Thursday, October 16, 2008

I Am Pro-Life

Yes. It's true. I am Pro-Life, and I can prove it: I support Roe v. Wade which upholds a Constitutional right to privacy as defined by the 14th Amendment. Essentially, the decision of the Supreme Court ensures that women have the right to choose whether or not to terminate a pregnancy without interference from the States.

I oppose hunting for sport and trophies. Hunters using semi-automatic weapons, with telephoto sights will always hit their target. Animals cannot escape our greed. I certainly am opposed to the aerial hunting of animals which is outlawed by the Airborne Hunting Act. I am opposed to Capital Punishment
which neither acts as a deterrant, nor does it bring back any victims. And, I am completely opposed to the USA engaging in Pre-Emptive Warfare based upon lies and misinformation.

Oh, and back onto the support side: I do support Assisted Suicide when a patient has no other options. Yes, it's our right to die, to choose our death as well as to choose our life.

I maintain that my Pro-Choice positions make me completely Pro-Life, and I am determined to take back the language of compassion from the Neo-Conservatives. Being Pro-Choice does not make me an abortionist. But it seems that some who call themselves Pro-Life feel it is okay to attack abortion clinics and practitioners, which I really don't understand.

But during last night's final debate between Obama and McCain, when McCain started talking about being Pro-Life (anti-abortion), I felt I had to just shout out NO. I am the one who is Pro-Life, not you, Mr. McCain. Not you, not your running mate. I want my language back.

26 comments:

Randal Graves said...

I didn't realize you carry such a hatred towards the zygote.

The entire wingnut lexicon is Orwellian.

Spartacus said...

DJ... you have just proved my point. This essay moved me. It is as powerful and impassioned as it is persuasive. Yes, I agree. Neo-conservatives have always narrowly defined the pro-life definition because it suits their aim. They care not one lick about the sanctity of life in or out of the womb, much less the women who incubate and birth them. It's simply a diving board to the pool of their utter contempt. If you ask me, all life is sacred from birth to death, and not just human life. I'm so with you on this.

DrDon said...

One simply cannot claim to be pro-life and yet support the death penalty. The two notions are mutually exclusive. I don't know how the right was ever able to hypnotize people into believing that they have the moral upper-hand in this debate with these incongruous beliefs.

Distributorcap said...

anyone who is pro-war is anti-life - period

anyone who shoots and kills innocent animals for sport is anti-life period.

anyone who is pro-death penalty is anti-life period.

but you say it so much better

MRMacrum said...

Reasonable views are not to be tolerated. Thoughful conjecture is frowned upon. And for the love of Pete or whatever god you want, stop making sense. There is no room for that in the New Age of unreason and dim thoughts.

Diplomacy at the end of a gun is good. Lining the pockets of folks riding in limos is good for the country. And killing doctors is considered light sport. Although I will admit it has fallen out of favor as hunting moose and caribou is the new craze.

But fear not. You have some time left to change your wicked ways. Almost 3 weeks in fact. Show your support for Joe six pack and his cousin Joe the plumber by not thinking for yourself. And you can have your language back. You just have to step over to the right side to own it. Simple really.

Border Explorer said...

I cannot add to what you've said. I just want to thank you for saying it and for saying it so well.

Sal Kilmister said...

While I am not a Catholic, I will say the Vatican has been, in recent years, very consistent about this sort of thing. Though I don't agree, I can understand why someone can conclude that abortion is murder. However, one cannot call themselves "pro-life" and be in favor of war, sport hunting, or the death penalty.

Dean Wormer said...

Well said. My view - which I think jives with yours - is that there are worse things than death. We need to make the world we live in a better place for everybody. This in and of itself is a very pro-life position.

Fran said...

You ARE the Diva.

May I add allowing Polar bears to go into extinction, and killing the planet with Nuclear power plants & offshore drilling are not pro life either.

ThomasLB said...

Thanks for linking to the court's decision.

I didn't know the Right to Privacy was an offshoot of Amendment 14. I had always assumed it was from the 9th amendment.

The 9th is my favorite. It's the one that says:

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

In other words, we've got all kinds of rights above and beyond the few that are spelled out. (People who claim to believe in "strict interpretation" of the Constitution often seem to be unaware of Amendment 9.)

DivaJood said...

Obama said it well last night - being Pro Choice does not mean one is Pro Abortion. It simply means that the decision is private, between a woman, her doctor, and her family.

As for the rest of it:

Randal, you know I am an arugula-eating commie pinko.

Spartacus, I just got so nauseated listening to McCain saying he was Pro-Life - I had the radio on for the debate, and am so glad I didn't have to look at his smarmy face - ugh.

DrDon, you do too know how they did it: they lied with a fragment of truth, dressed up with fear.

Distrib, thank you. My cat, Mr. Bean, helped me type and I had to fix links. But John McCain and his smarmy rhetoric was my inspiration.

Mrmacrum, I thought that Joe Sixpack had changed his name to Joe the Plumber, then realized they were cousins.

BE, thank you, but really, I am just so pissed off by the misuse of language, I'm putting my foot down.

Sal, I had a dear friend who was an ex-Jesuit priest - he was pro-choice. Staunchly pro-choice. It is a personal, private decision. I don't demand that someone HAVE an abortion any more then they can demand that a woman MUST NOT have one.

DivaJood said...

Dean, there ARE worse things than death. Living in a persistent vegetative state is one. We have to make the world better for everyone.

