Feminists

Status
Not open for further replies.
Though I'm not sure where the discussion fits into this board, I'll toss in my two bits on "choice" or whatever you choose to call it.

Folks, I think the anti-choice people, especially on a board such as this which spends so much time discussing how little we trust government to control and rescind our rights, must try to remember that if your government has the power and the authority to outlaw abortion, it also has the power to REQUIRE abortion.

In the current situation, government has nothing to say about a woman's choice as to what is going to happen within her reproductive system. Would anybody think that forced abortion is a good plan? Then don't advocate government getting into it at all.

Problems with the taxpayer funding it? Not a heck of a lot of that is going on, lemme tell you (the bride works in the field, I am not clueless). But if there were, it is health care, get government out of funding health care altogether and I'm a happy man. It ain't their job, and they do it VERY poorly.

Larry P.
 
What about the rights of the babies Larry? Sure, we could go far Libertarian on this issue and say the government shouldn't regulate very, very little. However, don't we all agree that murder should be illegal? What do you think is moving around in that mothers stomach when the spermie scores and finds an egg? It is the start of a new life.

If we can find drunk drivers and others who kill a mother and their unborn child guilty of two counts of man-slaughter, why do we allow abortion. It is not about a right to treat our bodies how we wish. It is about the unborn's rights. I used to think that the government had no place telling people what to do with their bodies. I knew abortion was wrong, but I felt that I didn't have a right to tell anyone else whether to get an abortion or not.

Then I realized I was being a hypocrite. If I don't condone murder of walking breathing humans, why should I condone murder of those who haven't reached that stage in their lives yet?

I am for less government, but that doesn't mean I am for murder and other crimes.
 
My understanding is that (before I was old enough to know what was going on) when abortion 'rights' were passed, that it was verbally guaranteed that "no one would use abortion for birth control". Women were only supposed to 'choose' to have anortions for medical reasons etc and no one wanted the gov't to decide when a woman 'needed' an abortion. Well, there is no doubt that it is being used for birth control now. People are getting abortions because they got themselves voluntarily into a bind and they want out. It is a matter of convenience, ("I just don't want to have this baby I made right now, because it is just not a good time, so let's get rid of it") and 2.4 million babies killed per year (more are aborted than born!) is proof of that.

Anyway, back to the topic!:

I don't think you feminists have anything to worry about. You are NOT going to lose your precious 'right' to choose the death of your babies.
Let's think logically here (something my side of the coin does well): We had THREE terms in a row of anti-abortion (or certainly not "pro-choice") Presidents in the White House and there was little attempt, and pretty much no success, in abolishing the 'right' to choose abortion.
If we do get another President in the White House that does not believe in the 'right' for abortion, believe me, he is going to have NO success in getting it repealed. You have nothing to fear from a Republican President. Even if he dared to try, he would never succeed, and you would not let him.
So, lighten up, and don't be a one-issue voter on this one. Your 'right' is not threatened. Concentrate on some other issues, abortion is a past issue.
 
Dr. Rob:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Until the republicans BREAK with the religuous right and step into the pro-choice realm, not too many feminists will stray to the republican side of the room.[/quote]

Stereotype.

mckysdad:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Despite my views on gun control, I also find it extraordinarily difficult to vote for Republican candidates who are controlled by the religious right. I understand that most pro-choice women will end up HAVING to vote Democrat due to that factor only.[/quote]

More stereotype.

Larry P.:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Problems with the taxpayer funding it? Not a heck of a lot of that is going on, lemme tell you (the bride works in the field, I am not clueless).But if there were, it is health care, ...[/quote]

Anecdotes don't win the argument, Larry. It is a note of interest that your wife is in the field, but I have an aunt in the field too. My anecdotes would provide evidence contrary to yours. Your assumptions are pretty obvious: "But if there were, it is health care, ..."? Oh, so let me think of an analogy here, okay, "No, we didn't stump for political funds in the White House, but if we did it was okay, because the other side was raising more money at the time and we might have lost the election." First one I could think of ... "It's not, but if it is, it's okay."

Well with that kind of logic, you can't be wrong for being so right!

Lastly, I promised myself I wouldn't respond to any of Kathryn's posts because of her obvious (to me) sensitivity and hair trigger, if you will. However, I point out the difference in how this thread has gone and ask her to compare it to how the posting went on Ms. BB.

