'Time Bomb'
[NAFDA] Spike-centric discussion. Lusty, lewd (only occasionally crude), risqué (and frisqué), bawdy (Oh, lawdy!), flirty ('cuz we're purty), raunchy talk inside. Caveat lector.
There was something in the paper within the past week or so where the author was pointing out that, statistically, when health care is available, the number of abortions goes down.
One of the author's points was that when health care is available, women can get birth control ... which, unfortunately, is also a no-no to many of the "pro-life" people.
And part of "someone pro-life I can talk to" is that once you DO end up in that conversation you can wind up hearing things like "Well, if a woman's life is ACTUALLY in danger..." or "It might be different in just the first few weeks" and reply, "Well, that's actually the law as it stands. Abortions are very much the most common in the first trimester and INCREDIBLY difficult to get in the last. You've been lied to. A lot." and show them actual cites of actual laws.
Most caring people do not want to see other people dead. Most pro-life people are trying to protect those as they see as most vulnerable in the scenario. Most pro-choice people want the very same thing. There is a lot of common ground there if you can ignore the biggest assholes.
All I'm saying is that I'm not comfortable siding with a group whose official stance is "This health care bill won't pay for abortions! Hooray!" just because they're opposing a group whose official stance is "This health care bill sucks because abortions are still legal."
... which, unfortunately, is also a no-no to many of the "pro-life" people.
I honstly don't know how MANY though.
Technically, yes, the Roman Catholic Church is a big opponent of birth control. In practice, however, that's not always so much the case. Some of your hardcore fundie Christian suckers are as well, but most have no problem with family planning within a marriage - their gripe is with promiscuity.
So I'd call that a qualified "many". Lots of religious people have problems with sex outside of marriage and if they think access to birth control ENCOURAGES it they're not going to like it. If you can convince them, however, that statistically that is not the case there is, again, room to work together.
I'm all "let's find common ground, y'all" lately. Dunno what that is.
All I'm saying is that I'm not comfortable siding with a group whose official stance is "This health care bill won't pay for abortions! Hooray!" just because they're opposing a group whose official stance is "This health care bill sucks because abortions are still legal."
I'm not siding with them by any means. I'm just in the "Another reason Stupak is a DB" camp.
Man, I tried to have a similar conversation before the election with a friend who was single-issue voting on abortion. I said that if you looked at the 2 candidates' platforms, there is no way that McCain's was truly more "pro-life" than Obama's. No fucking way in hell.
If you believe abortion is murdering babies, it's hard to vote for the guy who doesn't want to outlaw it.
Our local source food club has just started delivering seltzer. In vintage bottles. Someone tell me that I don't need it.
You don't need it, Vortex. You need a Soda Club: [link]
The Soda Club (renamed Soda Stream -- why?) is AWESOME.
One of the author's points was that when health care is available, women can get birth control ... which, unfortunately, is also a no-no to many of the "pro-life" people.
Well that, and you might actually consider having children if you don't think prenatal care, delivery and post-natal and health care for your kids is going to ruin you financially.