SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: E who wrote (560980)4/7/2004 7:12:19 AM
From: Poet  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
Here's an interesting op-ed piece on what's happened in Portugal since they criminalized abortion.

Oh, and before I paste it, I believe I described you as "a lit taper"-- a lovely woman, which at least one other reader of this thread can testify to. Not that our looks matter. After all, it would be MOST unChristian to judge a person by her "feature set"!!!

April 7, 2004
OP-ED COLUMNIST
The Abortion Question
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

LISBON — To understand what might happen in America if President Bush gets his way with the Supreme Court, consider recent events in Portugal.

Seven women were tried this year in the northern Portuguese fishing community of Aveiro for getting abortions. They were prosecuted — facing three-year prison sentences — along with 10 "accomplices," including husbands, boyfriends, parents and a taxi driver who had taken a pregnant woman to a clinic.

The police staked out gynecological clinics and investigated those who emerged looking as if they might have had abortions because they looked particularly pale, weak or upset. At the trial, the most intimate aspects of their gynecological history were revealed.

This was the second such mass abortion trial lately in Portugal. The previous one involved 42 defendants, including a girl who had been 16 at the time of the alleged abortion.

Both trials ended in acquittals, except for a nurse who was sentenced to eight and a half years in prison for performing abortions.

Portugal, like the U.S., is an industrialized democracy with a conservative religious streak, but the trials have repulsed the Portuguese. A recent opinion poll shows that people here now favor abortion rights, 79 percent to 14 percent. In a sign of the changing mood, Portugal's president recently commuted the remainder of the nurse's sentence. There's a growing sense that while abortion may be wrong, criminalization is worse.

"It's very embarrassing," said Sandy Gageiro, a Lisbon journalist who covered the trials. "Lots of reporters came and covered Portugal and said it had this medieval process."

Portugal offers a couple of sobering lessons for Americans who, like Mr. Bush, aim to overturn Roe v. Wade.

The first is that abortion laws are very difficult to enforce in a world as mobile as ours. Some 20,000 Portuguese women still get abortions each year, mostly by crossing the border into Spain. In the U.S., where an overturn of Roe v. Wade would probably mean bans on abortion only in a patchwork of Bible Belt states, pregnant women would travel to places like New York, California and Illinois for their abortions.

The second is that if states did criminalize abortion, they would face a backlash as the public focus shifted from the fetus to the woman. "The fundamentalists have lost the debate" in Portugal, said Helena Pinto, president of UMAR, a Portuguese abortion rights group. "Now the debate has shifted to the rights of women. Do we want to live in a country where women can be in jail for abortion?"

Mr. Bush and other conservatives have chipped away successfully at abortion rights, as Gloria Feldt notes in her new book, "The War on Choice." That's because their strategy has been to focus on procedures like so-called partial-birth abortion and on protecting fetal rights. The strategy succeeds because most Americans share Mr. Bush's aversion to abortion.

As do I.

Like most Americans, I find abortion a difficult issue, because a fetus seems much more than a lump of tissue but considerably less than a human being. Most of us are deeply uncomfortable with abortion, especially in the third trimester, but we still don't equate it with murder.

That's why it makes sense to try to reduce abortions by encouraging sex education and contraception. The conservative impulse to teach abstinence only, without promoting contraception, is probably one reason the U.S. has so many more abortions per capita than Canada or Britain.

Portugal's experience suggests that while many people are offended by abortion on demand, they might be even more troubled by criminalization of abortion.

"Forbidding abortion doesn't save anyone or anything," said Sonia Fertuzinhos, a member of the Portuguese Parliament. "It just gets women arrested and humiliated in the public arena."

The upshot is that many Portuguese seem to be both anti-abortion and pro-choice. They are morally uncomfortable with abortion, especially late in pregnancies, but they don't think the solution is to arrest young women for making agonizing personal choices to end their pregnancies.

As one sensible woman put it in her autobiography: "For me, abortion is a personal issue — between the mother, father and doctor." She added, "Abortion is not a presidential matter."

President Bush, listen to your mother.



To: E who wrote (560980)4/7/2004 12:34:33 PM
From: Johannes Pilch  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
Attack? That's interesting. I thought for you it was all warm and endearing and joyful and all.

You thought incorrectly, as usual. I certainly never said it was all warm and endearing. The dialect can also be used to for an attack, obviously. Discerning the context here is vital. You are simply being so self-corruptively hysterical you are ignoring it.

Consider the link of my post that you have abused repeatedly. You call it racist simply because I implied a certain inflection of voice, not that I actually made a racist comment about all blacks, but simply because I used a certain form of language to lock horns with a leftist on insurance. I remember the discussion very well. Here is the opponent I engaged at the time of the post. This fellow obviously understood the ridicule I was hurling his way and now watch him hurl it back.

“Uh, it don't matta cuz dey [*note* insurance rates] be goin up just da same. And no it ain't mah fat ass, but it was mah shoulder dat cost 11k of yo insurance moaney! So don't u be runnin too hard and pull somethin, yoo might be needin some of mah money!!!
Message 19419295

hehe. Excellent. In fact, the guy was brilliant. Though my ardent opponent on the issues, he clearly celebrated his mastery of this brand of jab, enjoying this dialect as he hacked at me. You must now claim that this leftist is racist. Of course you are wrong. There was no racism in this exchange at all – not even a shred of it. The racism is in you.

You don't have to tell me about the ways black people, and others, use dialect in comradely ways among themselves. I need no education on that score

Well, obviously you do, despite your “race.”

You are not in that social context here.

I certainly don’t need to be in a black social context to employ this dialect as a weapon. The exchange above proves that fact quite handily. The fact is, a forum is very dynamic. I suspect had I not left off the discussion with my opponent above and instead followed up with something like “LOL! Dang maaan. You awright. Caint be sayin’ nothin’ to dat mess,” that dude very likely would have responded in kind, the conversation instantly turning warm. Your racism has blinded you so that you now aim to suppress even the language of others based upon their race.

(And, incidentally, you are not a black person.)

How black is black? The truth is, I’m not black to you because people like you just refuse to let me be black. You are all filthy racists.

You said this, in this forum, in writing and not informal, relaxed personal banter, on SI. In this context, everyone who read it recognized it as a mocking racist parody:

hehe. I should not have to tell you that SI is a public forum, a casual, dynamic forum. Merely because I employ text here does not make the dialog “formal.” Contexts here can rapidly acquire sub-contexts that are immediate and brief, depending upon the parties involved and upon their moods at the time. You are trying so hard here to find racism, that you are unable to reason. The racism is hidden - in you.

You can write your obfuscatory little essays from here on, they won't transform those racist posts, or change your cruel, smug, taunting, gloating posts to Poet, the mother of an adopted child (now gentlemen, more first violins…) who talked about a stage in her adopted daughter's life (second violins and violas follow to balance…) when she would cry (more viola and cello…) because she was from a far away land (intensify the contrabasses) and knew nothing of it (calmly now), or of her biological family (begin to swell….), and looked very different (all strings swell together) from all her friends (intensify!) and family (big dark chord, tritones, tremolo strings and brass everywhere!).

hehe. I’m really not sure how to respond to this, so manifestly false and cheesy it is-- even with the music. One thing is certain, the Asian girl looks only "very different" to a racist. Were she my daughter, I would have held my face firmly against hers in the mirror, and we both would have just sat there looking at ourselves and talking until she saw the truth.

And it had broken Poet's heart, and you responded by forging a fairy tale and wielding it sadistically.

It is no fairy tale. I know it isn’t, so do you, so does Poet. It is your brand of racism that has caused the most harm here, the most crushing devastation. This racism is ubiquitous. Adoptive parents need to be more self-examining.