nemorathwald (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
nemorathwald) wrote2005-08-10 02:17 pm
nemorathwald) wrote2005-08-10 02:17 pm
Entry tags:
Corny Planned Parenthood Cartoon
I was referred to this over-the-top Planned Parenthood promotional cartoon by Christians outraged that it depicts a superhero killing them for nothing more than expressing anti-choice beliefs. Of course it's stylized kiddie-violence committed on inhuman zombie protesters in an obviously unrealistic heroes vs. villians setting, so it's not endorsing violence against real pro-lifers. But it's still the corniest heavy-handed preachy superhero story I've ever seen, even compared to Bibleman. Unlike Bibleman, this is mitigated by the fact that it doesn't take itself seriously, but I still can't decide whether to laugh or cringe.
I said some things in my response to![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
zifferent's comment that I think should be appended to this entry, so I deleted my comment and added it here:
I support abortion rights. But this cartoon demonstrates the communications deficits that have resulted in pro-choice making so little headway in public opinion in the past few decades. The number of Americans who are actually as unthinking and reactionary against abortion as this cartoon depicts is surprisingly small. Granted, that small number is the loudest group. A surprisingly large number of moderate Americans would be much more pro-choice if it were debated differently.
The pro-choice movement is concerned with women's rights. They should be. But to focus on this one vitally-important value to the exclusion of concerns about the life in the womb leaves the pro-lifers as the only ones talking about the life in the womb, and they win that argument in the minds of Americans because they go mostly un-answered. We tend to cede a victory on that to the pro-lifers and try to make it seem that it doesn't matter whether the fetus is a person.
People prioritize whatever it is they feel has hurt them personally, so highly that they don't listen to other people to understand what drives them. I know I've done this at times. This accounts for the reputation of activists as self-righteous scolding memebots lacking humor or perspective. Too often we're so fanatically fixated on choice-- driven by our intense fear of how disastrous it would be to lose it -- that we'd like the question to be completely ignored, whether a fetus is entitled to rights. But the facts in that question are on our side! Pro-choice needs to scientifically address the question of whether a fetus is a person. It unequivocally is not at least until the twenty-eighth to thirtieth week-- the third trimester. I think two reasons pro-choice doesn't win the battle for hearts and minds as much as it could is that we also indulge ourselves in religious beliefs about souls, and when a baby is wanted we go ahead and indulge the mother-to-be in the idea that her baby-to-be already is a baby. This cuts the legs out from under the pro-choice position.
I said some things in my response to
zifferent's comment that I think should be appended to this entry, so I deleted my comment and added it here:I support abortion rights. But this cartoon demonstrates the communications deficits that have resulted in pro-choice making so little headway in public opinion in the past few decades. The number of Americans who are actually as unthinking and reactionary against abortion as this cartoon depicts is surprisingly small. Granted, that small number is the loudest group. A surprisingly large number of moderate Americans would be much more pro-choice if it were debated differently.
The pro-choice movement is concerned with women's rights. They should be. But to focus on this one vitally-important value to the exclusion of concerns about the life in the womb leaves the pro-lifers as the only ones talking about the life in the womb, and they win that argument in the minds of Americans because they go mostly un-answered. We tend to cede a victory on that to the pro-lifers and try to make it seem that it doesn't matter whether the fetus is a person.
People prioritize whatever it is they feel has hurt them personally, so highly that they don't listen to other people to understand what drives them. I know I've done this at times. This accounts for the reputation of activists as self-righteous scolding memebots lacking humor or perspective. Too often we're so fanatically fixated on choice-- driven by our intense fear of how disastrous it would be to lose it -- that we'd like the question to be completely ignored, whether a fetus is entitled to rights. But the facts in that question are on our side! Pro-choice needs to scientifically address the question of whether a fetus is a person. It unequivocally is not at least until the twenty-eighth to thirtieth week-- the third trimester. I think two reasons pro-choice doesn't win the battle for hearts and minds as much as it could is that we also indulge ourselves in religious beliefs about souls, and when a baby is wanted we go ahead and indulge the mother-to-be in the idea that her baby-to-be already is a baby. This cuts the legs out from under the pro-choice position.
no subject
no subject
Egads!
Ironically, it's a "pro-choice" message that's basic theme is that anything other than what planned parenthood believes is an invalid choice. Can't they be happy believing what they believe and respectfully disagree with the other side?
This is the same kind of feces piled on by the ultra-conservative right-wing christians. The only difference is lack of a pro-choice bible. But hey who needs a bible when you have such blind unquestioning infallible faith in your cause.
Gaaah! General rant about idealogues!
Both sides have forgotten what they were fighting for and it seems now are only fighting to win. Competition is a stupid reason for ruining people's lives.
How would you like to know that I'm pro-life and just because you don't believe in God doesn't invalidate my beliefs that a child is a child no matter how small (please, forgive me Dr. Seuss.) As I believe that a fetus is a child , he/she has a soul and one person doesn't have the right to take another's life.
On the other hand, I don't think Roe vs. Wade should be overturned. Confused? Read on.
I understand that you may or may not believe in my God, consequently you have a different belief system than I have. Which means that you live your life by a different set of mores and rules. In turn you think abortion is all right.
That's okay with me, because I feel like I don't have the right to force my beliefs on you. Particularly, a religious set of beliefs. Which, by the way, is why I don't entirely agree with the entrenched Right to Life forces.
For instance, before Prohibition, several tee-totaling Evangelical Christian groups decided for everyone else that they can't drink either. The truth is there was a major Anti-Catholic sentiment at the time, and Catholics at the time were known to be "evil drinkers." Prohibition was aimed squarely at Catholics. In essence though, they foisted their religious belief system upon everyone else by law. Government played too close religion and everyone got burned.
Re: Gaaah! General rant about idealogues!
Re: Gaaah! General rant about idealogues!