Skip to main content

View Diary: Why did MSNBC have to hide the faces of some of the abortion providers it interviewed? (137 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  there's no need (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ahianne, LadyMiseryAli, OrdinaryIowan

    for them to make it illegal. As this post illustrates, we're already 90% f the way back to pre-Roe conditions, nationwide, even with the law still on the books. States that had legalized abortion pre-Roe still have reasonable access, more or less, while states where it was illegal before the decision have increasingly less, some almost none.

    Theyll never actually overturn Roe, because it's far to useful to them as a bloody flag. But de facto, they've already won.

    "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."........ "The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." (yeah, same guy.)

    by sidnora on Thu Jan 24, 2013 at 04:01:40 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Exactly. Roe v Wade is more useful (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      snazzzybird, sidnora

      on life support than it would be dead, because it's still a potent rallying cry to "stop killing babies!" No one really bothers to process the idea that no one is killing any babies, because a fetus is not a baby until birth. It's a very useful lie for them, of course.

      Your black cards can make you money, so you hide them when you're able; in the land of milk and honey, you must put them on the table - Steely Dan

      by OrdinaryIowan on Thu Jan 24, 2013 at 07:00:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site