• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Women and government

Aunt Spiker

Cheese
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
28,431
Reaction score
16,989
Location
Sasnakra
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
I never said anything about 100% of the time. :doh The fact remains that allowing a women to make a choice, doesn't put you in the category of removing a woman's choice(pro-life).

We have an entire forum just for that discussion - by all means :)
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
110,642
Reaction score
56,316
Location
Bradenton Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Yeah, it allows one to be called an evil right-winger or a government-cradler by taking a position, even though both are potentially silly characterizations of the stance. :p

Framing an issue is also not neccessarily a bad thing. While I reject the terms "pro-choice" and "pro-life", niether is exactly inacurate and both are very clear examples of framing an issue. I frame issues all the time, it is to my mind part of the debate process.
 

katiegrrl0

OWL Forever
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
4,172
Reaction score
1,960
Location
at the computer
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Socialist
No - pro-life doesn't mean you oppose abortion 100% all the time :roll:
It doesn't even mean that they are aginst killing innocents in wars or even the guilty by use of the death penalty. :)
 

Teh Internets

Active member
Joined
Jun 13, 2010
Messages
351
Reaction score
125
Location
Virginia, USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
@ Josie

It seems contradictory to claim to want the government to not tell you what to do with your healthcare decisions, but also advocate limiting healthcare decisions based on your personal values. A pro-choice stance would
compliment your libertarian beliefs much better. The government isn't reaching inside of women and aborting children against the mother's will, who are you to deny them the freedom to terminate their pregnancies? As you said earlier in the thread, you're a big girl, and you don't need the government to pass legislation to prevent you from terminating a pregnancy.
 

katiegrrl0

OWL Forever
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
4,172
Reaction score
1,960
Location
at the computer
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Socialist
You're misrepresenting what I'm saying. I'm a libertarian. I think too much government intrusion is anti-freedom. The "Julia" propaganda showed a fictional character going through life with government carrying her along the way. I don't want women (or anyone) to want government to carry them from cradle to grave. I don't think anyone should find happiness in knowing that the government is there with another program full of regulations for them to follow.
You still identify as right leaning. However you want to try and soften this it is still right leaning.
 

Fiddytree

Neocon Elitist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
30,023
Reaction score
17,397
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Those rights were fought for by women who actually wanted women to be equal. They would be outraged by the way the right wants to treat women. They would be outraged that a broadcaster could call a woman a slut of radio because she has sex. How long have women had to accept less for jobs than men? How many years did it take to fight for the right to attend college where the male was not treated preferentially? How much would you be willing to give back? How many rights are you satisfied with? Because you are content the rest of us can go to hell? How nice for you.

Ah, here we go. You committed a basic historical fallacy: anachronism. You cannot boldly declare that women of the past in the related movements for women would react the same way as you in a present situation. Furthermore, you presume they had the same notions of morality or ethics that you do.

It all depended on whom you were referring to. There were many who fought for suffrage or reforms related to work or various other rights that were quite conservative or moderate for other women in the movement, and especially so today. Many women were not necessarily fighting for the level of equality you are referring to. Some, in fact, were quite clear that they were not. Much of the time, some argued a rather exceptionalist track for women, whether it upheld the view of the woman's sphere (as separate from men), and others argued contrarily that they would be the moral clarity lacking in public discourse, by virtue of womanhood.
 
Last edited:

Josie

No Day But Today
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
49,126
Reaction score
26,102
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Those rights were fought for by women who actually wanted women to be equal. They would be outraged by the way the right wants to treat women.

Did you know Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton were also very much against abortion?

They would be outraged that a broadcaster could call a woman a slut of radio because she has sex.

Yes, they probably would. With good reason.

How long have women had to accept less for jobs than men? How many years did it take to fight for the right to attend college where the male was not treated preferentially? How much would you be willing to give back? How many rights are you satisfied with? Because you are content the rest of us can go to hell? How nice for you.

I'm not sure where your outrage comes from. I'm not living in the past.

You don’t believe it but it is said by the side you say you identify with.

Good Lord, katie. So what? People of every political persuasion say stupid, vulgar, evil things.

But he is on the right and the icon of the right. Are you right wing or not. What are you? What women’s rights do you stand for really? If you can stand shoulder to shoulder with the Santorum's of the world what women’s rights are you for.

I stand on the side of life and liberty for all. Perty darn simple.
 

Fiddytree

Neocon Elitist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
30,023
Reaction score
17,397
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Framing an issue is also not neccessarily a bad thing. While I reject the terms "pro-choice" and "pro-life", niether is exactly inacurate and both are very clear examples of framing an issue. I frame issues all the time, it is to my mind part of the debate process.

It's not. It's necessary. It's sometimes amusing to look at, however.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
110,642
Reaction score
56,316
Location
Bradenton Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
It's not. It's necessary. It's sometimes amusing to look at, however.

