I don't think much about particular posters' personal views... It's not that I'm not listening, it's more that I don't care.
And you wonder why people don't want to discuss with you...
I may notice whether a given person seems to be arguing the pro or anti side, but not much more than that, not the nuances or shadings.
And if you had been actively listening, you might recognize that this is not an issue with just two "sides." .
I just never think of interactions here as having anything to do with what I may think about a poster
<<Karen, how cold-hearted your post sounds.>>
Hmmmm.
I think that, as Neo might phrase it, my response to you has been quite restrained under the circumstances.
It distresses me greatly when anyone here thinks that because I may attack a stated position on some issue, I am thus attacking the poster as a person
I believe that. After all, we're not individuals but, rather, generic women. As in...
<<"Rational" (Karen); "Logical" (X)....
You are both beginning to sound like Mr. Spock. Women used to be criticized (by men!) for listening to their hearts too much. The pendulum appears to have swung much too far in the opposite direction. >>
<<I think women have to face up to them. Women are fierce defenders of childrens' rights, but only after they are born, even though a fetus in the womb is a viable human being (child) after some point.>>
<<I'll bet you're the first woman on these threads to define abortion as killing an unborn child.>>
...if we are going to have open, frank discussions on issues.
Do you really think I was born yesterday?
Karen |
