At 07:26 AM 5/17/2005 -0700, Nick wrote:
We have discussed numerous restrictions on war (even the most red-blooded
conservative doesn't believe that the US should choose a war without
restriction).On the other hand, we still don't have any examples
of the liberal Democrats supporting restrictions on abortion - and I
even made the question multiple choice!
To use the language I used about war... there are plenty of liberals who
have
a moral presumption against abortion. There are plenty of liberals who know
that it is a terrible and sad thing. There are plenty who are doing a great
deal to make abortion rare. I believe those things. They are part of
having
a consistent ethic of life.
Fine then, Nick, then answer the challenge!Name one type of abortion
that Liberal Democrats have consistently failed to defend from restriction!
Allow me to provide a list of suggestions:
-no public funds should be used to fund abortions
-Catholic hospitals should not be required to perform abortions
-minors should be required to notify their parents or a judge before
getting an abortion
-there should be a mandatory waiting period for an abortion
-partial-birth/dilation and extraction abortions should be prohibited
-abortions after viability outside the womb should be prohibited
-gender-selection abortions should be prohibited
If you cannot come up with one, then I think that you owe Dan M. an apology
for your completely over-the-top reaction to his statement that The
standard liberal Democratic position is to defend all abortions without
question. Either the standard liberal Democratic position has been to
defend all abortions against restriction, or else it has been to support at
least one restriction on abortion.
By rights, Dan M. and I are giving you a gift by defining the standard
liberal Democratic position in such extremist, absolutist, terms. To
disprove this thesis, you need only provide one, single, example - so how
about it?If this proposition is such extremist, strawman, hogwash,
surely the one, measely example you need to demonstrate it as such is
readily available to you, is it not?
Now, hobgoblins, that's the conservatives' cue to tell me I'm living in a
fantasy land if I think that abortion can be made rare. Pink unicorns and
all
that.
What utter mularkey Nick. Or to use your language: Extremist strawman
hogwash. That is neither the conservative position, nor much of anybody in
within the conservative movement. What do you think that I and so many
other pro-lifers are working for if not to make abortion rare???The
central motivating ideal of pro-life conservatives is precisely that
abortion can made rare!
At 07:16 AM 5/17/2005 -0700, Nick wrote:
Is it fair for me to say that you are trying to stake out a *very* nuanced
position here?
No.
Nice cheap-shot taken by stripping all of the relevant quotations out of
your reply.Shall we review the parts you conveniently snipped?
If the standard liberal Democratic position is to oppose every one
of those restrictions on abortion, then isn't it true that they are
defending all abortions from any legalized restriction?
I suppose it does. But that is dramatically different from defending
abortion.
Your message appears to make a fine distinction between defending all
abortions vs. defending abortion. If that isn't nunaced - something
along the lines of it depends what the meaning of 'is' is - then you have
a very peculiar definition of nuanced.
JDG
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
