RIGHTWINGSPARKLE gives us an interesting analysis of the Obama reaction to Palin
I think she has hit the nail on the head! We as a society must resolve the abortion issue or these problems will not end.
http://rightwingsparkle.blogspot.com/2008/09/pink-elephant-in-room.html
Reaction?
http://rightwingsparkle.blogspot.com/2008/09/pink-elephant-in-room.html
Reaction?
Labels: Politics
posted by Jim | 3:10 PM
2 Comments:
We've had earlier discussions on abortion, so I don't want to re-hash all of it again, but I do find one aspect of this worth pointing out. From the blog post:
"To them Sarah is a slap in their face. Every time they see her, they see someone who says that aborting their baby was wrong. It's made worse by the fact that Sarah even chose to bring a disabled child into this world."
It's the use of the the word 'choice' (or choose or chose). First of all, was a choice made? If one is already 'pro-life' then there is no choice being made; assuming the mother's life is in no danger, then she will have the baby regardless of any other information that is available. To the extent a choice was made, it was made when the person became 'pro-life'.
For those who are 'pro-choice' I don't see why they would have a problem with a mother who has a baby. What they have a problem with is those who would deny the mother a choice. The pro-choice position does not stop anyone from being pro-life, but the pro-life position generally does intend to stop people from exercising choice.
Note that I don't deny that this is a very difficult issue, and it seems that even at the linguistic level it is difficult to keep things straight.
I think the linquistic level was perfect in that article. You are overreacting to the word "chose".
Sarah "chose" because she was advised by tests (I am assuming this is what happened) and she and her husband "chose" to keep the baby. It has nothing to do with Pro-Choice or Pro-Life in the sense RWS was using it. I could imagine a Pro-Choice mother deciding to keep a Down Syndrome baby or a Pro-Life mother deciding to not have a baby for other reasons (although I admit this is the least likely).
Regarding Pro-Lifers not allowing Pro-Choicers to have a choice - our society does not allow the choice of many activities. It all depends on your moral interpretation of the act.
I will end the discussion there and hope I have added some clarity to a problem that is similar to discussing politics and religion!
Post a Comment
<< Home