home

Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will Prevail'

By Jeralyn, Section Civil Liberties
Posted on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 05:02:07 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

President Bush spoke to anti-abortion activists who were protesting the Roe v. Wade decision today, telling them "We Will Prevail."

President George W. Bush on Monday told opponents of abortion their views would eventually prevail and urged them to work to convince more Americans of "the rightness of our cause." On the 33rd anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court decision that established federal abortion rights, Bush addressed activists by telephone from Manhattan, Kansas, and called their goals noble.

"We, of course, seek common ground where possible," he said. "We're working to persuade more of our fellow Americans of the rightness of our cause, and this is a cause that appeals to the conscience of our citizens and is rooted in America's deepest principles -- history tells us that with such a cause, we will prevail."

Democrats, take heed. The writing is on the wall. Do not confirm Judge Sam Alito.

Americans may not be listening. According to the latest poll,

The CNN/USA Today/Gallup survey also found that only about one in three Americans believe President George W. Bush's conservative candidate would vote, as critics fear, to reverse the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.

Why do they bury their heads in the sand?

[Graphic created exclusively for TalkLeft by CL.]

< Report: Fitz Investigating White House Iraq Group and Niger Docs in PlameGate | Bloggies Finals >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will Prevail' | 43 comments (43 topical)
    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#1)
    by Punchy on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 05:49:47 PM EST
    Democrats, take heed. The writing is on the wall. Do not confirm Judge Sam Alito. Uh...JM...we don't really have that choice, do we? Filibuster if we can, but the Senate will be nuked in the process. It seems almost stunning--no, I'll say outrageous--that only ~33% understand he'll overturn R v. W, and quickly. Makes you wonder how in the world the other ~67% of the people can tie their shoes and turn left on the arrow...

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 06:02:21 PM EST
    You can fax your Senators about the Alito nomination for free here.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#3)
    by Sailor on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 06:54:47 PM EST
    Punchy, then nuke the senate! Make the rethugs overthrow 200 years of free speech in the senate, then throw every obstructionist rule of order in their face, stop ALL business and tell the people why. We are already under a virtual dictatorship, make the repubs state it out loud. We (and by we I mean We The People, not dems) will either lose big or have our democracy back. Netro, thanks for the link. I'll be using it.l

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 06:57:17 PM EST
    Once again we can tell the election is not far away. Its funny that when an election isn't on the books he never mentions abortion once. Its like they only use it as an election issue to con people into voting for them. How could that be?

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#5)
    by jimcee on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 07:14:05 PM EST
    Even if the Alito nomination goes through, which it will, abortion will not be outlawed by the Supreme Court but instead bumped back to the state level and the states will deal with it through the legislative process. If Congress made a federal law to guarantee abortion rights then it would be the law of the land the way laws were meant to be made, legislatively not judicially. I would say that abortion should be legal (with exceptions) and rare as President Clinton said. I also think that the Supreme Court overstepped its authority when it found abortion rights extra-Constitutionally. Abortion rights are, or should be, a legislative matter decided by the elected representatives of the people. The court in 1973 created a federal law that didn't exist and that was wrong. In Great Britain the law was decided by national debate and Parliment and there is nothing like the controversy over abortion there that there is here. In my opinion it is less about whether a woman should be able to obtain an abortion legally (she should be able to), but about how that law was made. It is the Legislative branch's responsiblility to make law and the Judiciary's to decide whether that law is constitutionally exceptable not the other way around. I also believe that the Left's strong support of the Supreme Court's decision and its embrace of the activist pro-abortion movement drove the religious folks into the arms of the Republicans to the detriment of the Democrats and the Dems have been paying the price electorially ever since. Either way a Justice Alito won't be the end of the world.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#6)
    by mjvpi on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 07:46:37 PM EST
    It looks to me like Rove/Bush are really scared. They are pulling out the lines from the last election. Abortion to get the Evangelicals in line. All of the terror talk from the Pes/VP/Rove. I'm waiting for the gay bashing to start. All of the talking heads have the same talking points. I smell fear. Make sure that you remember to call your representatives and let them know how you feel. They are trying to marginalize the blogs. They will have a harder time if it matches the sound of their constituents.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#7)
    by Sailor on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 08:27:14 PM EST
    jimcee, I can almost see your point, (and I read your post several times), but I think the court's finding was on a constitutional matter, not a legislative matter. If anti-choice folks want to change the law, be honest and try to change the constitution, just like you want to do with gay marriage.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#8)
    by BigTex on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 08:29:54 PM EST
    Count the votes. Kennedy + the liberal 4 = 5 votes to sustain Roe. Alito isn't a direct threat to abortion. Also, even if Roe was to be overruled, the question is what will replace the decision? That question can't be answered until we see who the next Justice is (not counting Alito), but jimcer is probablly right in that it will become a 10th Amendment states right issue. All the chicken little routine is accomplishing is to show how shallow the reasoning on the left is on this issue.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 10:29:42 PM EST
    How do they get away with comparing OBL and liberals, when OBL has far more in common with conservatives? The right wing has raised projectionism to an art form.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#10)
    by jimcee on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 06:42:44 AM EST
    Sailor, Big Tex said it much more succintly than I did. (I shouldn't write after a long day of travel). Simply put, The Supreme Court created a Federal law where none existed before and that is not how the Constitution is written. The Supreme Court is supposed to determine the Constitutionality of exsisting law that is created through the legislative process.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#11)
    by Lora on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 07:33:16 AM EST
    They will confirm Alito. They're afraid of the RNC spin machine, and afraid that standing against Alito is the equivalent of committing political suicide.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#12)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 09:02:40 AM EST
    Is there anything more odd than men arguing about what reproductive rights women should have? Abortion can't go back to the states anymore than slavery, poll taxes, separate but equal, and on and on. It's been a national right for more than thirty years. Sending it back to the states and you will assuredly see a return of the coathanger and the back alley -- metaphorically and, still, literally. Depending on your economic status, of course. The better off will still be able to skirt any prohibition easily, but, as usual, the less well off will be the ones who are really affected.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#13)
    by Edger on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 09:20:36 AM EST
    Dadler: Is there anything more odd than men arguing about what reproductive rights women should have? I've always found it very odd that any men can be so cripplingly insecure as to crave power over women. I suppose they are terrified by any except subservient slaves.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 09:25:51 AM EST
    Hilzoy at Obsidian Wings did a fantastic post on Moral Values in Theory and Practice.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#15)
    by Edger on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 09:53:09 AM EST
    Jesurgislac, thanks. It is sickening isn't it?

