Left has gone too far (IMHO)

[__Inanna__]

OK, I was thinking about this earlier tonight and want to put my two cents in. There has been so much discussion on religion vs. science, religion vs. atheism, and I have stayed out of the discussions. They don't interest me, as I don't see what these discussions accomplish, other than to further divide people on both sides of the issue.

However, tonight I heard this guy on Jeanine Garafolo refer to a fetus as a parasite. That's all the right needs to hear, that wacko liberals refer to fetuses as parasites. I am pissed off enough about this myself, due to my own personal beliefs (and I am pro-choice), but I am really becoming discouraged and thinking if we don't find a way to bridge the chasm between the left and the right (when the real focus should be on us vs them -- Americans versus the regime in power), we're screwed. The religious right wingnuts already want Armageddon to come, and language like the above on Air America fuels the fire. I will write the show concerning this matter, but want to share it here as well.

While I embrace the values of the left, I am getting to the point where I wonder if I belong here. I don't want to be labeled as anti-religious and an atheist, as I think the right will use it to further its cause. (Plus, I am not anti-religious or an atheist, I keep my beliefs to myself.) I just want everyone to be entitled to express their own beliefs and do so in a way that doesn't alienate other Americans, irrespective of what state they live in or who they voted for. There is too much at stake here.

[BurtWorm]

1. The guy has a right to call fetuses whatever he wants to call them.

The left has to figure out a way to make free speech something Americans believe too precious to give away. Obviously, anyone who calls a fetus a parasite is speaking for himself, not for the left.

[Bouncy Ball]

3. And you filled in what I left out of my post.

Thanks.

[seabeyond]

11. you are right and then everyone else has the right to be disgusted

by what he says

just ammunition for the right. but you got it. they do have the right to say it

[sangh0]

227. They got the right, so to hell with the consequences

I never understood why some would defend something that hurts people. There's nothing wrong with defending the right to say it, but no one is saying he didn't have the right to say it.

[WLKjr]

253. exactly n/t

n/t

[Guaranteed]

167. He has the RIGHT argument- just used the wrong word.

It's about time someone started using that argument instead of the "You're a man, shut the hell up" argument.

[ixat]

202. Anyone calling a fetus a "parasite" is bound to come off as a total asshat

[Iris]

219. Why? Some pregnancy books, particularly ones aimed at dads,

refer to the fetus as a parasite.

(Or passenger, or tenant, the list could go on forever.)

[RUDUing2]

293. for the same reason that I get upset when anti-michael shciavo fanatics

call his two children bastards..

for the same reason I would get upset if a fundy preacher called all women who have had sex with anyone other then their husband (and then only if they waited until marriage to have sex) a slut or whore..

just because a word is technically or dictionary-definition correct doesn't mean that it is the appropriate term to use...

[Dora]

296. whoa there

I'm in my eighth month of my first pregnancy. I've more than once referred to my bambino in utero as my parasite. I've loved this baby since before it was conceived and I'm already the best mom in the world.

Words are words, and meaningless without context. Context and meaning vary according to the listener, reader, and messenger.

Pleae don't paint me with that asshat brush.

[Sara Beverley]

298. Hell, some adults are parasites.

What's that all about. We should worry because the RW is as ignorant as we know they are? It wouldn't matter what we said about fetuses, they would never change their mind about liberals. The truth of the matter is, every time a woman ovulates and doesn't conceive its the loss of a potential life. Does the RW care that their policies (US policies)across the globe have caused the deaths of millions of third-world babies? Nope!

[Bouncy Ball]

2. I hate to break this to you

but technically, a fetus IS a parasite. It feeds off its host. The relationship isn't even symbiotic, as the fetus doesn't do anything good (physiologically speaking) for the mother. Now, if they called it a "parasitic infection" that would be misleading, as you probably couldn't consider it an infection! But a parasite? Most definitely! The word DOES have negative connotations, true, and most people do NOT think of fetuses (fetii? LOL!) as parasites, but strictly speaking, they were absolutely telling the truth. I remember my OB/GYN mentioning that to me when I was pregnant. We had a good laugh over it.

Might I suggest a bit of a sense of humor? And a dictionary? Or would that be pissy?

[Bouncy Ball]

5. to add:

Biology. An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host.

From dictionary.com

[mike_c]

12. actually, the mother does benefit, at least potentially....

See #9. The increase in reproductive fitness for every successful progeny is one of the most powerful evolutionary forces of all, but as far as I can see it's the only thing that separates placental vivipary (live bearing young) from endoparasitism.

on edit: and then of course there's the nearly 20 year exoparasitic stage that follows....

[Bouncy Ball]

14. The benefit would have to be

specifically for that woman's immediate survival for the fetus to NOT fit the classification of parasite. Thus it still fits the classification. I did not have to gestate in order to survive. My daughter, when a fetus, did not aid my survival except in terms of passing on my genes. My actual life span was not affected one way or another.

[mike_c]

27. oh I agree with you-- don't get me wrong....

It's just that the measure of "benefit" in a biological sense includes successful reproduction. That's actually the driving mechanism behind the evolution of internal gestation-- it increases the likelihood of offspring survival. The increased cost to the mother-- the parasitism part-- has to be balanced by some correspondingly greater benefit, otherwise natural selection would operate against internal gestation (and has-- witness marsupial mammals, for example, and the majority of non-mammalian animals). The benefit is an increased likelihood of having grandchildren, i.e. of having offspring that survive to have their own offspring.

[Bouncy Ball]

34. ah,I see we actually agree...

my apologies, I think I misread your original response to me. Cheers!

[American Tragedy]

190. With all due respect, it doesn't freakin matter

Whether or not fetuses are indeed parasites (I tend to think so) is totally outside of the point that the original poster was making, which is about how liberals frame the debate. Obviously you cannot and should not control what people say, but I have to agree that it isn't exactly an example of great public relations.

[Silverhair]

208. Excellent point.

Overall, we are getting clobbered because we are doing a very poor job of framing the debate.

[sangh0]

232. True, but "We have the right"

to lose

(-:

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

279. Is there a "we?"

As if "The Left" is some kind of corporation or church that is suffering from lack of organization and control. It isn't. It's just individuals. There's NO FUCKING WAY to stop hyperbolic idiots from speaking in public, even if it were only one in a million.

The problem is the media, which amplifies each and every excess coming from "The Left" while downplaying the Coulters and Savages of the world.

[InvisibleBallots]

224. "except in terms of passing on my genes"

right, no different than a parasite. It seems that all living being who reproduce fit that description, huh?

[Buck Rabbit]

127. re: your edit: "nearly 20"

My 25 year old son has 2 more years of grad school, and my 29 year old junior executive daughter hasn't made a car loan payment to us in 8 months. Nearly 20, Huh.

[Bouncy Ball]

142. LOL, good point.

Maybe that stage last longer for some than for others!

[Tace]

172. Strange, But My Parents Have Become Parasites

They like to lord their dollars over me, but they want to suck my emotional blood.

[Buck Rabbit]

181. Are they good Liberals?

Our little bunnies love us, but then one lives 200 miles away and the other 10,000, probably makes it easier for them. We also never say a word about the money we give and lend them, which may account for why the one who makes a bundle never pays.

[American Tragedy]

193. LOL I'm a parasitic 21 year old myself

In the case of my parents, I think that the downfall of being the cool, ultra-liberal, unrestrictive mom and dad who don't embarrass their kids in public is that we younguns don't have much of an incentive to desperately avoid them or their abundant funds.

[FizzFuzz]

256. "the nearly 20 year exoparasitic stage that follows"

heh heh heh....bingo! :evilgrin:

[disillusioned1]

15. Is this correct?

My neice is an OB nurse, assists with deliveries.

She said a fetus does not receive the mother's white blood cells. They're filtered out, or the mother's body would attack the fetus as an invasion.

[Bouncy Ball]

17. That has nothing to do with it.

Look at the definition of parasite as provided in this very thread. A fetus IS technically a parasite. Because of our perceived negative connotations of the word, we don't usually describe them that way! But they are. Look at the definition. I remember learning that years ago. My little "former parasite" needs me for a moment, so I must cut this short....LOL!

[mike_c]

44. that's essentially correct....

The mother has specific, genetically determined molecular markers on all of her body cells that her lymphocytes use to identify her tissues as belonging inside her body. The baby also has similar genetically determined markers, but since the mother and the baby are not genetically identical, the fetus's markers would not be recogized by the mothers lymphocytes, so they would stimulate an immune response. BTW, the fetus and the mother do not exchange blood at all under normal circumstances.

on edit: shutting this "self recognition" system down is a strategy that numerous parasites use to avoind stimulating an immune response from their host.

[disillusioned1]

246. Thanks for the explanation. n/t

[hlthe2b]

20. Exactly... Like it or not a fetus, until viable to live outside its "host,

IS a classical parasite. That doesn't mean we are demeaning human life as a tapeworm, just the fact that it is totally dependant on its living "incubator,"-- its mother for life until birth, or shortly before. That is a parasite, by definition.

[ixat]

201. I see everyone's point, but at this point the definition is just academic,

to the point that I don't see any benefit in using it.

[bloom]

270. I think there is a good point in framing pregnancy this way.

Seems to me there are forces on the right who would like people to think that a fetus of 12 weeks is every bit a person as the mother. With the same constitutional rights and privileges. If people do not frame the debate otherwise - that is how the majority will see it. I think they are wrong.

[AliciaKeyedUp]

209. Aren't you embarassed making this post?

Trying to defend the indefensible I mean.

[hlthe2b]

211. Aren't you embarrassed that a scientific definition

gets you so worked up? Facts are facts. A fetus--whether human or any other of the animal kingdom-- is a parasite until it is viable to live outside the mother. Why is that so offensive to you?

[sangh0]

231. Aren't you embarrassed to ignore the fact

that this is a discussion about POLITICS, not science?

Why is that so offensive to you?

Maybe because some people don't like hearing others speak of the things they love in the same terms Hitler's Nazis used to describe the Jews?

Just a guess.

[hlthe2b]

251. Sangho... I am not (nor do I think anyone here) is suggesting calling

someone's baby (or inutero pregnancy) a parasite. I agree that this would be insensitive. But, the truth is that this is what it is in scientific terms. Calling out your fellow DUers as comparable to Hitler's Nazis because they are trying to explain scientific fact is truly out of the pale.

I am really shocked you would do so.

[sangh0]

275. NO, you're not suggesting it, but you are defending it

and I didn't say that anyone on DU is comparable to Hitler's Nazis. I did say that calling a fetus a parasite *MIGHT* cause some Jewish voters to be offended.

they are trying to explain scientific fact is truly out of the pale.

It is beyond the pale to argue that because it's a scientific fact, it's a good idea to use it in politics to defend abortion rights.

I am really shocked that you would do so.

[hlthe2b]

295. Saying that we descended from primate ancestors

*MIGHT* cause some fundie creationists to be offended.

So, should we avoid any scientific discussion? I know many very prominent jewish scientists, physicians and others who would certainly acknowledge the truth of basic biology--that any developing organism goes through a stage where they are totally dependent on the incubating mother--and that that DOES constitute the basic definition of parasite.
That the Nazis bastardized science in truly cruel ways does not eliminate the need to study and understand the basic principles.

Again, I would never use that term, knowing that it would be misinterpreted (as is obvious here) and could offend some. AAR's Garofolo and Sam S. get carried away sometimes. I would agree. I personally don't go out of my way to offend and don't deny that there is a time and a place for this kind of discussion. But, totally denying scientific reality above all else--so as not to offend some basic sensitivity-- is the mindset of the far RW fundamentalist. That is something I'd surely hope would not be pushed by subsets of our own liberal/progressive/dem membership.

[Cobalt Violet]

276. Holy Roller Crack Pot Nut Jobs don't have any respect for ...

Scientific Terms.

[Iris]

226. Aren't you embarrassed to assume you are the one who decides

what's indefensible?

[Cronus Protagonist]

41. Life is a terminal, untreatable, chronic, sexually transmitted disease

It's always fatal too.

I wonder if that also offensive or, does the thread starter think it only counts when we're talking about a fetus?




http://brainbuttons.com/home.asp?stashid=13
Buttons for brainy people - educate your local freepers today!

[Bouncy Ball]

42. Probably only when it applies to an embryo or a fetus

I mean, er, um, an UNREALIZED HUMAN BEING!!! :eyes:

[Cronus Protagonist]

45. I wonder why they only care about fetuses?

And they never tire of it either. The selective myopia of anti-women's rights people is one of the wonders of the world - and they all had their own hosts too (I mean mothers).

