Offering constructive criticism to the social cripples in our midst since early 2005.

[SlaveNoMore]

sebastian_dangerfield
Notwithstanding the cosmic wrongness of the fiduciary analogy, sex is not the same as any other human activity for which a person may be held responsible. As you and I both know, once you hit 14, its a biological urge that can all but overwhelm ones life. To hold women hostage to a quirk of nature (not getting that Y chromosome you and I did) is not the same as holding them accountable when they drive drunk.

Stop being stupid. And this is where we concur on the right-wing anti-sex-ed types being stupid too.

This is where the need for progressive interpretation of rights runs headlong into conservative rigidity. I am staunchly social Darwinist on 99% of these matters. I don't agree with many govt social safety nets. BUT, I think progressive policies which try to equal the rights and burdens of the sexes are fair and proper in a free market society. We can't have a fair playing field where one side pays a draconian penalty for a biological urge (or broken condom) and the other gets to walk away from it (I suggest you not even attempt to make the argument that are equally responsible because they have to pay paternity... thats a dead lock loser for innumerable reasons).

Drink some more coffee and make more sense.

I can appreciate what I know your comeback will be - "people must play the cards they're dealt... women included." I agree with that on all things but reprdocutive rights. I think such a belief would keep women out of productive jobs, thus holding back our society and our markets. Nobody benefits where half the workforce can be taken out of commission because of a biological urge or malfunction of birth control.

This is the scotch discussion, You're missing a lot.

Again, you're not anti-woman. You're rigidly libertarian.

I tread Fed/Libert

The pro-lifers, however, are absolutely, 100%, card carrying anti-woman.

Lastly, you have to understand how noxious your argument sounds coming from a man. The GOP seems to believe that being a chickenhawk is OK, that its wrong to have a rule which requires a publi official go to war before he can send others there. Academically, technically, they're right. But that will never change the public's low perception of a chickenhawk. His warmongering will always make others disgusted. For this same reason, your high minded academic justifications for policies which are regressive toward women will always come off disingenuous and chickenhawkish. You and I will never truly understand the abortion debate, so the last thing we should be doing is telling those who can and do understand it as a result of their anatomy what they can or can't do with their bodies.

You're free to do it anyway, of course, but understand that, to women, it will always look pretty goddamned hypocritical.

Nice soapbox there. You hit the Gold, the Silver, the Bronze and the trash can - all in one spew. Congrats.