"The Minority Report" and thoughtcrime is fiction; let's keep it that way. If you're a Catholic, don't force me to live as a Catholic.
Respect the Constitution. If you can muster enough votes to make an amendment, then give it a try. But until and unless there is a "no choice" amendment and/or separation of church and state is amended away, the Constitution as-is is still the highest law—obey it.
Who would have thought that two brilliant Al Jazeera women journalists would make the best new TV program on the politics of abortion out there. And who would guess that they pulled this off on the cusp of our presidential political conventions when the "issue" is at a boiling point. They have, they did. (...)
You are right, I was overstating. But if all women had access to birth control, if Plan B was readily available, if Planned Parenthood is supported, if children receive appropriate sex ed, etc.
Well, as a necessary medical procedure, we will always need abortions. There are a lot of ways to reduce the need for them, like, oh I don't know, maybe a little EDUCATION for starters. But there will always be instances where an abortion is the best, or the 'least bad' medical decision. And the fact remains, it is not anyone else's business.
You are right, I was overstating. But if all women had access to birth control, if Plan B was readily available, if Planned Parenthood is supported, if children receive appropriate sex ed, etc.
When the government stops interfering with a woman's right to determine her own choices, we will no longer need abortion.
Well, as a necessary medical procedure, we will always need abortions. There are a lot of ways to reduce the need for them, like, oh I don't know, maybe a little EDUCATION for starters. But there will always be instances where an abortion is the best, or the 'least bad' medical decision. And the fact remains, it is not anyone else's business.
Thank you. I like to tell people "I wish there were not any abortions, but I know sometimes they are necessary, and in those cases it is none of my damn business".
There's an article somewhere about Doctor George Tiller and one of his patients. It's heartbreaking. Having an abortion was the least horrific thing in that little girl's life.
When the government stops interfering with a woman's right to determine her own choices, we will no longer need abortion.
I will still call myself pro - choice. I am not pro - abortion or anti - abortion. Its just nobody's business but the woman's and her doctor's.
Thank you. I like to tell people "I wish there were not any abortions, but I know sometimes they are necessary, and in those cases it is none of my damn business".
There's an article somewhere about Doctor George Tiller and one of his patients. It's heartbreaking. Having an abortion was the least horrific thing in that little girl's life.
Last week, I wrote a post about how NPR identifies people who support or oppose abortion. It engendered a lively debate inside and outside NPR. Today, some top editors got together to review the 2005 policy and decided to no longer use "pro-choice" or "pro-life."
Here's the memo that was just distributed to all NPR staff:
"NPR News is revising the terms we use to describe people and groups involved in the abortion debate.
This updated policy is aimed at ensuring the words we speak and write are as clear, consistent and neutral as possible. This is important given that written text is such an integral part of our work.
On the air, we should use "abortion rights supporter(s)/advocate(s)" and "abortion rights opponent(s)" or derivations thereof (for example: "advocates of abortion rights"). It is acceptable to use the phrase "anti-abortion", but do not use the term "pro-abortion rights".
Digital News will continue to use the AP style book for online content, which mirrors the revised NPR policy.
Do not use "pro-life" and "pro-choice" in copy except when used in the name of a group. Of course, when the terms are used in an actuality they should remain."
Thanks David
David Sweeney Managing Editor
I will still call myself pro - choice. I am not pro - abortion or anti - abortion. Its just nobody's business but the woman's and her doctor's.
Last week, I wrote a post about how NPR identifies people who support or oppose abortion. It engendered a lively debate inside and outside NPR. Today, some top editors got together to review the 2005 policy and decided to no longer use "pro-choice" or "pro-life."
Here's the memo that was just distributed to all NPR staff:
"NPR News is revising the terms we use to describe people and groups involved in the abortion debate.
This updated policy is aimed at ensuring the words we speak and write are as clear, consistent and neutral as possible. This is important given that written text is such an integral part of our work.
On the air, we should use "abortion rights supporter(s)/advocate(s)" and "abortion rights opponent(s)" or derivations thereof (for example: "advocates of abortion rights"). It is acceptable to use the phrase "anti-abortion", but do not use the term "pro-abortion rights".
Digital News will continue to use the AP style book for online content, which mirrors the revised NPR policy.
Do not use "pro-life" and "pro-choice" in copy except when used in the name of a group. Of course, when the terms are used in an actuality they should remain."
I'm very uncomfortable with the recent rage of "Coat Hanger" response to the Stupak amendment on the Health Care bill.
Can someone please explain — based on the amendment, not a blog — What exactly is wrong with the amendment.
Here is a good place to start: LA Times Stupak Amendment explained. It has a link to the actual amendment — and when you see it, you'll understand why it's so confusing.
From my understanding, the bill prevents public funding for Abortion. Given the tenor of public opinion in this country, I agree that public monies should NEVER pay for elective abortion.
Abortions are safe and available — even to low income women. This Amendment does NOTHING to restrict abortion, it simply takes public money out of it.
How is this "A Serious Assault on Abortion Rights"?
I think we need to calm down an overreaction to this bill, and not lose focus on the really important issues of Health Care.
Abortions are not necessarily available to low income women, esp in rural areas. One of the reasons these women have later term abortions is because they are unable to get to a clinic until they are past the 3 month mark, due to their circumstances.
Women and their drs should be able to make this decision, not Bart Stupak. This is sexual discrimination, imo. The Republicans, for the most part, although this jerk is a Dem, use this as a hot button, to keep constituents paying attention. BTW, the Republican National Committee's health insurance policy pays for elective abortions!
I agree with you Rose, about the coat hanger thing, but I guess they are trying to get their very valid point across.
I'm very uncomfortable with the recent rage of "Coat Hanger" response to the Stupak amendment on the Health Care bill.
Can someone please explain — based on the amendment, not a blog — What exactly is wrong with the amendment.
Here is a good place to start: LA Times Stupak Amendment explained. It has a link to the actual amendment — and when you see it, you'll understand why it's so confusing.
From my understanding, the bill prevents public funding for Abortion. Given the tenor of public opinion in this country, I agree that public monies should NEVER pay for elective abortion.
Abortions are safe and available — even to low income women. This Amendment does NOTHING to restrict abortion, it simply takes public money out of it.
How is this "A Serious Assault on Abortion Rights"?
I think we need to calm down an overreaction to this bill, and not lose focus on the really important issues of Health Care.
"The Minority Report" and thoughtcrime is fiction; let's keep it that way. If you're a Catholic, don't force me to live as a Catholic.
