A Small Victory

From the 9/11 Commission's report:

[Radical Islamism] is not a position with which Americans can bargain or negotiate. With it there is no common ground -- not even respect for life -- on which to begin a dialogue. It can only be destroyed or utterly isolated.

You let one Ann Coulter column put you off conservatives? Yep, she's the super-snarky Pit Bull of my ideological side. Take out the snark and you take out much of the reason people really read her writing.

But she's far from the only conservative writer and there are thousands of us for every one of her. Don't get scared away quite yet. :)

This Democrat is appalled by the "I had an Abortion" T-shirt.

Abortion is about fixing mistakes. Would you wear a shirt that says "I rear-ended someone on the Interstate"?

When abortion stops being about fixing mistakes, it crosses the line for me.

Anybody know where one might find a look alike with "My Mom didn't have an Abortion" T-Shirts one might carry to offer to anyone encountered wearing one of those self centered, in your face, bad taste garments so you could offer them something to change into?

Nicely, of course.

It's people like Michael Savage and, to a lesser extent (but only slightly) Ann Coulter, who give the rest of us fairly-normal, rational conservatives a bad name. I cringe every time I try to read a Coulter piece because it starts out perfectly sane. And then, about 25-35 percent through, it shoots off into crazyland.

Unfortunately, what we do to portray Dems as radicals, they do right back to us with the Religious Right, Michael Savage, and Ann Coulter.

How about defining yourself, instead of letting Savage or Coulter do it for you?

The Right is supposed to be individuals, not a Collective.

Note how many of us conservatives disavow Savage and Coulter and how few liberals disavow Moore (heck, Clinton nearly supported the premise of F 9/11 in his interview with Rolling Stone!)

Do we have our extremists? Sure, but look at how we disavow them or, at worst, ignore them, compared to how liberals embrace their "desperados".

If PP is so "proud" of their t-shirts, why didn't they make the lettering bigger?

How about a t-shirt that says "I had a Dilation and Curettage & all I got was this lousy T-shirt"

Mark,

Sorry to inform you but, NOW and Planned Parenthood have dictated that males have no right to voice any opinion regarding the abortion issue. Unless, of course, you agree to everything said by the feminist movement.

NOW and Planned Parenthood do not care what you think, to them the male opinion on abortion is irrelevant.

Yes it is your sperm, your off-spring, however, NOW and Planned Parenthood advocate that females to have complete and total control over the decision to exterminate your contribution.

Males have no rights regarding 'Pro-choice' as the decision has been dictated that females only have this right.

I am a female who believes that because males contribute to half the reproduction equation, you do have rights. My sista's seem to believe otherwise.

That said, imagine where you would be had your mother and father fallen prey to NOW and Planned Parenthood's rhetoric.

The shirt is disgusting; I mentioned it earlier somewhere, either in my blog or in a comment...Can't remember which. It is promoted on Soapbox, Amy Richards other site.
Ugh.
I don't see what there is to take pride in about having had an abortion.

At least now Planned Parenthood can not take the stand that they offer anything other then the advice that you should have an abortion. Having an abortion is now akin to surviving cancer in their eyes. This is clear indication that the left and not even the far left is out of sync with mainstream america.

I just can't get past the shirt. I tried, I even read the whole post, but that damn shirt. It crawls up into my brain and picks a fight with logic. Who would wear something like that? But why? For what purpose? Ooooooowww, oh christwagons, my ear is bleeding. I think...I'm having an aneurysm.

So would the shirt be amusing if a man wore it?

I'm not apalled at all. I find it refreshing that the lunatic fringe is being good enough to so readily identify themselves. In a sense this helps make Planned Parenthoods case that some people just really shouldn't reproduce.

I was going to say that PP no more represents mainstream Dems than Coulter represents Republicans, but since Coulter is a freelance loose cannon and Feld is speaking at the convention even I'd have a hard time pulling that one out of my tinfoil Bush bashing hat. Planned Parenthoods advocacy of choice is clearly a key part of what divides the parties. Since I can't, at least with a straight face, claim she doesn't speak for the party, I can only hope that the message is sent that this is a one issue woman and there is much more going on. Kerry's ongoing inability to separate the extremists from the core base is about the only thing that can torpedo him. Even as a supporter I'm coming to dread his cabinent apointees if he can't even manage a campaign staff.

Contrast this with the RNC speaker list. A list that is a very determined effort to appeal to the center and present the Republicans as moderates. Arnold, Pataki, Liz Dole, Powell, etc. -- how Trent Lott snuck in is beyond me, Frist I guess they had to let play -- where are the Santorums and Falwells?

We Dems are so going to screw this up. We have you guys. If the vote was today it would be damn near evenly split (Remarkable in a time of war against an incumbent, you should really look at that regardless of the results. Bush is so far from a mandate he may as well be governing from Japan), but after we finishing emptying the asylums of every half-baked radical with an agenda and sixties style 'activist' we'll be lucky to get 20% of the popular vote.

I wonder if any Democrats are equally appalled at the Planned Parenthood shirts as I am at Coulter's column?

I am not a Democrat; I voted for Bush in 2000 and will vote for him again this year.

But I'm a shitty Republican, because I'm pro-choice.

And I understand what they were after with that t-shirt. And I don't think it's "repulsive."

They are trying to say, not every woman who has had an abortion is a careless whore; not every woman who has had an abortion is a selfish monster; not every woman who has had an abortion did so because she found herself knocked up with triplets and worried it would upset her lecture schedule, so hey, let's reduce it to just one!

(That last is from a recent NYT article.)

Maybe the Supreme Court had to make up a heretofore nonexistent "right to privacy" to strike down abortion laws and maybe that was a terrible way to decide the issue. You could definitely count me in that camp; on that score, I agree with many conservatives. While I happen to like the result, the decision was poor.

But I do get the t-shirt. If I had ever had an abortion myself, I personally would not want to wear such a shirt. I would not want perfect strangers accosting me in the mall to harass me about that decision.

But I can easily understand others thinking it's a good idea, a way to stand up and be counted for making a decision that I suspect is seldom as easy, as cut-and-dried, as some pro-lifers make it out to be.

(As for Coulter, what can I say?--WORD. Polarizing and divisive.)

I don't get the shirt. If I was being mugged and I had to kill the mugger to save my own life, it would not be appropriate to where a shirt that says 'I killed a man.' Although I may have felt like that's what I had to do to survive, that qualifier alone does not mean that it is something I should be proud of.

ilyka, I'm pro-choice, too, (though what would be called a reluctant pro-choice) but the shirt is beyond the pale. The great divide is no longer between pro-choice and complete abolition of abortion, it's between those who think of it as a political event to be shared/celebrated and those who think it is, at best, a personal tragedy. Pro-lifers are really not even in this last fight..their position has been set from day one. But more and more people are really rethinking the position of PP, NOW, NARAL which can be summed up as: any abortion at any time at any age under any circumstance must be available and affordable and no one has a right to question or judge or even comment on it.

re: Ann Coulter ... I read her like I do Maureen Dowd; meaning, not at all. :-)

There are SO many other thoughtful, thought provoking conservative writers, but I guess polite 6'4" grey-haired Jews aren't quite as photogenic as snarky half-starved blonde WASPs for the morning shows. Maybe Ann just needs a couple blueberry muffins to take the edge off. ;-)

BTW I was home yesterday to listen to Dennis Prager's coverage of the Dem convention and he really had some revealing interviews with delegates and others on the floor. I'm in awe of his interviewing skills. I recommend anyone who can to catch him sometime this week.

I saw Ron Reagan wearing a T-shirt that said, "My mom wish she had aborted me."

Maybe that was my imagination.

Sorry. I love Ann. I've read Slander and am in the beginning chapter of Treason. Her humor is refreshing, and she in no way can be compared to the lunatics on the left - in my opinion, anyway. I mean, at least what she says is TRUE and can be documented - unlike the ravings of Gore and the fabricating of Moore.

Sometimes the ridiculousness of the left needs to be pointed out. She doesn't need to make stuff up to be funny, she just needs to tell it like it is. I for one respect her and am glad someone like her has the...excuse me...balls to be loud and obnoxious when the situation warrants it. I wish I had the same knowledge of history that she does so when some idiot starts spouting the Democratic Groupthink I can come back with hard facts wrapped in sarcasm and humor like she does.

I'd rather have my snark with a healthy dose of The Truth. Just my $0.02.

Syn,
In light of your comments, which I agree are 100% true, I wonder when men will have the power to stand up and say "Eighteen plus years of $300+ a month child support payments would be a real inconvenience to me. I'm opting out of having this child."
NOT that I would ever say that, of course, but if a woman can opt out, I should be able to as well. After all, half of that "mass of tissue" is mine...correct?

"(How many of the Islamofacists took the time to see Dawn of the Dead?) "

In a story about Mohammed Atta's life and the experiences that ended with him leading the 9/11 mass murderers, I read that he reacted to his first US movie by sitting in the theater muttering "chaos, chaos, chaos" over and over. It was quite clear the movie didn't just leave him unimpressed, but angry and disgusted.

The movie?

"Snow White and the Seven Dwarves"

I wish I could remember where I read that. It seems too good to be true, so I'm thinking I may have imagined it.

Good points.

