Comments on: Summer Frivolity: Berkeley Fighting Terrorists, Stanfurd Assisting Them

by: Tommaso Sciortino

Thu, 01 Dec 2005 07:43:36 +0000

What are yuou talking about? Seriously, I thinkyou misunderstood my point becuase you seem to be taking a tone where you disagree with me but then turn around and agree with every point I make.

To recap:

1. We’re talking about pro-life Catholics. The vast majority of these people do not believe in abortion ever. Not even in case of rape or inc*st.

2. I agree with you that most Republicans do support abortion in some cases.

3. The “extreme” pro-life position held by Catholics is morally and intellectually coherant: If you really believe a fetus is a human being then killing it is always wrong (except perhaps if the life of the mother is threatened).

4. The “not-extreme” pro-life position which (you agree) is held by most Republicans is immoral and intellectually incoherant. If it is ok to abort a fetus caused by rape, then you obviously don’t consider the fetus a human being. The only remaining reason to oppose abortion is presumebly becuase you think babies are a good way of punishing sluts.

This was a sub-point I was making while on the way to arguing that pro-life Catholics would do better to recognize that Republicans are not serious about abolishing abortion (even with all the provisos of the “non-extreme” kind).

by: Anonymous

Wed, 30 Nov 2005 22:19:40 +0000

Tomasso seems to apply his reasoning that Republicans are bad to mean that they don’t want abortions in any case. A person with feelings that Democrats are bad to interpret them as allowing abortions right before the baby’s head is about to depart the uterus.

News flash. Most Americans support abortion when the mother’s life is threatened, incest or rape, and oppose abortion in the third trimester. It’s not as polarizing as all or nothing, and certainly people who are all or nothing are in the very small minority yet very vocal minority. Maybe that’s why Tomasso is baffled because he sees so many pro-life and pro-choice protestors supporting extremist views.

by: Beetle

Wed, 30 Nov 2005 21:33:26 +0000

Yeah, that’s the point. If it really was a matter of saving lives, being conceived by rape wouldn’t matter.

by: Anonymous

Wed, 30 Nov 2005 21:13:25 +0000

WTF how many Republicans do you know that are pro-life on rape? Come on now.

by: Tommaso Sciortino take 2

Wed, 30 Nov 2005 14:02:28 +0000

Hmmm. From now on I’ll call it the less offensive “parent-on-progeny-action”.

by: Beetle

Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:50:56 +0000

Because you mentioned incest, dude. I think this will be moderated, too. Just be patient.

by: carlito

Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:29:41 +0000

Opus Dei has taken control of calstuff. bow down.

by: Tommaso Sciortino take 2

Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:03:15 +0000

Calstuff seems to be blocking me from posting my next paragraph. What’s up with that?

by: Tommaso Sciortino take 2

Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:02:06 +0000

That view isn’t reflected by the pro-life political arm of the Republican Party. A lot of them act like the point of being pro-life is to scare people into not having sex by threatening them with having to take care of children. How else to explain the “pro-life except rape or incest” routine which is held by so many Republicans?

by: Tommaso Sciortino

Wed, 30 Nov 2005 11:58:52 +0000

I think one of the really sad things about the Roe v. Wade debate is that pro-life forces, lead by some really far far right people, have blocked middle way attempts at working with pro-choice groups to ensure that fewer abortions are needed. Even a majority of American Catholics have no problems with birth control and we can assume a lot would support its use to prevent abortions.