Abortion is a difficult issue; emotionally charged, financially and socially motivated, calling into play a choice that will tear at your heartstrings forever. It may buttress religious beliefs against the realities of daily life. As a woman, nurse and mother I’m grateful I never had to make that choice but I’ve sat with many women who have. All that being said, how did so personal a choice for women become a political issue? Pregnancy is a women’s issue regardless of cause; hosting a child within your body, going through labor, giving birth, and raising and parenting a child are decidedly women’s issues.
Leora Levy (greenwichtime.com 9-5-12) says she supports a woman’s right to choose, yet she supports Romney/Ryan who want to remove that right and abolish abortion regardless of why or how the woman became pregnant. She purports discomfiture with government dictating that a pregnant woman must bear a child regardless of reason. That doesn't leave me uncomfortable. It leaves me livid! I could not diverge more vehemently from her stance that this should NOT be an issue to sway a woman’s vote. If the personal sanctity of your body and the right to make decisions about it is not reason enough, then I don’t know what is. When the audacity of some allows them to feel righteous enough to legally dictate not only what you do with your body but also lets them feel they can play with your mind, this raises the stakes very high for me. I think it should for any woman, and for any man who has a daughter, a wife, a sister or a mother.
Every woman has the right to choose birth or abortion, but why should anyone feel they can impose or legislate their beliefs on another when they don’t have to bear the consequences? I have concerns for the future of more unwanted children being born. There are too few adoptive families; too many abused, neglected, hungry and homeless children; too many unwilling and/or incapable parents. Bear in mind that health and social services programs for the needy and the rest of us could be cut and severely diminished based on the outcomes of this election. There are already too many women/single heads of household who are unequally burdened with child care responsibilities that impact their earnings, job availability and wealth equity opportunities.
I cannot clear my mind of the all-male House Oversight and Government Rules Committee that was convened to determine women’s health and reproductive rights issues without benefit of women on the panel, and their GOP leadership denying the Democratic members any input from women. The audacity!
I shudder in horror, and you should, too, that around twenty states now require women considering abortion to submit to a vaginal ultrasound, view the fetus and listen to the heart beat, an unabashed physical and emotional assault, in an effort to dissuade women from choosing an abortion. About ten more states are in discussion about moving forward in this direction. Aside from the unmitigated arrogance, this adds unnecessary cost, is an unwanted/unnecessary procedure, infringes on privacy rights and constitutes state-sanctioned rape and exploitation of women.
The medical dictionary (medicinenet.com) defines rape as, amongst other things, the insertion of an [unwanted] inanimate object into the female vagina. An 8-10 inch vaginal probe, which mandates you to expose your most intimate and private parts, which is unwanted by the woman and her doctor, which serves no medical purpose, and which you are mandated to have against your will, constitutes rape and exploitation in my book. As with any other type of rape, this leaves a vulnerable woman who is confronting a very difficult decision for reasons that are her business alone, humiliated, embarrassed and defiled and she gets to pay for the privilege. It calls to mind Texas GOP Gubernatorial Candidate Clayton Williams, who in 1990 quipped, “If it [rape] seems inevitable, lay back and enjoy it”. No thanks, I’ll pass.
The choices in this election are many and stark in contrast. Check out the long-held positions of the candidates in our races, don't just listen to our election campaigning because talk is cheap. See what we HAVE stood for, what we HAVE fought for, and if we are already legislators, what we HAVE LEGISLATED FOR. This is but one significant major issue in this election. I urge all men and women to think very carefully about what this means to you and the women in your life when you vote in November. This is a very slippery slope we're on with potentially dire consequences. Although Roe vs. Wade has been law for 40 years, state after state has shown how easily legal rights can be eroded both legislatively and through the Supreme Court. Make your vote count this year to protect our already hard-won women’s rights!
I've appreciated your input and I thank you for sharing your perspective. I, too, feel enough has been said but folks can feel free to dialogue as long as they would like as far as I'm concerned; I'm ending my responses to them because the folks on this thread seem pretty set in their minds on where they stand on the issues, and this sits just fine with me. Unlike many, I don't feel people need to see or do things my way. As in the issue of DNA and when life begins, what I think is irrelevant to the matter. If someone doesn't feel life begins with conception, than the rest of the arguement holds no sway for them. Why would my thinking on the issue be more valid than theirs when they have a tough decision to make, and they have to live with the consequences of their choice? Be well.
Again, thank you to all of you for sharing your thoughts. Whether or not I agreed with them, I respect your right to your points of view and your individual perspectives and I've enjoyed the debate. There were interesting nuances that gave pause to ponder, and that is how we all grow. I, for one, have never been too proud to change my mind on something when I had been given a reason to do so. On this issue, however, I feel pretty strongly about the value of indivdual choice and the freedom of personal decision making based on one's OWN beliefs, not because someone else in a position of power feels they can foister their religious or moral beliefs on another. I just think that is wrong on so many levels.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/tina-fey-calls-grey-faced-men-talking-rape-222011232.html
This is like pre-Revolution France. Queen Marie Antoinette and one of her ladies-in-waiting ride by in their golden coach throwing cake to the crowds. When the crowd gets unruly, the monarchs tell the driver to move on and away they gallop. Jaimie, this thread dies when you say it does, not when some politician and/or limousine liberal decides to patronize us all and shut it down. Nobody died in your kingdom and left somebody from Greenwich in charge. M. Luca, you are correct about uberliberals. They are lost at sea once they get outside their framework and their response is to call you names or pick up their marbles and go home.
"The individual choice for taking such an action, in my opinion, lies with the parents ideally, the mother if the two cannot agree," Next question. Is there anything, any of you feel , that only a man should decide. And if a woman and man cant agree, the verdict should rightfully go to the man? And? would you find it offensive and 'chauvanistic, or sexist' if a man wrote a column that suggested such? Yeah--of course you would.
Women are clearly capable of making their own decision about their bodies without the input of our (largely male) legislators. Ladies (& gentlemen), we are on the cusp of a very slippery slope with regard to women's reproductive & health care rights. I hope that when you choose your candidates on November 6th you have done your homework & realize what is at stake. The appointment of one supreme court justice representing the far right or the fundementalist point of religious view, and the rights of women in America could be set back 50 years. I was recently at a wedding where a fundamentalist preacher (nephew) was telling the congregation that the man is the head of the household & this new bride must now fall in behind him & follow his word. Is this what YOU believe. Not me! I promised to love, honor & cherish; the vow to "obey" went out the window decades ago. I wouldn't want it coming back. Bye
Oh Lord, Luca's sundowning again.
Also, I instantly knew you were successful, wealthy, and highly advanced just by your penchant for posting thousands of words on...The Patch (where the elite all meet to discuss the events of importance). This is my favorite witty rejoinder of yours this week..."there was little doubt 30 years ago, where you would end up." I bow to your superior intellect, although it may not understand punctuation, and allows you the leisure time to type upon your gold computer whilst sitting upon a hand hammered pewter folding chair...but forgive me, guv'ner...it would be remiss I didn't excuse myself lest I be stopping you from playing the grand piano in the sitting room.
I think we all understand that one of the 'bodies' that comes into play, is the woman's body. Where, in your analysis, however, is the 'body' of the fetus? You are saying, it has no rights? You may be able to ignore the rights of the fetus, but until what point? 9months? 8? 5 , 2? My point is simple--you want to narrow the issue to a question of who carries the baby. But if the fetus can survive outside the womb, instead of killing the fetus, should we strive to allow it to live? Then it's not about the woman's body, because a procedure has to be done on the female body. Should the procedure be to extract the fetus and incubate , or kill? And is that really the choice of only the mother? Can the father decide? Should society legistlate that a sustainable fetus, has rights? I dont think its fair, for you ,to decide that only one gender gets those choices. Since I am pro choice, but decide to listen (with my listening ears) to consider more than my point of view, I know that I am not being unfair here. What I think is that its much more convenient, to decide its just about the woman, and her body to simplify it- . THese are far more complex issues than you want to allow for.
Stephanie. I have to challenge you here again. IN order for that statement to be correct, you need to tell me the exact stance of the current 9 justices towards Roe V Wade. I honestly do hope, as a person running for office, you will take responsibility for the statements you make. Why are you so sure, that the decision could not be overturned, with the present court? Presently, on the court there exist 6 (yes 6! ) Catholic members. Why are you so certain, that their religious teachings, dont translate into pro-life? Sotomayor is a Catholic. She is new. They may already have the votes.
"I bow to your superior intellect, although it may not understand punctuation, " Then you say: "it would be remiss I didn't excuse myself lest I be stopping you from playing the grand piano in the sitting room. " (it would be remiss I didn't excuse...") Jimmy Pursey 12:56 pm on Thursday, October 25, 2012 Luca- this is similar to the problem you had with one of my previous sentences. Although that one hinged more on your inability to understand how comma's are used. How do you spell the plural of comma? We can keep at these petty things? But for someone , such as yourself, that makes the occasional mistake, maybe you should just let it go? I, for sure, will make mistakes when typing. And apostrophes are not convenient to include, when I am pretty sure writing its, instead of it's is understood. If the best you can attack me for, is missing a comma, then Id say, your previous statement of going after condescending people, is inaccurate. You just look to fault. As I said, instead of ridiculing , why not engage in intellectual debate, replete with facts, and acknowledgment of truths? Is it above your level of intellect? And the one liners and punctuation lessons is as good as you can get? If that is the case, it's not a demonstration of anything interesting. As just shown, you make mistakes when typing--so why bother? If saying i miss a comma is the best you have? Is that something worth having?
If you are, as you say, not too proud to change your mind when you have been given a reason to do so, please take this opportunity to reject the “right” to kill helpless human beings because they aren’t a convenient gender. Don’t go down a path which leads to the dustbin of history just to get a NARAL endorsement for your candidacy. “Science may have found a cure for most evils, but it has found no remedy for the worst of them all--the apathy of human beings.” Helen Keller
It is the role of law in our country to interfere with, prohibit and penalize free will decisions if our elected representatives, judges or Constitutional Convention electors deem it necessary. For you as an aspiring representative to say that you wouldn’t tell someone who has opinions different from yours to behave in a certain way would seem to mean that you are disqualifying yourself from an essential role and duty in representative government. If you truly feel this way, consider terminating your election campaign.
I never told anyone to shut down the thread. We have more than one Stephanie in on the discussion, but I do think the issue on which I wrote has been covered from virtually all angles. Some good questions were generated on both sides of the arguement and that only goes to show it is a complex issue with many nuances and ramifications. I'm glad my article engendered such a wide range of discussions. I have never felt that people have to agree with my point of view, nor I with theirs, thus the option of individual choice. If nothing else it gets one to thinking and broadens one's scope. Keep your marbles and stay in the game. I enjoy your writing style.
I'm not sure what a video on wrestling has to do with a woman's right to choose an abortion for gender selection but there is a video which does address this issue. It's from a discussion between Bill O'Reilly and Laura Ingraham and can be accessed below. There are four states which prohibit gender selection abortions including Illinois, home state of Barack Obama and Pennsylvania, a nearby contested swing state in the US Presidential election. Mention is also made of NARAL’s pressure on this issue. You are pleased with NARAL ‘s endorsement, I think. Some legislators have shown the courage to prohibit this hideous atrocity, Ms. Paulmeno, but you stand aside. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kedw3SytVWc
If it isnt apparent then let me tell you---Stepahnie has latched onto an issue she thinks she can command. However, she has demonstrated a disturbing gender bias. Bias that is rationalized and legitimized, by statements as inane as " both genders shoud discuss-and if they dont agree, the woman should prevail, goes to the bias/intelligence of Stephanie. While she makes unsupportable comment after unsupportable comment, she does nothing to correct herself other than write platititudes. "I am for the white man, -but im for equality, she may as well say." This is the type of government we have....a bunch of people who have a low level of intellect and try their best to appeal to one or two special interest groups. For the Dems--its unions and women who they have convinced they should be scared. For Republicans, it's corporations and the rich. Our country would be best erved to understand the limitations of people like Stephanie. We need intelligent fair people----willing to consider more than their narrow points of view.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Edmund Burke
He's been the Director of the White Plains Vet Center (a Veteran's mental health outreach center) in Westchester for 30 years now, a place where I do a lot of volunteer work. I'm sure he'd love to hear from you. Many people have looked him up & contacted him following his book chapters, including the pilot of the copter he was in when injured. Our phone number is listed, & made public by me as a candidate, so I have no problems providing it to you. Feel free to call. We, probably like you, are home now.(203) 637-9227. I'd like to thank you for your service. Only about 1% of us ever step up to the plate to serve as you and he have, & you all deserve both our thanks & our gratitude. Although we have different points of view on several issues, I just agree to disagree without malice. Despite your perceptions of ME, which I dare say few would agree with, I think if you knew me you'd find I was one of the nicest people you know. Roger thinks I'm one of the smartest he knows!(smile)
Roger was a door gunner. Good man. I served with him. Amazing....
Roger Paulmeno now has an account and a profile on Greenwich Patch, if you'd like to see if he is, in fact, the person you think you served with in Vietnam.
http://www.coachoutletod.comCoach/ Factory Outlet http://www.coachs-outletcar.com/ Coach Factory Outlet http://www.coachoutletdp.com/ Coach Outlet Store Online http://www.coachoutletwo.com/ Coach Outlet Store Online http://www.coachfactoryoutletsp.com/ Coach Factory Online http://www.coachfactoryoutletli.net/ Coach Outlet Online http://www.coachfactoryoutletce.org/ Coach Outlet http://www.coachoutletonlinelc.net/ Coach Factory Outlet http://www.coachoutletonlinesc.com/ Coach Factory Outlet http://www.coachoutletonlinelsa.com/ Coach Outlet Store http://www.louisvuittonoutletct.com/ Louis Vuitton Purses http://www.louisvuittonoutletti.org/ Louis Vuitton Bags http://www.coachoutletrf.com/ Coach Outlet Online http://www.coachfactoryonlinebp.com/ Coach Factory Outlet