Here's a Democrat that is appalled by Ann Coulter, Michael Moore, the Planned Parenthood T-Shirt, Rick Santorum, terrorism of all stripes, corruption of all stripes...

There are a lot of us.

No party or ideology has a lock on virtue, and it would be nice if everyone remembered that.

Just read the Coulter column - you have to admit the '7-11 Challenge' part that ends with Kucinich explaining how he got taken by a couple of 11 year olds is pretty funny....

Isn't "your women are ugly" the kind of insult that rival high schools throw at each other? Ann Coulter isn't the Michael Moore of the right, she's the Wonkette.

I think Coulter is more or less the Maureen Dowd of the Right. What annoys me most about Coulter and Savage is that I get the sense they don't really believe their own shtick. They're just purposely trying to say things in the most "outrageous" way possible, and draw attention to themselves.

They are trying to say, not every woman who has had an abortion is a careless whore; not every woman who has had an abortion is a selfish monster; not every woman who has had an abortion did so because she found herself knocked up with triplets and worried it would upset her lecture schedule, so hey, let's reduce it to just one!

I consider myself a conservative; I think the governemt should butt out of our lives. That goes for abortion too! I think anyone should have a choice about abortion because if it were illegal then people would let morons do it for/to them in dirty back rooms. That would be wrong. I also feel that adoption is a good idea. Carrying your baby to term and giving it up for adoption is a fine thing and an excellent alternative to killing babies. I think adoption should be encouraged. I also think it is good to make contraceptives and prophylactics available to kids some how so that when they have that loss of self control they will be properly armed to prevent pregnancies. I also like it when young people encourage abstinence. Nothing wrong with that at all. I don't see why abstinence makes PP people so mad. But I think the government should butt out of this issue and should not be either pro or con.

I consider myself conservative and I think drugs should be legalized to stop funding gangs. And drug use should be considered a disease; If being fat is a disease then certainly drug use is. I think the government should butt out again...

And don't even get me started about taxes... Damn that huge government that tosses my money around like it was free or something...

I also do not believe in organized religions. I have a personal view that we keep coming back. But I can see a need for religion and was never offended by anyone praying or saying "In God we trust", "One nation, under God...", "Bless this food..." I am not the least offended and I am actually comforted that so many people want to profess peaceful religions that are into helping people. No problem here either. I am conservative. And there are a lot of us over here that feel like government is too large and too controlling and too intrusive but that is the fault of Congress and not the president so much.

I will vote for Bush. No question here at all.

Do we have our extremists? Sure, but look at how we disavow them or, at worst, ignore them, compared to how liberals embrace their "desperados".

And somehow, that makes us conservatives (moderates, really) the owners of some moral high road? Please. If conservatives have some moral high road, it's because we're right about things.

If you believe in something strongly enough, why can't you express it strongly enough? Because that would be "judgmental". And thanks to our lily livered, spineless society, that would not be polite. Here is a point where liberals have been very successful - emasculating the country.

I spy a lot of the standard moral equivalence BS on this thread, and to be frank, I'm not buying it. There is no comparison between Ann Coulter and Michael Moore. Moore has to lie to entertain; Ann just tells the truth.

So what if this kind of humor gets thrown back in your face? Challenge that person to disprove the points. Stand up for your beliefs.

Maybe it's time for people in this country to choose sides, and not be so damn wishy-washy. People complain when Kerry waffles, but those people are guilty of the same thing.

TV (Harry)

Well, having an abortion is nothing to be ashamed about. I see this shirt about just having a valid choice and chosing it. No different than the "I chose life" shirts you see around.

And as far as Ann goes, you must have a stronger stomach than me, because I can't read her for more than two sentences before my eyes go all wonky.

"Well, now you can proudly display your choice on a t shirt. How repulsive.....Let's face it, I'm really not a true conservative (an atheist who supports gay marriage? No way), but there are days I'm enticed by all their pretty words and emotions."

I am both a Democrat and a Buddhist and, as a Buddhist, I have a perfectly consistent moral view on the act of abortion. It is killing and the gravest karmic consequences in future lives will ripen for the individual who makes such a choice. Just as the same consequences will arise, say, for someone who bombs an abortion clinic and kills someone in the process.

I can also understand the viewpoint of the Christian anti-abortion activist. It is completely consistent with the premises of Christian belief that God has forbidden murder.
Some, generally the Catholic ones, are more lucid about it than others, but the overall logic is clear even when the experssion is sometimes, frankly, addlepated.

But I stand bewildered how anyone who is so determinedly atheist in point of view as yourself can truly say anything more than that they reject abortion solely because it offends there own private taste.

And, in the case of other "moral values" propaganda from the conservative side of the house, the principle is the same: if you have no religious belief, how can it be anything but "pretty words and emotions" or, in other words, gush and wind driven by bile and spleen.

I haven't read Ann Coulter deeply, because she repels me, but I strongly suspect that she, also, is a secular "conservative" full of gush and wind driven by bile and spleen.

When private taste meets “private choice” the results are a toss-up. So, no, I'm not particularly appalled by the t-shirt. It is only a rag, after all.

I am dismayed by killing. All killing, no matter where or who. Because I have a clear understanding of the interminable suffering which will rebound on the perpetrators and I know that no one would dare to do it if they really understood the consequences. And I pray daily that both the ignorance and the suffering eventually cease.

And this is more than just pretty words and emotions.

Whether Ann Coulter is to your taste or not, the real story there is that someone at USA Today hired her to write a daily column at the Spawn of Sat- Oops, Democrat -- convention, and then was shocked, shocked! to not get a paean of praise for the liberal Democrats. This is about like hiring a grunge band to play a wedding and then being surprised that they aren't a string quartet. Anyone who had read any of Ms. Coulter's columns or books would have known what to expect. The USA Today is the idiot in this transaction.

Laurence - I think the male equivalent would say, "I made my girlfriend have an abortion"

How's about "My Mom Didn't Have An Abortion and All I Got Was This Lousy Life"

Appalling.

I love Coulter's comment about 'gay men identifying themselves'. Snarky observations about her gay male friends aside, does this mean Republicans have to use a hanky code now? Green hanky in the left pocket if you're an Objectivitist free-marketer, right pocket if you believe in subsidies for small businesses?

Moore has to lie to entertain; Ann just tells the truth.

When even David Horowitz distances himself from Coulter you know things have gone into la-la land. She does, in fact, just make stuff up and all you do is hand the Left ammo when you reach up to reverently touch the hem of her miniskirt.

I mean, c'mon: everybody at the DNC with an American flag T-shirt is part of the Secret Republican Coalition? All "the pretty girls" are Coulter fans? (Yes, they too wish to be underfed, single-girl bleach blonde pseudo-Christians when they grow up...)

The T-shirts are probably somebody's misguided attempt at a version of those "We Are Everywhere" or "This is what a feminist looks like" buttons.

on edit: Yes, I know Coulter's column was supposed to be humorous - but it's a kind of humor that often gets thrown back in your face. If you are considered part of the politics that Coulter represents - which I so often am - then it gets thrown at you also and that makes it hard to have a firm ground to stand on when you're trying to claim the other party is the intolerant one]

Michele, you disarm them w/a laugh, roll of the eyes and and, Of course.....

You've got to stop being liked - never let them see you cry.

I mean, after all, it's not like the FORMER VP OF THE US called you a "digital brown shirt" is it? Yet when I start to rant against my dem friends, I throw it in there.

Anyone tells me they didn't need their tax refund, I'm going to ask them that it must have felt good to rip up the check. Oh, you didn't?? Did you.....

And when they ask what I did w/it, I'm going to tell the truth.

Because, you see, I'm an evil --------------republican...OF COURSE I couldn't be expected to....., especially when my husband is an evil, capitalistic white oppressor of (fill in the blank)who owns his own business - even tho it's people like my husband who are the backbone of this country - not companies like Microsoft. But when someone is more tolerant, giving, compassionate as I've been told ad nauseum, one must expect to walk the talk.

The T-shirt sucks.

I'm against Big Government, but only in the way I'm against invasion of privacy. I don't like government prying into my financial records, watching what books I read, or using my taxes to fund paramilitary groups in third world countries to topple elected leaders, or leaders we supported a short time ago but now decided we don't. (Not referring to Iraq here obviously... Iraq was not a stealth paramilitary fund campaign)

I'm NOT against big government providing jobs to people so long as the jobs DO SOMETHING VALUABLE. Having a huge government agency that provides jobs to people for the sole purpose of increasing the agency's budget is wrong. I don't mind, however, the government using surplus labor to improve our parks, rebuild our schools, and do things we at least see a benefit from.

( -- i'm separating out a section of this comment, will paste at the end)

--- As for Coulter, well I dislike that kind of "humor" as I dislike the idea of our politics turning into Jerry Springer. I feel it lowers the discourse level in America, and I'd dislike anyone on either side who did that.

Do I dislike Moore? A little, but not as much. I've never heard him mention us killing Republicans, locking them up, or any other type of "humor" thats not funny. For the record, she HAS been called on a lot of her comments that were innacurate, and she says the same thing Al Franken says... "it's just humor... it's not meant to be accurate".

I dislike any political commentary that de-humanizes the other side... especially when innacurate. It's divisive and leads to further polarization rather than understanding between groups.

