How the left can exploit the politics of life?

17 posts / 0 new
Topic locked
Last post
Sun, 2011-05-15 16:10
#1
Machjo
How the left can exploit the politics of life?

How does the NDP win over at least soft pro-life advocates by adopting policies that give parents who want to keep their children more options?

Among some options I could see:

1. Provide quality education for all. We could look at year-round schooling for nine years starting at the age of 5, followed by two years of college to learn a trade or profession before the age of 18. This would ensure all above the age of 18 have the ability to earn a decent wage. This would also alleviate the pressure on the parents of 5 year olds and up to ahve to find baby sitters, summer schools, or summer camps for their children.

2. Provide day care in schools for student parents.

3. Provide day care for all working parents with no stay-at-home partner and who fall below a particular wealth line.

4. Manage the overall economy well.

 

 

Some might also say that it's the woman's fault. But first off, it takes two to tango. Secondly, not always was the tango mutually agreed to. So who are we to question how or why she got pregnant. Who's to say a woman could not be a victim of rape, yet choose to keep the child and feel uncomfortable discussing how she got pregnant?

Certainly the woman ought to get support even if only for the child's sake, without the government prying too much into how or why she got pregnant.

Any ideas on this as a means of winning over some soft pro-life voters?

Top
Sun, 2011-05-15 16:21
remind remind's picture

How about you just fuck off?????

Top
Sun, 2011-05-15 16:26
Machjo

remind wrote:

How about you just fuck off?????

So you're not in favour of quality education and support for parents at work or at school?

So not only must we be pro-choice, but also penalise those who choose to keep their baby? So what's the difference between the Progressive Conservatives and the NDP then?

Top
Sun, 2011-05-15 16:48
Maysie Maysie's picture

Machjo.

Your OP describes an issue I've never heard of, that there is a group of people who are "soft pro-life" (whatever the hell that means). I question where this came from, and it sure looks like you just pulled it out of your ass. Further, you assume that the NDP at the federal level wants to court such voters (who may or may not exist), which is a specious assumption. Additionally, you use language such as calling fetuses "children" and "babies" which implies to any feminist with a brain cell that you have absolutely no understanding of the issues of access to abortion, which is, it's the woman's choice. Full stop.

The woman's reasons for choosing abortion are irrelevant. The circumstances under which she became pregnant are also irrelevant and none of your (or the state's) damn business. You're making many many offensive and problematic assumptions. Cut it the fuck out.

Access to abortion is a non-issue on babble. Go educate yourself.

The fact that you're using the idea of access to abortion as a political lever or selling point to prove your already on-thin-ice argument about "quality education" is even more aggravating.

I suggest you stick to topics that you have at least a bit of workable knowledge about. Or whatever.

If you want to start a thread about public education I further suggest, in a very friendly manner, that you not get into the issue of abortion access, since you clearly know SFA about it.

P.S. Or, what remind said.

Laughing

Top
Sun, 2011-05-15 17:03
remind remind's picture

Thanks maysie, it appears you have an abundance of patience today. Kiss

One would think I would have  some though, given that I am pretty relaxed watching the snow melt, off of the mountain tops, whilst hanging washing up to dry outside,  on a breezy, yet balmy, 78-80F day.

Na, forget I said that. I go with my first action.

 

 

Top
Sun, 2011-05-15 17:04
Machjo

Maysie wrote:

Machjo.

Your OP describes an issue I've never heard of, that there is a group of people who are "soft pro-life" (whatever the hell that means). I question where this came from, and it sure looks like you just pulled it out of your ass. Further, you assume that the NDP at the federal level wants to court such voters (who may or may not exist), which is a specious assumption. Additionally, you use language such as calling fetuses "children" and "babies" which implies to any feminist with a brain cell that you have absolutely no understanding of the issues of access to abortion, which is, it's the woman's choice. Full stop.

The woman's reasons for choosing abortion are irrelevant. The circumstances under which she became pregnant are also irrelevant and none of your (or the state's) damn business. You're making many many offensive and problematic assumptions. Cut it the fuck out.

Access to abortion is a non-issue on babble. Go educate yourself.

The fact that you're using the idea of access to abortion as a political lever or selling point to prove your already on-thin-ice argument about "quality education" is even more aggravating.

I suggest you stick to topics that you have at least a bit of workable knowledge about. Or whatever.

If you want to start a thread about public education I further suggest, in a very friendly manner, that you not get into the issue of abortion access, since you clearly know SFA about it.

P.S. Or, what remind said.

Laughing

Where did I mention anywhere in this thread that I was proposing cutting access to abortion? Now for the record, yes I am pro-life. However, seeing that the OP had nothing to do with curbing access to abortion, I therefore don't see what relationship the thread has to access to abortion or whether or not I am pro-life myself. My position on abortion and access to abortion were not even brought up in the thread. Well, sorry, you brought it up!

Now as for 'soft pro-lifers', I have met plenty. Essentially they do believe that abortion is morally wrong but may or may not support legislation against it and are not likely to vote primarily based on a candidate's pro-life or pro-choice stance. Though such a stance may influence how such a 'soft pro-lifer' might vote, it does not guarantee that he will unequivocally vote for a pro-life candidate over a pro-choice candidate after taking otehr factors into account.

Now as for the pro-choice option, I would assume that even some pro-choicers still believe that a woman's choice ought to be supported either way and that she should not be penalized shoudl she choose to keep her baby, and so would be in favour of promoting more support for such women. Overall, many on the left would support such services I'd assume, so why not also point out its benefit to women who should choose to keep their babies. After all, many on the left support such policies at least in principle anyway, so from a marketing standpoint why not milk it for what it's worth?

And as for education, "F. off" is not intelligent discussion beyond the pre-school level.

Top
Sun, 2011-05-15 17:16
6079_Smith_W

I was going to let this pass, but what an incredibly odd idea. Is there an anti-school vacation lobby group that I'm not aware of, because I have never heard of it before your post. I know I like summer vacations, and I think most people do too.

And never mind that it has nothing to do with access to abortion, I am not sure what it has to do with education.

I'm not sure if keeping kids warehoused  for nine straight years without a summer break is necessarily good for students, parents, or teachers.  And the idea that this permanent full-time system will spit out fully trained workers and alleviate whatever job training problems you are imagining? Aside from the fact that education is a provincial matter, and that a lot of those decisions are made at the school board level, I don't think you have thought this through, or that it is a very healthy model for education.

And how about universal access to affordable daycare instead of a means test or assumption that the norm is a traditional family with someone staying at home? Seems like Harper did that already with his 200 dollars a month, and I don't know how much it has improved anyone else's daycare access. I know we don't use it for that.

Finally, never mind the assumption that all people who have children are pro-life, soft, hard, scrambled, or whatever. And talking about how to "exploit" them or anyone else isn't really a great starting point for ANY policy.

 

Top
Sun, 2011-05-15 17:18
remind remind's picture

How about you just fuck off, machjo!!!!You really are piece of work.

Top
Sun, 2011-05-15 17:21
Maysie Maysie's picture

Yes, Machjo, you and I are in complete agreement. You have no understanding of the issues of access to abortion. Including the fact that YOU raised such issues in the OP and don't even know that you did. Priceless.

Okay, the moment of mirth is over. I don't have the patience to discuss that issue with you again.

Machjo wrote:
Now as for 'soft pro-lifers', I have met plenty. Essentially they do believe that abortion is morally wrong but may or may not support legislation against it and are not likely to vote primarily based on a candidate's pro-life or pro-choice stance. Though such a stance may influence how such a 'soft pro-lifer' might vote, it does not guarantee that he will unequivocally vote for a pro-life candidate over a pro-choice candidate after taking otehr factors into account.

So, this thread isn't about "How the left can exploit the politics of life?", whatever the hell that means. Do you mean you want to discuss strategies on how the NDP can court voters who aren't pro-choice? Then say that. And do you mean the federal NDP? Then get this stinkin' thread out of the Ontario forum. Ontario's done enough idiotic bullshit recently, don't make up stuff it hasn't done. Yet.

 

Top
Sun, 2011-05-15 17:25
Maysie Maysie's picture

Smith! No! It's a trap!

Top
Sun, 2011-05-15 17:29
Machjo

remind wrote:

How about you just fuck off, machjo!!!!You really are piece of work.

Well, I guess if 'Fuck off' is acceptable in this forum, then I'm pleased to use it. Fuck off, Remind.

 

Now as for Maysie, I wasn't referring to any particular level of government, but just in general. As for universal daycare, I could support that. And just for your information, I was not referring to exploiting people but rather political platforms. Also, the word 'exploit' does have a number of dictionary definitions, such as when we talk of 'exploiting' resources, so why can't we fully 'exploit' a political platform in favour of universal daycare for example by pointing out how it could make it easier for parents struggling with children, which would be a nod to the pro-life group.

Sure my idea of year-round schooling might not be well thought out, but I don't see the harm in brainstorming. I do see harm though in discussion being summed up in 'fuck off's and 'go fuck yourself's. If that's the best argument one can come up with, then he needs more education.

 

Oh yes, and as for providing more hours of schooling over all, you can't deny that more skills can help one earn a higher wage will you?

Top
Sun, 2011-05-15 17:31
Maysie Maysie's picture

remind, it's cold, damp and rainy today in T.dot. I love it, as I always dread the humidity of summer. The cherry blossoms finally bloomed last week, and the rain of the past few days knocked most of the petals down. They smell great though.

Top
Sun, 2011-05-15 17:34
6079_Smith_W

Maysie wrote:

Smith! No! It's a trap!

Yeah I know, it's just that school thing is so f'ing whacked I can't believe it. 

On a more serious issue that actually IS related to abottion access, I have to go check out the podcast from today's Sunday Morning about a woman who has been defying injunctions against protests at womens' clinics since 1992. Not sure what sort of treatment they will give it, but it sounds like it iw worth listening to. 

Jesus, it is funny how this issue just exploded right after the election. I expect that here in Saskatchewan, but I dunno...... I hope it is not a sign of even more bad things to come.

ANyway.... I am taking a bit of time out of the bright sun before I get back into the garden. So thanks for the warning, and I am out of here.

Top
Sun, 2011-05-15 17:41
Machjo

6079_Smith_W wrote:

Maysie wrote:

Smith! No! It's a trap!

Yeah I know, it's just that school thing is so f'ing whacked I can't believe it. 

On a more serious issue that actually IS related to abottion access, I have to go check out the podcast from today's Sunday Morning about a woman who has been defying injunctions against protests at womens' clinics since 1992. Not sure what sort of treatment they will give it, but it sounds like it iw worth listening to. 

Jesus, it is funny how this issue just exploded right after the election. I expect that here in Saskatchewan, but I dunno...... I hope it is not a sign of even more bad things to come.

ANyway.... I am taking a bit of time out of the bright sun before I get back into the garden. So thanks for the warning, and I am out of here.

Though this may surprise you coming from someone who is pro-life, I actually agree with injunctions against protests at women's clinics. And here's my argument:

Regardless of whether you are pro-choice or pro-life, once the state has made the decision that abortion is legal, then a person should be legally free to get an abortion without harassment. I do not even support pro-life marches since they often simply turn to insulting the pro-choice group, which I find to be quite counter-productive. I would of course defend the right of pro-life groups to engage in letter-writing campaigns or petitions, as I would their freedom to express their views in a respectful manner in the media as part of an intelligent discussion and exchange, but not through harassing protests.

Top
Sun, 2011-05-15 17:43
Machjo

Maysie wrote:
Do you mean you want to discuss strategies on how the NDP can court voters who aren't pro-choice? Then say that.

OK, I didn't 'say' it, but I figured it was obvious enough and you proved me right.

Quote:
And do you mean the federal NDP?

At any level. Seeing that eduction and many social services are mostly provincial matters though, it seemd to make more sense putting it in the provincial section.

Quote:
Ontario's done enough idiotic bullshit recently, don't make up stuff it hasn't done. Yet.

 

I have no clue what you're talking about. I guess you're not as transparent as I am?

 

Top
Sun, 2011-05-15 18:51
remind remind's picture

Maysie wrote:
remind, it's cold, damp and rainy today in T.dot. I love it, as I always dread the humidity of summer. The cherry blossoms finally bloomed last week, and the rain of the past few days knocked most of the petals down. They smell great though.

Ya, I miss  the blossoms from VIsland in the spring....and the smell when walking through them is amazing.

However, I was  3/4 of the way up a mountain on mother's day having a campfire  on top of a snow slide over the road,  with mountain  Western Spring Beauties, which are little white flowering plants,  all around, so I can't call too hard done by.

Top
Sun, 2011-05-15 19:44
Catchfire Catchfire's picture

First of all, "pro-life" is a disingenuous label. A crooked wheel. We prefer "anti-choice."

And, of course, choice is not up for debate on babble, nor, we hope, in Canada. So the above question, insofar as there is one, is a non-starter. Support women and freedom over their own bodies, or take a hike. We don't want you (we being babblers, the NDP, Canada, etc.).  You also seem to be confused about what choice actually is: it means if you don't want an abortion, don't have one.

 

You complicate this very simple issue with very bizarre things which have no relevance to the choice debate in its current form, Machjo. Children's rights never intersect with choice. You will never find an anti-choice politician supporting anti-poverty legislation, education, health or anything to benefit actual children. If you do, do. I hope this brief post has cleared up your confusion. And I hope it was confusion, because my first instinct (akin to remind's) was to suspend you, but perhaps you took too quickly to the keyboard this afternoon and forgot to think before you posted. It happens.

At any rate, this farce of a discussion is over, and this thread is closed. Thank you very much to Maysie and Smith for your patient responses to this travesty.

Love,

Catchfire.

Top
Topic locked