This is for you Kathryn. This bulletin board, as exemplified by this thread, is open to many different ideas and opinions. The registrants of this board do not all agree. How could they? There are almost five thousand of us. But, as you find yourself on the threshold of losing an argument, being overwhelmed by sheer numbers of posts from the opposition or not being able to argue (debate) well enough to convince the evildoers on this board of your ideas, try not to get so frustrated. Know when to let your post sit so we can digest it and make a reasoned reply. Who knows, we may eventually agree. And (God forbid) you may too.

Lastly, this is The Firing Line and it is about responsible weapons ownership and the furthering of that. I suggest some of you go read the posted policies and leave this alone. As important as it obviously is to some of us, it's not appropriate for this BB.

I am guilty too. I responded in kind before I got preachy.
 
Kathryn's disappearance from this thread makes me uneasy.

Kathryn, are you still there?

Shame if she got chased off TFL.

Nice to hear from a smart chick who actually shoots.



------------------
*quack*
 
FWIW..
Kathryn hasn't been chased off. If she has indeed left, its by her own volition. She is just as welcome here as she was prior to the thread.
Apparently, we've (she and I) have had a personality conflict stemming from our differing beliefs. For that I sincerely apologise; I often get caught up in the exercise of debate itself and fail to examine the foundations of the beliefs/positions. It was also pointed out that I may have inadvertently blind-sided her by not making it obvious that I am a female. Once again, I apologise.



------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
Red Bull--just because we weren't aborted, it doesn't stand to reason our moms were all pro-life. Pro-life is anti-choice...yet you emphasize the fact that our mothers chose what to do. If one option isn't available to them, how is it a choice?

On the flip side of the coin, just because you support the opportunity to choose, it doesn't stand to reason you're ever going to have an abortion. Plenty of pro-choice people would never have an abortion themselves; they just don't want to go back to the days of coathangers and alleyways.

jdthaddeus--let's extrapolate your logic. The abortion issue certainly seems like it's gotten more heated lately, right? I can't say for sure, but I certainly don't remember any abortion clinic bombings or pro-life murders (a beautiful irony, btw...perhaps the doctors should have stayed in the womb) during Reagan's or Bush's terms. Lately it looks a lot like the two sides are becoming more and more polarized, and more extreme...meanwhile, "fetus rights" bills continue to be passed by Congress. They may not make a lot of headlines, but--like gun control laws--they're seen by many as stepping stones to abolition.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by walangkatapat:
I'm a male lesbian, would this count me as a feminist?
[/quote]

This is the strangest thing I have heard in a long time! So does this mean that being male your sexual compass is oriented toward the female gender? Maybe you should just e-mail me back with your response... :)

------------------
John/az

"The middle of the road between the extremes of good and evil, is evil. When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it's yellow..." RKBA!

[This message has been edited by John/az2 (edited March 23, 2000).]
 
Back to guns and feminists. I know a number of women who call themselves 'feminists", and some of them own guns, some don't. The original question Kathryn posed was why don't we see more feminists accepting "conservative" ideals?? Well this is a really open ended question require knowledge of feminist theory that most of us don't posess or fully comprehend. (e-mail me if you want to start this discussion, though I am by no means an expert) So I offered a simple and practical response, based on my experience. The feminists I know use the abortion issue as a litmus test for cantidates the way we use RTKBA records as a litmus test. Its ceratianly not the ONLY issue they look at, but its certainly an important one.

My additional 2¢

Dr.Rob
 
What the heck, DC, I didn'tknow you were a Wo-maine for a while myself, after first coming here.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>... It was also pointed out that I may have inadvertently blind-sided her by not making it obvious that I am a female. Once again, I apologise.[/quote]

Now, DC, you know better than that. You have nothing to apologize for that I can find to read here. Blind-sided because you didn't annaounce you were a woman? Now that's just plain (missing word sent in email).
 
DC, you have nothing to apologize for. Your comments were neither insensitive nor unprofessional. Just because she got defensive does not mean you need to apologize. Frankly, I am sick of feminists not listening to both sides of the debates. If you argue with them at all, they call you sexist or a bigot. Lemme re-phrase to be politically correct, MOST FEMINISTS, NOT ALL.

It should not matter whether you are a female or a male. If feminism is about equal treatment, then your sex should have no bearing on the topic discussed.

I can care less if I am bashed for these statements. It is just getting ridiculous that we have to pamper somebody. If their skin is not thick enough for a discussion, than I don't think they can handle intense RKBA debate.

This is a gun forum, I swore not to get involved with these kind of topics again. However, it just really pisses me off that we have to walk around on eggshells because somebody has thin skin. Last post in this topic.