(--- ok here's the excerpted part... it's on social class... i figured I'd separate it so people not interested could skip --)

Look... we're all slaves to the rich. Whether they're free-market idealouges, or limozine liberals, we're slaves to them. And as long as we realize this, it's fine to BE a slave, so long as you stand up for yourself. Here's the ultimate problem of ANY social structure that has a pyramid control structure:

The rich have three options, or perhaps four, on how to deal with the lower rungs of society when work is short.

One: let them starve. Not really a good option as it often leads to revolution .

Two: give them unemployment. Not really a good option for extended periods - we don't want people 100% dependent on government and getting used to not working at all. Entitlement is not the way to go.

Three: Provide jobs for them that accomplish some national goal. Rebuild Schools, etc

Four: Military, though that kinda fits in with three in that it provides jobs for the national goal of defense.

MOST people WANT to work. Most people are willing to put in their day's work.

I know some of you there are saying, "you're not even entitled to a job. We have no responsibility to employ you." You're right. There is no national responsibility to employ people. However... if you want to keep people enchanted with the system, then you need to make concessions. Otherwise you get civil unrest.

If you want people to buy into the American Dream, you have to provide some portion of it as reality so people don't give up and become a drain. They must FEEL their efforts matter. If the feudal lords wanted to keep their serfs from running away or rebelling, you had to make sure you really pushed the 'we're protecting you' aspect, to make them feel like they're getting something for all their effort, and that running off would have been dangerous.

I honestly wouldn't have so much of a problem with today's system even if there wasn't an opportunity for the lowest class to "move up", so long as the lowest class still had non-demeaning jobs that left them living a decent life. Feudal lords took care of their slaves. I wish ours would do the same to our nation's poor.

rawb,

Most of the poor DO move up... Your view of the rich is so 19th century. Take a look at the richest people, for everyone who inherited their wealth, there's a person who came from a poor or middle class background and got rich by busting their ass, coming up with goods or services that ADD to the economy.

You can't live in the USA that I do, rawb.

Yes, I know Coulter's column was supposed to be humorous - but it's a kind of humor that often gets thrown back in your face. If you are considered part of the politics that Coulter represents - which I so often am - then it gets thrown at you also and that makes it hard to have a firm ground to stand on when you're trying to claim the other party is the intolerant one
standing ovation

This "Ann just tells the truth stuff" is, sorry, not true.

Take a look around.

By the way, the "but my side's crazy advocate tells the truth" defense is a common one for Moore on the left. Coulter and Moore are actually very equivalent. They speak some truth, but a lot of other stuff..not so much.

I'm proud I had an abortion instead of becoming another teenage welfare mom.

There's a lot of propaganda circulated by the pro-life people about the longterm negative physical and emotional effects of abortion, and I'm standing up against those people. I've had no negative effects from having an abortion. I've successfully completed two subsequent pregnancies and raised two boys to teenager-hood. I don't regret the abortion, I don't obsess over it, I don't cry because of it, I don't wonder about the child that fetus might have grown into or what other missed opportunities arose out of my abortion.

Kris just brought up an interesting point.

There have been no post-abortion studies, IIRC.

We study cow gas, smiles, everything one can think of, but no one's ever done a study.

Kind of makes one go hmmmm......

[this part of comment has been deleted] Ed note: You crossed a line there, Inspector. You are in my home, please treat my guests with at least a bit of respect.

____________
Spinsanity.org? Maybe you could have redirected me to Democratic Underground for some of their wisdom. Maybe even dailykos. 6 of one, 1/2 dozen of the other.

Anyway, Coulter's main philosphy is correct. The fact that she's caustic is what turns certain people off. We can all nitpick over littel facts.

Once again, thanks to our spineless culture, being caustic (unless you're a lefty) is considered judgmental and "in your face". I think it's long overdue.

TV (Harry)

Kris Hasson-Jones

As an alternative to 'welfare mom', had adoption ever crossed your mind?

Could you have given life a chance?

Who gave you the right to decide who lives and who dies anyway????

Well Kris, I'm proud of my birth mother for carrying me to term and adopting me out to family who loved me rather than killing me out of fear of becoming a teenage welfare mom. I have a wonderful life, a great husband, and two beautiful children as a result of my birth mother's sacrifice. It's not just your "opportunities" that are affected when you abort.

Kris, just because a woman decides to have the baby doesn't mean she becomes a welfare mom. Most of the women I've known who were single mothers never went on welfare, they just worked their asses off, paid their dues, and both they and their children became very successful people. A t-shirt that says 'I'm Proud I had an Abortion' practically spits on their acheivements. Maybe people defend their abortion with the 'financial burden' of children should do a cost-benefit analysis on condoms.

Hubris, I believe the New York Times has recently confirmed Ms. Coulters thesis in Slander.