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#16)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 10:58:04 AM EST
    Is there anything more odd than men arguing about what reproductive rights women should have?
    The old standby. Is there anything more odd than the franchised arguing about what voting rights disenfranchised felons should have? Is there anything more odd than non-sex offenders arguing about what privacy rights convicted sex offenders should have? Is there anything more odd than non-murderers arguing about what rights to LWOP murderers should have? Is there anything more odd than citizens over the age of 21 arguing about what rights minors should have? Etc., etc., etc.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#17)
    by roy on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 11:21:46 AM EST
    Depriving each other of rights is what democracy is all out. The Left is happy to tell people what right they have to smoke amongst consenting adults (see smoking bans for private places like bars in NYC), to drink (see MADD), to say (see campaign finance reform), to agree to in a contract (see all employment law), to be stupid about (see seat belt laws), to keep and bear (see gun control), or to do nothing about (see forcing pharmacists to dispense morning-after pills). But mention abortion, and suddenly rights are trump cards. Good, but how about a little more consistency? Fight for the right to abortions, but aknowledge my right to offer somebody only three bucks an hour to rake leaves. (I doubt any one person supports all the right-infringements I listed above, btw, but they're all significant within the larger Left)

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#18)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 12:15:51 PM EST
    Sarcastic, There is nothing in any of those comparisons that approaches the incomparable nature of the abortion issue/debate. For the most obvious examples: Adults are legally and naturally responsible for children, and HAVE BEEN CHILDREN themselves; all people are capable of being murderers or victims of; same with sex offenders and felons and franchised or disenfranchised voters. The very nature of the debate -- the physical burden the mother bears -- renders the debate unequal FOREVER. It cannot be altered. And it certainly puts men in an incomparable position, as well. And there will never be an easy answer. Like there are for some things in life. They're what make it hard to be a rational creature. Roy, Smoking in public places as a public health issue is certainly not a partisan issue where it's been curtailed by law. Not enough smokers to make it so. Not that I agree with it, but I don't see partisan left in that issue at all. Or with drinking. I mean, come on, booze is the NATIONAL PASTIME OF RECREATIONAL DRUGS in America. And I doubt MADD, of all organizations is tilted to the left, unless drunk driving somehow has killed a disproportionate number of lefty kids. And is labor law some bad thing? Why would you WANT to pay someone poverty wages for a real job? So your employee has to live in a shack? Guns are readily available in America like candy. Period. There's a combination gun shop/liquor store right off interstate 8 in east county. Gun control, my as*. And pharmacists and the morning-after pill? What medication (many of them hardcore narcotics) are you going to let pharmacists pick and choose to dispense or not? Opiates? OxyContin? Anti-Psychotics? Contraceptives? There is not even a FETUS involved with the morning-after pill, which makes it all the harder for me to take this argument seriously. I'll repeat what I told Sarc, the abortion issue is, by it's very and unchangable nature, incomparable. And for that reason I leave the choice, utltimately, to those most directly involved in each case. If the man feels his wishes aren't granted or considered, the simple truth is they don't bear as much weight. Sometimes they might, sometimes they might change a woman's mind, but not always, and legal or not that won't change. In other words, for men, when it comes to having control over a pregnancy, we are forever limited by our, no pun intended, sex.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#19)
    by jondee on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 12:25:26 PM EST
    Roy - In a country in which the right has become the center and the center "the left"(thats too funny), its only natural I suppose that MADD, and the people behind smoking bans would be "the left". I would like to see you expand on this talk radio level analysis though. Gee come to think of it Marx, Goldman, Debs, MLK, did go on quite a bit about drunk driving and second hand smoke didnt they? I'd forgotten. Oh, and keep "offering people three bucks an hour to to rake leaves"(and kids a dollar) just dont be shocked if someone comes and burns them for you some night - oh, and remember to do your part to help keep our borders open if you want to keep paying "people"(or,if you prefer, parasitic excrescents) at that rate.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#20)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 12:28:01 PM EST
    Dadler, I wholeheartedly disagree, but what else is new. How about this one: Is there anything more odd than living, already-born people arguing about what right to live getting-ready-to-be-born people should have?

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#21)
    by jondee on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 12:52:23 PM EST
    Roy - People that think the way you do ie: Nothing matters but ME and MY rights, will continue to inspire Jim Brady(that red)conversions and MADD type crusaders into the unforseeable future.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#22)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 01:57:21 PM EST
    Sarc, Pleasure to debate you nonethless. Also, since the fetus is inside of a woman's body, I don't know whom else you would expect to decide whether to take the pregancy to term or not. Everyone else BUT the woman involved?

