Forums | MacLife

PantherAmI wrote:

Neither one of them said anything about an alleged rape.

That's my point.

Okay...so who knows what the real story is?

Do you possess an unquestioned faith in the Iranian justice system?

AAPL Shareholder wrote:

Pariah wrote:

AAPL Shareholder wrote:

wow... that was tasteless.
Thanks for taking a big dump on all the human right rallies I've attended.

You can't deny that the left has had a shamefull history of being an apologist for the anti-woman culture in most Islamic countries. This is just an extention of that same belief system.

WTF are you talking about? Are you kidding me? Is today opposite day or something?

Progressive folks have been at the forefront for global women's rights campaigns. We've been fighting against genital mutilation and antiquated traditionalism in africa, extremist oppression in the middle east, etc, etc.   

Please don't confuse respecting one's culture with shielding oppression and extremism. They're very very different, and intertwining them is incredibly counter productive. We should be trying to unify people to address these horrible issues, not ignorantly alienating people who want the same thing.

Sorry if I sounded like an ass.... but that post kind of pissed me off.  I've spent a significant portion of my life involved with progressive NPOs and global human rights campaigns. Much of my time has been spent trying to get the stories of the oppressed, to the public (our public). All too frequently, many of those stories revolve around woman. Women who have been banned from schooling,  banned from the workplace, banned from politics,  forced into guarded sweat shops, mutilated , beaten, covered up, murdered, forced by sweatshop to have abortions, had their children executed, etc. I could go on and on.

So say that the "left" has had a "shameful history of being an apologist for the anti-woman culture most Islamic countries" is, quite frankly, the COMPLETE OPPOSITE of what has actually taken place.

I fought my outrage at their outlandish claim, but almost replied inthe same spirit as you. I think you've been hooked by the bait. Join me in ignoring this thread? I'll buy the first round.

WTF does abortion have to do with the public execution of two gay teens?

iBubba wrote:

WTF does abortion have to do with the public execution of two gay teens?

me replying to Brattys question on page one

iBubba wrote:

WTF does abortion have to do with the public execution of two gay teens?

What the Farmer said.

And

Hank wrote:

As a prolife person, I can say that I dislike:
-humans being killed by other humans simply because of who they are.

(snip)

That goes for those two poor fellows in Iran (assuming that this isn't all some Iranian version of the INC spinning myths) whom this thread is, presumably about...and it goes for unborn humans as well.

Farmer's was a well-drawn parallel.

In any case, hanging people because they are gay, green, or gallant is repugnant.  Killing anyone because of who they are is repugnant.

bratboy wrote:

charon wrote:

The question is whether lefties believe that individuals have the moral authority to enforce a generally applicable code of justice upon other individuals.

The pro-choice viewpoint seems to answer "no."  It regards the question of fetal rights as immaterial to the debate over abortion rights through a sidestep--"OK, if you think they have rights, don't get an abortion.  Just don't stop me."

...and do we not shape 'rights'  through our laws?  Are you saying that "lefties" (and I'm seeing a lot of generalization in this thread) are hypocritical because they're not engaging in debate over "fetus rights?"

Sorry, I wasn't trying to make any claims about the left in general, just the "pro-choice" movement in particular (as a subset of the left).

I don't think anyone was trying to make a point about hypocrisy.  Like I said, the question is simply whether the left endorses any excessive moral relativism.  everlong clearly exaggerated what is true of a minority of the left.  Farmerkev offered a better example, I think.

I realize that "moral relativism" is an ambiguous concept.  But let me be clear that I'm distinguishing between pro-abortion rights and "pro-choice."  It's one thing to say "fetuses have no rights" (which is roughly my belief).  It's another thing to treat the question as a matter of personal opinion and say "to each her own, my body my right."  That's analogous to the viewpoint vis-a-vis Iran that everlong was attacking.

Last edited by charon (2005-07-22 4:21 pm)

So a lemming effect is what I am witnessing in this train wreck of a topic?

Hank Rearden wrote:

True. And if "no one likes" them, then it begs the question:

"What is there not to like?"

That's not what "begging the question" is.

Farmerkev wrote:

iBubba wrote:

So a lemming effect is what I am witnessing in this train wreck of a topic?

No, what you're witnessing would be intellectual honesty.

*blink*

charon wrote:

I realize that "moral relativism" is an ambiguous concept.  But let me be clear that I'm distinguishing between pro-abortion rights and "pro-choice."  It's one thing to say "fetuses have no rights" (which is roughly my belief).  It's another thing to treat the question as a matter of personal opinion and say "to each her own, my body my right."  That's analogous to the viewpoint vis-a-vis Iran that everlong was attacking.

Okay...I still find it confusing but I don't think that's your fault.

I don't know a whole lot about the "pro-choice" movement.  (I, like you, believe that a fetus does not have rights.) 

I see what you're saying, for those who might make a different argument.

Tria wrote:

Just because I'm curious, HR, you're pro life but do you think the government should regulate abortion?

See http://l4l.org/

Basically, I believe that the one and only role of government (if it has any role at all) is to protect its citizens.  And the one principle that all should live by is to not conduct violence against others or their property.

I find it hard to believe that an unborn child is a non-human.  In history, I have seen too many humans be classified as such, and the results are horrendous.

As such, if an unborn child is human, then he/she has the same right to be protected from violence as do you or I.

Take a look at the material available at the above URL.  It will serve to answer any questions that you may have arising out of this very brief summary of the argument.

Thanks for asking, BTW.