[This message has been edited by Svt (edited March 23, 2000).]
 
DC breaks some stereotypes as a woman, it's true.

Stereotypes are pretty foolish to maintain. While it is sometimes a life-saver to know "what is typical," making full-scale assumptions about someone will always cause problems, the least of which being your own personal embarrassment.

I could make the above statement with regard to women and call myself a "feminist," but why not make it about all people and call myself an "egalitarian." Better yet, why worry so dadgummed much about labels? Are we so insecure that we have to belong to a cubby-holed little clique with a tight label that defines us?

Are we willing to let a group or a party represent our SELVES in totality?

Does the Republican Party represent me in every aspect, or even most of them? How 'bout the NRA? The ACLU? No. to all. But I'm glad they're all in existence, and I've subscribed to at least some, if not most, of their tenets over the years.

Does NOW represent Kathryn in every respect? How about the word "Feminism?"

I'll bet there's some part of that that she says "Well, I'm not so hot about that..." And that's okay. Just don't get so caught up with a group that you let them form your identity.

:)
 
Svt--I know you said you were done with the thread, but I just wanted to comment on something:

If you argue with them at all, they call you sexist or a bigot. Lemme re-phrase to be politically correct, MOST FEMINISTS, NOT ALL.

This isn't being PC, this is being logical (kinda). It's hard to judge how many people are feminists but aren't compelled to cry bigotry and sexism...just like it's hard for lots of folks to understand that there are plenty of RKBA supporters who aren't raving idiots who collect roadkill. Why? 'Cause the people munching opossum corpses attract more attention than those who go quietly about their business.
 
I'm with the majority, DC.
Your sex should have nothing to do with this issue. Just as whether you're a gun owner should have nothing to do with your opinion of the Bill of Rights. Disagreement on a subject should be the starting point, not the end of discussion.
Rich
 
I asked my daughter what this feminist business was about.She told me "don't worry
about it Dad--it's over--it was only a bunch
of office Johnnys and Jennies with time on their hands and no real work to do."
So there.BTW she's 35.
 
"they just don't want to go back to the days of coathangers and alleyways."

Now come on, that is such an overused cliche. In the search for truth as this board is dedicated to, just how many women really got abortions from coathangers before it was legal? Sounds like an emotionalist cliche to me, akin to "13 children a day die from guns", and I hear it at the end of every feminist's statement on the topic.

I will withhold my opinion on the abortion issue because this is not the forum for it.

Here is a thought for the feminazis (sorry, couldn't help throwing that in ;)): How about getting your ticket (the Democrats) to support gun Rights by speaking up to them? They represent YOU, so there is no need to switch to Republican and vote for them, just convince your ticket (the Dems) to represent your ideals...all of them, not just one of them.

For instance, the Republicans don't represent our Gun Rights very well but what we are trying to do is kick them in the butt and MAKE them represent us on our issues, because that is their job.
 
GlockPoop makes a good point. One thing I have learned in the past few years is that all politicians that support RKBA aren't Republican. Hell, all conservatives aren't Republican! Neither are all Republicans conservative.

Sooo, GPoop's point is a sleeper that requires further thought: just because you support RKBA doesn't mean you have to vote Republican. Just get your Rep and Sen to do right, whatever his party!
 
"So there.BTW she's 35."

That must make it expert testimony then. I guess she got the Official Feminist Newsletter stating the movement was ending?

Glock--there's rhetoric on both sides. Pro-life people invoke images of babies being sucked through Wet/Dry Vacs and piles of fetuses stacked thousands high.

As for actual statistics, I don't think many people filled out the "Yes, I had a coat hanger abortion" survey...although it would be interesting to find out what the numbers were if such stats could be trusted at all.

What's true is that blocking access to abortions doesn't stop the demand for them, and in the absence of better sex education and much better access to birth control, abortions are going to stick around--by hook or by crook.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Now come on, that is such an overused cliche. In the search for truth as this board is dedicated to, just how many women really got abortions from coathangers before it was legal? Sounds like an emotionalist cliche to me, akin to "13 children a day die from guns", and I hear it at the end of every feminist's statement on the topic.[/quote]

It is probably emotionalist, yes, but it's an issue that many women are rightly emotional about, just like gun owners get emotional when discussing RKBA.

I don't have numbers for you, but I do wear a set of dog tags with the names of women who have died from illegal back-alley abortions. A friend of mine who is the director of the Richmond Planned Parenthood clinic wears a small gold coat hanger on a chain around her neck...maybe I could ask her for statistics...

------------------
*quack*
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top