[Cobalt Violet]

4. See definition # 2

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=parasite&x=14&y=12

[aquart]

6. Yes, dear. Worry about the nasty names they'll call you.

What values do you embrace, exactly? Not free speech, I see.

When the religious right demands you wear a garment that covers you from head to toe, you will, of course, do whatever makes them more comfortable, won't you?

Now would be a very good time to consider exactly what you DO value.

[Bouncy Ball]

7. Wouldn't want to alienate them, after all.

:eyes:

[sangh0]

230. So manners and tact are bad things now

No, the far left hasn't gone too far

:crazy:

[Old and In the Way]

8. You contradict yourself.

"I just want everyone to be entitled to express their own beliefs and do so in a way that doesn't alienate other Americans" Sometimes having a belief means you alienate other Americans. That's the nature of things.

I think most of us will accept a person's right to have a baby...or not. The Right, however, will not accept the "or not" part.

See, the right can call us "baby killers", but do they go to far?

And, technically, if a women does not want the pregnancy, those cells are parasitic. Yes, it is an ugly term, but it is correct.

[mike_c]

9. I'm sorry, but from a biological perspective a fetus is a parasite...

...in many respects. Remember, parasitism is a relationship in which one participant benefits at the expense of the other, with the declining performance of the host usually measured in terms of increased metabolic costs, decreased growth, and reduced future reproductive potential. All of those costs accompany human pregnancy to one degree or another, so in that respect the fetus operates as an endoparasite.

The exception to the general rule is that the reproductive fitness of the mother is increased-- a real biological benefit-- by each successful pregnancy that itself leads to future grandchildren. Again, this is the biological perspective, not the dewy eyed new parent's perspective.

[JohnnyCougar]

47. You're missing the point.

This is about framing the debate. If you took an opinion poll of the public, les than 10% would approve of calling a fetus a parasite.

And it's not pandering, or "trying to please everyone," it's called tactfullness, and framing the debate.

[Bouncy Ball]

61. I guess I'll put it here too

do you actually want to go around muzzling everyone on the left? Telling everyone how to talk, exactly what to say?

Put this in perspective here: ONE person said it on ONE show.

God, if I could COUNT the number of times the right has totally fucking offended me. How about when Rush called the torture at Abu Ghraib like just a bunch of harmless fraternity pranks?

[JohnnyCougar]

95. No, never said muzzling. Note even close. More self victimization.

[sangh0]

229. To some criticism is "muzzling", when it's them being criticized

How dare you criticize a statement as innocous as "A fetus is a parasite"!!!

I"m shocked. Shocked, I say!

[mike_c]

63. personally, I care less about "framing the debate..."

...than I care about accuracy and honesty.

But I wasn't missing the point at all. One of the democratic party's greatest failures in recent years has been its near pathologic willingness to let the right set the context for debate and define the issues in its own terms. The consequence is that the public perceives the right as "owning" those issues, and the left as attempting to usurp them. That has to stop.

[Bouncy Ball]

65. Exactly.

And why do I have the sneaking feeling this new "framing the debate" thing is ALREADY being pounced on by the right to subtly try to muzzle us even further?

Ahem.

[sangh0]

233. "its near pathologic willingness to let the right set the context"

Well, if the left wants to set the context as being about "parasites", I think I might prefer the right's context.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

281. A-ha! (and no, I'm not talking about the Norwegian pop band) (nt)

[Guaranteed]

171. Yes, you're right- oddly enough, this guy has the debate framed correctly,

but he USED THE WRONG WORD, like an idiot.

He's got the right argument- he just needs to get his diction straight. Shit.

Well- we're getting closer.

[SoCalDem]

222. He did it purposely

People will be singling him out, and calling him on his choice of words.. Had he used "polite" language, he would have been a mere "blip".. Publicity hounds embrace controversy..It's what pays the bills..

Unfortunately though, when left leaning people say outrageous things, there is an ARMY of talking heads WITH media venues, at the ready to "cue the tape", and manufacture the "outrage" necessary to turn whatever the "offense" was against ALL liberals...

That's the bad thing

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

282. You mean, like the original poster did? I agree.

If you ask me, these oh-look-how-the-left-is-so-horrible-that's-why-we-lost-the-election threads should be regarded with the same criteria as sex threads by the mods. But that's just me.

[bloom]

271. What is the nice word for parasite???

It would have been nice to hear the whole discussion - not just the one word. Sometimes context makes a difference.

But seriously - if someone wants to make the point that the fetus is not its own viable being - what term do you suggest?

[Tace]

10. Transcend The Labels Of "Right" And "Left" -- Be An Independent

I've got a far right-wing dad who took pleasure during my first three decades trying to paint me as being "Leftist."

Well, to hell with that. These are labels that we either give ourselves, or others try to put on us.

I've never registered for a political party. For the past 20 years, I've simply described myself as an "Independent." This way, I cherry pick my stands on various issues, although I invariably vote for Democrats. My votes are usually "against" right-wing candidates rather than "for" Democrats.

Actually, I've come to understand that it would be fair for me to describe my political position as Social Libertarian, somewhat left of center, and somewhat south of Authoritarian.

I'm just trying to say that the labels "left" and "right" have become debased in our political debate, and there's no reason to take on the burden of either side, simply to please an opponent, and give them a target for their shots.

[gottaB]

13. The wingnuts don't need excuses

Goddess Inanna, Queen of Heaven, don't go there. Don't go among those people. They will not accept you or understand you. Your openmindedness will be anethma to them, and they will scorn you.

Most voters understand that people who participate in callin radio and on internet message boards are mere mortals. Some of them are jerks. Some of them are idiots. Sometimes they get worked up. Timing is vital. Now is not a bad time to allow people to vent. If it bugs you, I suggest listening to something else for a while.

Personally, Garofalo's show gets on my nerves. I don't listen to it anymore.

[BeeBee]

16. IMHOP....

The left has not gone too far but the right has gone way out there...

[Bouncy Ball]

18. Thank you.

You ask me, the left has a loooooooong way to go.

I'm over here, working. Let them be shocked. It's about time. I've been shocked by them for years (and appalled, and disgusted, and horrified, etc.).

And as discussed in this thread, that statement is accurate, anyway. If the religious right can't handle the fact that a fetus is technically a parasite, they need to get busy redefining some words. They'd love that, they do it all the time.

[Tace]

19. Wow, You're Getting Slammed Pretty Hard Here -- They Are Jackals

They simply smell blood and pile on. They do not represent kind, sensitive people. I'm here. I'm not the only one. Please don't reject one side or the other based on this thread.

[hlthe2b]

21. No one is piling on. We are gently trying to educate the OP on the

definition of "parasite" and why it is not only accurate, but not an inherently demeaning term. While many probably learned this term in biology class, no one is being insensitive in explaining this to the poster.

You, Tace, are out of line.

[sangh0]

235. No you're not

For one thing, it was laughable to describe what you're doing as "gently"

Furthermore, the argument isn't that "parasite" is inherently demeaning. It's that it loses votes, an effect you have yet to respond to.

[Name removed]

268. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sangh0]

277. The OP raised that point

YOu chose to ignore it because "parasite" is scientifically true.

Just because some are trying to educate on the definition of parasite

This isn't a science board, and the OP didn't dispute the scientific accuracy of the word. It pointed out how politically tone-dead it is to use it, a point you refuse to address.

[Bouncy Ball]

25. Ah

so you fashion yourself to be the only kind, sensitive person here.

Saying the rest of us are ALL jackals isn't exactly kind and sensitive is it now?

I had two main problems with the posts' assertion:

a) it is ACCURATE to use the term parasite while describing the fetus.

b) This was a lecture from someone supposedly on our side about how WE shouldn't alienate the right. Like they're our buddies right now or something. Like they give a shit about alienating us or anyone else. Puh-leaze. Freedom of speech is a beautiful thing. People can say whatever they want and that DOES NOT only apply to the RIGHT.

[K-W]

32. Tace, get real.

Agreeing with arguments that insult my intelligence is not an act of senstivity.

If this person wants to support ideology she doesnt agree with to protest the opinion of one radio caller, good riddence.

But considering the slant of the post and the posters abscence from the thread I somehow doubt that person was particularly fond of liberals at any point.

This is the logic of the right. One liberal goes to far, the entire liberal movement is a bunch of dangerous wackos who would destroy our nation and therefore we must defeat them at any cost.

[Bouncy Ball]

35. Much as I hate to just say "wow good post"

um....wow good post.

:hi:

[Tace]

165. This Is Her Thread - I Was Trying To Address Her Issues, Not Everyone Else

[K-W]

176. Weclome to the online forum.

The original poster posted a message, you responded, I responded to you.

Im glad we cleared that up.

[Cobalt Violet]

40. I'm talking FACTS. As part of the FACT based community.

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=parasite&x=14&y=12

[mairceridwen]

46. from that link

Pronunciation: 'par-&-"sIt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French, from Latin parasitus, from Greek parasitos, from para- + sitos grain, food
1 : a person who exploits the hospitality of the rich and earns welcome by flattery


that sounds like a lot of republicans i know

so, if republicans are parasites

and fetuses are parasites

and roe v. wade has not been turned over....

QUICK EVERYONE LET'S GO ABORT THE REPUBLICANS

WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!

(yeah, and i know there is some kind of logical fallacy there...)

[gottaB]

185. Okay, let's look at Webster's definition

parasite

2. an organism living in, with, or on another organism in parasitism

parasitism

2 : an intimate association between organisms of two or more kinds; especially : one in which a parasite obtains benefits from a host which it usually injures.

How do you interpret "two or more kinds"? Do you believe headlines that proclaim "Woman gives birth to alien!" Is that typical?

I'm thinking the fact based community has left the building.

[cry baby]

228. Since we are being "fact based", here's a fact for you

If the pro-choice community is PERCEIVED as believing that a fetus (the repubs are already calling it a baby) is a parasite, then the "fact" is that we will never win another election. Until we realize that it matters HOW we frame our message, then it will get lost in the right wing media's spin. A fetus may indeed be a parasite, but let's choose other words so choice is not taken away.

[Iris]

221. Look - Some of us are getting sick of being scapegoated for

the Democratic Party's inability to get a message, ANY MESSAGE, across to voters.

WE'RE not the ones being unkind. It's the people who are asking women, homosexuals, and others to give up certain stances, opinions and even hard-won RIGHTS in order for us to win an election.

[sangh0]

236. Then do a better job

I don't see how saying "Fetuses are parasites" puts you in a good position to criticize the Dem Party's incompetence at forming messages.

[Iris]

242. Hey - Nobody asked me.

I see plenty of holes in Bush's supposed morality but apparently the geniuses of the DLC can't seem to figure out a way to expose them to the rest of the population.

[sangh0]

243. Please don't wait for invitation

IMO neither the DLC or the DNC have a clue about what to do.

[K-W]

22. If you want to base your politics on reactionary whims,

that is your own business. I'm not quite sure why you would advertise it to the world.

I personally support the sides of policies that will do the most good for people and the politicians who will enact those policies. If someone else who supports those policies says something I dont agree with, I thank my lucky stars I live in a country where we have the freedom of expression.

Then again this just reads like a bit. But Im not making any accusations of course.

[Tace]

23. You Parasite People Are Really Nuts

Go ahead. Cite your dictionaries. Wallow in your shallow knowledge. You've missed the point. The logical extension of your argument is that you were, and ARE parasites.

Good luck.

[Bouncy Ball]

29. No, the logical extension

is that we once ALL WERE parasites, but are no longer. The moment you are born, you are no longer a parasite, as you are no longer being kept alive directly by your host's body.

Shallow knowledge? What point, exactly, was missed? What problem do you have with accurate definitions? I like accurate definitions, do you not?

What exactly is your problem?

[Tace]

182. I'm Trying To Address This Lady's Issues

[K-W]

37. Anyone who's world view cant tolerate this comparison

is much closer to being crazy than someone who uses it.

What's the big deal? Fetsus are similar to parasites. Thats just how it is. Accept it, take it for what it means, which isn't mind blowing or anything. And move on.

Just because something messes with your romantasized concept of your species doesnt mean someone else is missing a point.

[hlthe2b]

52. Yes, we all were once parasites and you know what: we all share DNA

with amoebas, with jelleyfish, with all kinds of lower life forms! Of course it is possible that your disdain for scientific fact extends to evolution.... Does it drive you mad to know you are descended common ancesters to these lower life forms?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

283. Hm, 1833 posts is a lot!

Congratulations. Most don't last that much. But the true Masters achieve more.

[Amigust]

24. The radical wrong have not gotten to where they are by

watering down their message. Neither will we.

"I just want everyone to be entitled to express their own beliefs and do so in a way that doesn't alienate other Americans"

Pretty difficult many times to adequately express your own beliefs without offending someone along the way. Better to just get over the fear of offending and concentrate instead on figuring out what you deeply believe and why -- and how you can best get it across to others.

[mairceridwen]

31. word.

[JohnnyCougar]

50. Calling a fetus a "parasite" doesn't even appeal to our base, though

Most Democrats I know would be appalled by that statement.

[Bouncy Ball]

56. That's hilarious to me that you think that.

Most people I know (at least most who are familiar with basic, ninth-grade biological terms) already KNOW that a fetus fits the definition of parasite. I learned it over 10 years ago and wasn't appalled. I was pregnant at the time and my DOCTOR told me. I laughed, realizing it was indeed true. It fits the definition exactly.

It's simply a biological fact. ONE person apparently said it on ONE show and everyone has to have a hissy?

Damn.

[mairceridwen]

57. like i said

you need to get out more


besides most people in non-airamerica world, trying to be persuasive don't call it that.

[JohnnyCougar]

107. Ignore

[K-W]

58. Nobody is using it to appeal to anyones base.

Its a rather minorly used talking point. Its true, it illustrates something of a point. It isnt a big part of the rhetoric of the left.

By agreeing that it is even worth discussing is giving the right a victory on this that they dont deserve.

[JohnnyCougar]

84. The poster I replied to made the analogy

that the right was pandering to their base, not the other side. He suggested we do the same thing in the context of the "parasite" comment.

[Bouncy Ball]

90. No,

he didn't say "let's use the parasite comment! It's great!" His point was more global. The right routinely say some pretty horrific stuff (just the other day Falwell said, about Iraqis, blow them away in the name of the Lord) and they don't seem to feel any compunction to water their message down (though dear God it could use some common sense and compassion!).

His point was, why should we go around stomping on our own freedom of speech?

This is a freedom of speech issue, essentially. I refuse to advocate that we get in line to give ours up in order to win elections.

[JohnnyCougar]

94. No, it's a framing the debate issue.

No one is taking away any of your rights. Why do you, too, feel victimized?

[Bouncy Ball]

100. What is your deal with the word

victimized? Is it on your word of the day calendar? What a straw man you have there! Go tear him up! LOL!

I have not once heard you defend freedom of speech and that's what the rest of us are doing. You go get all in a twist about framing the debate. Watch the rightwingers continue to say whatever the fuck they want while we slowly sew our lips shut. Is that what you would like?

(Take the "us" and "our" to be general in nature. Not ME. Just so you don't use your favorite word again.)

[JohnnyCougar]

106. Yup, it is. And it's very relevant today, too.

[K-W]

93. He said no such thing.

He didnt say that we should use this particular fact to appeal to people, but simply that we shouldnt go out of our way to make sure our message is palatable to people who arent going to vote for us anyway, like people who think so emotionally that they cant handle hearing a comparison that is in no way obscene.

You created a straw man from that. He never said that we should use this to appeal to people. He made a larger point about message.

[QC]

220. "watering down their message"

So our message is now that human fetuses are the moral equivalent of tapeworms?

That's a real winner.

[progressoid]

26. If you don't belong here, do you belong with them?

There will always be a liberal that says something that will make you mad. We're not that homogeneous. I have lots of problems with Democrats - most of us do - just read the posts on DU for proof. Should they all keep their mouths shut so as not to piss off the rest of the party? NO!

As for being labeled anti-religious and an athiest...to a certain extent its too late. They have been high jacking religion for the last 3 or 4 decades. But the bigger issue is not to fall into that trap. This is the kind of hot button issue that they want to use to get you to go over to the dark side, shut off all reason and drink the koolaid of the GOP.

Cheers!

[DownNotOut]

28. We are all parasites

on earth. We (humans) take more than we give back...


DownNotOut

[mairceridwen]

30. and then what?

I heard a rightwingnut go off on someone who called it a fetus saying that was "scientific biased language for what should only ever be considered a human child"

[Bouncy Ball]

33. I once got yelled at by a right winger

for saying "embryo." We weren't even talking about abortion, for crying out loud. I was telling her about my friend's pregnancy and I said "the embryo is about a half and inch long now" and she freaked out and said "IT'S A BABY!!! A HUMAN BABY! NOT AN EMBRYO!!!" I was taken aback (I didn't get the memo on no longer using accurate terms to describe things) but told her that, while it certainly had the potential to become a baby, and most likely WAS GOING TO BE A baby, at the present moment, it was considered to be an embryo. That's not to say the future mom and dad go around calling it that (they were calling it "The Peanut" at that point, as that's what they thought it looked a bit like on the ultrasound, boy she'd blow a headgasket on them, eh?), but I WAS accurate in saying "embryo."

What exactly do rightwingers have against accurate terms? Science? When did science become such a boogeyman to be destroyed?

[mairceridwen]

38. how ironic

and we on the left get all the shit for wanting to police everyone's language.

yeah, my friends called their baby *lima bean* for a bit there


also, they rely on science for their so called claims...until ultrasounds came around it was all just humors and floating uteri. even the catholic church had nothing against "returning the menses" as long as it happed before quickening (or during quickening...about the first trimester)

[Bouncy Ball]

36. So Inanna, have you decided

if you belong here or not, based on one person saying "parasite?"

:eyes:

[JohnnyCougar]

43. You're completely missing the point.

Calling a fetus a parasite is completely tactless. I don't know one single person that would put up with that or agree with that word used to describe a fetus.

The point isn't whether it's technically correct whether it's a parasite or not, the point is that it's a stupid way of putting it.

Of course they have the right to say it. No one's saying we put a muzzle over people's mouth that says fetuses are parasites. But if someone comes up to you and says "cats are parasites" you're not going to formulate a very good opinion of them, aren't you. But technically, the cat needs you to live, shelter it, and feed it.

All this talk about framing the debate went right over your head, it seems.

[Bouncy Ball]

49. No, it didn't.

And saying my cat is a parasite would be inaccurate. My body does not host my cat.

Who is advocating that the left start referring to fetuses as parasites? The original poster took ONE comment from ONE person and extrapolated that we are alienating all of Middle America (remember based on that ONE comment) and wondered aloud if he/she should even continue being a liberal. See other posts here for better responses to this kind of silly reactionism.

Your vision of framing certainly does sound like muzzling.

And the point that parasite IS accurate when referring to a fetus seems to have gone right over YOUR head.

Do you imagine all liberals are going to start walking up to pregnant women and saying "so, how's the parasite today?"

Get a grip, really. The original post smells of a thinly (and I mean THINLY) veiled attack on the very people he/she claims to be part of.

Let's hope he/she never listens to George Carlin, good God.

[JohnnyCougar]

60. My vision of framing sounds like "don't sound like an idiot"

I am now convinced that people on this board are out of touch with the rest of the world. Go on defending your parasite calling friends. You won't win another election in your entire lifetime.

The OP wasn't just about one comment by one person, it alluded to a larger problem. The one comment was just one example of that larger problem. The fact that so many people are defendint this "parasite caller" only proves my point.

And if you feel victimized by that post, it is your fault. I don't see it as an attack at all.

[Bouncy Ball]

64. Ha!

Who said I was feeling victimized by anything? What the hell is even going on in this thread?

Parasite-calling friendS? Plural? What color is the sky on your planet?

You are saying you are ok with voluntarily muzzling the side you are supposedly on? And not with telling the other side to either grow a thicker skin, buy a dictionary or turn the channel? Shit, 99% of the crap spewed on Faux news, etc would totally offend and piss me off. You know what I do? I DON'T WATCH IT.

The vibes are SO fucking weird on this thread.

[sonicx]

72. i agree...

this has been happening since the election's end. people keep saying 'i saw a thread were someone insulted so and so group that voted for bush. that's why we lose elections! we need to be nicer!'

this is fucking liberal message board with 50,000 members. 100 million+ people cast their votes in elections. People say things here they never would in real life. :eyes:

[Bouncy Ball]

79. And I'm getting really sick and fucking tired

of people supposedly on my own side telling me what to say and how to say it.

I've lived in a red state my whole life and bit my tongue for most of it.

I was the good girl (though passionate) through the 2002 and 2004 election cycles and I did persuade plenty of former bush voters to vote for Kerry (a few opted to simply stay home). So thanks, I've been pretty clued in on how to frame things for a while.

But I no longer have a candidate to "act good" for. And I'm pissed. And if the right can't handle it, it just proves they can dish it out but they can't take it.

[sangh0]

238. Too bad

This is a political forum. Every thread contains posters telling others what they should say and how they should say it. Fortunately, you don't have to obey.

That's not censorship. That's free speech, and people have the right to criticize what you believe in, just as you have the right to criticize what others believe in. If you don't want to hear what others think of your thoughts, then don't post them. No one is forcing to post, and no one is forcing you NOT to post.

The people in your area may be able to get to you to quiet down, but no one on DU is forcing anything on you. Please don't project their acts onto DU. It doesn't happen here.

[K-W]

69. If you think that allowing people to think freely is the "larger problem"

good riddence.

You are obviously on the left under false pretenses. I apologize for the confusion.

Grow up, this isnt offensive, this isnt weird. Your reaction is humoursly over blown and I wonder what on earth you are trying to prove with this extraordinary response.

This is not an issue.
There is no larger problem.

The fetus is very similar, if not fitting the actual definition, to a parisite. This is a fact of life. Cope. It is not that big of a deal. If you cant process this fact, the problem is yours.

Dont get mad at other people because reality doesnt conform to your attitudes.

[sangh0]

237. So now criticism is stopping you from thinking freely?

No one is stopping you from thinking freely. It was criticism, not mind control.

The fetus is very similar, if not fitting the actual definition, to a parisite. This is a fact of life

And no one is disputing that fact, but for all your insistence on accuracy, you have ignored the FACT that statements like these are costing us many votes.

Dont get mad at other people because reality doesnt conform to your attitudes.

I will if you stop thinking someone is stopping you from thinking freely merely because someone is criticizing a statement you agree with.

[JMac]

287. Ha

"I am now convinced that people on this board are out of touch with the rest of the world."

Then what are your doing here, troll. You will feel more welcome on a rightwing site.

"Go on defending your parasite calling friends."

Ok, meanwhile you go on defending the rightwingers calling a parasite a viable human being.

"You won't win another election in your entire lifetime."

By using the term "you" in the above statement, you imply that you are on the other side (ie a republican troll). Get lost you loser.

[sonicx]

51. well, Majority Report is by liberals for liberals. it's not a debate show

plus it has a small audience. when you're around 'your own kind,' you say things you wouldn't to outsiders. Outside of that, you probably aren't going to hear people call fetuses parasites.

[JohnnyCougar]

81. I certainly hope so

Although from the looks of it here, many people are proud to call a fetus a "parasite." It seems like a badge of honor to them to be able to say it just because it will piss off the right wing.

[sonicx]

88. like i said, when you're around your ingroup, you say things...

you wouldn't say to outsiders. It's not to shocking that liberals would relentlessly insult RWers in the liberal-only message board.

[Bouncy Ball]

92. Seriously.

Serious question for you here: why do you read so much into things? It is really striking me as odd, and I'm not just saying that.

Where in the WORLD did you get the "badge of honor" stuff? The parasite thing is true, and that's ALL we were pointing out. Well, that and we still have that silly little freedom of speech thing in this country.

And just to piss off the right wing? Again, where do you get that? Our acknowledgement of a scientific FACT is just to piss off the right wing?

Obviously it offends YOU to hear a fetus is, technically, a parasite. Do you EVER hear things that offend you? Do you explore why they offend you or do you just lash out?

[mairceridwen]

99. you know what I am offended by...

speedbumps

such a course sounding word, with TWO drug references right there in the word. how can we be exposing the children to that?

traffic calming devices

isn't that better. it's better for the children. it will help us win votes. paint those red traffic calming devices blue baby yeah

[Bouncy Ball]

105. bumps is a drug word? LOL!

I'll have to come up with my list of words I am offended by, too! Fun!

[mairceridwen]

111. yes

as in, "would you like a bump of K?"

[mairceridwen]

54. oh please

the cat-human realtionship is in no way comprable to the mother-fetus/parasite (YES parasite) relationship and you know it.

the cat-human relationship is more like the mother-bornedbaby relationship and no one is suggesting that we kill babies except to occasionally feast on their tasty entrails

seriously, there is NOTHING wrong with framing the debate in purely scientific term.

"I don't know one single person that would put up with that or agree with that word used to describe a fetus."

you need to get out more

[Bouncy Ball]

68. He must not know a single scientist,

obstetrician, or anyone with any kind of familiarity with biological terms.

