Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Religion

In reply to the discussion: Can a feminist be pro-life? [View all]

Recommendations

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

Pro-life is antithetical to feminism. laconicsax Feb 2012 #1
I'll take that as you haven't read the article. rug Feb 2012 #3
So I should change my opinion because not everyone agrees? laconicsax Feb 2012 #12
No, but you should recognize the difference between opinion and dogma. rug Feb 2012 #13
Says the person who's confusing my opinion with dogma. n/t laconicsax Feb 2012 #15
You expected any less? darkstar3 Feb 2012 #17
Now, now. Be nice. laconicsax Feb 2012 #19
As it does with bigots who are heavily invested in their bigotry. rug Feb 2012 #30
If you really believe that, then you have a very strange view of what "dogma" means. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #34
And you have a very selective view of bigotry. rug Feb 2012 #43
That's because I don't throw the word around enough to make it meaningless. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #47
You throw it around quite selectively. rug Feb 2012 #48
Oh look, more baseless accusation. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #50
Sure it's baseless. rug Feb 2012 #51
I must have missed the equivocation. rug Feb 2012 #29
Did you think I was maybe expressing someone else's opinion? laconicsax Feb 2012 #33
Sadly, that declarative statement was yours only. rug Feb 2012 #44
I have strong opinions an a number of topics. laconicsax Feb 2012 #49
Strength of opinion does not equate to the rectitude of the opinion. rug Feb 2012 #52
I think it's called religious faith. n/t laconicsax Feb 2012 #53
yes she can sabbat hunter Feb 2012 #2
+ 1 no_hypocrisy Feb 2012 #23
nope, that is a definitional argument that alters the common meaning Warren Stupidity Feb 2012 #65
I don't like the term "pro-life". It should be pro-choice or anti-choice. We need to take that southernyankeebelle Feb 2012 #4
That's a more accurate frameing of the issue. rug Feb 2012 #5
I think so and we need to start using those terms. Don't you think? southernyankeebelle Feb 2012 #7
I do. rug Feb 2012 #8
*framing laconicsax Feb 2012 #20
Thank you- this is something I try to remind people about constantly. KaryninMiami Feb 2012 #14
It makes sense and we should keep using it and correcting people. Maybe it takes one person a time. southernyankeebelle Feb 2012 #27
It Should be pro-abortion and anti-abortion Riftaxe Feb 2012 #21
This is the only valid approach Why Syzygy Feb 2012 #22
Exactly right. If we all express the pro and anti choice maybe it will sink in. We all must do it southernyankeebelle Feb 2012 #28
Homosexuals can be conservative republicans tech_smythe Feb 2012 #6
People compartmentalize, and also suffer from cognitive dissonance, darkstar3 Feb 2012 #9
And some can harmonize seeming contradiction. rug Feb 2012 #10
And others can use euphemisms. 2ndAmForComputers Feb 2012 #16
And others use passive aggressiveness as a means of communication. rug Feb 2012 #31
Damn right they do. 2ndAmForComputers Feb 2012 #32
The third person plural doesn't really fit. rug Feb 2012 #45
Hm, you're right, it doesn't. 2ndAmForComputers Feb 2012 #55
This message was self-deleted by its author cleanhippie Feb 2012 #25
I have real problems with the whole question-- vixengrl Feb 2012 #11
I can see some gray in this one too ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2012 #18
yes 2pooped2pop Feb 2012 #24
Of course, and not just in the DU-safe formulation... Silent3 Feb 2012 #26
I don't agree with your premise, because darkstar3 Feb 2012 #35
I don't see how that's "axiomatic"... Silent3 Feb 2012 #37
Actually, no, the simplest definition of feminism darkstar3 Feb 2012 #38
Unless you have a different definition of "agency"... Silent3 Feb 2012 #39
Biology doesn't enter into it. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #40
The law doesn't regulate capacities, it regulates rights Silent3 Feb 2012 #41
I'm not accepting your hypothetical premise at all, because you can't play devil's advocate darkstar3 Feb 2012 #46
If that's how you're going to use the word "agency" Silent3 Feb 2012 #54
You just compared abortion and rape. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #56
What bullshit Silent3 Feb 2012 #57
Do yourself a favor and close down the pity party. darkstar3 Feb 2012 #58
I certainly think it's possible... Silent3 Feb 2012 #59
"hypersensitive"! darkstar3 Feb 2012 #60
So you think it's a subject... Silent3 Feb 2012 #61
No, I think everything that I posted in #46, darkstar3 Feb 2012 #62
I understand the idea of "my body, my choice" perfectly well Silent3 Feb 2012 #63
Interesting article about this. The major question cbayer Feb 2012 #36
Yes; otherwise we start getting into the 'No True Scots(wo)man' fallacy LeftishBrit Feb 2012 #42
"is the pro-life movement merely a stalking horse for the Christian right? " Warren Stupidity Feb 2012 #64
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Can a feminist be pro-lif...»Reply #10