Massive Pro-Choice March

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040425/nysu015_1.html



Will Bush call this one a focus group? 1,150,000 people in the Mall...even the police, who apparently don't do official crowd counts these days, estimated up to 800,000. I wish I had been there, but DC is a long way for a weekend jaunt.



Interestingly, there were 16 people arrested, one for throwing ink at protesters, and several from the Christian Defense Coalition, for demonstrating withouit a permit. A permit????? Now this truly sucks... why should Americans need a fzcking permit to protest? Imagine if those organizing protests (such as in Boston) in the 1770s decided against it because they didnt have permits? Is the US not a free speech zone these days?



http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/04/25/abo....ap/index.html



As much as I find religious fundamentalists of all brands a menace to civilization, they still have the right of freedom of speech and assembly. In America that is.



«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 60
    shawnjshawnj Posts: 6,656member
    I would have gone... I wore a large March for Women's Lives pin on messenger bag for a month...but I have a paper to write for tomorrow. Some of my friends marched. Great time.
  • Reply 2 of 60
    kirklandkirkland Posts: 594member
    A permit is needed because a protest can obstruct traffic, and perhaps lead to an altercation. People have the right to walk down the street, you know, so you can't just have people blocking the way whenever they decide to set down a row of soapboxes.



    Usually, permits are extremely easy to get for any political speech event, and are only used so that the city is aware of where to allocate manpower and where to watch for potential powder kegs.



    If your permit request is denied, and you believe it to be for reasons of political content, you can seek redress for such injuries through the courts, and almost certainly win.
  • Reply 3 of 60
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    I only caught a flash of some of the rhetoric from the pro-choice side. I try not to post politics anymore, but I must say, I found the logical contortions of the pro-abortionists particularly vulgar.



    If anything they moved me more to the pro-life side, though I haven't really been satisfied by their arguments either.
  • Reply 4 of 60
    existenceexistence Posts: 991member
    Of course you didn't. You're a male and want to stay at the top of the food chain.
  • Reply 5 of 60
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Is that sarcasm? You'll have to clarify, I'm trying to watch a hockey game and can't give AI my full attention.
  • Reply 6 of 60
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    Can you give an example Matsu?
  • Reply 7 of 60
    sammi josammi jo Posts: 4,634member
    Originally posted by Matsu [/i]

    Quote:

    I only caught a flash of some of the rhetoric from the pro-choice side. I try not to post politics anymore, but I must say, I found the logical contortions of the pro-abortionists particularly vulgar.



    If anything they moved me more to the pro-life side, though I haven't really been satisfied by their arguments either. [/B]



    It's "pro-abortion" now, huh? Nice little bit of emotional blackmail there, very manipulative. You find me a woman who is pro-abortion, and I'll send you an alien from Area 51.



  • Reply 8 of 60
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matsu

    I only caught a flash of some of the rhetoric from the pro-choice side. I try not to post politics anymore, but I must say, I found the logical contortions of the pro-abortionists particularly vulgar.



    If anything they moved me more to the pro-life side, though I haven't really been satisfied by their arguments either.




    What arguments?
  • Reply 9 of 60
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by sammi jo

    You find me a woman who is pro-abortion, and I'll send you an alien from Area 51.



    BR, are you a woman?
  • Reply 10 of 60
    shawnjshawnj Posts: 6,656member
    We are pro-abortion rights and more broadly, pro-reproductive rights. We are not necessarily in favor of abortion any more than your average anti-abortion rights advocate. Please don't confuse the two...
  • Reply 11 of 60
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    I think pro-abortion is not an unfair assesment. How much effort from the pro-choice side goes into helping those women who choose to carry their pregnancies to term? Perhaps it's all down to politics: you can't win that propaganda contest by giving too much time to the other side, thus highlighting the actual "choice" before women. The pro-life side is a little clearer about their position, they are anti-abortion. Some of their membership is not exactly pro-life, but they aren't about choice, they have no obligation to promote both sides, these 'lives' are non-negotiable -- neither the women, nor the unborn.



    The slight of hand comes when this is hedged as a women's rights issue, or a quality of life issue for women. It isn't. The conclusion may surprise people, it may leave room for choice in fact, but it is an ethical issue, one whose realities have been clouded by two equally disfunctional arguments.



    I don't care to sort it all out for you, because it's a lot of typing, but there are very good reasons to be less than satisfied with both sides.



    I do enjoy the propaganda, those are great diversions, and I always make a note of valuable tricks when I see them.
  • Reply 12 of 60
    brbr Posts: 8,395member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bunge

    BR, are you a woman?



    No but it sure seems like it's your time of the month with your voracity and (lack of) quality of posts of late.
  • Reply 13 of 60
    alcimedesalcimedes Posts: 5,486member
    Quote:

    We are....



    that's better read "I am".



    gets dangerous when you start speaking for everyone there.
  • Reply 14 of 60
    dmzdmz Posts: 5,775member
    I think the banner that read:



    "Hey GEORGE! Stay out of my BUSH!"



    ...was quite thoughtful.



    I've heard 3-year old's temper tantrums with more depth.
  • Reply 15 of 60
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    Quote:

    The slight of hand comes when this is hedged as a women's rights issue, or a quality of life issue for women. It isn't.



    What is it then?
  • Reply 16 of 60
    brbr Posts: 8,395member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dmz

    I think the banner that read:



    "Hey GEORGE! Stay out of my BUSH!"



    ...was quite thoughtful.



    I've heard 3-year old's temper tantrums with more depth.




    What's wrong with that? It sums up the situation quite succinctly.



    Was the temper tantrum that of your daughter upset she isn't allowed to pee?
  • Reply 17 of 60
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by groverat

    What is it then?



    Responsibility, that will also ask more of men, a lot more than they have had to pay in some cases.
  • Reply 18 of 60
    shetlineshetline Posts: 4,695member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dmz

    I've heard 3-year old's temper tantrums with more depth.



    The pro-life sloganeering is any better?



    The abortion issue is way too complex to summarize into banners or bumper stickers, regardless of what stance you take. If you want to use the fact that one side's placards don't make complete and compelling logical arguments, keep in mind that sword cuts equally both ways.
  • Reply 19 of 60
    dmzdmz Posts: 5,775member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BR

    Was the temper tantrum that of your daughter upset she isn't allowed to pee?





    Actually my daughter is a bit more articulate than pro-abort rehtoric.
  • Reply 20 of 60
    shawnjshawnj Posts: 6,656member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matsu

    I think pro-abortion is not an unfair assesment.



    (This is indeed a two-sided debate between those who favor abolishing abortion rights and those favor upholding them-- with a few abortion rights restriction advocates on the side)... So we have pro-abortionists and anti-abortionists, according to your "not unfair assessment"-- and somehow one position is clearer than the other? Maybe that's because "pro-abortionists" aren't necessarily for abortion-- therefore you should not inaccurately describe them as such.
Sign In or Register to comment.