General Discussion

hfojvt

(37,573 posts)

229. How is your self determination not limited by all laws?

Sat Nov 2, 2013, 09:42 PM

Nov 2013

Every law that prohibits something, limits your self determination. Even over your own body.

You are not allowed to smoke cigarettes if you are under age 18.
Even though you can vote at age 18, you still cannot legally drink alcohol.
In most states you cannot legally smoke pot.
In every state you cannot legally ingest cocaine
or meth
or heroin

Is it okay if DUers support those laws which limit your choices? Your self determination?

Many DUers also support things like
mandatory seatbelt laws (did you know that one of the early actions of the Obama administration was to extort states to write primary infraction seatbelt laws? Was that one of the reasons why YOU supported him? Because it sure was NOT for me. I opposed him doing that - strongly so, and was a minority on DU)
mandatory bicycle helmet laws

Once again limiting people's self determination.

How can such opinions be allowed on DU? It's an outrage!

Or how are those things fundamentally different? Except that some people are very, very fervent about abortion rights.

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

247 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Opinions please [View all] boston bean Nov 2013 OP

Isn't this like a witch hunt? RobertEarl Nov 2013 #1

No it is not a witch hunt. boston bean Nov 2013 #2

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #73

What Ohio Joe said. n/t demmiblue Nov 2013 #74

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #86

Objecting to the removal of civil rights from half the population is censorship? Warpy Nov 2013 #139

Agreed. Hayabusa Nov 2013 #184

Well, it's like a witch hunt in a world where witches are real and evil. Deep13 Nov 2013 #81

No... It's About Freedom... And About NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS !!! WillyT Nov 2013 #166

I am extremely pro-choice, however... zappaman Nov 2013 #3

The postings were no woman should have the choice. boston bean Nov 2013 #7

I misunderstood? zappaman Nov 2013 #11

Yes, you misunderstood. boston bean Nov 2013 #18

Well, by the same token, religions oppose gay rights. So can someone be a Democrat Squinch Nov 2013 #78

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #63

Ok, so you want to to be able to advocate banning abortion and overturning roe v wade? boston bean Nov 2013 #70

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #91

I'm calm and not in the least hysterical. boston bean Nov 2013 #100

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #110

I asked you if you felt it should be discussed here. You need to go back and re read. boston bean Nov 2013 #123

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #135

So, you want anti choice bullshit posted here on DU. Ok, now you've answered my question. boston bean Nov 2013 #136

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #138

Anti choice rhetoric is not civil. That's where skinner went wrong, IMHO. boston bean Nov 2013 #142

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #145

It is denigrating, the entire stance is a denigration on women's autonomy. boston bean Nov 2013 #146

It is a dangerous and repressive opinion. We don't tolerate a lot of bullshit and right wing morningfog Nov 2013 #220

You mean anti-choice, not pro-life. morningfog Nov 2013 #219

She is referring to those that are ANTI-choice. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #82

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #93

I might ask how one can be a liberal when holding an ANTI-choice POV. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #98

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #113

Is there ANY room for debate when it comes to CHOICE? cleanhippie Nov 2013 #122

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #137

It would seem you are arguing for LIMITED-choice. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #147

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #150

We are discussing anti choice. Which means wanting to ban abortion. boston bean Nov 2013 #153

What is there to discuss that would support an ANTI-choice viewpoint? cleanhippie Nov 2013 #216

Are you pro choice? boston bean Nov 2013 #148

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #151

"What about women who use abortion as birth control" What kind of statement is that? icymist Nov 2013 #225

It is disturbing... Ohio Joe Nov 2013 #4

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #64

The entire site is built around censorship... Ohio Joe Nov 2013 #69

Bless you eternally. Squinch Nov 2013 #79

+1 nt laundry_queen Nov 2013 #105

+1 daleanime Nov 2013 #156

First Amendment does not give one the right... awoke_in_2003 Nov 2013 #92

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #96

No but there is a rule "against" posting RW views. malokvale77 Nov 2013 #134

We are generally only confronted with hard core RW opinions until MIRT tombstones Zorra Nov 2013 #190

It seems to me there are plenty of right wing view points that are allowed and quite loud NoOneMan Nov 2013 #180

a Democratic County chair hfojvt Nov 2013 #232

Skinner gave the answer in the thread to which you linked Cirque du So-What Nov 2013 #5

The answer he gave, more or less, was that someone could advocate that half the population Squinch Nov 2013 #51