Spinsanity.org? Maybe you could have redirected me to Democratic Underground for some of their wisdom. Maybe even dailykos. 6 of one, 1/2 dozen of the other.

Huh?? You grossly misrepresent Spinsanity, methinks. Did you go to the link to Spinsanity articles on Moore I provided, where they shred him up?

Did you see today's Spinsanity column that attacked Krugman?

We can all nitpick over littel facts.

On second thought, perhaps you're a Moore fan.

Dman,

Yeah, the NYT sucks, but one partially correct thesis does not a font of honesty make.

I enjoy reading Ann Coulter. Her sarcasm is over the edge hilarious. Today I was harassed for being a fan of hers and I said, "She makes me laugh!". I happen to be a very conservative republican.
By the way, do you mean to imply the democratic party is not "The Spawn of Satan". I am so disappointed.

Fred

By the way, do you mean to imply the democratic party is not "The Spawn of Satan". I am so disappointed.

The problem is, she (along with Moore) occupy the shadowy netherworld between fact/fiction analysis/humor. Their shared defense is: Hey, I was just making a funny! I have no obligation to "facts"!

I don't know Coulter from AHITW, but I find that snarky little paragraph classically humorous. I feel nothing but pity for anyone who doesn't. The deliberate exaggeration is a clue that a certain amount of self-twitting is going on there.

Well, thank you for your pity.

What's funny about "Spawn of Satan"? It sounds like something Franken would say about the Republican convention. In either case, not funny. A non-joke. About as funny as Ted Rall.

Kris

I'm standing up against those people. I've had no negative effects from having an abortion.

That's not a snark. And I say it in all sorrow. I have would hoped, especially in light of your subsequent children ("successful completion of pregnancy"? I find that a strange turn of phrase) might have given you pause, and at least, a moment or two of wistfulness over the unique human being that wasn't able to fulfill his/her own potential. Maybe you could look at the love your boys bring you and just feel a tad sorry that you didn't allow another family to experience what you were eventually blessed with.

I'll say it again. I do not want first trimester abortions, even for "lifestyle" choices, to be made illegal. However, abortion for convenience (and be it interrupting school, career or lecture series) is immoral. There are lots of immoral things that we don't legislate against, but it doesn't make them things to be proud of.

How many people would be "proud" to wear t-shirts that said:

I cheated on my spouse.

I married for money.

My kids have lots of daddies.

There are lots of immoral things that we don't legislate against, but it doesn't make them things to be proud of.

Well said.

Sorry, Michelle, bad choice of words - it won't happen again.

TV (Harry)

I apologize to Kris, also. Really. Just an emotional reaction on my part.

TV (Harry)

JFH:

I do not agree with the following statements:
MOST of the poor DO move up.
Most of the middle DO move up.

I DO agree with the following statements:

Most of those born into rich families remain rich.
Most of the rich are made up of those born into middle-class families.

Most of the Middle class is made up of people born into middle-class families.
Most people born into a middle class family remain middle class.

Most of the poor are people born into poor families.
Most people born into poor families remain poor.

What does it all mean? Well imagine you have 100 middle-class people and 10 upper-class. Maybe 8 of those upper were previously middle, and 2 born rich. Clearly, most of the upper is made up of former middle. However, most of the middle remained middle.

As for abortion:
I'm aware I'm a male, and so my opinion matters only marginally... however. I can't agree with the idea that every potential child is a life to be lamented. If that was the case, my girlfriend and I would go into mourning every 28 days for the potential child that was just lost. Or... I'd have to pray heavily every time I looked at some 'ilicit material' and wasted a potential 3-million lives.

American Indians had herbs they used to induce abortions. They used them if there was a drought coming, if it was just after a drought and the future was uncertain, or if they just were not prepared for what was to come. Many animals do the same thing through their own bio-processes.

For something to be Immoral depends on that culture's morals. While some of you may find "giving every potential life a chance" to be moral, others may consider "giving every life a chance to be brought up in the best environment living with their mother (and father?)" to be what is most in line with their morals.

Morals are funny things... like mushroom fights or hot pink cars

Since those children aborted represent future taxpayers who pay into Social Security, perhaps we should reduce the woman's Social Security check when she retires. Say, 1% for each abortion she has had. Each convenient abortion in her youth reduces the available tax pool that will be paying her Social Security check.

I can't agree with the idea that every potential child is a life to be lamented.

Of course, the the problem is where to draw the line between "potential" and "actual," a matter on which people will never agree.

You've used extreme examples on one end(unfertilized eggs, wandering sperm); if you were presented with an alternative extreme of a "potential" child (say 10 days prior to due date), there would be room to lament, no?

It's not quite as simple as you imply, I think.