OH, I bet, and probably for the same reason I reject pro-choice and pro-life as labels for their respective viewpoints.
 

Josie

No Day But Today
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
49,126
Reaction score
26,102
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
@ Josie

It seems contradictory to claim to want the government to not tell you what to do with your healthcare decisions, but also advocate limiting healthcare decisions based on your personal values. A pro-choice stance would
compliment your libertarian beliefs much better. The government isn't reaching inside of women and aborting children against the mother's will, who are you to deny them the freedom to terminate their pregnancies? As you said earlier in the thread, you're a big girl, and you don't need the government to pass legislation to prevent you from terminating a pregnancy.

Who are you to deny the freedom of the child? As I said, I'm for the life and liberty of ALL. And I stand against the notion that an unborn child is the property of the mother.
 

srexob715

Banned
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
448
Reaction score
97
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
We have an entire forum just for that discussion - by all means :)

And since Josie brought it up, Im sure this message to me, was really meant for her. Or should I tell her? So, you admit I was correct about allowing women to choose is not even close to the same thing as removing women's right to choose. If Im wrong, I willing to listen. If you can't prove me wrong, just be honest!
 

Fiddytree

Neocon Elitist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
30,023
Reaction score
17,397
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
OH, I bet, and probably for the same reason I reject pro-choice and pro-life as labels for their respective viewpoints.

Well, and to point it toward a direction that is generally not comfortable with either designation, you have the disability rights community. They can generally find themselves pro-choice, yet rejected by the pro-choice crowd because of their conception for not encouraging the concept of abortion of disabled fetuses (with the understanding that it is a financial and emotional decision). It is difficult for the status-quo of the pro-choice segment to incorporate that message because it requires a degree of adaptation of the political framing that was very effective for decades. This is how they can at times make very uncomfortable alliances with social conservatives, who they see as far less interested in the disabled child once born.
 
Last edited:

Josie

No Day But Today
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
49,126
Reaction score
26,102
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
You people!

*shakes her fist*

I got so caught up that I forgot to eat dinner.

Be back laterzzzz.... :)
 

Teh Internets

Active member
Joined
Jun 13, 2010
Messages
351
Reaction score
125
Location
Virginia, USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
As I said, I'm for the life and liberty of ALL.

Are you, or are you just for the life and liberty of all as long as it doesn't make you feel uncomfortable?

(I'm not going to get into the whole, "Is a fetus a human?" thing because it has nothing to do with the point I'm trying to make.)
 

katiegrrl0

OWL Forever
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
4,172
Reaction score
1,960
Location
at the computer
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Socialist
Did you know Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton were also very much against abortion?
Yes they were they were also lesbian leaning as well. They also would not tell women they did not have a choice. They fought for all women and all our rights, not just the ones they liked most of the time as you do with abortion. Sometimes you are actually for it. :shock: You can't have it both ways. For or against? They had a concern that abortion would become what it has. This is the fault not of women who have the right to a choice it is the fault of the men and women who have unprotected sex. They were right in their belief that people are stupid and would screw like bunnies without protection. There are a lot more women who fought for our rights than the two you name and the majority are pro choice.



Yes, they probably would. With good reason.
Yes they would be and yes they would be spinning in their graves over the comments. But to find a woman who would align herself with an ideology that supports this kind of talk and actually applauds it would have them spinning in their graves as well.


I'm not sure where your outrage comes from. I'm not living in the past.
My outrage is that women still have to fight for equal pay. I am outraged that government policy would force invasive procedures on women. I am outraged that daily women fight for the right to choose because some who are against would try and take that right away from all women. But only sometime.



Good Lord, katie. So what? People of every political persuasion say stupid, vulgar, evil things.
You have to agree with enough of their beliefs to call yourself right. If you believe just 1% of what they say you would not call yourself right. You would have to follow their lead to even say you identify with their creed and platform.


I stand on the side of life and liberty for all. Perty darn simple.
But in this thread you are making things that are not women's issues our issues alone. These are people issues. If you would have any woman's rights abridged because of your personal belief I am asking where do you stand on women's rights really? As long as we fight for them for you, you will take whatever you can get? And if they don't mesh with your ideas at the moment you want all women to give them back?
 

Fiddytree

Neocon Elitist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
30,023
Reaction score
17,397
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
They fought for all women and all our rights, not just the ones they liked most of the time as you do with abortion.

While some were Alice Paul's, many were not. Much of their focus centered on the vote (when it was the vote, others in the earlier years focused on temperance, but not the vote). It was incredibly common for women involved in that campaign to drop from lives of women's rights advocacy after 1920.

But to find a woman who would align herself with an ideology that supports this kind of talk and actually applauds it would have them spinning in their graves as well.

Those two women subscribed to ideologies that you would find abhorrent today. Further, there were conservatives and moderates involved in women's rights too.
 
