Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (10049)	1/27/2006 2:58:19 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541518

If you look at positions rather than legislators (since they move around on issues, look at the attempts Tim and I are engaged in about Kerry and Gore), it can be more helpful. That's why I don't engage in those discussions about various politicians. I can't say I'm much interested in any of them, not enough to know their positions. I'm interested in the ideas and I think I can place them on a continuum. Throwing in a personality complicates it because the personality is the middleman between the idea and the continuum. So I want to leave the personalities out of it, too. We agree on that. Take abortion as an illustration. I don't consider being pro choice a "radical" position at all; I gather you do. Good grief. Not at all. I wonder why you "gather" that. I'm 100 percent pro choice. Always have been and always will be. I come at it from the libertarian right. But we can come to some agreement that there is a blanket pro choice position on one end of the spectrum and a blanket anti choice position on the other end I don't agree with that at all. Like I said, I'm pro-choice from the libertarian right. I'm pro-choice in virtually all things. There are two elements in the abortion argument, IMO. One is whether or not you think there's a person in the womb. People from either the left or the right can think that and they will all be anti-choice. Secondly, there's the question of government interference in personal reproductive decisions. There are a lot of people on both ends who think it's just fine for the government to intrude whenever they think their objective warrants it. Nanny lefties do that and social conservatives do that. So, no, I don't see it sitting neatly on the continuum at all. there are clearly a lot of steps in between There are a lot of places where a compromise can be reached, but I don't think there are any principled intermediates other than viability. All of the intermediate steps laid out on the continuum--rape, health of the woman, defect--are anti-choice. Some are just more balanced with sympathy for the woman than others.

To: JohnM who wrote (10049)	1/27/2006 3:03:06 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 541518

I don't use the term "pro life" because I think the arguments on that side don't take account of women's life and health I think it generally best to use the terms the groups use to describe themselves unless they are blatantly off. The pro-life side might call the other side "anti-life". The pro-choice side might call the other side "anti-choice" but such labels are heavily biased and serve more as a putdown than a useful label. Yes the pro-life's sides specific concern here is about life in a specific form, not all life in all situations. But the pro-choice side is also concerned about a specific choice in a specific situation, not all possible choices. Tim