I've been scared for peace and the economy for a while, for freedoms, too. But I am very suddenly terrified for science itself. Damn.

[JohnnyCougar]

75. I am a fucking scientist.

You who think that any sort of criticism means I am trying to muzzle you need to get over your victim complex.

[Bouncy Ball]

80. That's the second time

you've mentioned victim complex, which is something the right tries to throw around. The first time you mentioned it, you completely assumed, based on no evidence whatsoever, that I felt "victimized" by your post to me. I am baffled as to what you could have based that on.

What's your deal, anyway? No one has claimed victimization on this thread.

[JohnnyCougar]

91. You're the one claiming I'm trying to silence people

and making a victim out of yourself, when I'm not. All I did was state my opinion.

[Bouncy Ball]

96. LOL!

(This is getting funny, really....) Where am I making a victim out of myself? Where? Point it out to me!

You certainly aren't standing up for the rights of people to say what they want. (ie: parasite comment) Instead you are wringing your hands about framing the debate and thinking we are wearing the parasite comment like a badge of honor, as you said above.

"All sound and fury signifying nothing..."

[JohnnyCougar]

137. Right here!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=2788583&mesg_id=2788871&page=

You ask me if I want to go around "muzzling the left"

More victimization. I never suggested that. Your victim complex made you think that.

[mairceridwen]

140. how you get so many posts?

with such freeperlike logic?

[Bouncy Ball]

143. ..........

...............

[K-W]

87. Sounds to me like your the one who thinks you are being victimized.

Us evil liberals are threatning to destroy the world by not looking at it the way do again?

[JohnnyCougar]

98. Nope. The issue is frame the debate.

You made it into a "taking away free speech" victim issue.

[sonicx]

108. a single caller in a low rated liberal show is not debate.

[JohnnyCougar]

121. no one said it was.

the OP had a point, though. If nobody had responded to his post, I would have ignored it. But there are scores of people bashing him/her and insinuating that they are a freeper, simply because they disagree with the point.

From the debate on here, it seems like most people wouldn't have a problem calling a fetus a parasite. I think it is technically correct, but it is a crude way of putting it. It's not necessary to frame it like that anywhere. I don't know a single democrat that would approve of someone using that word to describe a parasite.

[K-W]

112. Self-consorship isnt an acceptable option.

I didnt make anything into any victim issue. As has been explained to you extensively, nobody is talking about any victims, you were mistaken, move on.

The idea of free speech is that everyone has the right to express themselves even if you dont agree with them. You have made it quite clear that you think people who want to compare fetuses to parasites should not express themselves.

You are in fact arguing that people should stifle thier opinions in order to court favor with other people who are unable to make intelligent political decisions and prefer, instead, to pick whichever side makes them less uncomfortable when listening to talk radio.

That is not free speech. That is allowing the opinions of some govern what opinions others should say.

There is no victim.
We are all here civilly explaining to you that you are massively overeacting and encouraging self-censorship.

[JohnnyCougar]

130. See, you just turned our side into the victim AGAIN!!!

That is not free speech. That is allowing the opinions of some govern what opinions others should say.

You are victimizing our side at the hands of the other here. You are implying that the other side is controlling us simply because someone suggests we frame the debate.

[K-W]

158. I wasnt talking about the other side, I was talking about you.

I never mentioned any other side. I never mentioned anyone being a victim.

If your ability to discuss this issue consists of pretending that everyone who has any opinion other than yours is advocating some weird theory of victmization, Id appreciate it if you would let us know so that we can stop trying to talk to you rationally.

[JohnnyCougar]

162. LOL

We are all here civilly explaining to you that you are massively overeacting and encouraging self-censorship.

Self-censorship. Only a victim would see it that way. I see it as framing the debate, and using common sense.

[K-W]

168. What is your obsession with the word victim?

Im done discussing this with you. You clearly had no intention of ever actually discussing this.

[JohnnyCougar]

I did, until you set up the fallacy that I was trying to censor people.

[K-W]

180. I never said that, you are again, mistaken.

I said that you were encouraging self-censorship.

Which you were.

The word fallacy does not mean what you think it means.

[JohnnyCougar]

186. Would you like some mustard with the crow you will be eating?

fal·la·cy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (fl-s)
n. pl. fal·la·cies

1. A false notion.
2. A statement or an argument based on a false or invalid inference.
3. Incorrectness of reasoning or belief; erroneousness.
4. The quality of being deceptive.

I never stated anything about censorship, period. You claiming that I did meets all four of those definitions.

[cry baby]

234. JohnnyC, why is it that when someone has an honest

disagreement, one or the other is called a freeper. I agree with you, this is a matter of HOW we say the truth. We can use words that don't sound brutal. I'd bet 90% of moms in this country will turn up their noses at the word parasite, even if it is accurate.

[JohnnyCougar]

71. I'll guaruntee I get out more than you.

So don't make assumptions about my life like a cocky bastard would do.

Speaking of bastard, my best friend doesn't know who his dad is. Do you think it's a good idea for me to call him a bastard, because it is the technically correct term?

[mairceridwen]

77. yes call him a bastard

and he can tell you to fuck off

when the fetus tells me to stop refering to it as parasite I will gracefully oblige

i am cocky though not a bastard as I know who my father is.

[JohnnyCougar]

97. thank god for the ignore feature

[K-W]

62. Radio Callers Dont Frame The Debate

Stop getting sucked into freeper decoy fights.

By entering this debate you agreeing that this is in any way important.

Who on earth cares what a caller to a radio show said. Do you have any idea what things right wing callers say on thier shows? It is one mans opinion.

So rather than jumping to prove your moral superiority by over-denouncing one rather unotable opinion and in the process turning on your allies, why dont you just put this in context and realzie that the price of living in a free society is that you have to tolerate other people.

[JohnnyCougar]

67. You're missing the point of a free society

Tha means I have the right to publically disagree with someone.

Last time I checked, you "got sucked into a freeper decoy fight" before me. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

[K-W]

74. So you have the right to disagree, but I dont have the right to disagree

with you?

You have an interesting way of rationalizing things.

There is a difference between disagreeing with an opinion and saying we should condemn them for sharing that opinion.

You are arguing that the left should conform to your sensiblities. I am not arguing that you shouldnt say your opinion, just that your opinion is wrong.

[JohnnyCougar]

78. More victim complex from you.

I never said we should condemn the person who said "parasite." Your victim complex told you to think that. All I said was that it is a stupid idea.

[K-W]

83. Victim Complex? Do you even know what these words mean?

Or do you just have a pamphlet of vague terms you can use to rhetorically dismiss people who dont agree with you?

You were not arguing that the opinion was wrong. In fact that I think you conceded that it is not. You are arguing that people with this opinion shouldnt share them.

There is no victim here, luckily you are in no position to use your bad judgement to silence anyone. There is just you expressing the opinion that others should silence themselves because you dont like what they are saying.

You can have that opinion, but dont try to pretend you are saying anything else. Dont try to wrap yourself in a cloak of legitimacy because you can write me off in your head as some cartoonish liberal charecter you like to trot out to make yourself feel superior.

[JohnnyCougar]

89. You claiming I was condemning someone is victimizing him.

I did not attack the person at all. You are seeing attacks where there aren't any. THAT IS CREATING A VICTIM WHERE THERE ISN'T ONE.

I never tried to silence anyone either.

[K-W]

104. In your passion you seem to have lost any sense of reality.

Condomning someone is NOT victimizing them. There are real victims in this world, you would do well not to basterdize that word.

I never claimed you attacked anyone. I never created a victim anywhere. It has been repeatedly explained to you that nobody here thinks anyone is victimizing anyone. So perhaps you should stop rambling on about victimization, clearly you misunderstood a few posts.

You didnt try to silence anyone, indeed. How could you.

You expressed the opinion that they should be silent. I think that your opinion is wrong and contrary to the principles of free speach.

Somehow from there you took a nosedive into thinking I was accusing you of some kind of attack and into this odd victim philosophy of yours that so far has defied any sort of rationality.

[JohnnyCougar]

114. But I wasn't condemning him!!!!!

And yes, sayint I was condemning someone is victimizing them.

vic·tim
(vktm)

3. One who is harmed by or made to suffer from an act, circumstance, agency, or condition

con·demn
Pronunciation: k&n-'dem
to impose a penalty on

You who is so hep to literal definitions sureley can't miss that.

[K-W]

155. You picked the wrong definition of the word.

Try definition one here. There is no harm, so there is no victim. Of course I didnt mean you had inflicted harm on someone. If anything you could argue that condemn is too strong a word, but arguing that it has anything to do with a victim is just plane erroneous.


Main Entry: con·demn
Pronunciation: k&n-'dem
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French condemner, from Latin condemnare, from com- + damnare to condemn -- more at DAMN
1 : to declare to be reprehensible, wrong, or evil usually after weighing evidence and without reservation
2 a : to pronounce guilty : CONVICT b : SENTENCE, DOOM
3 : to adjudge unfit for use or consumption
4 : to declare convertible to public use under the right of eminent domain
synonym see CRITICIZE
- con·dem·nable /-'dem-n&-b&l, -'de-m&-/ adjective
- con·dem·na·to·ry /-'dem-n&-"tOr-E, -'de-m&-, -"tor-/ adjective
- con·demn·er /-'de-m&r/ or con·dem·nor /k&n-'de-m&r; k&n-"dem-'nor, "kän-/ noun

[Bouncy Ball]

85. Actually that's more "victim complex" from you.

Is that your main defensive argument? Just resort to saying the person you are debating has a victim complex?

[JohnnyCougar]

102. Yup. Because you are all making the very same argument against me.

And accusing me of trying to take away free speech. You are screaming like victims about it, too.

[mairceridwen]

110. huh?

all we are arguing for is the appropriateness of the word parasite to describe a parasite.

no one is saying you can't be opposed to or offended by calling it a parasite, but your grounds for being opposed and offended have only to do with some arbitrary connotation and not in pure, scientific reason

[Bouncy Ball]

116. And to think, he says he's a scientist!

[JohnnyCougar]

122. I am a scientist.

[Bouncy Ball]

128. I'm the Virgin Queen of England.

[JohnnyCougar]

132. No, you are a troll. Now you are just headed to my ignore list.

[Bouncy Ball]

138. Okay!

Hey my first one!

FYI, not a troll at all. But hey, whatever floats your boat.

[JohnnyCougar]

144. Posting things simply to obtainan emotional reaction is trolling

hence you are a troll. Go look it up in the DU rules.

[Bouncy Ball]

147. I'm fully aware of the DU rules, thank you very much.

I'm still not a troll, trust me on this. Been around this site a LONG time, post counts are highly misleading in some cases.

But thanks! I thought you put me on ignore?

[JohnnyCougar]

150. I was about to, but then you calmed down

I did put that other poster on ignore, though. I forgot his name, but he has nothing of value to say.

[Bouncy Ball]

153. I calmed down?

You are a funny man!

Check your PM.

[JohnnyCougar]

157. Well, you're not equating constructive criticism with muzzling anymore.

That's calm enough for me. I have a high tolerance.

[Bouncy Ball]

160. ...

:eyes:

Are you still advocating what liberals should and should not say?

[JohnnyCougar]

163. .....

:boring:

[bloom]

273. I would rather Fetuses be called parasites than to have them

referred to as people with equal (and even superior) rights to the mother. Bush & Co. would have mothers die with their rewriting of the laws - so the unborn could live.

I don't think a lot men really get it. Maybe some subconsciously don't care if the the mother dies so the fetus lives. I find that mentality appalling. (Not the suggestion that a fetus is not capable of life outside of the mother's body).

This idea that the right to life of the unborn are superior to the mother's right to life really pushes my buttons. And that is exactly where this debate is going.

[donheld]

197. You gotta love it - I call it ask and run posts

Inanna starts a thread, but you gotta wonder if he/she ever read the posts to follow.

[sonicx]

39. variation #1000001 of 'let's not offend anyone'

this is getting old.

[Tace]

48. OK, I'll Relent -- We Were Parasites -- We Are Parasites -- Whatever

Put that in the Democratic platform and see where it gets us.

[K-W]

53. What on earth are you talking about?

The democratic platform?

Its a minor talking point for some people to demonstrate the biological realities of human development.

Nobody is putting it in any platforms, it isnt a big deal.

Its just something that brushes up against peoples romantasized conceptualizations of thier own biology and makes them a little uncomfortable so it is easy to spin into being offensive, extreme, or weird.

The only way to interpret this the way you do is to go in looking for reasons to take offense.

[gottaB]

109. romanticized conceptions of biology?

