I see in the news that anti-choice organizations are planning demonstrations today at Planned Parenthood facilities around the US to support GOP plans to defund PP.
Of course, my first thought was to grab a sign (and my, ummm, "kittyhat"!) and head for my local facility to show my support for PP, but I also see in the news that PP offices are asking that supporters not show up at the facilities to counter-protest (because they don't want the crowds of protesters any larger or more chaotic than necessary as women are trying to get in and out for services).
Some communities are planning counter-demonstrations in other venues, but I haven't been able to find any information about any events planned in my city.
So, I've decided to set aside the time planned for the anti-choice demonstration in my city today to contact all my elected representatives, from the White House down to my state legislators, and Tom Price at DHHS, to remind them that I support PP and am strongly opposed to any efforts to restrict women's reproductive rights or Planned Parenthood's access to public healthcare dollars as a legitimate healthcare provider.
I hope PP supporters here will consider doing the same, and spread the word to people you know. I hope people all over the country will have the same thought. Wouldn't it be great if, while comparatively small groups of protesters are standing out in the cold and snow with their signs, huge numbers of Americans were flooding mail boxes and switchboards around the country with messages of support for PP, women's health, and reproductive rights?
I didn't pretend anything. I said that the first sentence of my comment was to you personally, but the rest of it was intended for everyone (meaning all people everywhere), and I underscored that by pointing out the words that I used. That should have been clear if you paid attention to my words instead of trying to read something that isn't there.
My conscience is completely clear, but thank you for suggesting that. What beliefs should I be looking at?
All I know about your beliefs is what you've written here. In what I think was your first post here, you commiserated with a previous poster, telling him he was casting pearls before swine ... meaning me and anyone else arguing a non-religious pro-choice perspective. In a subsequent post, you referred to unbelievers, strongly implying that anyone outside the radical Christian right is an unbeliever.
What that says about your beliefs, especially about people with different beliefs, is for you to figure out. (Leading a horse to water and all that.)
I'm glad your conscience is clear, but that's between you and your deity and has nothing to do with me. On the other hand, when your beliefs also happen to be the sole justification for behaviors and policies that cause so much harm to people who do not share them, you can bet your bippy that I'll take a very close look at your reasoning. Just trying to resolve some very strong cognitive dissonance, really
All I know about your beliefs is what you've written here. In what I think was your first post here, you commiserated with a previous poster, telling him he was casting pearls before swine ... meaning me and anyone else arguing a non-religious pro-choice perspective. In a subsequent post, you referred to unbelievers, strongly implying that anyone outside the radical Christian right is an unbeliever.
What that says about your beliefs, especially about people with different beliefs, is for you to figure out. (Leading a horse to water and all that.)
I'm glad your conscience is clear, but that's between you and your deity and has nothing to do with me. On the other hand, when your beliefs also happen to be the sole justification for behaviors and policies that cause so much harm to people who do not share them, you can bet your bippy that I'll take a very close look at your reasoning. Just trying to resolve some very strong cognitive dissonance, really
First of all you are lumping me in with a group(s) of people with whom I might share some beliefs but not others, but I will use your term for a minute to answer your comment.
If you do not share the beliefs of the "radical Christian right," does that not make you an unbeliever?
I know what that says about me and my beliefs relative to people who believe differently...there's nothing for me to figure out. You threw some stuff out there as if applying them directly to me, so I asked for clarification of what YOU meant in order that I could answer.
In your previous comment you said that I should look to my own beliefs, "strongly implying" that you know of my beliefs and that you think I am going against them. Now you say that they are between me and God. So if you have something to say about what you think MY beliefs are, not what you are attributing to me based on what you think you know about the beliefs of the "radical Christian right," then lets hear it.
Whatever beliefs I do have, some of which are pretty clear from WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN, not what you think they are, do cause me to behave the way that I do, just as whatever YOU believe causes you to behave the way that you do. However, any behavior that you may think that I have you can only truthfully attribute to me based on what I have said or you have personally witnessed (not possible for you to have witnessed anything though since we have never met), not based on a group of people with whom you have no idea if I believe or behave the same as they do.
Any such "cognitive dissonance" here is erroneously perceived by you because you continue to attempt to lump me with other groups, of which I do not belong. Anything I have said here is completely consistent.
They aren't. Are you attributing these characteristics to me? If so, how? If not, then what do they have to do with what I have said?
Oh, please ... don't be disingenuous. You chose to join a thread started specifically to discuss support for Planned Parenthood. Since you agree with pmabraham, it's clear that you do not. You explain your reasons in terms of your own religious beliefs, which just happen to be the very same beliefs used to justify the behaviors I listed. What did you think was going to happen? Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas.
The fact is, your religion has shaped your personal morality around reproduction, which is as it should be for a believer. But it's largely irrelevant to those of us who do not believe as you do. As a determinant of public policy, it's a very tiny part of a very large picture. There are many of us who are unwilling to let it become the tail that wags the dog.
You know, I get (but don't necessarily agree with) the "taking of unborn life" argument. I can see how people arrive to that conclusion. What REALLY gets me is the folks who also would deny access to birth control. There is NO other argument to support that other than theological/religious.
I don't want people to codify their belief system in our civil law. That's just a more polite version of what Al-Qaeda and ISIS do...
Oh, please ... don't be disingenuous. You chose to join a thread started specifically to discuss support for Planned Parenthood. Since you agree with pmabraham, it's clear that you do not. You explain your reasons in terms of your own religious beliefs, which just happen to be the very same beliefs used to justify the behaviors I listed. What did you think was going to happen? Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas.