Last edited:

Josie

No Day But Today
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
49,126
Reaction score
26,102
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Yes they would be and yes they would be spinning in their graves over the comments. But to find a woman who would align herself with an ideology that supports this kind of talk and actually applauds it would have them spinning in their graves as well.

My ideology doesn't support this nor did I applaud Rush Limbaugh. You really need to stop making up stuff.


I am outraged that government policy would force invasive procedures on women.

Me too. You're mad about a woman having to have a tube stuck up her vagina and I'm mad that women are allowed to have their babies sucked out of their bodies with a vacuum and tossed in the trash. One of those is worse than the other.....

But in this thread you are making things that are not women's issues our issues alone. These are people issues. If you would have any woman's rights abridged because of your personal belief I am asking where do you stand on women's rights really? As long as we fight for them for you, you will take whatever you can get? And if they don't mesh with your ideas at the moment you want all women to give them back?

Katie, I don't think even you know what you're talking about.
 

Josie

No Day But Today
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
49,126
Reaction score
26,102
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right

Josie

No Day But Today
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
49,126
Reaction score
26,102
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Are you, or are you just for the life and liberty of all as long as it doesn't make you feel uncomfortable?

Yes I really am, but just for fun.... why don't you ask the question you really want to ask?
 

missypea

Mod Apologist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2007
Messages
6,152
Reaction score
2,344
Location
Pacific Northwest
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Head Start is a program designed to help kids get the start of an education so they can get off government assistance. It is not government control, it is an option.

^^^ This is one of the things that has me scratching my head. Josie--I don't understand how you are interpreting great programs such as Head Start as a form of government control. Will you explain a bit more where you're coming from?
I just don't see how you got there.


If this has been answered all ready, my apologies. I'm not quite to the end of the thread.
 

lizzie

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
28,580
Reaction score
31,554
Location
between two worlds
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Yes, Harshaw... thank you.

And as I'm reading about this "Julia" character, every page of her life is controlled by the government. And it's written as if that's a good thing. When did we become a country where government control over everything is something to be looked at as the American Dream?

It had its faint beginnings with SS, then Medicare, and really started gaining strength with the introduction of social welfare programs. We've gradually been conditioned to think of government as the benevolent parent, and individual strength as somewhat of an anomoly. It's the path of least resistance, and a great many people are like water or electricity.
 

katiegrrl0

OWL Forever
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
4,172
Reaction score
1,960
Location
at the computer
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Socialist
While some were Alice Paul's, many were not. Much of their focus centered on the vote (when it was the vote, others in the earlier years focused on temperance, but not the vote). It was incredibly common for women involved in that campaign to drop from lives of women's rights advocacy after 1920.



Those two women subscribed to ideologies that you would find abhorrent today. Further, there were conservatives and moderates involved in women's rights too.

These were actually not the women who were in the fight to expand the rights of women with regard to abortion. They proceeded that debate considerably.

Bella Abzug
Gloria E. Anzaldúa
Ti-Grace Atkinson
Lorraine Bethel
Susan Brownmiller
Charlotte Bunch
Beatrix Campbell
Thérèse Casgrain
Shirley St. Hill Chisholm
Sandra Coney
Sonja Davies
Angela Davis
Simone de Beauvoir
Carol Downer
Cynthia Enloe
Myrlie Evers
Susan Faludi
Melissa Farley
Clara Fraser
Elizabeth "Betty" Bloomer Ford
Gerald Ford
Jo Freeman (Joreen)
Marilyn French
Betty Friedan
Carol Gilligan
Heide Göttner-Abendroth, German
Germaine Greer
Carol Hanisch
Donna Haraway
Bertha Harris
Nancy Hartsock
Dorothy Hewett
bell hooks
Sheila Jeffreys
Florynce Kennedy
Coretta Scott King
Anne Koedt
Peggy Kornegger
Jacqueline Livingston
Angela Mason (1944-), British
Kate Millett
Robin Morgan
Ann Oakley
Griselda Pollock
Erin Pizzey
Janice Raymond
Bernice Johnson Reagon
Helen Reddy
Sheila Rowbotham, British
Joanna Russ
Diana E. H. Russell
Alice Schwarzer
Lynne Segal
Kato Shidzue, Japan
Ann Simonton
Eleanor Smeal
Dale Spender
Gloria Steinem
Michele Wallace
Hilary Wainwright
Molly Yard
List of feminists - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I tool the list from wiki it I decided it would be more complete than what I could provide.
You have named only two who would have belonged to the first wave of feminists. Would you like more lists of the women who fought for abortion rights?

The first wave fought for the right to vote primarily. The second wave and third wave of feminist activists were fighting for equality and reproductive rights.
 

Fiddytree

Neocon Elitist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
30,023
Reaction score
17,397
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I know I referred to first-wave feminists and their predecessors. That's because you gave a rebuttal to Josie that was rather lacking. I haven't actually named any names except Alice Paul, if you looked closely.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom