« Daou Report New Look | Main | Liberal Hawks Plan Democratic Party Takeover »


June 19, 2005

The Fetus and Child Protect ion Act: Progressives fight back Rove-style

-- by Patrick O'Heffernan

What began as a question on DailyKos, migrated to a thread on Ruth's Group and is now a piece of draft legislation at mansworldnot. It is a Rovian attack designed to split the Republican Alliance, strengthen Democratic supporters, block attempts to ban abortion, and in general demoralize the rapture right.

It's time for Dems to co-opt the culture of life and drive a wedge between the rapture right and republican corporations. How? Consider: the only value question dems and reps agee on in polls is the dishonesty of corporate executives. We can take advantage of this by reframing the question of abortion thus:
- the cause of abortion is unwanted pregnancy
- programs that increase unwanted pregnancies must be banned and programs that reduce unwanted pregnancies must be funded
- the best source of funds are repeal of tax cuts for corporations and the impostion of surtaxes on runaway corporations

This reframes the debate and forces Member of Congress to choose between their faithful who want to do anything that will reduce abortions, and their corporate paymasters who want to do anything to not pay their fair share of taxes. Read the bill and send it on

Posted by Patrick O'Heffernan at June 19, 2005 9:13 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.seeingtheforest.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-t.fcgi/364

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Fetus and Child Protect ion Act: Progressives fight back Rove-style:

» Friday Round-Up from Thoughts of an Average Woman
This week's posts that deserve more attention: Pam on a company that has a conscience regarding women. [Read More]

Tracked on June 24, 2005 5:26 AM


Comments

I've been thinking about writing a blog on abortion but wasn't sure it fit with Seeing the Forest. This is off the top of my head, but the whole issue is a manufactured lie. Abortion wasn't illegal in this country until 1879. That's important and very few people seem to be aware of this. Abortion wasn't considered immoral or made illegal to protect the "unborn" but because doctors resented the power and skills of midwives, who traditionally looked after women's reproductive health, including childbirth, contraception, and abortion. Don't think for a minute that there weren't safe and effective methods of both contraception and abortion; these were available since antiquity.

The church had sanctioned abortion and contraception since antiquity. There was no concept that the soul inhabited the body from conception. Various dates were proposed through the centuries for when the soul entered the body, but the concern was making sure that any live, soulful babies likely to die in childbirth got baptized so their souls wouldn't end up in limbo. There was no ban on either contraception or abortion until the church began to suffer a drastic loss of membership; the point was originally practical, not moral.

The anti-abortion movement has always been political, not moral.

Posted by: MJ at June 20, 2005 5:30 AM

...fascernatin'. That, I didn't know.

Posted by: Bribes at June 20, 2005 7:00 AM

thanks MJ, especially for mentioning the Roman Catholic Church's changing attitude towards the 'unborn'!
And thanks for the post, Patrick!

Posted by: Helga Fremlin at June 20, 2005 3:21 PM

Posted by: debt consolidation at October 28, 2005 2:58 PM

Three phrases should be among the most common in our daily usage. They are: Thank you, I am grateful and I appreciate.

Posted by: size genetics at December 7, 2005 6:24 PM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?



Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):


Return to main page