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#23)
    by Sailor on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 02:05:23 PM EST
    Simply put, The Supreme Court created a Federal law where none existed before and that is not how the Constitution is written.
    Actually the Constitution is written to say anything not specifically outlawed is legal, and/or reserved to the states. Thye found that a right to pursue happiness and be secure in your person trumped a law passed by congress or the states. They did not create a law, they just upheld the Constitution.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#24)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 02:10:32 PM EST
    Add Sarc, But that was a hell of a comeback. Took my rhetoric to the most basic level. Hope I gave you my answer as basically as I could. Good show, my fellow free American.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#25)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 02:11:50 PM EST
    Last Add Sarc, I meant to say, clearly, that your hypothetical question, "How odd is it..." was a hell of a comeback. If that weren't clear enough. I wasn't tooting my OWN horn, if that's what it sounded like. Peace.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#26)
    by roy on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 02:40:51 PM EST
    The problem is that the left thinks "rights" include the right to other people's help, property, and time. That's at odds with the "it's nobody's business" argument used to support abortion rights, because the determination of what is who's business is based on how the left wants society to look. Which reduces to "it's our business, but we don't see any reason to clamp down". The left should admit that they don't support the right to choose abortion because choice is sacred in general, they support it because they haven't identified a greater good that would be served by taking away that right. Or the left should embrace choice as a broad right, and fight to let people choose what to do with their bodies (and property) even when choosing not to help build the left's ideal society. Jodee, Jim Brady was inspired by an attempted murder, and MADD was inspired by people smashing cars into other people. Neither of those acts is a "right" in my view either. Dadler, The fact that you call a bar "public" and I call it "private" goes a long way to explain our differences. I didn't claim that the rights-infringements I listed were partisan, I claimed that there's significant support for them within the left. The right may agree with some bad ideas. ... The risk of derailing the thread is high. If anybody wants to discuss further how abortion rights relate to a general theory of rights, I'm up for it, but I won't spend any more of TL's bandwidth pointing out where liberalism is anti-liberty.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#27)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 02:42:06 PM EST
    Dadler, after I posted I thought of a slightly better one: Is there anything more odd than living, already-allowed-to-be-born people arguing about what right to live other getting-ready-to-be-born people should have? Same thing in the main, but slightly better I think. Anyway...
    since the fetus is inside of a woman's body, I don't know whom else you would expect to decide whether to take the pregancy to term or not
    Fetus or person. Object/thing or life. That is the crux of the debate. Depending on our chosen belief, we'll either be pro-choice or pro-life. Unless we choose to change our chosen belief, our pro-choice/pro-life position will not change. Why even have the discussion? Why have thread after thread on the same subject? Why is there air? (old Bill Cosby reference) Anyway, thanks for the props, I didn't think you were tooting your own horn. Peace.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#28)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 03:08:19 PM EST
    Sarc, Can't help myself, but I don't consider a fetus an object. I clearly see the living nature of the fetus. I also, however, recognize this same fetus is part of, and therefore IS, the woman's body. I'd rather spend a lot more time on preventing pregnancy in the first place, and teaching a realistic vision of parenthood, especially parenthood that happens far too soon. Props, indeed.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#29)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 03:13:16 PM EST
    Roy, Never said anything about bars at all, much less being public or private. So I'm lost there. As for significant support by liberals for the stuff you stated, I still don't get it. I addressed every point you made, even with the ones I didn't quite understand (MADD and drinking, for instance). Peace, my friend.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#30)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 03:32:14 PM EST
    Dadler, not to continue this too long, but, what the heck is "living nature?" Do you mean a fetus is life, like a person, or a part of living object, like a finger? And no, I don't think we can choose to believe a fetus is somewhere in between, because, imo, that is just a huge cop-out - it just makes it easy for somewone to be pro-choice and still allow them to feel anguish when a fetus is terminated. It's either life or it's not. To be honest with ourselves, I think we all need to choose one or the other.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#31)
    by jimcee on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 07:09:02 PM EST
    Sailor, You have made my point, exactly. There is no right to abortion explicitly written into the Constitution. It was left up to the states to decide and some states decided that abortion should be outlawed and others allowed legal abortions as was constitutionally permitted. When the Supreme Court found the unenumerated right to abortion in the constitution (Roe v Wade) they effectively created federal law that didn't exist prior to thier ruling and that is the judiciary making law which is constitutionaly the balliwick of the legislative branch. Thank you for completing my argument for me and again I personally don't think most abortions should be illegal drawing the line at 'Partial Birth' abortions and minors receiving abortions without parental consent barring extenuating circumstances.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#32)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 08:29:27 PM EST
    Sarc, A fetus is a living organism, is that more clear? But to say a clump of cells the size of a pinhead is the same as a sentient, living human, well, I just can't get behind it, intellectually, morally, ethically. Now, get later in the pregnancy and, of course, the quesions loom larger. But most abortions are first term, early first term, and most later term abortions are not for reasons of contraception. Copout to you, reality to me. Black and white is largely for old movies, not for life lived by humans. The woman's body is a barrier to me. Not to you. So be it. Peace, bro. Or sis, not to be sexist.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#33)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 09:42:10 AM EST
    The woman's body is a barrier to me.
    Dadler, well, there it is then. The woman's right to control her body is inviolate to you. It trumps all. Except that it really can't trump taking the life of another person, can it? Because taking the life of another person is, well, murder. What to do, what to do? Well, easily solved, I'll decide that an unborn fetus/child/whatever is not a person. Whew. That was close. Now I can sleep easy. Hey, don't sweat it. None of us can get through the day without rationalizations.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#34)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 10:33:00 AM EST
    Sarc, Yes, I believe there is a difference between a fetus inside a woman's body and a person living outside it. And I find it no rationalization, but a very apparent reality. Do you think I love abortions, that I celebrate them? Come on. Listen, my mother was single and pregnant with me in the sixties...and she should've had the right to have an abortion if she chose to. And I DON'T sleep well at night, bro, for many reasons: war, love, hate, my son, the future, work, money, my country, my state, my city, pollution, corruption, and on and on. A woman's right to choose is not one of those reasons. And I get the feeling, when it gets right down to it, that you consider me a sort of de-facto accessory to murder for that belief. Where do we go from there?