The fact is, your religion has shaped your personal morality around reproduction, which is as it should be for a believer. But it's largely irrelevant to those of us who do not believe as you do. As a determinant of public policy, it's a very tiny part of a very large picture. There are many of us who are unwilling to let it become the tail that wags the dog.
According to you I have "pretended" comments into non-existence, been part of the "radical Christian right," and am now "disingenuous." (I think there were others but I don't remember them all.)
I don't know how to quote from different posts to bring them into one, but here is the comment that I originally responded to that now prompts the "disingenuous" remark:
Heron: "Meanwhile, if you would kindly explain how lying, murder, emotional abuse and forced pregnancies are godly, that'd be nice."
I said that they are not godly and now you say that I'm being disingenuous? Where have I lied, murdered, been part of emotional abuse or forced someone to be pregnant?
So I imagine that there are those here that you agree with on some things but disagree on other things. If you were to say that you don't, THAT would be disingenuous. At the point where I agreed with pmabraham, he was talking about having been conceived in rape (post #168 is where I commented) and that he believed that killing someone because they are unwanted or putting a price tag on the cost is not compassion, and I do agree with him on that.
In the scripture that talks about pearls and swine, Jesus is saying that the gospel is precious as are pearls, but there will be people who will not believe when the gospel is given to them and will trample it as swine do when something is cast at their feet. So when it becomes clear that those people will not believe, it will do no good to make further attempts so we are not to do so.
In Matthew 10:14 the message is the same: "And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet."
As far as the tail wagging the dog, I don't understand how you are applying it in this situation relative to public policy.
ETA: I AM getting weary of defending false accusations, especially since this has gone exactly as I suspected it would. No one with your stance has ever been convinced that they are wrong--here or anywhere else on the internet--which is why I RARELY ever comment on threads of this nature and do not intend to do so much longer.
According to you I have "pretended" comments into non-existence, been part of the "radical Christian right," and am now "disingenuous." (I think there were others but I don't remember them all.)
I don't know how to quote from different posts to bring them into one, but here is the comment that I originally responded to that now prompts the "disingenuous" remark:
Heron: "Meanwhile, if you would kindly explain how lying, murder, emotional abuse and forced pregnancies are godly, that'd be nice."
I said that they are not godly and now you say that I'm being disingenuous? Where have I lied, murdered, been part of emotional abuse or forced someone to be pregnant?
So I imagine that there are those here that you agree with on some things but disagree on other things. If you were to say that you don't, THAT would be disingenuous. At the point where I agreed with pmabraham, he was talking about having been conceived in rape (post #168 is where I commented) and that he believed that killing someone because they are unwanted or putting a price tag on the cost is not compassion, and I do agree with him on that.
In the scripture that talks about pearls and swine, Jesus is saying that the gospel is precious as are pearls, but there will be people who will not believe when the gospel is given to them and will trample it as swine do when something is cast at their feet. So when it becomes clear that those people will not believe, it will do no good to make further attempts so we are not to do so.
In Matthew 10:14 the message is the same: "And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet."
As far as the tail wagging the dog, I don't understand how you are applying it in this situation relative to public policy.
ETA: I AM getting weary of defending false accusations, especially since this has gone exactly as I suspected it would. No one with your stance has ever been convinced that they are wrong--here or anywhere else on the internet--which is why I RARELY ever comment on threads of this nature and do not intend to do so much longer.
OK, so do you have anything substantive to say about Planned Parenthood and the campaign to destroy it?
OK, so do you have anything substantive to say about Planned Parenthood and the campaign to destroy it?
Let me ask you this...is there any point at which you believe that abortion should be restricted, or do you believe that abortions should be allowed at any point in pregnancy, up to and including when a woman is in labor? I only want to know what you believe, not what is currently legal or not.
ETA: I will go first. I believe all abortion to be the killing of a pre-born baby.
I believe that the guideline in Roe v. Wade is a rational one, in that it attempts to allow the procedure only until the point of significant extrauterine viability. Prior to that, I personally believe in abortion on demand.
I believe that the guideline in Roe v. Wade is a rational one, in that it attempts to allow the procedure only until the point of significant extrauterine viability. Prior to that, I personally believe in abortion on demand.
And if I believed in abortion I would probably agree with you.
Here's what I don't understand...correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm assuming that you are for abortion because of the belief in a woman's right to do what she will with her own body? If a woman has a right to choose, why wouldn't that right extend to the entire pregnancy? Why stop with viability? I do realize that some take this stance, but you have not. So what makes the difference for you?
heron, ASN, RN
4,660 Posts
All I know about your beliefs is what you've written here. In what I think was your first post here, you commiserated with a previous poster, telling him he was casting pearls before swine ... meaning me and anyone else arguing a non-religious pro-choice perspective. In a subsequent post, you referred to unbelievers, strongly implying that anyone outside the radical Christian right is an unbeliever.
What that says about your beliefs, especially about people with different beliefs, is for you to figure out. (Leading a horse to water and all that.)
I'm glad your conscience is clear, but that's between you and your deity and has nothing to do with me. On the other hand, when your beliefs also happen to be the sole justification for behaviors and policies that cause so much harm to people who do not share them, you can bet your bippy that I'll take a very close look at your reasoning. Just trying to resolve some very strong cognitive dissonance, really