Michele said, "Let's face it, I'm really not a true conservative (an atheist who supports gay marriage? No way)"

Maybe you'd feel more comfortable in the Libertarian party? Athiests are welcome. Libertarians like myself believe the government has no business issuing marriage licenses, so support of gay marriage isn't an issue.

Wow - just last night, as Coulter was being interviewed by Hannity, did I say to my husband how much I dislike that woman. Enough to make me too run from the ranks of the conservatives. She is so snarky, so full of herself; I said to my husband, "Look at how she sits there,,just her body language speaks volumes about how she believes she is so morally superior to anything beneath her." It's really too bad. Conservatives have a tough enough time finding voices of reason that don't make us look like complete Warriors of Evil.

Wow - just last night, as Coulter was being interviewed by Hannity, did I say to my husband how much I dislike that woman. Enough to make me too run from the ranks of the conservatives. She is so snarky, so full of herself; I said to my husband, "Look at how she sits there,,just her body language speaks volumes about how she believes she is so morally superior to anything beneath her." It's really too bad. Conservatives have a tough enough time finding voices of reason that don't make us look like complete Warriors of Evil.

(sorry about that--thunder actually struck and I hit the post key twice because I jumped :(

BUSH LIED

Hey, first she walks upright, now she can type!

You're an atheist, Michele?!

You really need to check into God.

Hub, I deleted that idiotic post.

Clark, I was a practicing Catholic for a good portion of my life. Checked into it, checked out.

Kris - I don't think most reasonable pro-lifers would claim that all women who have abortions suffer serious physical or psychological trauma. Heck, not everybody who smokes gets lung cancer, but that doesn't disprove the connection.

There have been a number of anecdotal collections on the issue; I admit that I'm not aware of whether anyone has done a serious study of the after-effects of abortions on the mothers. But the fact that one person can have an abortion and feel no guilt or pain does not answer the contention that abortions do, in some cases - how many cases? I don't know - leave such scars.

I have always wondered why a true atheist would not live their life by the "end justifies the means" rule at all times. It seems illogical to live it any other way if one were an atheist.

Just because you don't beleive in God does not mean that you have no morals or standards.

Only religious people are inherently good, then?

Geez, rawb, now we're going to have to define "poor."

Even the dems admit "the poor" don't want "the riches" taxes to be raised cos they might be rich one day themselves.

I think it was in Washington or Oregon.

And if you look over the 40++ year working span, most do move on, up and out. Now, as economist Arnold Kling just posted w/in the past few weeks of July(?), the poor are living the 70s middle-class lifestyle.

Not so bad, only 30 years behind. Kind of like Europe.....

Some comments, because I always have them ;)

If you'd like to take money out of the woman's social security check for denying us a future taxpayer, perhaps you should give money to the poor woman living in the ghetto who has an abortion for preventing a potentially no-insurance, chronically uninsured, potential drug user or gang member drain on our system etc etc etc. In short... i disagree.

Marriage liscences: I agree whole-heartedly. If there weren't xxxx rights granted to "married" couples not granted to "unmarried" couples, or even family members living together, there wouldn't be this problem. Now I can see where some of these rights came in to begin with... hospitals saying no one can visit at all now had to make concessions for the spouse. Well, how about making it generic... Hospitals must make concessions for one person at a time. Just define these laws as broadly as possible. Let marriage remain religious only. Government needs to get out.

Hubris: Yes I was using extremes, and it's obvious that the closer a child comes to being born, the more there is to lament. So I have a question for you... child poverty is on the rise and so is child mortality, especially in the black communities. Perhaps these communities should be allowed, or even encouraged, to wait until economically prepared to have children? Even if it means encouraging (or at least not villianizing) abortion?

See I have a huge problem with the Federal Government taking so much money, and my biggest beef is that they just give it back to us with strings attached. The fedgov takes x in taxes from your state. The fedgov then offers part of it back to your hospitals, so long as they don't mention abortion. Then it offers some back to your scientists, so long as they follow federal criteria. Then they offer some back to your roads, so long as you change your driving age. (Yes this happened in several states... they wouldnt get highway funds unless they did that)

I prefer a loose union for the most part. I prefer a system where every state could be 80% different, every state unique, and then people would have a choice of what kind of system they want to live in, rather than us all unifying under more and more central power. The reason I like this is because, under our original constitution which had no income tax, it could be argued that one state could be completely communist, another completely libertarian, etc etc etc. Diversity is the lifeblood of everything. Political systems are no different

syn and shank: I know I would have become a welfare mom, because my mother was one for a while; and she would not have let me give up a baby for adoption--she spent her entire adult life mourning and looking for the baby she gave up for adoption. (He finally made contact five days after she died, in March of this year.)

As for the morality: in my religion there are differing opinions, and at least some people believe abortion is not just acceptable, but required in certain situations. (I'm a Jew.) Even if I accepted that the fetus was a human being, I also accept that I chose to end that possible life, and if there are consequences for that choice, I will suffer them without protest. It was a struggle for survival against an attacker, and I defended my life.

Crank: Maybe the reason some women feel guilt is because people pressure them into it, as Analogue Mouse tries to pressure me, by implying that I cannot be a good mother or a compassionate person since I'm not even wistful about the life I ended.

Analog Mouse: Not all adopted children have great lives; some are abused, just like kids who are with their birth parents, and some are murdered (that guy in NYC who murdered his adopted daughter just got out of jail).

Perhaps these communities should be allowed, or even encouraged, to wait until economically prepared to have children?

Can you think of some ways to do that, other than abortion?

Aside from that, although I know you didn't mean it this way, the idea of encouraging birth control only among certain communities sound a bit, well, I think you know.

Sandy:
You're right... the poor think they'll be rich one day. And I honestly believe they are being deluded. Constantly watching shows like MTV Cribs, VH1's behind the music rags-to-riches stories, etc etc etc, constantly throw this myth at people. It may work. It's true for some. But for every one that makes it, dozens or hundreds or possibly thousands never do.

Honestly, and I know I can say this now because I'm not rich, but I'm a very low-maintaince person. If I made 25 million, I don't imagine I'd mind losing 2 or 3 or 4 million... and even 4 million is only a 16% tax. Hell I could probably live a 40k lifestyle and be way more than content. I don't drive. I don't consume much. I'd almost feel like I have to pay extra taxes because I know I don't spend enough to recirculate the money into the economy.

As for living the lifestyle of the 70s, well, I honestly don't see much value in our consumerist lifestyle personally. I'd actually prefer if some industries were wiped out, and those workers re-assigned into the other jobs we have now, and then everyone gets a shorter work week and more time with family.

I love the computer for one reason... even though we keep inventing new designs, its very apparent to me that a 500 mhz computer can still run today's applications, internet, linux, etc etc. It can be used to write programs, to interface with PDAs, etc. Less waste.

I'm not a consumer :-(

Hubris: I basically just meant keeping it an available option instead of squelching hospitals from mentioning it on pain of having their funds revoked.

Obviously some groups have more ability and slack economically to take time out and have children, even at younger ages, and other groups don't. And as much as I hate to say this, that means the former group can pretty much do whatever they want and still afford to pay for their mistakes, while the latter group would have a much harder time of it.

Michele,who said anything about religion. I am talking about the belief of God. I am also not saying that people that are true atheists are not or cannot be good, moral people. I am saying that it is illogical to be so if it does not benefit you first. Simplistic example. If you needed a $1000 for braces for your kid and you found a wallet with a $1000 in it, as an atheist would you keep the $1000. If not, why not? Right thing to do. says who?

Dman, that is both stupid and insulting. How does a belief or non belief in God determine whether I am an honest person? I have values that come from within. Just because my values and morality do not come from a higher being does not mean they are any less than yours.

"Right thing to do. says who?" Says ME. Because I have to answer to me, every day of my life.

The question should not be "as an atheist would you keep the $1000?," it should be "as a decent human being would you keep the $1000?"

Dman, I'm not an atheist myself, but there are plenty of moral/ethical frameworks that don't require a deity.

I would suggest glancing over Rawls as an example.

I just realized that I should emphasize that I'm not endorsing Rawls' views, I'm just giving an illustrative example.

Each convenient abortion in her youth reduces the available tax pool that will be paying her Social Security check.

What if her abortion is inconvenient? Do we only penalize women who managed to make appointments for an abortion on weekends, but leave them alone if they had to take time off work to get a bus to the clinic? And then there's the problem of women who get abortions in middle age, rather than youth.

"I have values that come from within. Just because my values and morality do not come from a higher being does not mean they are any less than yours."

Well, Michelle, I would say anyone reading your blog would guess that you have very exacting moral standards.

What is puzzling to me, however, is, if these values truly come from "within" you, why would you expect anyone else to share them with you? And why do you condemn them when they don't?

For surely this whole post is a loud moral condemnation of pro-choice activists and Planned Parenthood. Right? Aren't they morally reprehensible for buying or selling this t-shirt?

If the sole source for this condemnation is your "inner voice" why should anyone take it seriously as a statement of moral imperative?

It can be suggested that a person who believes in God (or other variations) only behaves morally out of fear of unavoidable punishment, not from personal character. Not always true, but quite often.

An athiest or agnostic behaves in a civil and moral manner out of respect for themselves and their fellow humans. When they fail to live up to ther own expectations, it is with the knowledge that they are failing themselves.