Saturday, October 28, 2006

Reproductive Freedom--Closer to Home

Have already suggested that Reproductive Freedom is part of a sane society and included some history on the subject. I've also griped about Graf's position against abortion even in the case of incest or rape. Consider visiting KUAT to watch Randy answer a question on his view of a woman's having to carry a pregnancy to term in a rape situation.

Got an email today pointing out Jon Kyl's record, and although they did not come out and request I post this information, it was clearly implied, and I am compelled to honor at least some of the request.

Kyl is as out there as Graf on this one, if not worse.

Directly from today's email:

Jon Kyl’s anti-choice record:

Jon Kyl has twice cosponsored amendments to the Constitution to outlaw abortion in almost all circumstances – including when a woman’s health is in danger. H.J.Res.104, 100th Congress (1987); H.J.Res.103, 101st Congress (1989).

Jon Kyl voted against a substitute bill for the Federal Abortion Ban that included a health exception. Senate vote #49 (3/12/03).


Who are these guys? Let me get this straight. If I'm a woman, and I get raped and become pregnant, and then something happens where the pregnancy endangers my life, I'm still to be denied the medical care that can save my life?

Or even if I wasn't raped? Say I'm happily married, but some horrible medical condition develops? Instead of addressing the situation, my husband is to watch both mother and child die? This is madness.

This anti-abortion thing is anything but moral, and anything but love of life.

It is about oppressing women, and I'll ratchet it up a notch. Dig deep enough under this rock and you'll find hatred of women.

Kyl's position has attracted NARAL's attention to where they've created an ad. You can see it here.

Jim Pederson and Gabrielle Giffords support reproductive freedom. It's the sane thing to do, and these are the people we should be sending to Washington.

9 Comments:

Blogger Dogma said...

I’m often enraged by Right Wing and religious zealots labeling pro-choice advocates as being pro abortion. The two are entirely different perspectives and have absolutely no relativity to one another. Being pro-choice is about favoring personal freedom over one’s one body above any ideological dogma.

But today’s conservative movement is all about labeling Americans in simple and, more often than not, deceptive ways in order to manipulate perceptions.

How ironic that the party of ‘family values’ is also the party of division, exclusion and outright bigotry.

10/28/2006 9:22 PM  
Blogger phx kid said...

I’m often enraged when Democrats like Hillary Clinton, Charles Schumer, and Ted Kennedy talk about personal choice and then do everything in their power to restrict the right to keep and bear arms. These people support personal freedom only on one issue, abortion. On every other issue they support restrictive government controls. That is why some refer to them as pro-abortion. A lot of them also support late term abortions being legal. The act of terminating a viable baby in the womb also demonstrates their fondness for abortion.

10/28/2006 9:34 PM  
Blogger sirocco said...

Phx Kid,

There is a difference in the two positions, (although I suspect you will try to equate them nonetheless), and being pro-choice but wanting limits on guns are NOT inconsistent positions.

An abortion is not murder. I know anti-abortionists disagree, but obviously that's the view of pro-choice individuals, and the law (currently at least) disagrees.

Meanwhile, many violent crimes are commited by gun owners each year, many accidents, both fatal and not, occur involving guns.

It's not inconsistent to provide reasonable limits on gun ownership -- where your freedoms threaten my life or safety, I want some limits.

10/29/2006 7:06 AM  
Blogger Kralmajales said...

Nice post X4mr!

This issue is one of the reasons I donated to Pederson and Giffords...among others.

Kyl is as extreme as Graf, it is only now coming out as the Pederson campaign lunges for that finish line! I applaud their campaign for being hard-hitting and for their hard work here at the end.

And you all know my thoughts on the Giffords campaign...

MASTERFUL.

10/29/2006 1:34 PM  
Blogger Marco Alatorre said...

Regarding the firearms issues, I believe the gentlemen meant that he is enraged that liberals talk about the personal choice with regard to abortion but no personal choice with regard to using a firearm for self defense.

Which would you choose the right to choose to defend yourself and your family or the right to choose to have an abortion?

Of course we shouldn't have to make this choice, but more on that in a different post.

10/29/2006 4:44 PM  
Blogger sirocco said...

Marco,

You do, of course, overstate the comparison.

Nothing on the books or proposed attempts to ban gun ownership entirely. I have no problem at all with law-abiding citizens being able to own guns and keep them at their homes if they feel they need to.

However, there is not (or should not be) an expectation you can just go out and buy a gun and take it home that very day. There are good reasons to run checks to make it difficult (not impossible, but more difficult) for certain people to get guns, etc.

So the choice is reasonable constraints on gun ownership vs. reasonable constraints on abortions (and there are some). I'll take both, thanks -- no actual choice necessary.

10/29/2006 6:46 PM  
Blogger Marco Alatorre said...

Sirocco,

We already have an instant check system that allows one to instantly be verified as a legitimate to buy a gun. There is no legitimate purpose to a waiting period. There is no purpose to further restrictions.

Are you saying that you would not object to waiting periods for abortions?

If so please tell my what purpose it could serve.

10/29/2006 10:24 PM  
Blogger sirocco said...

Marco,

That instant check is not applied at gun shows, by non-gun dealers selling guns, etc.

I.e., lots of loopholes.

There is a very legitimate purpose for a waiting period.

I've already discussed why comparing abortions to gun ownership is not a legitimate comparison. Someone can't point the idea of an abortion at me with the possibility of killing me. The same can't be said for a gun.

10/30/2006 8:03 AM  
Blogger Liza said...

I just discovered that Marco Alatorre has his own blog. I'm too lazy to set up the link. Just click on his name and it will show on his profile.

Geez, Louise, another red blogger who can construct a sentence, and in Marco's case, a paragraph. Okay, that makes four so far:
1. framer
2. phx kid
3. 206iscancer
4. marco alatorre

Phx kid, I am still wondering if 206iscancer is your dark, evil alter ego. I see similarities in the style of writing and I never see you both post on the same thread. Just wondering...

10/30/2006 3:35 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home



SOMETHING ELSE