I've made this confession before, but it bears repeating given the subsequent quote from Michele Bachmann.
When I was in high school, I was a very serious Republican. In fact, I was the founding president of my high school's Republican club. In addition to that, I used to be the conservative voice of the opinions section of the high school newspaper and often sparred (in print) with a fellow journalism geek named Carl. It was Carl who gets partial credit for my transformation into a liberal Democrat.
Here's how he did it.
It was one question during a debate about abortion. One interrogative sentence. I remember exactly where Carl and I were standing in the high school library when he asked me this question: "If your girlfriend got pregnant, what would you do?" Almost without thinking, I replied, "Well, it would be her choice to make -- ohhhh." And there you go. I had admitted to being pro-choice without realizing I was pro-choice until that very minute. And of course, being intellectually honest, I conceded the point to Carl.
With that one question, Carl had ignited an epiphany of sorts that led me to liberalism. Naturally it should be "her choice." It was so obvious. What else was I supposed to do? Hold her hostage and force her to birth our (rhetorical) child? Her body, her choice.
Since then, in every political item I write, I always strive to create that one point like Carl had in 1989 -- the most incisively salient point possible that could potentially spark a similar transformation in conservatives who read my stuff. If nothing else, that's my primary goal as a writer and blogger: to either create a similarly persuasive question, or to provide ammunition for readers to do the same thing.
However, there's one aspect of this story that's an important variable in the equation. In order for conservatives to experience a similar epiphany, they have to possess some sort of intellectual honesty. They have to be able to admit to inconsistencies and concede to reality. Sadly, many conservatives are so wrapped up in a local-sports-fan Go Team! view of politics they refuse to acquiesce a point or to even recognize the barrage of empirical truths karate-chopping them in the face because they fear becoming a traitor to their team -- a fair weather fan.
Take Michele Bachmann, for example. She's easily one of the most far-right conservatives in Congress in addition to being an anti-choice "pro-life" zealot ("pro-life is in quotes because conservatives are only truly "pro-life" when it comes to pre-born humans). She claims to be anti-choice since the age of 16 when the Roe v. Wade decision was handed down. She voted against funding Planned Parenthood, she supports 14th Amendment (personhood) rights for unborn fetuses thus criminalizing abortion and she introduced legislation to force women seeking abortions to listen to the sound of the fetal heartbeat. Just about as extremist as they the come.
And yet she said this on Meet the Press last Sunday:
BACHMANN: What we want is women to be able to make their own choices [...] We want women to make their own choices in healthcare. You see that's the lie that happens under Obamacare. The President of the United States effectively becomes a health care dictator. Women don't need anyone to tell them what to do on health care. We want women to have their own choices, their own money, that way they can make their own choices for the future of their own bodies.
She literally admitted to being pro-choice on national television. She might still be anti-abortion, in the sense that she thinks abortion is vile, but she said she's in favor of allowing women to choose what happens to "their own bodies."
Sound familiar? When pressed about reproductive healthcare, just as I was at the naive age of 18, she snapped into the only logical answer: women should be given total latitude over their personal medical choices.
Michele Bachmann is pro-choice.
The only other option is to say no, women shouldn't have any choice in their reproductive healthcare options -- even though it would sound ridiculous coming from someone who claims to be a small government conservative. And yet so many conservatives fail to see this glaring hypocrisy: they support small government; they're against the government interfering in healthcare; and yet they're mandating transvaginal probes and telling women what they can and can't do with the contents of their reproductive organs. Total hypocrisy and a complete lack of intellectual honesty.
While we're here, Sarah Palin admitted to the same thing several years ago during her infamous interview with Katie Couric.
COURIC: Palin says she makes no apologies for her pro-life views and opposes abortion, even in the case of rape or incest.
PALIN: I'm saying that personally I would counsel that person to choose life, despite horrific, horrific circumstances that this person would find themselves in.
"Choose" means the same thing as "choice," no? And by saying that she would counsel someone to "choose" implies that she's in favor of it -- "pro," if you will.
Earlier in the 2008 campaign, Palin said:
"We're proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents. As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows she has our unconditional love and support."
She's "proud" of Bristol's choice -- her "decision." If she was truly anti-choice and anti-abortion, she would have done what anyone would do if another life was in danger of possibly being killed: she wouldn't have allowed Bristol the decision-making latitude and forced her to have the baby -- with or against Bristol's will. Pro-life dogma mandates that the mother has no choice in the matter.
During a "pro-life" fundraising dinner in 2009, she admitted to considering the option of aborting Trig when she received the results of her amniocentesis. She said she made the "good decision to choose life." Again, a choice. She talked about girls making "the choice to let the child live." Literally the word "choice."
She's in favor of having the right to choose, which, by definition, is pro-choice. If she was truly against women having the choice, she would have said something like, "I had no choice but to have Trig. Choosing wasn't any part of the equation. Pregnancy requires live birth." The very fact that she had an amniocentesis showed that choice was a factor. If the Palins were truly pro-life, the health of the baby would be irrelevant. They would simply have the baby and let the chips fall where they may.
Ultimately, conservatives have totally missed the reasonable position regarding abortion. Instead of banning choice (Palin and Bachmann are clearly against banning choice), conservatives should be making it easier for women to choose "life." They should be pushing for totally free and universal healthcare for pregnant and post-natal women and children, and in some cases job support, housing and food. If the health and life of the fetus is so important, then caring for that life should be priority number one for conservatives. But they'd rather make the "choosing" process either illegal or wrought with government intrusions and harrowing mandates with, in the case of working class women, absolutely no means of birthing a child without going broke in the process.
I'm sure there are many other examples of self-proclaimed "pro-life" conservatives admitting to supporting choice. The challenge, again, is to get them to concede that they admitted to it. That's a much more grueling mountain to climb.
Crossposted at The Daily Banter
Subscribe to the uncensored and totally raw Bob & Chez Show After Party podcast.
Click here to listen to the Bubble Genius Bob & Chez Show podcast, with Bob Cesca and Chez Pazienza.
Bob Cesca's Awesome Blog! Go!
Follow Bob Cesca on Twitter: www.twitter.com/bobcesca_go
Check the movers and shakers within this Camp...and you'll find a LARGE amount of those folks are ALSO in the "PRO-LIFE" camps....
Verichip/Positive ID figures, have been on record saying that one of the goals of thier-hoping-to-be-emerging-and-fastest-growing industry, which is promoting use of the "DIGITIAL ANGEL" rfid device...
is to make inroads into HOSPITALS and most especially NURSERIES to find thier customers...and make their parents "the offer that's too good to pass up" especially when they're in a very vulnerable state wanting "saftey for the little one, that just now came into the world"
Now...if you were Verichip or PositiveID....why would you want any impediments to you being able to have maximum opportunity to make PROFIT?
Especially from a pesky little court ruling like "ROE v. WADE?"
Think about it, won't you?
If your religious organization supports infanticide it is worthless and false. You do know it impossible to claim Christ as your Lord and favor the choice of death over the gift of life correct?
Here's a hint - why do you think Planned Parenthood and others so strongly reject any notion of viewing an external (i.e. NOT vaginal) ultrasound? Cuz that "blob" looks like a little human being - even when it is the size of a peanut. Abortion-minded woman have a real hard time having an abortion when the see their baby.
Scripture:
Your hands shaped me and made me…Remember that you molded me like clay…Did you not pour me out like milk ... and knit me together with bones and sinews? You gave me life … (Job 10:8-12 NIV).
"Before I was born the LORD called me; from my birth he has made mention of my name...and now the LORD says--he who formed me in the womb to be his servant..."
(Isaiah 49:1, 5).
"The word of the LORD came to me, saying, ‘Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart…" (Jeremiah 1:4-5).
I was raised in the 1960's. Pregnant woman used knitting needles, poisons and jumped off second stories to terminate a pregnancy.
Like all these bible thumpers are going to end abortion. Abortion has been part of family planning since Eve found a sharp object in the Garden of Eden and thought it might come in handy. Modern educationn in family planning has given woman CHOICES and the power to use them. Deciding when to have a kid is a right and that should be protected by federal law. I am also weary that the sperm donor is rarely mentioned, the woman who seek family planning or an abortion is on her own and it is all her fault, the Scarlett Letter plays for women in an endless loop. It is time to move on and take care of the humans that are already landed on this planet. Just read the headlines, kids are abused and starved daily, not by strangers but by those who control our government. Today on the news the homeless children who live on the street that leads to the Magic Kingdom of Disneyland, fantasy vs reality.
Since ROE over 50,000,000 babies have been killed. No biggie, right? That's only the rough equivalent over 400 9/11 Attacks each year….every year….for the last almost 4 decades.
When society chose to legalize murder, thus making it "moral" too many eyes, we began down a slippery slope. Queue assisted suicide, “EXIT” (the group killing the elderly – not the sick – in England), and more talks, very recently, of infanticide (killing babies – health ones- after birth…
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/03/infanticide_on_demand.html
I'd say "LOL" but the results are beyond tragic...
There is nothing advisory about abortion in the Bible.
That entire deal was blown up too.....we all know what Rosen
meant, a real job outside of the 'regular' job of the family.
Many mom's work 60-70 hours and still raise a family, often
alone. How does Romney stack up to that ?!?
offered lots of over time ....
she worked those kinds of hours probably at least 20-30 weeks a year,
for over 10 years....
OK, so-called pro lifers, have at it. Give us your best reasons for your choice of which to save.
However, if someone claims to value a fetus equally or more than a born person, but his or her first instinct is to save the baby and leave the frozen embryo (or cart full embryos) then that person needs to examine their own true beliefs on this matter. And I think the point of the article (as well as an overriding philosophy of my own life) is that people need to examine their beliefs and convictions from time to time. A little introspection never hurt anybody.
States can try and outlaw abortion, but they will only succeed in making abortion unsafe, not in ending them.
I've known of many woman from before Roe v. Wade until this current year who had had abortions, some were illegal and dangerous; others were legal and safe.
My question to the two GOP women the author mentioned would not be "Are you pro-choice?," but "Do you believe, like your rapid followers, that abortions are murder?"
Read the whole story of this "quality" woman. A real winner!
Healthy people continue to learn past high school library events.
Does it feel good to you, having grown out of such childishness?
To them, no one has the right to ask the question that your friend asked you that one afternoon that changed your perspective for the rest of your life. If it were up to them, if your girlfriend got pregnant, there would be no "What would you do?" situation. There would be one authority, their authority. You would never get an option and you would never get an option to question the circumstance of this disparity.
The GOP isn't pro-life. They're pro-authority.
It's not just that they are intellectually dishonest, they hate women. That's it. Even Bachmann. Even Palin. They hate women. Until we're honest about and deal with their hatred, we're not going to go anywhere with them.