As if science had no way to distinguish between parasites and embryos? Many standard definitions of parasitism stress that the two organism are dissimilar, i.e. not the same species. Here's one:

Parasitism. A type of symbiosis where two (or more) organisms from different species live in close proximity to one another, in which one member depends on another for its nutrients, protection, and/or other life functions. The dependent member (the parasite) benefits from the relationship while the other one (the host) is harmed by it.

http://biotech.icmb.utexas.edu/search/dict-search.mhtml?bo1=AND&word=parasitism&search_type=begin&def=

According to these definitions it's not accurate to apply to the term to fetuses. It's just a metaphor, and a sloppy one at that. Further, the choice of "parasitism" rather than "commensalism," "mutualism" or "symbiosis" betrays a hostility towards bearing children. That's going to offend people without being spun. And, yeah, as OP suggested, it's the kind of thing that will be spun.

Let's be clear. We are discussing rhetoric, not the facts of life.

[Bouncy Ball]

115. No

symbiosis involves both parties biologically benefitting, as in both parties being able to SURVIVE because one is hosting the other.

Being pregnant rarely ever saves one's life.

And even if it did, it's a temporary condition. So symbiosis doesn't work.

Why would you need to compare the terms parasite and embryo? A human embryo simply happens to fit the definition of parasite. The two terms are not mutually exclusive, as you set them up in your post.

And there are other definitions of parasitism in which it is NOT mentioned that they are of different species, so what?

Hostility? Ah, so I suppose when I had a chuckle in my OB/GYN's office all those years ago when he told me my fetus was technically a parasite, I was really showing hostility toward the idea of giving birth to her?

:eyes:

How many people in the world can't handle simple facts without them rocking their whole world? I'm beginning to think more than I thought.

Put this in perspective: it was apparently ONE anonymous random caller on ONE liberal radio show with a small listenership. If it makes you feel any better, tell yourself it was a rightwinger saying that to make us look bad (and how do you know it wasn't?).

Again, this WHOLE thing is such a tempest in a teapot.

And has anyone noticed the original poster has never even bothered to engage in their own thread?

[gottaB]

146. A note on hostility

Are you familiar with Freud's concept of the Uncanny?

Don't get me wrong. It's perfectly normal for people to be ambivalent about such things. I'm not passing any judgements about your life history, but it seems to me that the source of your information on this topic is not the most authorative: a trip to dictionary.com and a humorous exchange between you and your gynecologist. Meanwhile other techinical definitions more precisely describe parasitism. My conclusion is that you have presented political rhetoric as scientific fact.

Sorry if that rocks your world.

[Bouncy Ball]

149. It doesn't at all.

Inaccurate descriptions given by anonymous people on the internet rarely ever even approach the level of rocking my world.

Your mistake was in assuming that what you described has been my ONLY exposure to such terms.

Now, do you have a substantial rebuttal to my argument against your use of the word symbiotic and the fact that you placed embryo and parasite as mutually exclusive terms, or would you like to get into psychology now?

[mike_c]

166. quick interjection from a biologist, if I may....

"Symbiosis" simply means "living together." Parasitism is one form of symbiosis. Another is mutualism--that's the kind you're describing in which both participants (symbionts) benefit.

[Bouncy Ball]

170. You're right

I meant mutualism.

Thank you, mike!

[mairceridwen]

117. it's an apt metaphor

for a woman who doesn't want it as it could very well be psychologically harmful

i know it's not a tapeworm, but still...


it won't offend people if they can make the kind of corrective you are suggesting, rather than, IT'S A HUMAN CHILD!!! And they'll spin anything and everything we put forth so what gives?

[Bouncy Ball]

125. Exactly

what I find humorous and greatly distressing at the same time about all the liberals screaming about framing the debate correctly (and btw, I think they are taking the framing the debate thing too far, as I highly doubt Lakoff would endorse censorship) is that I have to think they haven't really debated a real live right winger in their lives.

It DOESN'T matter what you say on some issues. They will twist and twist and twist your words to fit whatever purpose they have. The truth doesn't matter. Facts don't matter. Have we not learned that much from the bush voters we have been dealing with for four years now?

So those who are taking "framing" to this ridiculous length will find themselves knotted up altogether and STILL no progress on getting through to the right. And their lips sewn shut by their very own hands, too.

Geez.

[sonicx]

120. "That's going to offend people without being spun."

kind of hard to do on a show for and by liberals. It's like a tree failing in the forrest. if RWers aren't listening to complain or be offended, did it really happen?

If you hear Democrats on TV say 'parasite,' *then* there might be a problem.

[mike_c]

169. a fetus does meet the biological definition of parasitism...

...in most respects. See #9, above.

[gottaB]

189. "in most respects"

If I subscribe to the International Journal of Parasitology, what will it teach me about human ontogeny? In most respects?

[gottaB]

254. In case you are still following this thread, I ask you to clarify

I'm saying that the concepts of "species" and "reproduction" are essential to the life sciences, so much so that they couldn't possibly function at the level of sophistication they have attained without permitting a clear distinction to be drawn between reproductive processes and parasitism.

The argument you got into starting with post #9 was silly. Think about it. By bearing offspring, is a mammal's reproductive fitness enhanced or diminished?

So in my view your "most respects" misses what is most essential about the life sciences, particularly evolutionary theory. And yet there seem to be a dozen posters on this thread who are convinced of the correctness of your view--with or without qualification. Since you've been so forthcoming with your expertise, I'd like you to clarify. Do you agree or disagree with the claim that the proper definition of parasitism involves a relationship between organisms of different species?

[Bouncy Ball]

59. Dear God

are you actually a Democrat? Who is talking about putting anything in platforms? Again, ONE PERSON said it on ONE show and it IS accurate. What exactly is the problem?

By the way, we aren't technically parasites after we are born, despite any hyperbole to the contrary. Only before birth.

This entire thread smells to high heaven.

[serryjw]

55. Isn't PROTECTING freedom difficult.......

the biological definition is not the issue. What he said upset you. This is the time you have to DEFEND his right to be obnoxious! We can't defend freedoms ONLY when someone agrees with us.
Is this NOT the same argument over ROE or Gay marriage? People ask me all the time do I agree with XYZ....My answer is always the same......It makes NO difference WHAT I BELIEVE, THEY have a CONSTITUTIONAL right to THEIR beliefs.

The 1st Amendment is the MOST precious. That is WHY our Founding Fathers gave it #1! This is a very slippery slope. I will defend his RIGHT to be as wrong, sickening and offensive as possible. THEN I KNOW we have FREEDOM! Don't like what he said....YOU have a CONSTITUTIONAL right to turn the dial.

[Bouncy Ball]

73. Applause, applause, applause.

Remember when people used to say "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to my death your right to say it?"

I remember those days. I haven't heard anyone say that in a VERY long time.

Well I still feel that way. Which is why I don't listen to right wing hate radio, which is why I don't watch them spew their crap on TV, either. I don't have to. It's great that way.

[serryjw]

103. Well there are TWO of us!

It's a START!

[Swamp Rat]

66. Nice try but no dice.

[OneBlueSky]

70. God, people, we're playing right into their hands . . .

they want to divert us from the real issues, so they throw out red meat topics like abortion to keep us occupied . . . and we fall for it every time . . . what we should be talking about is joining together to build a more humane, more just, and more sustainable culture (or, for marketing purposes, a more humane, more just, and more sustainable America) . . . we can start by Ending Corporate Governance . . .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=2778474&mesg_id=2778474

I don't want to discuss abortion . . . or gay marriage . . . or prayer in school . . . I want to discuss saving this country and the planet from fascism . . . and building a true democracy . . . and restoring citizen authority over corporations, and over our government . . .

[azoth]

86. Thank you - you are absolutely correct.

Religion and/or religious-based "issues" like abortion and gay marriage are just fucking flares sent up to distract us *all* from the real Issues.

Semantics is not a reason to abandon one's beliefs, nor is one less-than-pleasant sounding turn of phrase.

Good GRAVY - given all the shit burying us right now - international "diplomacy", war, looming economic disaster, environmental contamination and the pressing need for all of us to learn to goosestep to name but a few - it's not worth giving one single *word* the power to crumble the foundations of one's own beliefs.

[Pirate Smile]

76. Well, I guess I'm crazy because I definitely had a negative

reaction to describing a fetus as a parasite.

Of course, people can say whatever the hell they want but that description will not help our cause in the least.

I didn't focus on the rest of your rant but I don't think the issue you wanted to raise was the validity of parasite as a technical definition for fetus.

I think Anna Quindlen's article in Newsweek about this topic a week or so ago was interesting and raised a lot of real issues.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6542344/site/newsweek/

Nov. 29 issue - I've been an opinion columnist for 15 years, and the public debate that has advanced least during that time is the one about abortion. (For the record, the discussion of gay rights has come the farthest.) From the time Roe v. Wade was first handed down by the high court, leaders of the opposing sides have been frozen into polar positions. Autonomy versus maternity. Coat hanger versus cradle. Constitution versus church.

Those are oversimplifications, but too often oversimplification has seemed to be the ruling principle on this extraordinarily complex issue. And so many of the discussions of abortion from both sides have felt remote from everyday concerns. Maybe you know someone who watches the little stick turn blue and sits down on the toilet to think about a culture of life or the right to privacy. I don't. Lots of women have decided to end a pregnancy wondering why the so-called debate seems to have no connection to what they're thinking, feeling and doing.

We talk about how the country became so bitterly divided. Abortion is the issue that first set the template for this schism. The public dialogue hardened into ice long ago. In the most recent issue of Conscience, the journal of Catholics for a Free Choice, the leader of the group tries to break the impasse with a wise and provocative manifesto. Frances Kissling asks those who believe in legal abortion to publicly acknowledge competing interests, writing, "Are we not capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time; of valuing life and respecting women's rights?"

She goes on to raise some compelling questions. Is it helpful to concentrate solely on legal arguments when moral imperatives are so much a part of the equation for many people? Is it useful to refuse to consider the emotional pull of the fetus even as we conclude that the rights of the mother ultimately take precedent? Is there a dangerous disconnect between our public positions and our private sentiments, a disconnect the public suspects is dishonest?

[Bouncy Ball]

82. Did you know

before you heard it on that radio show that fetuses do fit the definition of parasite? Just curious.

[Pirate Smile]

134. Yes. I also know that while carrying three of them inside me I would have

never even imagined considering them anything of the sort.

But, hey, excuse me if my personal experience is interfering with your vocabulary lesson.

[Bouncy Ball]

139. Who said anything about that?

I was simply curious to know if you knew about that before you heard it on the radio show, nothing less, nothing more.

I think you might have read things into my post that weren't there.

[sonicx]

101. "that description will not help our cause"

it was a caller on a liberal radio show with relatively low ratings.

it's like a tree falling in the woods. the cause is not hurt. ;)

[Pirate Smile]

126. I agree because how many people actually heard it but I really wouldn't

want it spread around a lot.

I believe we have two completely separate discussions trying to be held in this thread and never shall the two meet.

The technical definition of parasite v. framing discussions about abortion (actually this one never even got off the ground although Johnny Cougar tried to start it).

Maybe, another one also about the original poster's crisis of belief in the left political wing.

[Renew Deal]

156. I don't consider a fetus a parasite and

that's not why I am pro-choice anyway. I support a womans right to choose. I am anti-abortion, but pro-choice. I don't understand why the right wants to takes womens rights away.

[Pirate Smile]

177. This is where I thought the thread would go but it seemed to take

some crazy looped de loops instead.

[JanMichael]

113. The rIght has gone too far. They always have, they always will.

So there.

And fuck off, I hate your fucking subject line:-)

[Bouncy Ball]

118. Why didn't I just wait

for this post? LOL!

Hey, I'M a former parasite! Whoooo! Crazy stuff! :crazy:

[JanMichael]

124. I'm known for brevity. The subject line is fodder for our enemies.

It's freep material, or at least bait. I simply call them as I see them.

Regardless of the content which I could give a shit about.

[Bouncy Ball]

135. I agree

on your comments about this thread.

[JanMichael]

131. Whoops. I hadn't seen your previous posts...It's late...I'm blocked.

Cheers and good night!

[pop goes the weasel]

119. one thing Republicans have taught me

"You have no right to not be offended."

So they get their panties in a wad. So you get your panties in a wad. So it's a pantywad party. By Republican's own standards, you have no right to expect language that does not offend you. And you certainly have no right to expect ideas that do not offend you.

As for atheism, I have news. The only way that atheism will not alienate other Americans is if atheists never get to publicly mention their atheism ever. Never protest when our children are forced to take a religious oath. Bow our heads and pretend to pray when the rest of the crowd does. Lie when applying for work and asked about our religious beliefs. Support faith-based initiatives that discriminate against us and attack us while using our tax money.

