What are your criteria for "reasonable" (serious question)?
In this context, I mean that it can actually be mapped to policy. Though I'd also say that if you feel that something is immoral, it's reasonable to oppose government funding of it.
In the context of the current health care debate, there's a certain logic to applying the Hyde Amendment (which is what I think of as "opposing government funding of abortion") to government-funded health insurance.
I wish that they could just maintain the Hyde Amendment and not turn the health care debate into an abortion debate too, but I suppose it makes sense for the opposition to do it.
Not to speak for Gud, but I think I get what he is saying-- other points make no actual sense when looked at as a whole and/or with what actually happens (like Geo. Bush and Co. saying that they oppose government regulation/more laws and then wanting a fucking amendment to ban gay marriage). At least the abortion thing, while wrongheaded, says "we don't want people to get abortions AND we don't want to pay for them", which makes sense together.
My face/teeth hurt and I can't tell if it is sinus or teeth. I really hop it is sinus, because it is is teeth it is pretty much going to have to wait until Monday at this point. I am also about 30 seconds from closing my door and going to sleep on my floor. The only thing stopping me is that I would seriously sleep the whole afternoon. I do not understand how parents work outside of the home at all. I got 4 hours of sleep last night, and about 50% of the time my cat was walking on me and meowing. I am exhausted.
But Sophia, the "purity test" only mentions public funding of abortion, not its overall legality.
No, there isn't. Because this is the first instance in which the issue has hinged on fungibility.
That's a good point, maybe the fight is simply unavoidable.
But Sophia, the "purity test" only mentions public funding of abortion, not its overall legality.
What I really want to know is if you get purity points for actually making abortion illegal, or does just fantasizing about it count?
Yes, I agree completely on both counts.
As I happen to be loving on this blog post right now, I thought I'd share since Natter turned toward the topic. Synergy!
The single IM service I am allowed to use is not working today. Bah.
But Sophia, the "purity test" only mentions public funding of abortion, not its overall legality.
That's what I get for just skimming the darn thing. Also, I cannot believe that a "purity test" featuring almost biblical-like language with Ronald Reagan and Jesus is not a joke.
Also, I think liberals are just as unhappy with some liberal politicians moving away from what I think are liberal core values (equality for all in both a practical and legal sense, peace, saving the environment and protecting workers) as the conservatives are with the conservative party. We have a very liberal radio show host in Rochester who tries not to get into politics on air, but when he does he is really, really good at making an argument and pointing out the fallacies in others' arguments. He is about to be livid at Obama for sending more troops in to Afghanistan.
