[Peace-discuss] Obama gets another one right

Sun Jan 25 15:15:50 CST 2009

This is an assertion of settled religious prejudice, joined to the anti-liberal 
view that people who disagree with such bigotry should just shut up.

Brussel Morton K. wrote:
> A fine discussion, Ricky, but I for one am less forgiving of the 
> religious fundamentalism-ideology that largely supports the 
> anti-abortion/anti-contraception/anti-sex education/anti-women's rights 
> movement in the USA, and those who now speak up for it on this listserve. 
> 
> They are beyond convincing because of their "faith".  I can understand 
> that you may not want to get into a discussion of the myths , 
> religiously inspired, that form a basis of this movement, a movement 
> largely of willful ignorance and lack off empathy for many woman's 
> problems when confronted with a pregnancy. They have unreasoning empathy 
> only for the myth of the humanity of a sperm which happens, divinely, to 
> meet an egg. 
> 
> --Mort
> 
> I admired your remark: " the values of libertarianism require also the 
> values of socialism to be logically and humanly consistent", although I 
> think that the libertarianism of Wayne et al. are contradictory to 
> broader social(ist) values and responsibilities. 
> 
> 
> And I agree with others that this kind of fundamentalism has no useful 
> place on this list. 
> 
> 
> On Jan 25, 2009, at 2:11 PM, Ricky Baldwin wrote:
> 
>> Wayne,
>>
>> I appreciate your concern, as always, for the downtrodden, but I'm 
>> afraid it's misapplied here.  Many people I agree with on most issues 
>> would dismiss yours and others' anti-abortion views as another example 
>> of your religious blinders; I don't.  My guess is that you are both as 
>> sincere and as misguided and the many good humanitarians who 
>> supported, e.g. the US attacks in Kosovo (to save the ethnic Albanians 
>> from Serbian aggression) or the US conquest of the Philippines (to 
>> save the locals from Spanish tyranny, etc.) or the British conquest of 
>> India (to rid the Indians of superstition and slavery, etc.).
>>
>> But for starters, I think you will have to admit that the ethical 
>> question of abortion rights has little to do with Margaret Sanger's 
>> infamous Social Darwinism (which is anyway not quite the way her later 
>> critics portray it, it seems to me), any more than your own Christian 
>> views are questionable in light of the Crusades, the Inquisition, the 
>> European 'civilizing' campaigns that masscred millions of indigenous 
>> people on one continent after another, or the many other Christian 
>> atrocities against the poor and downtrodden of the world. 
>>
>> The question of whether abortion is a form of racism, or class 
>> oppression, is more complex in some ways, though actually very simple 
>> if looked at rightly, I'd argue.  True, abortion has been visited on 
>> the poor and people of color in this country and others as an 
>> oppressive campaign at times.  We can go further: forced abortions and 
>> forced sterilizations have been practised as genocide for at least 
>> generations.  Less overtly public welfare policies have targetted 
>> oppressed groups in many ways from the days of workhouses, -- up to 
>> and including reproductive policies my fellow NOW organizers and I 
>> encountered (as an example) in Mississippi in the 1990s whereby the 
>> locally administered Medicaid program would pay for poor  women to 
>> have subdermal contraceptive Norplant insertions BUT NOT pay to have 
>> them removed, regardless of the woman's wishes or even of the 
>> side-effects or allergic reactions, which were not uncommon.
>>
>> It may surprise some honest abortion-foes to learn that NOW fought 
>> such policies vehemently, by the way.  The reasoning is relevant 
>> here.  NOW and other wrongly described "pro-abortion" groups currently 
>> working in the US support a basic principle that simplifies the whole 
>> issue: the individual liberty, autonomy, freedom, however you want to 
>> describe it, of a woman as well as a man to decide what happens to her 
>> physically, sexually, and in particular in terms of being pregnant or 
>> not.  As such it is the most fundamental libertarian political right.
>>
>> Critics of the "pro-choice" movement rightly point out that such 
>> decisions, often difficult enough in themselves, do not happen in an 
>> economic vacuum - and so are not truly "free" choices.  Women and 
>> their families or support networks (spouses, partners, siblings, 
>> parents, close friends) must at times make tough decisions based on 
>> economic realities not of their own choosing.  Nowadays there are 
>> convincing statistical arguments that women overall have very nearly 
>> caught up with men in terms of earning power, and the biggest 
>> difference that lingers is that when women hit their child-bearing 
>> years they fall behind and usually never catch up again.  Of course 
>> some men encounter the same problem, but overall it is women.  For 
