of the fertile mertyles of the world don't have to worry about Pablo the Playboy knocking them up. On another note, FINISH THE DAMN MALE PILL! Good lord they've been talking about that since I was in high school, what's the f'ing hold up?

Fourth, (here's where I piss off the pro-choicers) only allow abortions within the first 14 weeks, unless medically necessary. Why? Because I'm pissy and if you can't figure out within 14 weeks that you are pregnant then you don't deserve a "get out of jail free" card. If you pass the deadline (dumbass) and you don't want the child there is always adoption. Don't like that option? Congratulations on being a new parent!

Any questions?

Adoption

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 3:20pm.

Great subject.

After many childless years, my nephew and his wife have adopted through the LDS church. This should set them back about $10,000. There is no insurance to cover adoption.

My son and his wife would like to adopt, as it appears the attempt to reverse his sterilization isn't working (he has children from a prior marriage). Again, even with two employed adults the cost to adopt is prohibitive.

I wish adoption was the solution but if you multiplied $10,000 times the 1.3 million abortions in one year, that would require $13,000,000,000 in available funds in the United States to adopt 1.3 million children.

$13 billion. Does that sound like a familiar number? Billion....where have I heard billion before?

http://thurstonblog.blogspot.com/

C'mon Larry, I just talked

Submitted by Norm on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 3:25pm.

C'mon Larry, I just talked about overhauling the health system, no reason we can't fix the adoption system as well. Break it down, why is the adoption costing $10,000? Is there something in there that can be eliminated?

We need a Plan B

Submitted by Guglielmo on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 3:47pm.

for abortion threads.

WTF?

Submitted by Maehren on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 3:49pm.

Can someone explain to me why I get on here, respond to a comment, get off (not "get off" but log off, you know) get back on, and there are like 30 comments in there that weren't there before I posted mine? I'm new here, sorry. "Fixing the system" sounds nice, but people are going to be unhappy no matter what, especially if the system prohibits them from making choices about something as personal as their bodies. Merwyn, your husband is hot.

Oh Jebus, I bring this on

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 3:55pm.

Oh Jebus, I bring this on myself. And I wonder why some people think I'm gay.

As for the comments question, the alternative (which happens too) is to post something heartfelt that means a lot to you and not have any response whatsoever.

Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals.
Peter Viereck, Yale Professor

Are you mad because you are

Submitted by Norm on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 4:04pm.

Are you mad because you are causing discussion? I'm not getting you here Mae.

Yes, some people are going to be unhappy, but that will happen no matter the result. There will always be someone unhappy. I was hoping to strike middleground there and make both sides a little unhappy.

Easy Norm, Maehren's

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 4:12pm.

Easy Norm, Maehren's alright. If you don't already know who she is you'd recognize her from the Broho.

I personally thought she was just being semi-snarky about everyone commenting while she's away.

Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals.
Peter Viereck, Yale Professor

What was it?

Submitted by Maehren on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 4:00pm.

That you didn't get a response to? I would probably have something to say if I read it......

Oh, no, I'm not trying to

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 4:09pm.

Oh, no, I'm not trying to fish or beg for comments. Sometimes I get 'em, sometimes I don't, that's life. Once in a while though I'll post something, somewhere, here or Myspace, blogger or even what's left of The Sphere, that I really hope brings in the discussion and it's nothing doing.

No big deal, though, because I certainly don't throw in my two-cents on every blessed post from everyone else.

The flipside is I'll post a two-sentence throwaway post which is only an excuse for a link, and will get dozens of (sometimes off-topic) responses.

Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals.
Peter Viereck, Yale Professor

Thread too long.

Submitted by Rick on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 4:15pm.

Go outside and play.

OlyBlog.net

OlyBlog is devoted to hyperlocal news and discussion specifically about Olympia, Washington. Contributors to OlyBlog are citizen journalists who care about their community and are tired of corporate media.

If you'd like to contribute, please register for an account. Here is a list of local news beats that need to be covered. You can post your news as a personal blog entry, and it will be reviewed (and possibly edited) for promotion to the front page. You can also send news via email. All members of OlyBlog agree to abide by our comment and fair use policies. If you are frustrated about something said in a comment thread, go here.

Now playing at: