--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Oct 1, 2007, at 2:38 PM, authfriend wrote: > > >> He does mention the word, Judy, in reference to the trips > >> he felt that MS was attempting to lay on the women who chose > >> abortion. > > > > No, in reference to what Barry suggests the women he > > consoled were feeling--not using the word explicitly, > > but obviously implying it. Did you not read the last > > two paragraphs of my post? I left them in below. > > Yes I did, and your thoughts go around in so many circles > it becomes nearly impossible to follow, IMO.
Translation: Judy's logic is airtight. <snip> > > And whatever distressing factors play into the > >> whole thing couldn't be terribly powerful, seeing as how > >> over a million women a year in this country alone somehow > >> manage to counteract them and have abortions. > > > > And quite possibly suffer from debilitating guilt > > afterward as well as beforehand. > > All million of them, every year? *None* of them should have to. I haven't taken any kind of poll, but > it seems highly unlikely. And I have a feeling the Religious Wrong > finds it unlikely as well, which probably explains why they don't > take their own polls. If sufficient numbers of women were really > feeling that way, those idiots would be shrieking it from the > rooftops. They've been shrieking it for years. "Abortion Hurts Women" is one of the major antichoice slogans. Put "abortion hurts women" into a search engine and have a look at some of the hits (22,600 on Yahoo). Or just read this: http://usconservatives.about.com/od/abortiondangers/p/hurts.htm <snip> > >>> To counter the "wanton disregard for the fetus" canard > >>> by invoking the emotional distress caused by abortion, > >>> as Barry did, is to cite *one* spurious reason for > >>> opposing abortion against the *other* spurious > >>> reason for opposing abortion, putting the woman right > >>> between a rock and a hard place and handing the > >>> argument to the antichoicers. > >> > >> YEah, if that's what he was doing. But it wasn't, IMO. > > > > Not consciously; he just didn't think it through. > > He was more interested in beating up on mainstream > > and exalting his own "compassion," and in the process > > exploiting the women's victimization. > > Yeah, you obviously think Barry is going into some kind of > "savior" mode with all this, when all I see is that he's > relating his own experience of what it was like for those > women at that time. My guess is, if it were anyone but Barry, > you'd see it that way too. His tendency to exalt himself is so dependable, it's hard to see it any other way with him. He's long since used up any benefit of the doubt. A man who was genuinely on the side of women on this issue would have expressed outrage *both* at the idea of "wanton disregard of the fetus" *and* the fact that these women were having trouble dealing with their decision, rather than exploiting the women's pain to refute the "wanton disregard" notion and exalt his own great "compassion," thereby *validating* the antichoice "abortion hurts women" theme. > > Here's where the "guilt" comes in with regard to > > Barry's consolees: > > > >> because it's *inherently* difficult, it's because > >>> the antichoicers have *made* it difficult. Barry > >>> tacitly acknowledges this in the case of the women > >>> he consoled by claiming that one of the ways he > >>> could be helpful was not to "judge" the women. > >>> > >>> What is there to judge other than "wanton disregard > >>> for the fetus," on the one hand, or guilt on the > >>> other? Barry insists it wasn't the first, so it > >>> could only have been the second. > > Mind-reading isn't my thing. Translation: I can't think of any way to get around Judy's logic. Here's what Barry said, just for the record: "One of the only ways in which I found that I *could* be helpful was just not to judge."