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#35)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 11:14:16 AM EST
    Dadler, too much to respond to, much of which I did not say nor (intend to) imply. Let me just focus on one thing: If a fetus is human life, then aborting a fetus is murder. If a fetus is not human life, then aborting it is merely elective surgery. Yes, it's that black and white, or at least it should be. I think we should all, deep in our hearts, decide whether or not a fetus is human life and/or whether there is a certain point at which it becomes human life, and let the chips from that honest decision fall where they may.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#36)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 01:36:29 PM EST
    Sarc, With all due respect, I HAVE decided. But you won't accept my decision at face value. Is the death penalty murder? Was Terry Shaivio murder? Is blowing a child into hundreds of pieces because you THINK you MIGHT have killed a terrorist murder? No one has a monopoly on being concerned about "life" here. I leave this most incomparable of choices to the people directly involved. Which means primarily to the pregnant woman. Tho I think until we all start adopting unwanted children in droves we're full of sh*t mostly.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#37)
    by jondee on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 02:45:13 PM EST
    Roy, I think the left believes in a contractual arrangement involving something called a society (part of a larger arrangement called civilisation) into which EVERYONE contributes in good faith,or,if you prefer, as an exercise in what used to be refered to as "common decency". Youre operating out of a non-systemic self/world paradigm which bit the philosophic dust a hundred years ago. Stay there. I,ME,MINE.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#38)
    by jondee on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 02:54:10 PM EST
    Btw - Anyone who wants "the right" to pay (Im assuming) adults three dollars an hour for honest work should think before accusing others of claiming "a right to peoples help, property and time".

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#39)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 03:03:42 PM EST
    With all due respect, I HAVE decided. But you won't accept my decision at face value.
    Dadler, I'm not asking you to tell me or anyone else what your decision is regarding whether a fetus is human life or not - but if you feel you did express your decision to me in this conversation, I sure as heck didn't catch it, and therefor can neither accept it nor not accept it as you say. So that there is no confusion, here's my decision: Pre-point of viability, a fetus is not human life. After that point, it is.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#40)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 03:38:52 PM EST
    Dadler, I'm re-reading my last post and I think it sounded more angry or aggressive than I meant it to be. Lots going on at work today. Peace.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#41)
    by roy on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 03:51:34 PM EST
    Jodee, I'm familiar with the "social contract". I usually treat the term as a harmless euphemism, but you seem to think it's actually something like a contract. Society can change the terms of the contract against my will. I can't change the terms unless I convince society. The terms include enforcement mechanisms and penalties which society can create and I can't. I agreed to the contract by being born here. I can only be released from the contract if I find another society with another contract. That's nothing like a contract. That's coersion. Under the "social contract", what rights we have we have at the whim of society. Thus each woman's womb effectively belongs to society; fortunately leftist society isn't currently interested in exercising its power over the womb. Less dogmatically, the social contract ideology encourages people to stick their noses where they don't belong, whether it's a sick person's pot stash or a woman's womb. The "whatever happens amonst consenting adults is nobody else's business" argument is the simplest and most fundamental defense, but the social contract rules it out.
    I,ME,MINE.
    And you, you, and yours. I support others' rights too. First person pronouns are just more concise than "each individual", and when it comes to brevity I need all the help I can get.
    Anyone who wants "the right" to pay (Im assuming) adults three dollars an hour for honest work should think before accusing others of claiming "a right to peoples help, property and time".
    Meaning offering low wages indicates a percieved right to others' help? Not at all. The worker has the right to refuse. I don't have a right to his time, he doesn't have a right to my money. If we come to an agreement, great, and it's nobody else's business. Do you think that a destitute citizen who gets seriously ill through no fault of his own should have a right to health care funded by taking others' property as tax? If so, that's a pretty clear example where you feel one has a right to others' property. (I am, btw, not a libertarian absolutist. It's just convenient to argue as one sometimes. When my side starts winning elections, I'll dial back the rhetoric.) Dadler, Re: bars, I mentioned smoking in "private places like bars", you mentioned smoking in public places. Maybe I jumped the gun.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#42)
    by jondee on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 04:47:33 PM EST
    Roy, Lets stick with the original example that you (not arbitrarily, I think) gave; asserting your "right" to offer someone three dollars an hour for thier labor. Anyone who is in such dire straits that they would even consider working at that rate is - Im sure you would agree, not exactly in a position of strength and your "offer" is obviously based on this knowledge; at least, thats the way these things generally work in the real world. So basically you,(oh so "non-coercively") are taking advantage of his weakness - and hunger,need for shelter etc Hey, who knows, if you do it enough you could even write an article about it, send it in to Reason and maybe they'll consider you for the Ayn Rand Achiever Award or something. But, basically, I find your predatory ethos only slightly better than that of muggers and pimps(only slightly). Of course though, if you have "a right" that trumps everything else; and we know what makes right.

    Re: Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will P (none / 0) (#43)
    by jondee on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 02:02:26 PM EST
    And Roy, you dont get to refurbish two hundred years of political philosophy by redefining "left wing" as legislation that Roy,Grover Norquist and General Electric dont approve of. Btw, a system of representation in which you have to extra for "speech" is not non-coercive. Get a clue.

    Bush Tells Anti-Abortion Activists: 'We Will Prevail' | 43 comments (43 topical)