[Peace-discuss] Snarl Wants to Subjugate the Uterus to the Rule of Law

[C G Estabrook]

Bob—

You have two sorts of posting to this list.

Type One is a generally informed and well-reasoned objection to US war-making, often under the banner of ‘Just Foreign Policy.’

Type Two is a mad (in both senses) personal attack, inaccurate and occasionally involving outright (and conscious) lying. 
(Example: <https://www.counterpunch.org/2016/08/19/roaming-charges-prime-time-green/>).

Is the difference the cooking sherry, Bob? or do you have another excuse for this Jekyll and Hyde act?   

This morning’s post is clearly Type Two, but I’ll try to answer as if it were an argument, rather than just an insult.

[1] Abortion obviously ends a human life. “My political views: I'm basically against anything that kills people or destroys the planet we live on.”

Most of my friends who’ve had abortions or seriously considered it have done so for economic reasons (even the privileged ones). 

As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg pointed out, government support for abortion arises from motives of economics and eugenics: "Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”

Opponents of abortion must press for universal medical care, free education, child supports, etc. 

[2] I 'support Rodney Davis’ in the sense that I think one should vote for our incumbent Republican Representative rather than his Democratic opponent, not because I generally agree with his political views - I don’t - but because I don’t think that the party of Russiagate and opposition to peace talks with the DPRK should be given control of the House of Representatives.    

[3] "A red herring is something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important issue. It may be either a logical fallacy or a literary device that leads readers or audiences towards a false conclusion.” With that definition in mind, re-read your email quoted in the <counterpunch.org> article, above.

Regards, Carl 


> On Jun 15, 2018, at 6:45 AM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> 
> Snarl wants to ban abortion. Snarl wants to Subjugate the Uterus to the Rule of Law. That’s why Snarl supports Rodney Davis. Because Snarl is a Catholic Fascist who wants to Subjugate the Uterus to the Rule of Law. Snarl’s professed concern for peace is a red herring. Banning abortion is Snarl’s true objective. That’s why Snarl supports Rodney Davis  Because Snarl wants to ban abortion and Subjugate the Uterus to the Rule of Law. 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss