Wednesday, August 13, 2008

"Taking Control"

To steal a phrase, I do not think that means what Mr. Fitzpatrick thinks it means:

They know that only by encouraging young people like us to take control of ourselves - our sexuality, our behavior, our values - and resist the absurd "consequence-free sex" crud we've been force-fed at OSU and elsewhere. [sic]


In other words, we're being told that "taking control" means doing what Mr. Fitzpatrick says and following only one course of action.

4 comments:

Cassie said...

I especially like how he begins the article, "In my experience, defenders of abortion, contraception and Planned Parenthood have one main thing in common: they obfuscate and try to cloud the argument."

Yeah, those crazy defenders of contraception, what argument are they clouding exactly? I guess the only approved sex is of the baby-making variety- after you are married of course.

Anonymous said...

Cassie- I guess you do not care about the philosophical argument about life. That is a fine stance. However, those who defend abortion while ignoring this aspect are not going to win friends. The question really becomes if the baby is nine months and some doctor tells the mother that her psychological issues are valid ones and decides an abortion is okay. I know this is an absurd case but under current law it is possible. Once you start to decide there are cases where the abortion should not be allowed, then you start down a path that would restrict a "right." This is problematic for abortion proponents and they therefore obfuscate and try to cloud the argument so as not to face this issue.

As a point of fact I am a female and I support abortion/contraception rights to a certain point. I believe that certain restrictions are acceptable and they need to be codified into law. What those are, I am not sure but I want the discussion to start so we can move on in this country.

Cassie said...

Anon at 8:47- I'm not sure how my original post indicated that I don't "care about the philosophical argument about life." I was just pointing out the language of the piece that suggests that the author is against even contraception. I didn't even mention abortion in my post let alone defend anything.

But, if you want to play this game, I think there are many defenders of abortion that care about life but realize that sometimes the "life" of a fetus should come second to the life of the woman carrying it. I think a lot of "pro-lifers" conveniently forget about that life.

Anonymous said...

Cassie-

I would agree with you about the pro-lifers ignoring the woman. Just as the pro-abortionist forget about the baby such as using the term fetus instead of baby to depersonalize the issue. I was just pointing out that we need to find a middle ground through rational, honest discussion recognizing there is a woman involved and a baby. As a woman I feel that abortions, including the "contraceptive" morning after pill should be fully available to the fully informed. But I also believe there comes a point where the baby's life is just as important as the woman's. Other than for life-threatening medical reasons I do not see the need for third trimester abortions. But unlike many in the debate I could be persuaded by a valid argument that brings up cases that I am not aware of. As I said before, this debate will not make any progress unless both sides acknowledge that there are two(or more) lives involved and they both deserve legal attention.

 
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.