How is your self determination not limited by all laws? hfojvt Nov 2013 #229

If you are equating laws against minors smoking and drinking, and laws about seatbelts Squinch Nov 2013 #230

they are equal hfojvt Nov 2013 #240

Not reading your post. They are not equal. Have a nice night. Squinch Nov 2013 #241

you had to reply? hfojvt Nov 2013 #245

Here I walk on thin ice. Laelth Nov 2013 #6

I think we have lost a lot of ground on reproductive choice - in some states there is no where, bettyellen Nov 2013 #13

I don't deny that this battle is ongoing. Laelth Nov 2013 #21

The problem with that 20 year change is that Ilsa Nov 2013 #231

" on all the significant social issues in America, the left has already won" Aerows Nov 2013 #27

I will, in fact. Laelth Nov 2013 #29

I don't deny that Aerows Nov 2013 #199

I haven't seen that, but I would find it disturbing. Autumn Nov 2013 #8

"This is an important women's right that is under attack by the RW and it should not be acceptable bettyellen Nov 2013 #14

Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2013 #9

Your opinion means a lot to me. This response by Skinner has made me Squinch Nov 2013 #54

I agree. procon Nov 2013 #85

I see why you're shocked. haikugal Nov 2013 #10

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #72

Excuse me? haikugal Nov 2013 #104

Then why have Community Standards at all? cleanhippie Nov 2013 #108

I'm with Skinner on this one tkmorris Nov 2013 #12

I am not advocating an auto ban of anyone. boston bean Nov 2013 #17

That IS what you advocated though isn't it? tkmorris Nov 2013 #30

I wrote "anti choice view points should not be welcome here". boston bean Nov 2013 #34

I don't understand the nature of your response tkmorris Nov 2013 #37

Do you think there are racists on DU? Do you think there are homophobes posting on DU. boston bean Nov 2013 #41

I agree with you 100% laundry_queen Nov 2013 #118

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #120

Choosing an opinion is not pro choice. boston bean Nov 2013 #126

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #140

Seems to me that the person who chooses choice over limiting choice isn't forcing an opinion. boston bean Nov 2013 #149

There is a difference between being troubled by the concept of abortion and being anti-choice. Warren DeMontague Nov 2013 #32

Exactly. Advocating a legislative ban of a medical procedure is the problem Cal Carpenter Nov 2013 #39

Exactly!! haikugal Nov 2013 #43

If being ANTI-choice is not auto-bannable, what other extreme RW views are ok? cleanhippie Nov 2013 #116

Kind of like being a homophobe Aerows Nov 2013 #206

Well to be honest, nothing surprises me anymore. nadinbrzezinski Nov 2013 #15

I feel that way about defending a surveillance/police state and predatory economic policies woo me with science Nov 2013 #16

Then perhaps you should start a thread on that. Warren DeMontague Nov 2013 #45

You mean like anyone that supports the police state zeemike Nov 2013 #83

I totally agree with you. Anti choice rhetoric should be a TOS violation. nt DLevine Nov 2013 #19

Seeking to abolish our right to choose is clearly a RW republican position. Zorra Nov 2013 #20

Being anti-abortion isn't right-wing Prism Nov 2013 #22

This thread is about anti choice, which is a rw position, not a left/democratic position. boston bean Nov 2013 #23

I read the OP correctly Prism Nov 2013 #24

So? That doesn't mean those opinions should be debated here. boston bean Nov 2013 #26

I don't think it's an outrageous thing for a Democrat to believe Prism Nov 2013 #55

Catholic Democrats, based on the teachings of their religion, Squinch Nov 2013 #213

You say you know liberal Democrats who are anti abortion. DLevine Nov 2013 #31

Being anti choice is every bit as deplorable as racism and homophobia. nt DLevine Nov 2013 #33

No. It isn't. Prism Nov 2013 #48

Tell that to the families of the women who will die DLevine Nov 2013 #49

That's why these discussions are poop Prism Nov 2013 #52

Unless you've been through an Isoldeblue Nov 2013 #165

Being ANTI-choice is EXACTLY the same a being racist or bigoted. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #127

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #71

Anti choice is a RW position. DLevine Nov 2013 #76

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #87

That is not an anti-choice example Bradical79 Nov 2013 #128

That is not an accurate description of what choice means in this context. Squinch Nov 2013 #214

Sexism and misogyny chervilant Nov 2013 #36

I could Prism Nov 2013 #50

Oh, really? chervilant Nov 2013 #94

Yes! 100% n/m Isoldeblue Nov 2013 #194

But by the same token, to paraphrase you, who are they to disagree with me Squinch Nov 2013 #61

Well said Squinch...Thanks haikugal Nov 2013 #119

Do we really want MagnumUK Nov 2013 #25

On issues of women having control of their own bodies, yes, I do want an echo chamber. boston bean Nov 2013 #28

