TV’s Frink said:
darth_ender said:
Pro-life is a distortion? Are you telling me that those who choose the label ‘pro-life’ are not accurately in favor of life? And let me ask here, how many of the pro-choice crowd have said at least once in a recent discussion about abortion that those who oppose it are somehow opposed to women (i.e. War on Women, want to keep women in the kitchen, etc.)? Is that not a distortion?
If you say you are pro-life, and you care about more than ridding the world of abortions, I believe you. But I never hear about solutions from the vocal side of the pro-life argument. All I hear is “ban all abortions” and I hear nothing about what comes next. Those are the people who are distorting the term “pro-life” when it really just means “anti-abortion.”
Perhaps this is because you only witness pro-life crowds on the news shouting their opposition to abortion. Have you considered the charitable work that numerous conservatives do? Perhaps it’s not in government social programs, but in local charities, churches, and other contributions. Have you considered the private organizations that contribute to the health and well-being of Americans of all demographics? Small government does not necessarily mean opposition to kindness. In fact, numerous studies show that religious people tend to be most generous.
https://www.americamagazine.org/content/unconventional-wisdom/blue-states-get-dinged-almanac-american-philanthropy
And yes, I’ve seen articles that disagree, particularly those that throw out every penny that is donated to religious organizations because, oh, that’s just piety, not real generosity. I’m also aware of those studies about children in day cares. But read the above article, which shows that generosity abounds among the religious and bear in mind that there are opposing studies.
Also, consider the motivation for conservative policies. Whether you agree or not, most Republicans believe that when the wealthy thrive, all Americans thrive; they believe that they are helping the poor when they help the rich. Considering that most of the poorer white socioeconomic class is conservative, you might want to give that more consideration. Furthermore, conservatives believe that the people should be more independent, not as an act of cruelty but as a means of fostering strength. Yes, they may be narrow-minded and not recognize that some people cannot help their condition, but most conservatives believe that anyone can make it in this country, and that some might have to work harder at it, but ultimately will be stronger for it.
It’s not a matter of caring little for the poor. It’s a matter of how they feel one should care for the poor.
TV’s Frink said:
moviefreakedmind said:
As for pro-life being a rightwing distortion, I don’t necessarily see how. It’s technically accurate.
The right does not support life as much as they are against abortion. Hence anti-abortion being more accurate.
Here’s another example - Republicans (in general) favor tax breaks that favor the rich while pulling government support from the poor. They care about making sure a fetus comes to term, but then don’t care at all what happens after it is born. That’s not pro-life either, that’s anti-abortion.
Is that not an oversimplification? Is there really this belief that Republicans are just out to punish the poor? Even if you oppose fiscal conservatism, it seems wrong to me to ascribe motives like not caring how the child fares after birth. I am more moderate than most conservatives and favor more social programs than your average Republican, but nevertheless, are you not generalizing that most who oppose abortion and favor individuals and families taking more personal responsibility for their economic well-being are really “not caring” about how the child does after birth?
Sure, I’m generalizing, but you said it yourself - you favor more social programs than average Republicans. The Republican/Conservative motto, and correct me if I’m wrong, is as limited a government as possible. People who are truly pro-life should want to limit unwanted births as much as possible (including sex-ed and contraception, not just abstinence only) and should be as passionate (if not more so) about helping the needy as stopping abortion. Do they only want to stop the poor single raped mother from having an abortion, or do they also want to help her after she gives birth?
I agree, the view is narrow-minded once again. The fear is that allowing for such things gives the government too much say in how to raise a child or allows people to justify premarital sex. They are not opposing it so that they can force women to have babies. They are opposing it because they believe they are promoting a more moral nation.
That said, I see the reality of it as: a) people will have sex; b) the more resultant pregnancies will lead to more abortions, therefore; c) we should do what we can to limit unwanted pregnancies so we can avoid abortion. I wish everyone shared my morals, but since they don’t, I’d love to do anything I can to limit abortion.
I thought that if a group chooses to identify by a certain term, that is their right to choose. I am pro-life. Most conservatives, even the overzealous Evangelical brand, care a great deal about people from conception until death. I’ve seen stereotypes in this thread about how every conservative belief is motivated by sexism or racism or socioeconomic superiority. Most of them are good people who think they are doing what is best for the general populace. I get just as irritated at them when I hear stupid generalizations about liberals.
Perhaps I’m wrong, but all I hear overzealous Evangelical brand of conservatives doing is trying to end every single abortion regardless of impact or context, and putting way more emphasis on that then what to do with all the unwanted babies.
I attended a General Conference for my church in person at Salt Lake City more than a decade ago and was surprised to see that, amid those who were vocally opposed to my church’s doctrines were those protesting Mormon abortion policies! I could hardly believe it. It turns out, it was because of the exceptions we allow. Yes, there are those who are extreme. There are anti-abortion terrorists who will shoot up abortion clinics. Do they represent the whole? Hardly. Many pro-life advocates are reasonable people. How often have you watched an anti-abortion protest on the news where the protester said, “I want to donate to more charities so I can help raise those unwanted children”? Somehow, I doubt that’s the focus of those protesters or the news agencies that cover the protest. But if you bother to look elsewhere, you will find that there are crisis pregnancy centers devoted to helping women seek alternatives to abortions, enrolling them in social programs and connecting them with post-partum support.
http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/07/24/538556088/crisis-pregnancy-centers-help-pregnant-women-enroll-in-medicaid
