Skip to main content

View Diary: Planned Parenthood believes it's being targeted with another hidden camera sting operation (65 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't think that even if the (16+ / 0-)

    questions were real that aborting a fetus because it is a girl is illegal. Women are free to choose whether or not they wish to have an abortion, and they are free to take into consideration anything they wish to. There are people out there who actually care a great deal about the gender of their child, so while such a decision would not be politically correct it is also perfectly legal and a private matter.

    •  You may be right, but (19+ / 0-)

      The intention of these sorts of propaganda operations is to gin up visceral disgust at the idea that Planned Parenthood is running a eugenics program.
      Republicans run on pure emotivism.

      Keep Christian mythology out of science class!

      by cybersaur on Mon Apr 23, 2012 at 02:07:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  but I often feel... (4+ / 0-)

        when in conversations with fervent far right republicans that when I concede certain points they believe to be "ace cards" the conversation is much more successful.  

        Being pro-choice is morally separating yourself from the decision, which means you can still morally disagree but you are separated.  The same goes for all sorts of topics.  I morally object to abortions after the first 15-20ish weeks but its not my choice to make.  On that note I often ask "so if you had a 10 year old daughter that was raped by a relative you don't think protecting her from a pregnancy would be the morally right thing to do?"  If they want to talk an extreme, which abortions after sex can be determined is not common, I gladly engage, concede where I honestly feel in agreement and then move forward.

    •  This really hits a point... (5+ / 0-)

      I have sometimes been criticized for pointing out around here.  Which is that this idealistic version of why most women get abortions is a dumb path to argue because then the opposition can collect anecdotal evidence to the contrary and every is just throwing shit.  An article in New York Magazine from 2005 pointed this out very well imo...

      http://nymag.com/...

      Its where reality meets the road.  This article points out that many people that were volunteering to house women from out of town who were having abortions were taken back by the reasons and actions of these women.  

      •  Their reasons are nobody's business, (8+ / 0-)

        not since Roe vs. Wade, thank goodness.
        Before that, even in many states where abortion had been decriminalized, committees of doctors ruled on applications for abortions. If a women's stated reasons to terminate her pregnancy were not persuasive to a small group of (mainly) male, (mainly) white, middle-class doctors, then no abortion.

        I could have been a soldier... I had got part of it learned; I knew more about retreating than the man that invented retreating. --Mark Twain

        by NogodsnomastersMary on Mon Apr 23, 2012 at 02:52:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Billie Jean King has talked about having to (7+ / 0-)

          appear before a panel like that. Horrifying.

          Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!

          by elfling on Mon Apr 23, 2012 at 03:08:28 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  right, I agree... (6+ / 0-)

          but often times people try and make compelling arguments about reasons.  You often hear of people raped by their father from pro-choice people and then the fundies throw out the party girl just too busy doing other stuff and waiting until the 20th week.  

          I accept that some people may get abortions for what I would consider pretty disgusting reasons.  Being pro-choice is being morally out of the equation.  

        •  Their reasons for getting an abortion (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mamamedusa

          should not be at issue, but what's interesting, to me, is that this particular scenario which is designed to make PP look bad actually sets up the potential Mother up to look bad, imo.

          Meaning that a person who is not capable of coping with having a child of one gender or another does not appear to be capable of coping with the realities being a parent of either child - regardless of its gender.  The scenario supports the case for abortion.  It is not for anyone to tell the woman she must have an abortion, but pointing her towards counselors who would discuss the pros and cons of parenthood with a person like that in an effort to help her figure out if she (or she and her partner) are really ready to take on the responsibility of parenthood would likely seem reasonable to the large majority of the population.

          •  This particular scenario (0+ / 0-)

            is all about ginning up outrage against certain immigrant communities, IMHO, as well as Planned Parenthood.

            It's a twofer.

            The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy... the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

            by lcbo on Mon Apr 23, 2012 at 07:14:26 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  but it would be a PR disaster (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Bach50b3, Larsstephens

      Remember that many Americans were horrified at Chinas one child rule when they learned that parents were aborting female fetus so their one child would be a boy.

      I also doubt it's within PP guidelines to use gender as a basis for recommending an abortion but I don't know that for a fact.

      America could have chosen to be the worlds doctor, or grocer. We choose instead to be her policeman. pity

      by cacamp on Mon Apr 23, 2012 at 04:16:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site