Merely by being DEMOCRATIC Underground, it's bound to be something of one. Warren DeMontague Nov 2013 #44

"we"? H2O Man Nov 2013 #57

DUers have gored all my oxen. If you hold on to one around here, it will get gored, too. HereSince1628 Nov 2013 #35

You're undoubtedly aware that chervilant Nov 2013 #38

It was more the blessing from admin that's it's ok as long as a poster is respectful and doesn't boston bean Nov 2013 #62

Well, it's not okay, under chervilant Nov 2013 #107

I don't think pro-life/anti - choice people should be allowed to post here. Vashta Nerada Nov 2013 #40

I agree. I think supporting (or at least, not openly opposing) CHOICE ought to be a basic Warren DeMontague Nov 2013 #42

Exactly. cyberswede Nov 2013 #247

Democrats respect the rights.... DeSwiss Nov 2013 #46

This!! ^^^^ haikugal Nov 2013 #47

And another put on ignore Savannahmann Nov 2013 #53

Perhaps you should read the Democratic Party platform boston bean Nov 2013 #56

^^^This^^^ malokvale77 Nov 2013 #97

I will second the ^^^this^^^. Vashta Nerada Nov 2013 #112

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #117

Those are "not" liberals malokvale77 Nov 2013 #152

On DU? If so please show us some links...... Little Star Nov 2013 #208

*snap* "The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right Zorra Nov 2013 #164

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #67

This site is entirely too tolerant of right-wing talking points on just geek tragedy Nov 2013 #173

The key difference is... Freddie Nov 2013 #58

Exactly. And that line might be my line in the sand here. Squinch Nov 2013 #66

I can definitely get behind this. Starry Messenger Nov 2013 #59

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #60

You are not understanding and I say that respectfully. boston bean Nov 2013 #65

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #89

It is not pro choice. If there is only one choice given there is no choice. boston bean Nov 2013 #95

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #103

Wanting to ban abortions is a one way choice. Therefore that is not part of pro choice. boston bean Nov 2013 #111

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #130

And this thread is about those who want to ban abortion. boston bean Nov 2013 #133

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Nov 2013 #143

Anti choice persons. I guess I'd have to hear your definition of pro life before I would agree. boston bean Nov 2013 #144

The person in question advocated a law to take away choice. malokvale77 Nov 2013 #162

Read post #56. Vashta Nerada Nov 2013 #114

IMO, anti-choicers/forced birthers do not have a place on a democratic/liberal board. n/t demmiblue Nov 2013 #68

It's one thing to be against the concept of abortion for religious reasons,... Spitfire of ATJ Nov 2013 #75

My opinion, for what it's worth... ScreamingMeemie Nov 2013 #77

What is the name of the witch we seeketh to burn? Seriously...this is useless without a link. nt msanthrope Nov 2013 #80

I'm less interested in the witch we seek to burn - Ms. Toad Nov 2013 #198

I agree...without links/posts, these threads are speculative and useless. nt msanthrope Nov 2013 #201

Here... A-Schwarzenegger Nov 2013 #202

Oh yeah...that one...tangled with her before... msanthrope Nov 2013 #228

This was Skinners response: AAO Nov 2013 #84

Well, I used to be right-to-life, but have been pro-choice for a long time. Deep13 Nov 2013 #88

Not a burning issue to me quinnox Nov 2013 #90

I think the Admin statement merits parsing... whttevrr Nov 2013 #99

There had to be at least fifty posts arguing it. boston bean Nov 2013 #102

I hope it was not a thread I skipped to the bottom to reply... whttevrr Nov 2013 #131

The LINK: A-Schwarzenegger Nov 2013 #109

Yeah, I passed on that thread when I saw it. whttevrr Nov 2013 #163

Hi Boston bean. i have seen a poster openly admit and espouse views against abortion fascisthunter Nov 2013 #101

I guess maybe it's because I find the opinion to be in the same league boston bean Nov 2013 #106

you are correct... handmade34 Nov 2013 #125

my opinion... handmade34 Nov 2013 #115

While I am pro- choice, I know quite a few dems TxDemChem Nov 2013 #121

Are there any lines you would draw? DLevine Nov 2013 #132

I don't think I could draw any lines. TxDemChem Nov 2013 #189

IMO pro choice is not pro abortion tavernier Nov 2013 #124

Good post! nt caledesi Nov 2013 #129

Sad facts question everything Nov 2013 #141

we should never ignore handmade34 Nov 2013 #159

Yeah. No. What we're talking about here is not something that should just be allowed Squinch Nov 2013 #223

My husband is as strongly pro-choice as I am. RiffRandell Nov 2013 #235

Speaking for myself personally, Isoldeblue Nov 2013 #154

In general, unless an opinion is suddenly made for disruption Pretzel_Warrior Nov 2013 #155

But admin has given the ok as long as it's respectful and the poster isn't doing it all the time. boston bean Nov 2013 #160

Isn't that standard admin policy? leftstreet Nov 2013 #167

Is what a standard admin policy? I can only speak to what I have linked to in the OP. boston bean Nov 2013 #168

Oh, I mean the auto-banning leftstreet Nov 2013 #174

Not that I am aware. But what other rights that dems support is there such understanding of those boston bean Nov 2013 #179

If someone were to come in and make an occasional racist or homophobic comment, Squinch Nov 2013 #224

The one who calls other women here "murderers"? Adds nothing worthwhile. REP Nov 2013 #157

Yep. That one. The same one who parses whether Squinch Nov 2013 #226

Should we ban Roman Catholics in general? WinkyDink Nov 2013 #158

No. boston bean Nov 2013 #161

Why not? NoOneMan Nov 2013 #170

Why should they? boston bean Nov 2013 #172

Why shouldn't they? NoOneMan Nov 2013 #175

You asked if they should and I said no. Why would you ask? boston bean Nov 2013 #181

I didn't ask NoOneMan Nov 2013 #182

Woops. I need to know they asked to expound further. I guess you are out of luck. boston bean Nov 2013 #183

I've never thought about it, but every other position in the world is debated on this board NoOneMan Nov 2013 #169

I would hope it would be one, ie on the lines of boston bean Nov 2013 #171

Have you read the Terms of Service? nt DLevine Nov 2013 #176

Have you read threads here justifying torture, spying, libertarian economics, droning, etc.... NoOneMan Nov 2013 #177

Just as an example, DLevine Nov 2013 #178

Ok, so social issues are off limits? Right Wing Economic and Military policy still ok? NoOneMan Nov 2013 #185

I don't make the rules. It's not my site. DLevine Nov 2013 #187

It's probably a reflection of the party leftstreet Nov 2013 #188

Undoubtably that's part of it NoOneMan Nov 2013 #191

By all means you should start a thread on that topic. Squinch Nov 2013 #227

I guess Jimmy Carter would be banned here then? oberliner Nov 2013 #186

Seems like jimmy carter as president accepted roe v wade as law of the land. boston bean Nov 2013 #192

So did George W Bush oberliner Nov 2013 #193

No the point of the post was persons espousing anti choice rhetoric. boston bean Nov 2013 #197

He wanted to change the Democratic Party platform oberliner Nov 2013 #242

It shouldn't be part of progressive thought at all LadyHawkAZ Nov 2013 #195

I AM NOT a breeding slave. Jasana Nov 2013 #196

why is it mercuryblues Nov 2013 #200

It is frustrating gollygee Nov 2013 #203

Of all the things in the world that I have to worry about rrneck Nov 2013 #204

You didn't read the op did you? boston bean Nov 2013 #205

I don't care what you linked to rrneck Nov 2013 #209

Thanks for your help and guidance. Whatever would I have done without it. boston bean Nov 2013 #210

Exactly the same as if I had never posted a word. rrneck Nov 2013 #211

My comment concerning many who are against abortion is they dwell on the stereotype. haele Nov 2013 #207

Our wonderful "Big Tent"... Kermitt Gribble Nov 2013 #212

Especially RW positions that deny people civil rights gollygee Nov 2013 #215

The tent needs to be burned down and re-pitched. morningfog Nov 2013 #218

I think Skinner is wrong. There is no such thing as an anti-choice progressive. morningfog Nov 2013 #217

Okay, I'll go for it... Jasana Nov 2013 #221

I understand why some people feel abortion is murder ProudToBeBlueInRhody Nov 2013 #222

Being anti-choice should be bannable. Absolutely kcr Nov 2013 #233

Whoever the admins want to keep on their site is their choice. But if someone is going to rail hrmjustin Nov 2013 #234

There is no context in the thread you linked to goldent Nov 2013 #236

Well maybe you should take the admins word for it. boston bean Nov 2013 #237

I thought you were questioning the decision of the admins? goldent Nov 2013 #238

You aren't following along very well and have missed the point. boston bean Nov 2013 #239

oh well goldent Nov 2013 #246

I agree with Skinner Vattel Nov 2013 #243

Jimmy Carter could be considered anti-choice philosslayer Nov 2013 #244