Fran, I'm a pissed off Diva, that's for damn sure. Protecting the environment against Global Warming is also Pro-Life.

Thomaslb, The Right To Privacy is based upon the 14th and the 9th Amendments, and The Supreme Court used both as part of their decision. My bad. I was just so pissed off when I wrote this post.

robin andrea said...

Very well said, divajood. We do need to take our language back. We need to have a President in the White House who actually thinks critically, can argue forcefully and logically, and understands the meaning of words. It has been too long that the language of the right has been used as a bludgeon, rather than a tool of to foster knowledge.

Pagan Sphinx said...

What really riles me is that the religious right's so-called Pro-life stance includes making birth control unavailable to a lot of men and women and making it almost impossible, in these times, to properly educate young people on sexuality and birth control.

I agree with Obama that there should be a lot less abortions. As a women who has exercised her right to an early, safe, LEGAL abortion in her past, it is almost always somewhat to very tragic for the vast majority of women. I've talked to many, many women about abortion. However, I agree with you all the way on everything you say. I said thank you at my TV set repeatedly as Baracl was discussing Roe vs. Wade and its implications.

One thing that's not directly related but which really bugs me about Obama/Biden: if only Barack would be as daring about discussing legalization of gay marriage in the same way that he discussed their position on abortion. I wish this was addressed more clearly by the candidate because I have to hear a good argument made against it. Both Biden and Obama believe that marriage should remain between a man and a woman and yet they've given no real compelling reasons why.

Liberality said...

Are we twins? You read my mind. I agree 100% with your stance. You have my vote! Diva Jood for president!!!

DivaJood said...

Robin Andrea, I completely agree - and Obama certainly displays that particular skill.

Pagan, the Gay Marriage issue is a real conundrum. Many people (myself included) truly don't understand why it has to be marriage in order to give Gay couples legal rights. A civil union made more sense to me, and many others. However, that said, the same rights to privacy and choice apply to Gay couples as to Roe v. Wade. I am one of the many who will vote no on Prop 8, because it is just wrong.

Lib, I appreciate your vote, god knows I can use it.

Pagan Sphinx said...

And I, in turn, don't understand why it can't be marriage instead of civil unions or domestic partnerships, which vary so widely from state to state.

Pagan Sphinx said...

Sorry but I forgot to mention that civil unions don't give couples nearly the same protections as marriage.

DivaJood said...

Pagan, whatever we call it, what I'm really saying is that the right of choice, and civil liberties, should be protected for Gay couples as well. If you look at Prop 8 in California, it is an ugly way to deny Gay couples their civil liberties. It is an obvious NO vote, however you look at it. Unless you are a rabid fundamentalist who feels that same sex marriages threaten his own marriage.

That is where it becomes obvious - the name of it is almost irrelevant - the real crux of the matter is how the Fundamentalist feels that when your daughter marries her partner, that marriage will somehow undermine HIS marriage. And that's a crock of shite any way you slice it. What your daughter does has nothing to do with Mr. Fundamentalist. So, why does he have to dictate what she does?

I'm using her as a more personal example of how this right wing language twists compassion into a thing of fear.

What is crucial is this: the right to privacy, and the end of discrimination, are essential. Let's call the Right Wing out on all of this. I'm Pro-Life. If you are too, raise your hand.

Dianne said...

Perhaps we'll get our language back when we get our country back.

I remain cautiously hopeful.

DCup said...

What a great post, Diva. I can't really add anything to what all your other commenters have said, but I just wanted to tell you how important I think it is that you covered all matters of life and choice.

Utah Savage said...

I can only echo Dcup's words.

DivaJood said...

Dianne, we won't get our language back until we take it back. We just really have to speak truthfully.

DCup, thank you - I'm feeling so angry and frustrated right now, it makes me crazy when people like McCain or Bush refer to "compassion". As if.

Utah, thank you.

D.K. Raed said...

The appropriation of the words "pro-life" has always bothered me, too. It divides people into two camps which do not really exist.

I loved hearing Obama tie Roe back to the right to privacy. The opposition always flings out that it was a "bad decision" but never goes much beyond, other than to try to get you to say when you think life begins, which totally misses the point.

To me, the abortion issue boils down to this: women have always had abortions and they always will. Period. Make abortions illegal, and you create a crime out of something that is a personal decision. You also create a lot dead women who resort to illegal unsafe abortions.

DivaJood said...

DK, the genius of the Right Wing is that they know how to spin. It's better to be PRO something than ANTI something - so doesn't "Pro-Life" sound better than "Anti-Abortion?" Well, the truth is, they are anti-abortion. And there is nothing worse than a coat-hanger abortion.

Thorne said...

Oh Diva I've missed you! I love you!!! I jumped straight to this post because I knew it would be elegant and articulate as well as heartfelt and righteous!
Pro Life indeed. I read recently (and have no idea how accurate the statistic is) that " 62 percent [of people living in "red" states] believe life is sacred unless we're discussing the death penalty, abortion providers, homosexuals, Muslims, or gun laws"
As for the gay marriage as opposed to civil unions question, it's as debatable within the gay community as everywhere else, I sometimes think. My take on it as a lesbian is this: If straights are allowed to marry under law, I should have the same right. But truth be told, I don't think anyone should "marry" under law. Marriage is a religious ceremony and as such has crossed the boundary between separation of church and state. I think everyone straight or gay should only be allowed to enter into civil union. Muahahaha!
xoxoxo
Thornie