Oh, we atheists are just so terrible, aren't we? And the Democratic Party suffers so from our membership. Maybe we should just quit it and go join the Greens. Or maybe you can point out that there are a lot of Republican atheists, too, and that the big difference between them and Democratic atheists is that the Democratic atheists don't think that the state should use religion should to control the masses. The Republican atheists happily lie about their atheism in order to be better Straussians. The Republican atheists think they are using the right wing Christians, and the Talibornagains think they are using the Straussians. And they lie, lie, lie to each other and the public. Is that how you want the Democrats to be?

[nadinbrzezinski]

123. Reframe this

You are not pro choice, but they are pro fetus... (regardless of what your believes are regarding the soul and all that),

here is teh logic... they are pro fetus because they do not care what happens to that baby AFTER it is born.

Now right now many are struggling wtih the semantics to use.

Oh and this is pretty value neutral when you say this... you are pro fetus... not pro life, pro fetus, not pro children, pro fetus.

See how this works?

As is, the left has many facets and right now all are screaming at each other

You have the Religious Left (which incidetally has been throughly ignored)

You have the economic left

Teh environmental left,

The liberatarian left

The progresive left.

See what I am saying? Here at DU, for many reasons, it is the Economic Left that makes the most noise. You belong here, just find what part and realize what you win today many not be what you have to compromise tomorrow in your personal agenda

How do people thiink Norquist does this?

STEAL HIS PLAY BOOK and adapt it, damn it!

[Pirate Smile]

136. They are pro-birth. After the kid is out, screw em by their standards.

[nadinbrzezinski]

161. pro fetus is even harsher

and clearer.

[Pirate Smile]

173. Aha, here we go into the framing debate some people seem to

have a problem with for some reason.

IMHO, I think pro-birth makes a larger point about how after the baby is born the RW anti-abortion crowd doesn't care about their health care, etc. I just think it focuses more strongly on that contradiction in their stance.

[Tace]

129. This Thread Is Actually Awesome -- I'm Really Digging It

I was only trying to help the lady out. And it has shown what a really hot-button issue the unborn are, whatever our definition.

[Bouncy Ball]

133. The unborn are not a hot topic issue for me, sorry.

But I do detest a lack of information.

[mairceridwen]

141. Yeah

especially when the lack is on our side

[Tace]

148. I'm Not Being Clear -- "Abide In The Unborn Mind" Is A Zen Concept

http://www.poetry-reviews.com/The_Unborn__The_Life_and_Teachings_of_Zen_Master_Bankei_16221693_Revised_and_Expanded_0865475954.html

This is some seriously heavy-duty stuff.

I've never considered it in the context of this thread, however.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

285. Me too.

It gives me plenty of opportunity to hit "Alert." It's cathartic.

[ComerPerro]

145. So go join the fascists, if it makes you feel better about yourself

[Bouncy Ball]

151. Now, now

I fear you are framing your statement incorrectly! You will scare him/her off! We cannot alienate! We must appease! Always!

/sarcasm off

[JohnnyCougar]

154. LOL

Unbelievable

[Pirate Smile]

178. That is why a lot of people probably just read these kinds of threads

and may not post.

You aren't alone but it can feel that way sometimes.

[Renew Deal]

152. Jeanine Garafolo is an idiot.

Her and Sam are increasingly shrill and not that good. They are not nearly as good at what they do as Randi Rhodes. Both of them are barely hanging on. They are not good at arguing points. There is no message coming from the show. It's not a good situation.

[K-W]

159. Barely hanging on?

Keep dreaming.

[Renew Deal]

174. What I meant is...

barely hanging on to credibility. Who cares what she has to say? She doesn't make any real points and has no original thought. I don't get anything from her that I don't already get hear. Sam is slightly better, but he was all too happy about accusing the US of war crimes the other night. It's not that they haven't happened, it's the way he said it. I hope that there is some chance they will be replaced, but I doubt it.

[K-W]

179. Credibility?

If you would like to assail thier credibility, perhaps you should present an argument that speaks to thier credibility.

Thier points aren't 'real' enough for you.
Thier thoughts arent original enough for you.
You didnt like Sam Seder's delivery.

None of this relates in any way to credibility. That is just your subjective opinion of them. Unfortunately for you, your individual opinion is not highly valued by broadcasters. They dont care what you think as long as enough people like it to make them money. So far people seem to like it just fine.

[Renew Deal]

184. Jeanine calling fetuses parasites is a credibility issue.

Even if it's somehow scientifically true, most people don't believe that. It sounds dishonest and is pretty nasty too. Besides that, she and Sam don't deliver their points with the knowledge and credibility that others do. Namely, Randi and Molloy.

It's not that they're not credible. They just have a credibility problem. Here is a definition. I want to make sure that we are both talking about the same thing.

3 entries found for credibility.

The quality, capability, or power to elicit belief: “America's credibility must not be squandered, especially by its leaders” (Henry A. Kissinger).
A capacity for belief: a story that strained our credibility.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=credibility

[QC]

218. She and Sam validate just about every stereotype of liberals

that the reactionaries have been hitting us with for thirty years. With their slams on "rednecks," religious people, and now this one, it's as though they are on a mission to prove the GOP talking point that liberals are snide, condescending urbanites who hold "regular people" in contempt.

And yes, that's powerful propaganda. It's how the party of Big Money Inc. has managed to convince so many poor and working people that Republicans are the real populists in this country. And I would be a rich man if I had a dollar for every person who has said to me that they don't like the Republicans' tilt toward the rich but won't vote for the Democrats because "they look down on people like me."

Between Jeanene and Sam doing their best to confirm Rove's pseudopopulist lies and Al giving half his show to freepers, I can't see how Air America is doing us much good.

[RUDUing2]

292. as someone who lives in a Red State w/an extremely strong

extremely conservative fundy base (AOG headquarters), you are exactly correct about how this plays out in the real world.

Many moderates in this state will not vote democrat because they feel that the dems look down their nose at them, and have no interest in their lives. They will vote repub even if they don't really agree w/the repubs because they at least act like they don't hold them in contempt.

If you feel that a party has nothing but contempt for you and yours you are not going to be very receptive to anything they say. And you are going to find it very easy to be swayed by others telling you that they are lying, etc.

This is what happened this last election (and in 2000)..so libs need to do a bit of a reality check and realize that claiming the intellectual high ground don't do a lot of good if they let the conserves cut off the supply line..

btw those who have said that using the word parasite is okay cause of dictionary definition...should we start using these terms? After all if all that matters is dictionary terms, not common usage...

Bastard: an illegitimate child

slut: a promiscuous woman (not restricted to one sexual partner)

whore: a promiscuous or immoral woman

[QC]

294. Good point about language.

There are all sorts of things that are literally true but unwise to say.

[Hello_Kitty]

164. Calling a fetus a parasite (actually true) is nothing compared to

The hate-filled venom emitted by r/w pundits at every turn. Liberals are compared to terrorists and called treasonous.

[Renew Deal]

187. Just because they are hate filled irrational scumbags

doesn't mean we should be.

[the_outsider]

175. what about calling anyone who is pro-choice "baby killer"?

Is that ok? Have you ever listened to any right-wing talk show? Do you have any ideas what words they use and how they frame their personal beliefs? You are not going to win them over by being nice and sensitive to them.

[Renew Deal]

188. I agree that you are not going to win them over by being nice

and sensitive, but calling a fetus a parasite is beyond the pale. It makes us look so inhuman. I can't imagine people that cry for every soldier would say such things.

[Karenina]

207. I sit here shaking my head

in disbelief at what I'm reading. One tactless (however correct) remark
on one fleeting radio show and a tizzy ensues. Here's a word to get your knickers in a wad: GENOCIDE.

Americans in their collective impotence are daily enabling the COLD-BLOODED MURDER of LIVING,BREATHING infants, children, teenagers, women (hosts and the parasites they may be carrying), men, INNOCENT PEOPLE who simply want to live their lives and have done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to deserve the ATROCIOUS BRUTALITY your gub'mint has unleashed on them.

But PLEASE, DO carry on about your ignorant masses whose sensibilities may be offended by accurate biological terminology.

[the_outsider]

183. what if I am an atheist and I am anti-religion

and want to be labeled as such. If stating that alienates some, does that mean I should just shut up just because it may hurt us in elections and the party should try to disassociate itself from wacko fringe lefties like us? That's precisely how the right wants to frame it.

[Renew Deal]

192. No

But that's far different than this. Lice is a parasite. Are you saying fetuses are equivelent to lice? That's the problem with this.

Here is another parasite.

Saying that fetuses are parasites is some cold, inhumane shit.

http://www.biosci.ohio-state.edu/~parasite/a-z.html

[the_outsider]

194. OP mentioned right wing using atheism and anti-religion for their cause

if you read the whole post. The point is we should not worry about what right-wingers might use something to their advantage when we express and discuss our thoughts and opinions. No one recommended to start using "parasite" for fetuses. It's just one caller to one radio show and we are getting worried about how we may alienate them ! It's a lot more important to defend the caller's freedom of speech and expression than to worry about how the right may use it.

[Kipepeo]

191. It's a radio show

It's no big deal.

It's not like the democratic platform calls fetuses parasites. It's not like we are all on DU advocating how to best use the word parasite to attract new voters.

Reublicons say much worse, much more horribe things on right-wing mainstream) talk radio all of the time. It doesn't matter.

I wouldn't think about leaving the Democratic party because I disagred with what one democrat said.

[Tace]

195. OK, How Many Of Us Have Addressed _Inanna_'s Original Post?

This entire tread seems like a bunch of nonsense, considered in the context of the person who posted the thread. Everyone feel better now? Got yer ya ya's out? What about the poor lady who posted this thread?

Sorry to say, but so far, this has simply been an ego-fest.

By the way, she's moved over to Free Republic. And I can't say I blame her.

Oh, yeah, yeah -- don't let the door hit her in the ass on the way out. Most of you folks have completely -- I mean completely -- missed the point. This lady made a reasonable point, and asked a reasonable question, to which we have made total asses out of ourselves.

This is her thread!

[charlie]

206. Get off yer perch

What was she waiting for, a chorus of hosannahs before she'd deign to favor us with a reply?

She warns us there's "too much at stake" then hightails it to Free Republic? And you think you're gonna hang that on us?

Pfft.

[Renew Deal]

212. If she's hanging out at freeperville

then she's got issues beyond this thread and just posted this to stir shit up.

[Cobalt Violet]

216. Good riddance to her.

[Threedifferentones]

196. While I do understand that a fetus is indeed a parasite,

and I am not offended by hearing someone say it, the OP's point is entirely correct. If we want to win elections we cannot talk like this on the radio. This does not mean we should change our positions, it just means that in public we should talk about them in ways that will appeal to a reactionary, emotionaly charged American voter as well as an intelligent, progressive DUer. Calling fetuses parasites will not accomplish this.


3DO

[rman]

198. 'some guy on the radio' is not "we"

maybe the RW gets its order on what to talk about in the media from central command, but we don't.

[Threedifferentones]

274. And this definitely has something to do with

how they are able to get away with so many lies. This is not to say that every progressive thinker should take his marching orders from one source, but rather that people who want liberal politicians to win elections MUST weigh the importance of weight they are saying against the impact it could have on the average American's mind. Some things must be said no matter what the public thinks; I am not advocating that we give up on abortion, but I do know that statements like these only make the chances of us keeping abortion legal less likely.

3DO

[Warren DeMontague]

199. Great, another "We need to watch what we say" thread.

Funny, isn't it, that the republicans have plenty of folks that agree with Rev. Fred "God Hates Fags" Phelps, yet no one seems to be out there trying to herd them into ideological conformity. No one seems to think they need to "shut up" about their beliefs. The President of the United States hangs out with Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, who blamed 9-11 on "Lesbians and Secular Humanists" (Mohammad Atta presumably being both) and he plays Bocce Ball with friggin Bob Jones of Bob Jones University, and no one seems to be waxing apopleptic about how they need to moderate their message or squelch certain corners of their ideological base.. Hell, all they need to do is trot out two big pro-choice names at every convention, while conveniently keeping them well the hell away from the platform drafting committee, and they are magically transmogrified into the Party of mainstream moderation.

Yet let a few atheists actually assert their non-belief and we are "alienating the heartland" and "mocking the faith of middle America". This is identical to the talk, immediately following the election, about how Gays "lost it for us" and they need to shut up and stop "alienating other Americans".

I don't believe in "God", certainly not in the popular Christian sense of an all-powerful, invisible man with a strange obsession over peoples' sex lives. If my mentioning that fact, and not apologizing for it, means I'm 'alienating middle America', I'm sorry, but f*ck 'em. At least I'm not trying to come to their churches on Sunday and teach evolutionary biology in the same way that many of them want creationism taught in "science" class.

Likewise, I have many friends who are good, patriotic Gay and Lesbian citizens. If standing up for their rights to make lifelong committments (and, gasp! call it "marriage", even) to each other is too much to deal with for some folks in Kansas, I'm sorry, but I'm in no way going to moderate my stance on what I know to be right any more than I would have changed my position on Segregation in 1959.

Finally, I am pro-choice. I don't apologize for that fact. Doesn't mean I have anything "against" fetuses.. While I didn't hear the AAR show in question, I suspect that context probably had a lot to do with the quote you are speaking of-- particularly in the sense that, from a rationality standpoint, even if a fetus is a full human from the second of conception, the fact that it is wholly dependent upon anothers' body for its' survival puts it in a legal state unlike almost any other member of society. If your brother needed a kidney transplant to survive, and you were the only possible donor, it might be the right thing to do to give it to him, but he's not entitled to your kidney by default, even if he has a "right to life". Likewise to criminalize abortion in all cases is to say that a fetus has more right to a woman's body than she does herself!

And this is what the abortion debate is really about. Not whether it's "nice", or "good", but whether it should be against the law. Whether the government should be in the position of legislating women to remain pregnant against their will. I don't believe it should be, and I am more comfortable with that power residing with women and their doctors than with big-hair televangelists and legislators like Tom DeLay. If so-called "pro-lifers" were really interested in reducing the numbers of surgical abortions, for example, it would make sense if they were out there supporting access to safer, more effective birth control. The morning after pill. Comprehensive Sex Ed. Dare I say it, they would be supporting a liveable minimum wage and a single payer health care system. They do none of these things, because the agenda is really all about control.

This is why I'm pro-choice, I'm supportive of Gay Rights, and I refuse to be silent about the fact that, sorry, I don't believe in anything resembling the Judeo-Christian god. That's who I am, I'm proud of all those beliefs, and I'm sure as hell not going to start apologizing for any of them.

[Withywindle]

255. Wonderful post!

Very eloquent, and I agree 100%.

I find the militant anti-choice point of view actually offensive -- how dare they imply that a tiny senseless cluster of dividing cells has "equal rights" with an already present-and-accounted-for, fully-realized human being (who is always female, thus making it an inherently misogynist position).

Funny, just last week I went to a baby shower for a good friend of mine. She and her husband were full of banter about the "parasite" and "alien seed" (and talking about when it was going to burst out through her chest and latch on to her face) and the "spanner in the works" and the "enemy within." Yes, very affectionately: they're happy about the baby and looking forward to being parents and I think they'll be great ones. But mandatory starry-eyed reverence is NOT the only way to discuss parenthood and its issues, that's for sure. (Yes, they're Democrats).

[Qanisqineq]

200. one of my college professors called the fetus a "parasite" all the time

because it basically is. It lives off the mother without the mother benefitting in any way. I understand why you are afraid of what the right will think, they blow everything out of proportion. But I agree, it is a parasite.

[Solly Mack]

203. right-wingers will label you what they want to label you

regardless of how you feel about it. No matter how much it bothers you...and it seems to bother you a great deal.

THEY DON'T CARE WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT IT.

They will label you no matter what and there's nothing you can do about it. They don't care how much of a lie it is... and the more it bothers you, the happier it makes them.

Once you understand and accept this fact, it's all good.

Right-wingers are "parasites" feeding off your discomfort and your displeasure of what they think about you. They eat it up and come back for more.

What do you even care what they think of you? Are they the standard by which you measure yourself by? That you measure others by?

I hope not.

If calling a fetus a parasite offends you...then say as much without making it a case of "what will right-wingers think?"

[REP]

204. Read An Obstetrics Textbook

Williams Obstetrics, for one, refers to the human fetus as a "very effective parasite" in regard to its relation to the woman sustaining its life.

Anyone so delicate that they're offended by that description should take to their beds with a cool cloth pressed to their foreheads for the next few years, and by all means keep the radio tuned to the easy-listening station.

[quaker bill]

205. I understand your point

The question is not whether the statement is factually accurate or not, but whether it is well thought out or merely undisciplined semantic hedonism.

People have the right to free speech. Some of them use it wisely to advance the causes they believe in, others form circular firing squads with it.

The word "parasite" may be technically correct. However the implied notion that women can or even should approach terminating a pregnancy in the same manner emotionally as getting treatment for a tapeworm is both wrong and profoundly stupid.

No woman I have known who has had an abortion treated it as anything less than a very significant moral and emotional decision. To imply otherwise does no justice to these people.

People have the right to free speech. People also have the right to be jerks in public, but I for one am not about to start lobbying for them.

[Dastard Stepchild]

215. This is a very nice reply...

I was going to make a similar comment, but you've done the work quite nicely for me :)

[Im_Your_Huckleberry]

297. bingo.

[Stephanjnj]

210. Saprophyte is the better analogy

Both "host" and "parasite" ultimately provide a mutual benefit to each other. Parasite implies a one-way channeling of resources to the detriment of the host. I doubt if may parents would feel that way about their offspring (with the possible exception of adult children living at home that is!).

[OnionPatch]

213. While I tend to feel the same

(that this type of crap plays right into the RW's hands) I also thought that about Rush Limbaugh when he first came out. I was SHOCKED at the vile filth and hatred he spewed. I felt personally attacked the first day I heard him on the radio and I just KNEW in my heart that the American public would be disgusted and he wouldn't last another month or more........

[Dastard Stepchild]

214. The comment was a personal comment....

but, unfortunately, personal comments still get tied to the political party that the individual is a member of. It's that shortcut-form thinking that allows us to neatly and easily identify a "liberal" and "conservative" and a "dem" and "pug" based on the content of the comment and the ideology it espouses. I won't go so far as to say the left has gone too far, however. This was literally one individual's statement. Just making a brief comment on how individuals unintentionally speak for the whole when they take a certain stance. When I speak my mind, I could probably find a million lefties that would wince at some of my positions, but I am speaking for myself, not for the left as a whole. Still, since I am a leftie, it could appear as though I am speaking for the left. Which is why I usually preclude most political discussions/comments with "Personally...blah..blah...blah..." That leaves no room for question, and puts the kibosh on shortform thinking.

[Iris]

217. I've read pregnancy books that refer to the fetus as a parasite.

So get off you high horse.

[salin]

223. so a guy, whose a guest on an AAR show - is now "the left" that has gone

too far?

Too bad the right doesn't worry about things that savage says.. they are WAY more offensive that this.

[Warren DeMontague]

225. Right. Whereas Right-Wing Radio is a bastion of moderation and reason.

How many times have Coulter, Savage, et al. Referred to liberals, for example, as "parasites"?

Sorry, that "watch what we say, or they can label us as extremists" dog won't hunt. You flip through the AM dial and you're liable to hear all stripes of Republican jerk-offs proposing that we be sent to camps, put to death, that sort of thing. Right wing radio is hardly known for it's moderation, or taste. Yet it is widely considered not only one of the biggest public relations coups for the right and the republican party, but also one of the keys to their success over the past 10 years.

Maybe, and I'm not speaking about the specific quote in question, but rather more in a general sense-- what we need to do is display more balls about who we are and what we believe, not less.

I think the author of this thread (who, it seems, posted it and ran) is 100% on the wrong track.

[__Inanna__]

239. WoooooooooooooW

I never expected all your responses, and what varied responses. Some positive (read nice), more not so positive, but that's OK. Such is the nature of the Internet. To the few who were kind in your replies, thank you.

I admit, I didn't communicate my message very clearly (when I get emotional, I tend not to do that), but several mentioned the central issue, which is to frame things in a way that will achieve desired results. I am not saying your comments about the definition of a parasite were not correct, but I am saying that if I, a Democrat, had a negative visceral reaction/perception based on what I heard on Air America, that the right *could* feel the same way. And the right *could* vote based on those feelings. We sure know they didn't vote based on the facts. (To those of you who don't care what the right thinks, may I remind you that the right doesn't care what the world thinks? I think both positions display an arrogance.) What I also failed to mention, my bad, was that a play was also discussed called "letting go of God," or somesuch on the show, as well. Overall, I was left with the feeling that liberals are a bunch of pro-abortion, God hating people (as distinguished from pro-choice, tolerant people).

My basic premise, and what I would like to get across, is that in spite of facts and figures (in this case being technically correct about a fetus being a parasite), I think bridging the chasm between the right and left, or winning elections going forward, may well be a function of successful marketing and public relations. This means that no matter how stupid you think someone is (i.e. a * voter in a red state), you find a way to not say that and to say something positive. In the process, you deliver the real message, which is positively spun to reflect our more moral values. If it means using different language, then that's what it means. To a lot of people, perception IS reality, and they vote that way. Ok, my two follow-up cents.

[Kahutec]

240. fetus

fetus definition - an unborn human in the later stages of development showing the main recognizable features of the mature human.

[Hamlette]

241. how do you propose to communicate with "religious right wingnuts already

want Armageddon to come?"

Actually, the fetus IS a parasite. Read Roe v Wade. There is a balancing test between the rights of the mother and the fetus until the fetus is capable of living on its own.

It's the whole foundation of the law on abortion.

We can't talk to these idiots. I'm sick of trying. I'm gonna tell the truth. If you don't want to, fine. But I'm guessing it won't get better.

I think things will realign. Hopefully. When America sees that it has more in common with the Middle East than it does with Europe. And aligning with the Middle East will only bring about a larger war.

I think we might be saying "gee, the French have a enviable life style. Why are we dissing on them?"

[sangh0]

244. It's not about communicating w/religious right wingnuts

It's about not turning others against us with such tactless remarks.

For one thing, I really doubt Jews, who have a long history of being portrayed as "parasites", are going to have any warm associations with the word. You can argue that they shouldn't have a negative reaction because this is a completely different issue, but that's an awfully poor argument to someone who grew up listening to their parents stories of being imprisoned in a death camp because they were considered to be "parasites"

I don't see how calling fetuses "parasites" helps us defend abortion rights. And I don't see where anyone in this thread, yourself included, defends using this statement because of the way it helps us defend abortion rights.

[cry baby]

252. We are not trying to communicate w/ the right wing-nuts anyway.

Aren't we trying to communicate our ideas to the middle, the swing voters. You can still tell the truth, just in a more palitable way. We don't hve to sound brutal. We are smarter than they are - let's try to find words that will win us elections so we can keep our rights intact.

P.S. does anyone actually read new posts in such a long thread?

[Bush was AWOL]

245. Stupid comment by the "guy"

I approve of free speech, but if someone said this in front of me I'd think they were a disgusting asshole, and someone I don't want to be associated with.

[Geek_Girl]

247. The Guy had it all wrong it's Not fetus'

That are parasites its teenagers.

Just Kidding

[Kahutec]

248. parasites

I was thinking the same thing! Kids become parasites after they are born!

[da_chimperor]

249. I can't say I approve of his terminology

but the left has to have some nutballs just as the right does, only not nearly as many :D The only difference is the nutballs on the right are in the national media spotlight. They're more fashionable. I think Falwell saying we should 'blow them away in the name of the lord' is just as far out there as calling a fetus a 'parasite'.

[__Inanna__]

250. News Flash

I have read your posts and have enough information to formulate a pretty good opinion of why we lost this election. I already shared in my previous post of today what I think can be done to move forward and actually win elections, but now that I have had to time to read EACH post, I have a few other thoughts.

First, to all of you who expected me to address this thread on your schedule, sorry, I posted it and had other things to do and didn't get around to it until today. Is there a rule against this? And as all of you have the right to free speech, SO DO I! And I expect to exercise it without the majority of you jumping on me and saying things like, Good Riddance, when you don't even know me.

Second, several of you are very unkind (to put it mildly) and assume facts not in evidence. Would you be this way sitting in the same room with me? I doubt it. It's amazing what a keyboard will do to some people's manners.

Third, I thought liberals were supposed to be tolerant and compassionate. Most of the replies in this thread are anything but. I will keep voting for Democrats, but I won't be having any of you over for coffee, anytime soon.

If you want to "alert" on me or ban me for exercising my right to free speech, feel free to do so. That's your right too. And now forgive me if I don't bother to check back here for any further comments.

__Inanna__

[nomatrix]

257. Welcome to DU

Were you listening to an archived program? I didn't think she was live during the week.

"Some guy" is pretty vague. Is he an authority? To say he was a dem with an opinion or what the rest of what he was saying had any value, no just some guy. Did he call in?