>> these and many other reasons (oppressive parents, drug-use, birth 
>> defects) abortion is not always a "free" choice any more than a large 
>> family has been a real choice for billions of women for thousands of 
>> years - they do it in part because their choices are severely 
>> constrained.  This is not the only reason to support abortion rights 
>> of course.  The basic argument for the right is an argument for human 
>> dignity and autonomy, as I've said.  But this is the economic context 
>> that can't be ignored.
>>
>> So publicly-funded childcare, maternity and paternity leave and other 
>> employment considerations, free access to birth control and family 
>> planning services, rational sex education, and free abortion on demand 
>> are and must be all part of a comprehensive program of human rights 
>> that includes women as valued equal members of society and not 
>> second-class citizens.  It is part of why I believe the values of 
>> libertarianism require also the values of socialism to be logically 
>> and humanly consistent.  It is why conservatives who want to say they 
>> support women's rights and oppose racism and oppression must pick and 
>> choose which freedoms they support, which pieces of the overall 
>> reality they bring into their arguement.  And it's why liberals who 
>> want to support abortion rights are not always allies in the struggle 
>> for women's rights, but their programs do sometimes coincide.
>>
>> Obama's move against the vicious "Mexico City" policy is progress, 
>> toward allowing poor women and families in communities whose 
>> livelihoods we have wrecked to at least find some maneuvering room in 
>> that disaster.  Reagan's and both Bushes' policy of limiting the 
>> options of the global poor, often our own victims, is oppression on 
>> top of oppression; lifting that ban is at least mild relief.  It isn't 
>> enough, but it is a step in the right direction.
>>  
>> Ricky
>>
>> "Speak your mind even if your voice shakes." - Maggie Kuhn
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag <mailto:ewj at pigs.ag>>
>> *To:* Ricky Baldwin <baldwinricky at yahoo.com 
>> <mailto:baldwinricky at yahoo.com>>
>> *Cc:* peace discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net 
>> <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>>; socialist forum core 
>> <sf-core at yahoogroups.com <mailto:sf-core at yahoogroups.com>>
>> *Sent:* Friday, January 23, 2009 5:13:10 PM
>> *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] Obama gets another one right
>>
>> Ricky,
>>
>> I find Obama to be quite consistent in his policy.  He supports the 
>> killing of innocents both at home and abroad,
>> both with his warfare and with his "welfare".  One can't say that 
>> Obama is incoherent as an international minister of death.
>>
>> Abortion is the most explicit expression of racism and class warfare 
>> in our contemporary world.  
>> It is the most dastardly and cowardly of all human rights violations, 
>> since it violates the most fundamental Natural Right,
>> the Right to Life, and it attacks the Unborn, who are completely helpless.
>>
>> The operative social purpose of abortion is to rid the society of 
>> "human weeds".  The founders
>> of Planned Parenthood identified as the poor and the Negro as 
>> undesirables who should not be allowed to reproduce.   
>> Have you read Margaret Sanger's writings? Have you read about her 
>> "Negro Project"?
>>
>> I have some commentary at my 
>> website:  http://www.liberty4urbana.com/drupal-6.8/node/43
>> I hope that you will watch the three videos there and then report back 
>> with your take on those issues.
>>
>> Also, *Lux Libertas* will be broadcast again on UPTV-6 at 10 pm Sunday 
>> night.
>>
>> Trent Cloin and I discuss the paradox and error of Abortion in America 
>> in the first 30 mins.
>> In the 2nd 30 minutes we discuss MLK's April 9, 1967 speech "The Three 
>> Dimensions of a Complete Life" which was
>> given in Chicago just 5 days after the "Beyond Vietnam" speech we all 
>> heard last Sunday afternoon.
>> "Three Dimensions" does significantly address aspects of the 
>> "Revolution of Values" which King called for in "Beyond Vietnam".
>>
>> Wayne
>>
>> Ricky Baldwin wrote:
>>> Put this one in the column of real differences, differences that 
>>> matter to poor people's lives, among US presidents:
>>>
>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090123/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_abortion_ban
>>>
>>> This is not as groundbreaking as closing Guantanamo Bay prison.  As 
>>> the article says, Clinton did the same.  Still, it speaks to the tone 
>>> Obama is setting in his first week in office.  And if Obama didn't do 
>>> this, we'd be right to call him out for failing to act.
>>>  
>>> Ricky
>>>
>>> "Speak your mind even if your voice shakes." - Maggie Kuhn
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>>   
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss