Women got lectured yet again in last night’s Egopalooza.
It’s up to men to tell us what’s right or wrong, we have no freedom from this:
Abortion is a moral and ethical issue. this is not an issue simply of women’s freedom.
I think abortion is a moral issue and an ethical issue. I think that those who are pro-choice make a mistake when they — if they suggest — and I don’t want create straw men here, but I think there are some who suggest that this is simply an issue about women’s freedom and that there’s no other considerations.
(no, of course. It’s a matter of men entitlement)
And declared that FOCA is not a priority
Now, the Freedom of Choice Act is not my highest legislative priority. I believe that women should have the right to choose, but I think that the most important thing we can do to tamp down some of the — the anger surrounding this issue is to focus on those areas that we can agree on.
Contrast this with
“The first thing I’d do, as president, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That’s the first thing that I’d do.”
speech to Planned Parenthood July 17, 2008
The Weekly Standard people sure appreciated this
Obama’s supple mind is still capable of nuance and complexity though, as evidenced by his answer to a question about abortion. Obama said abortion is “a moral issue and an ethical issue” and that women “struggle with these decisions each and every day.” Our president is clearly troubled by abortion, but not so troubled he would outlaw the practice. Instead the president wants “to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies.”
Yup. Men who want to impose their “ethics” on women agree….
Once again he said women make those decisions
in consultation with their families, with their doctors, with their clergy.
Prayerfully.
For the perfect deconstruction of this tortured Obama argument, always go to Cinie
So, let me see if I’ve got this straight. All these women, responsible enough to come to Daddy when they’re “in trouble,” simply don’t have sense enough not to whore around and get knocked up in the first place? As far as he seems to be concerned, the only reason any woman would ever consider an abortion is because she’s a slut; either too stupid, or too young, not to fall for any available slickster’s line. The way to fix that, of course, is to send these Godless whores to church, where the anointed sexorcists can drive the unholy sex demons out.
Update
On the same topic – a Romanian movie tonight on Sundance channel at 10 PM toda
4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days
Update 2
Judge Souter retiring. MSNBC speculates with their uncanny “common sense”:
Souter’s retirement is unlikely to alter the ideological balance on the closely divided court because Obama is almost certain to replace the liberal-leaning justice with someone with similar views.
Similar views as who? That “choice” has nothing to do with women’s freedom but everything with advice from clergy?
Over at Politico, an NYU professor makes a better guess
a good opportunity for Obama to again play the “bipartisan” card by picking a moderate, and almost dare the Republicans to come out against him.
And in Obama’s book, an anti-choice judge would me a moral, ethical man – a moderate.
33 comments
April 30, 2009 at 8:31 am
gxm17
Sooooo, this is what a feminist looks like? Oh my. I’d laugh if only I wasn’t crying.
April 30, 2009 at 8:33 am
Deja_Vu
Just over a year ago, in his FOX news interview, he made clear his admiration of the anti choice faction.
“Now, part of the reason they didn’t have it was purposeful, because those who are opposed to abortion — and I don’t begrudge that at all. They have a moral calling to try to oppose what they think is immoral.”
I guess we pro choicers are answering an amoral calling, then?
This was the first time, but certainly not the last, that I saw Obama morph into a full blown RW neocon theocrat.
The Obots just thought he was wonderful in that interview, cause he, gasp, sat down and talked with the enemy and was soooo cool. What he actually said, well, that wasn’t scrutinized in the least, in keeping with the standard Obot modus operandi.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,352785,00.html
April 30, 2009 at 8:36 am
Ginger
During the primaries, when NARAL decided to back Obama, I wrote to them how as to how disappointed I was with their decision. That they know that the issue of choice has evolved beyond it just being about abortion (they refuse to evolve with the times). That “my body, my choice” encompasses all of us for many reasons.
Some time ago, there was a lawsuit brought on by men who worked for a railroad company. There had been an accident in which these men were involved. Blood was taken. They sued because the railroad company tested their DNA w/o their permission to see if they were pre-disposed to certain ailments.
Furthermore, we need to look to the future as it is entirely possible that by not having rights over our bodies, that just as it’s true now that they can force a woman to use birth control – the opposite could also be true.
April 30, 2009 at 8:37 am
Ginger
I know what I wrote is choppy but short on time.
April 30, 2009 at 9:09 am
edgeoforever
What you wrote is very important. And maybe if we can convince them that men can be affected too, we would stand a chance.
April 30, 2009 at 8:49 am
insightanalytical
Looks like we’re well on the road to Sharia law here if Obama speaks only in “religious” and “morality” terms. He’s such an inspiration on both fronts…. (snark)
Yeah, freedom has nothing to do with it….
So when do we start castrating men who rape? Let’s call it an immoral action and start from there…
April 30, 2009 at 9:04 am
sister of ye
And if your hand—even your stronger hand —causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. (Matthew 5:30)
Biblical precedent. Direct words of Jesus. I’m sure an upstanding, God-fearing man like Obama, not to mention those guardians of morality, the GOP, would have to get on board with this.
April 30, 2009 at 9:00 am
madamab
EOF – I am so outraged over this I am barely able to concentrate on anything else.
He just declared war on pro-choice women, but in even clearer terms than before.
Of course the teevee is glossing right over that part of his speech. Women are sub-human and not worthy of consideration, after all.
April 30, 2009 at 9:54 am
FLVoter
The Obama apologists are out today. His answer while “flawed” was thoughtful. I paraphrase this from something I saw on a left blog this morning. There is no middle ground in reproductive rights. If you state you are pro-choice, as President you have an obligation to actively fight for women’s reproductive rights. By doing nothing and adding a level of complexity that does not exist, you are diminishing women’s rights. Mr. President you are either with us or against us, you cannot vote “present” on this. So far, you are actively coming out against us and we will remember come re-election. Empty rhetoric will not get you re-elected.
April 30, 2009 at 9:59 pm
leslie
this “flawed but thoughtful” BS has been going on since last summer.
I am sick to death of those bots who consistently say.”It is such a pleasure listening to a president that speaks in complete sentences!”
The problem is they’re so impressed that they don’t actually listen to the sentences.
@$#@%*%^$$#
April 30, 2009 at 10:11 am
speaktruth
A big part of what’s scary about the whole thing is no one seems to be talking about it. Most people seem to have missed hearing him say it.
I didn’t even hear the last part about – “in consultation with their families, their doctors, their clergy”last night. I was too busy screaming “WTF!!??!” over and over and over after the part about morality, not “women’s freedom”.
What if you have no “clergy”? We’re still allowed to be atheists, right, or have I missed the latest? Of course we little women need the guidance of men, because they are so much smarter. Because there might be some math and science involved in the decision, and you know how bad we are at that. And of course, what do we know about morality and ethics, oh…(wipes brow, agitatedly)…my goodness, the whole thing is just sooooo confusing. (Lies down on fainting couch, taking deep cleansing breaths, looking around anxiously for husband, or at least for clergy, or doctor. Male, of course.)
(Sighing with relief when man appears and takes charge, finally peaceful).
Let’s see, how long did it take us to go right back to fifty, seventy, hundred years ago. And Ms. Magazine, Naral, etc. are going right along with it.
April 30, 2009 at 10:28 am
angiencpets
Please speakstruth — if a woman doesn’t have clergy she just goes to whatever other “owner” is nearby. Basically, the nearest man.
April 30, 2009 at 11:41 am
Two-Faced TOTUS « The Confluence
[…] Edgeoforever alertly points out: “The first thing I’d do, as president, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That’s the first thing that I’d do.” […]
April 30, 2009 at 2:09 pm
DeniseVB
How about this….if a pharmacy won’t carry morning after pills, they can’t carry the ED pills either?
April 30, 2009 at 3:33 pm
HT
delurking.
I feel sick, we’ve been put back 60 years – what next, June Cleaver-ville?
Abortion is not an issue in my life anymore. When I needed one, I couldn’t get one so had to endure 9 months of agony to give birth to conjoined twins who had no possibility of survival. 9 months of mental anguish because I knew something was wrong, however I was patted on the head and advised that “women get unexplained fears” – paternalistic bastards – I come from a family who experience some, shall we say, psychic intuitiveness and I knew, but I was only one of those little wimmenz.
I am not religious, although I was raised that way. Mom was the strong one, but she was also the god police. I witnessed and experienced things that no child should have to, and I became one of those godless heathens who honestly believed that all humans were created equal and are entitled to the same rights. Although I’m past the issue of abortion, there are other issues that affect women, and I’m so bleeding scared that not only the advances we have made in choice are eroding, but that erosion will extend to other areas. Believe it or not, there is still a huge resistance to women in the upper eschelons of the business world, in politics, in power structures. How long before this attitude of paternalistic control extends into the workplace ? (I won’t get into the other areas that it will impact – give the bustards an inch, they’ll take a mile) BTW, I wonder how Obama feels about regulating the use of Viagra, and did you read that they think they have a cure for prostate cancer? How long have they been working on breast cancer? Strange juxtapositions.
I read Margaret Attwood’s “A Handmaid’s Tale” when it was first published – I think it was mid eighties. I thought it was frightening, but it could never happen….. I was wrong. I’m re-reading it now, and it’s worse than I remember, because it seems more real. Here’s a quote from the chapter I read last night.
“Don’t let the bastards grind you down. I repeat this to myself but it conveys nothing. You might as well say, Don’t let there be air; or Don’t be. I suppose you could say that.”
April 30, 2009 at 9:00 pm
angienc2
oh, HT — I’m sorry about what happened to you.
April 30, 2009 at 9:37 pm
HT
Angie, thanks, I appreciate that. I usually lurk but once in awhile, a post will make me angry, and I’ll post. This one hit a nerve, and I glossed over my experience. It was a thousand times worse – paternalism and misogny at it’s finest, and I’m terribly afraid that we are heading back to that time.
I’ve been reading your comments for a long time (I was a day one-r at the confluence). You are a very empathetic person so it must be he11 to hear all your clients’ stories and remain sane and detached. I don’t know how you do it, but am very glad there are people like you who care enough to carry on helping others. Brava.
April 30, 2009 at 9:44 pm
angienc2
Well, I’m not that good at staying detached — that’s why I work so hard for them (and, not to brag, why they all love me). And sanity doesn’t exactly run in my family — it’s overrated anyway. 😉
April 30, 2009 at 10:38 pm
HT
Hey, remember I’ve been lurking for a long, long time, so I’m familiar with the little that you have written about your family, so I am certain that sanity is not a concern. Eccentricity, however, seem to abound.
“Eccentricity has always abounded when and where strength of character had abounded; and the amount of eccentricity in a society has generally been proportional to the amount of genius, mental vigor, and courage which it contained.”
John Stuart Mill
nuff said.
April 30, 2009 at 11:22 pm
angienc2
ooh, HT — I like that quote — I’m stealing it!
May 1, 2009 at 1:50 am
Daily News About Freedom : A few links about Freedom - Thursday, 30 April 2009 15:49
[…] Freedom of Choice Act – not a priority « Not Your Sweetie […]
May 1, 2009 at 6:51 am
Good Thing I’m Not A Feminist « Cinie’s World
[…] I had worked my ass off to get a guy elected because he promised to promote my agenda, and then he turned around and dissed me on TV, in front of God and everybody, I’d be pretty ticked off. That’s […]
May 1, 2009 at 9:25 am
insightanalytical
Big H/T to you, Edge in this follow-up post….look what Obama’s Saudi friends are doing now to women…more outrageous restrictions….
While Obama Blows Off Women’s Freedom as He Celebrates His First 100 Days, the Saudis He Bows to Clamp Down on Women Even More
http://insightanalytical.wordpress.com/2009/05/01/while-obama-bows-the-bbc-reports-that-saudis-clamp-down-on-womens-gyms/
May 2, 2009 at 7:51 am
Jr.jr: Military tribunals not so bad when I do it « Not Your Sweetie
[…] Good times, good times….In fact, the Freedom of Choice Act was also a priority back then. […]
May 4, 2009 at 6:59 am
No final word where they went behind the shrubery « Not Your Sweetie
[…] other news, a third war is brewing, military tribunals are back and freedom of choice is not a freedom, nor is it a priority. But then again, all this is scripted stuff as I just […]
May 7, 2009 at 6:49 am
Today in Hypocrisy « Not Your Sweetie
[…] I remembered that we now have Jr.jr who also courts Christian right. Who says freedom of choice is a moral issue and women need to decide “prayerfully”. Who promised them money. So, if you are going […]
May 15, 2009 at 4:18 am
Poor mr Post-partisan! Roe dragging him in culture wars! « Not Your Sweetie
[…] in the bowels of the article the flip-flop on FOCA is mentioned. This being Teh One, it’s not called a flip-flop though, nor is it a broken […]
June 1, 2009 at 10:24 am
Obama’s Sister Soulja moment « Not Your Sweetie
[…] with the renewal of the pledge at the Notre Dame speech and the recent declartion that choice is not a freedom , how surprising can it be that some extremists took it to mean hunting season on […]
June 13, 2009 at 5:31 pm
Muddied Waters « Cinie’s World
[…] when SEIU/stimulus, or Government Motors, or freedom of choice, or civil rights, or gay marriage rights, or banker bailout paybacks, or any other Obama lies, flip […]
June 23, 2009 at 6:27 am
Anti-Choicers cheer their dog whistle from Obama « Not Your Sweetie
[…] and declared FOCA not a priority, and choice not a freedom. […]
November 7, 2009 at 8:52 am
Roe gets banned – “de facto” – as per Obama’s wishes « Not Your Sweetie
[…] FOCA wasn’t his priority and abortion is not a freedom issue but a moral one I think abortion is a moral issue and an ethical issue. I think that those who are pro-choice make a mistake when they — if they suggest — and I don’t want create straw men here, but I think there are some who suggest that this is simply an issue about women’s freedom and that there’s no other considerations. […]
November 24, 2009 at 5:13 pm
Alex
Hiya!. Thanks a bunch for the blog. I’ve been digging around looking some info up for shool, but i think i’m getting lost!. Yahoo lead me here – good for you i guess! Keep up the great information. I will be coming back in a few days to see if there is any more info.
April 16, 2010 at 7:40 am
Courts be damned: Obama proclaims Day of Prayer « Not Your Sweetie
[…] Obama declared – repeatedly that abortion is not an issue of women’s freedom, but a moral choice. […]