desertvixen (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
desertvixen) wrote2006-03-03 08:12 am
desertvixen) wrote2006-03-03 08:12 am
Entry tags:
On Pro-Choice
http://www.forbes.com/business/businesstech/feeds/ap/2006/02/28/ap2559931.html
President Bush, asked about the South Dakota measure in an interview with ABC News' Elizabeth Vargas, said Tuesday he hadn't "paid attention to that, to this particular issue you're talking about" but "I am not going to prejudge how the Supreme Court is going to judge a particular issue."
However, he said, "My position has always been three exceptions: rape, incests and the life of the mother." Asked if he would include the broader category of health of the mother, Bush said: "No. I said life of the mother, and health is a very vague term, but my position has been clear on that ever since I started running for office."
I know some of the discussion about the bills in South Dakota and Mississippi have included women wondering about how the distinction between a woman's life and a woman's health. I guess now we know (I hadn't seen this particular quote previously) what the President thinks.
As a woman, I'm scared, very scared. Considering that GWB thought they should keep Terry Schiavo alive as well, I guess anything up to just short of a woman hemorraging to death in the middle of delivering a baby won't count as endangering the woman's life.
So would he support forcing a woman to continue a doomed pregnancy? (Anacephaly comes to mind.) Forcing a woman to carry a child that has no chance of life - which by the way, you're now financially responsible for. Personally, I think it would either make me crazy or drive me to doing something harmful to myself.
Call me selfish, but I'm one of those people who doesn't want to live if I'm not *alive*. The quality of life is a big factor, and I think some people are starting to blur that one out.
I'm pro-choice, because it affords women the right, the basic right, to make decisions about their lives. Our reproductive life impacts on every single area of our lives, and we should be able to control it.
I think we should have access to abortion, if needed, without having to jump through flaming hoops. I think we should have access to birth control, at an affordable cost, and access to a method that works for us. I think we should be able to walk into any pharmacy and have our prescriptions filled, without worrying about if the pharmacist is "okay" with it. (BTW, if they're so concerned about our sex lives, stop selling Viagra while you're at it.) And I think we should have the right to these choices without being hounded and harrassed and disrespected.
DV
President Bush, asked about the South Dakota measure in an interview with ABC News' Elizabeth Vargas, said Tuesday he hadn't "paid attention to that, to this particular issue you're talking about" but "I am not going to prejudge how the Supreme Court is going to judge a particular issue."
However, he said, "My position has always been three exceptions: rape, incests and the life of the mother." Asked if he would include the broader category of health of the mother, Bush said: "No. I said life of the mother, and health is a very vague term, but my position has been clear on that ever since I started running for office."
I know some of the discussion about the bills in South Dakota and Mississippi have included women wondering about how the distinction between a woman's life and a woman's health. I guess now we know (I hadn't seen this particular quote previously) what the President thinks.
As a woman, I'm scared, very scared. Considering that GWB thought they should keep Terry Schiavo alive as well, I guess anything up to just short of a woman hemorraging to death in the middle of delivering a baby won't count as endangering the woman's life.
So would he support forcing a woman to continue a doomed pregnancy? (Anacephaly comes to mind.) Forcing a woman to carry a child that has no chance of life - which by the way, you're now financially responsible for. Personally, I think it would either make me crazy or drive me to doing something harmful to myself.
Call me selfish, but I'm one of those people who doesn't want to live if I'm not *alive*. The quality of life is a big factor, and I think some people are starting to blur that one out.
I'm pro-choice, because it affords women the right, the basic right, to make decisions about their lives. Our reproductive life impacts on every single area of our lives, and we should be able to control it.
I think we should have access to abortion, if needed, without having to jump through flaming hoops. I think we should have access to birth control, at an affordable cost, and access to a method that works for us. I think we should be able to walk into any pharmacy and have our prescriptions filled, without worrying about if the pharmacist is "okay" with it. (BTW, if they're so concerned about our sex lives, stop selling Viagra while you're at it.) And I think we should have the right to these choices without being hounded and harrassed and disrespected.
DV