Really sorry that you didn't include a link to "some guy" or that you did some backup check on what you post because that is your responsibility.

If you choose to be the "liberal thought" police, you'd better bring some evidence of the crime. If you said it was Jannine who made the comment, we know who she is. She is a stand-up commediene. It could have been part of her routine. "Some guy" could have been a stand-up too, but since your post was so vague, I choose not to take his comments any further.

What others did here was an example of providing a link to the fact check. Thank you, I didn't know that information. If I didn't see a definition link, I would have googled it.

Do your kids ever say to you, "what does this mean?" & you say "look it up?"
It's a good idea to look it up rather than trust someone elses definition, because it could be entirely wrong. A lot of time and energy gets wasted being pissed about nothing.

Randi Rhodes, to me, might have been a better choice on archived AA. She talked last week, about the US using napalm in Iraq. I don't like word napalm. Bad memories of Vietnam. Why would the US be using a defoliate in the desert?

http://therandirhodesshow.com/

Warning Aljazeera link, not alway a reliable source.

http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/news_service/middle_east_full_story.asp?service_id=5875

Napalm gas used by US in Fallujah-witnesses

No matter what, there will alway be other sides to the story. Sometimes, like in Vietnam, napalm was used to uncover the VC tunnels and hiding places. If a veteran ragged on me, I have to expect it. Napalm may have saved his life, his platoon, his unit. Who am I to judge? I didn't think it through, and it gave the vet a chance to share his view.

This is what this country was suppose to be about. Free speech. If I change that, I am no longer a liberal, no longer a democrat, no longer an American. I refuse to surrender who I am, for who? Some guy? The neocons? (They are the "napalm" of their party leaving a burning memory for the next election.)
Sorry, but I disagree with you there. I don't think we need to "start framing" what we believe in. It is there. In the constitution, already framed.
I do not believe we need to have more in common with the right, we need to have less. So there is no confusion.
Let them take responsibility for what they believe in and have pursued.
I believe it is our responsibility, to hold them accountable and not back down.

That is just this liberal from MA opinion. American history was hammered in real life, in my home, not read from a history book. I will always be grateful for being raised in New England.

In am glad you shared your views, and hope you come back again.

[Q]

258. I thought liberals were suposed to be blah, blah, blah...

Perhaps you're having a hard time here because of your stereotypical bullshit...labeling a group of people because of something one person said?

You also don't seem to understand that many of us don't give a crap what the 'right' thinks of us or what we say. That you seem to care shows where your loyalty resides.

Hit and run threads are a dime a dozen these days. And as expected...you don't have a strrong argument and you're running away in the end. Trite.

[nascarblue]

260. Is that all you guys do on here is argue??

[Bridget Burke]

262. Only since the latest invasion of disrupters.

Low post count folks coming here & saying why "we" lost the election. Sounds like somebody made a tasteless remark on the radio; where's the right-wing outrage? (Aside from the stuff posted here.)

The Democrats will remain pro-choice & not abandon any other important issues because Republicans drop by & tell us we ought to do so.

[nascarblue]

259. Yeah, I agree, I'm so grateful for AAR, but "parasites"?....

...They need some help. This kind of stuff happens a lot on their show.

I love Janeane and Sam, but they're not very good DJ's. They miss cues all the time. They often manage their time with interviews badly. Janeane loses her cool too often, and too easily, and Sam can't stop stuttering.

Now this is my OPINION, so don't have a seizure on me just because we have different opinions. I still listen to them ALL THE TIME and the reason I might be a little picky is because I was a DJ for 12 years. So I notice technical "DJ" type stuff. It's not all their fault, their producer isn't very good either. I think they need someone older and more "take charge".When I want something to work out so badly, I get a bit unnerved when mistakes are made that might cause them to lose listeners or drive them away.

Now AAR on a whole, is a total godsend and I listen to it religiously. I love Randi R and Mike M. Sometimes Al isn't so great as a DJ, but he always seems to have great guests. I especially liked the U.N. interview the other day on Al's show. It was great to hear after the Cheney puppet mouthpiece Judith Miller was on C Span on Friday morning telling more lies for her White House masters.

[Q]

266. George Carlin once joked...

...that there are TWO KNOBS on the radio if you don't like something you're hearing. That is...there's a tuning knob and the off/on knob. You have the option of either turning the channel or turning it OFF.

The basic principle still applies. If you don't like what someone is saying...whether they're liberal or conservative...turn the f**king channel or turn it off.

RWingers come here on a crusade to spread their GUILT BY ASSOCIATION rhetoric instead of looking for a reasoned debate. And then they act offended when people call them on their BS.

[sangh0]

278. And Q comes along to tell us what appropriate criticism is

If you don't like it Q, you can hit ignore. No one made you read the posts. If you don't like it, take your own advice for once.

[Q]

288. Well...one could say that...

...if you don't like MY posts...then just hit ignore. You can't seem to follow your own advice. And, of course, no one 'made' you read my posts.

Who the hell are you? Champion of the oppressed? I've noticed how you go out of your way to defend crazy claims made by those doing little more than starting flame wars over comments by some 'lefty'.

Perhaps you need a hobby?

[cleofus1]

261. strange argument....

So some guy on a radio show calls a fetus a parasite. Somehow you think this relates to all liberals? You are using faulty logic. Not all liberals think that fetuses are parasites (I certainly don't), therefore your position is based on a false premise.
really...seriously!

[ecstatic]

263. I actually agree

I am also pro-choice, and while I see where Garafolo's guest was coming from, things like that should not be said out loud--particularly on a left/Democratic leaning public radio station.

[cleofus1]

264. open discussion is what radio is about?

My question is, what did Garafalo say in response?

[secedeeconomically]

265. I have an idea

How about the next time anyone makes a statement, they get your ok. Would you be happy with that?

[tngledwebb]

267. One isolated example, from JG show, doesn't mean much,

especially since the religious/cultural/moral divide issue has been created by MSM to divert attention from the election fraud.

And remember- the fascist bastards who have taken over this country illegally in two presidential elections would have not the least compunction about planting their own moles throughout the media, esp. on Air America, in order to defame and demean liberal ideology.

[UdoKier]

269. I've heard people say that, too. It's offensive, however...

it is not a "left" position. There are many repukes who support abortion rights and there are a significant minority of anti-abortion democrats.

To me left-right issues are economic and labor-oriented. Civil liberties issues are up and down on the chart, I believe...

[leesa]

272. It is a correct relationship. A fetus has a parasitic relationship to

its host.

[RetroLounge]

280. Oooh, this thread is bound to bring out the X-tian nuts

oops, I see it already has...

RL

[PATRICK]

284. The solidarity that comes

from all us being victims, enslaved, betrayed and dead. Whatever your stand on fetus abortions at any stage the gamut of the born dying is expanding swiftly and it is for decisions of abstract profit and private restricted benefits. The population and the world being as it is, a planet-wide abortion of our species and many others is a fairly larger concern than citizen choice- which in any event is disappearing like the carrier pigeon.

Cannibal capitalism is becoming dominated by its own worst renegades whose view of civil government is not libertarian so much as a nouveau royalty thinking the human race is a cash cow. The evidence is that ideology no longer is anything but a commodity being stolen, locked away, disappeared. The same with life, individualism.

Morality and ideology and social systems could be open to healthy debate, but they are not. The truth will not win. The best will not win. The temptation in frustration is, as it was during the Revolution with the Loyalists, to go the route of civil war among the suckers. Save your frustrations and struggles for a fair democratic process on a level democratic playing among educated peers. Tyranny thrives on division. So do lies.

Build coalitions, even non political, non ideological powerhouses to redeem the American way or we argue about nothing and when the ship sinks the silence will win.

What we share. Those are the values we fight for, the living world we try to make better. That is progress, not ivory tower socialism or entrenched natural law roadblockers.

We will all hang together or separately. The power elite represents NONE of our rights or aspirations or vital needs. They will get us and your children all killed. They will do it choked happily on vice.

[Bridget Burke]

286. Do Right-Wing radio commentators ever say anything tasteless?

Are the Republicans ever made to account for the garbage broadcast every day--supporting their policies?

[Kathryn7]

289. Hitler called the Jews "parasites" to dehumanize the Jews in the minds of

the Germans (Mein Kampf) The religious right is making this point when they speak of abortion as "genocide". They are using our words against us and making points. We come off as monsters when we choose this type of language. It doesn't help us at all.

[JNelson6563]

290. Well then run away and hide

if your so afraid of your image.


Buh-bye. :hi:

[hyphenate]

291. Anyone who voted for GWB

has completely alienated me, and likely at least 50,000 fellow DUers. We worry way too much what the right thinks of us, and WAY too much about being politically correct, regardless of which message we want to convey. Why do we allow the Repukes to do most of the framing of the debates on issues in this country?

DU is home to MANY different religious groups, different economic backgrounds, different races, different colors, different philosophies, different and varying amounts of intelligence AND education, and moreover, we are more and more the party of inclusion.

Repukes don't like the fact that many minority groups will side with Democrats, not because they want their votes, but because a very large part of the right is filled with bigotry, intolerance and a sense of superiority. The right also has far more people who are as selfish as one can possibly be, and egocentric and self-absorbed yuppies (or former yuppies) who have nothing but disdain for anything we do, even to the point of calling us weaklings because we express concern and compassion for many who can't speak for themselves.

The right took up the anti-choice stance a long time ago. Yes--anti-choice. I will NEVER consider their tripe as being pro-life, because they aren't, and never have been. The majority of those on the right who are anti-choice chose one element to pull out and show off at every possible opportunity their "concern" and their hypocritical offensive to take that "choice" away from us. It is far, far better for us to look at their stance and crash their straw man arguments to the ground--pummeling them for being anti-choice, and use the opportunity to go on the offensive, instead of trying to defending our position. Get THEM into a defensive position and keep after THEM for having the more derisive of the two parties.

WE, as Democrats, liberals, Green party members, and anyone left of centre need to STOP APOLOGIZING. We're not in the wrong. We're in the place we need to be. THEY are in the wrong: wrong on choice, wrong on a secular government, wrong on promoting their radical religious beliefs and getting into our faces in that arena, wrong on just about EVERY SINGLE ISSUE and DEBATE in this country.

Why are we letting them take away our rights? Why are we letting them stay on the offensive, while we supposedly defend a "weaker" position? NO! Not anymore. I have said it before, but we need to go on the attack. WE need to attack them for their screwed up positions and beliefs, and WE need to show that not only are we far more worthy of being in charge, but that we would be the RESPONSIBLE party in charge.

No more framing the debate on abortion as whether their stance is right and ours is wrong. No more: the connotations alone of pro-choice or "pro-life" have got to give way to a new paradigm, and a new way of looking at the whole issue--we are PRO-CHOICE and they are ANTI-CHOICE. And they, by the way, are also PRO-DEATH, NOT pro-life. Regardless of whether we're talking babies or adults, they're in favor of the death penalty which on the grander scale shows that they are hypocritical assholes who talk out of both sides of their mouths.

I really don't give a shit anymore about what the "right" thinks of me and my positions, and I know a lot more people here at DU have reached that same point. We are NOT repuke light. We are a recognizable political body that respects the opinions of all who make up our party, that has not only responsibility and compassion for ALL members of our party, that wants to make sure that some activities of the people in this country are not subjected to governmental "approval" and has, at its heart, a finer and more mature outlook on the way of the world. THEY, on the other hand, want to take subjects like sex, homosexual relationships, women's health issues, and other such activities and stifle them all by making them all illegal and or regulated. What the FUCK is wrong with them? I don't honestly know. But they DO need to be attacked, and we must NOT let up on the offensive. There are too many people out there that are as ignorant as a cockroach, and they are being controlled by the right because we have never taken up the cause we need to take up. They consider this the holy crusade of their lifetimes--we must make it anything BUT a "holy" crusade.

There is nothing fair in this world and there never will be. But I'll be damned if I let the right control me in any way, regardless of any other relevant issue in the meantime. The best defense we can mount now is a strong offense. And hell be damned to any repuke who stands in our way!

[Dora]

299. IGNORE THIS POST: It's bait.

This poster isn't a liberal, a progressive, or a Democrat.

S/he says, "While I embrace the values of the left..."

That's a giveaway.

Yo, _Inanna_: if you don't believe in the values of the left, then WTF are you doing here?

In the mood to stir the pot?

[Arkana]

300. Then that's why we need to continue fighting

The wingnuts have beaten us over the head with everything--what's the use of trying to sound "proper" to them now? There is nothing that we can do without them turning and running to the "librul" media with it.

[Skinner]

301. I'm locking.

The person who started this thread was a troll.