Bristol's Choice

John Edwards affair and probable love child was well known, but a taboo subject for the American press for months while he ran for President because his personal life and family weren't relevant. At least that's what we were told by the main stream press when asked why the Enquirer had to break such a major story. Yet...the Newsweek bureau of the Obama campaign finds it fit to print an article with the headline "Bristol's Choice". Bristol who? Is there a Bristol running for office? No Bristol is the 17 year old minor daughter of the VP nominee for President. So of course we don't have to wait months for the Enquirer to give us the gossip....we get it right in a headline. Leaving aside the incredible double standard, complete unfairness, and downright evil minded meanness toward a 17 year old girl, pro-life positions are hardly something new in American Politics. One of "The ONE" key suppoters Gov Casey of PA holds the same pro-life positions. but I doubt if anything short of Gov Palin choosing to chop up and flush her downs syndrome baby, prior to its birth, would satisfy Ms Lithwick in regard to Gov Palin's feminist credentials, but in my opinion she's a true feminist, and doesn't need Ms lithwick's approval to validate her values, and thank God she has some. Oops Ms Lithwich...I'm sorry....I shouldn't have said the G word should I? I hope that "The ONE" and all of his worshippers continue with these disgusting and filthy attacks because I think each one shows what kind of man "The Obama" is, and what kind of people he would empower if elected President!

Here's a quesion, contingent on your stance as being pro-life, and not relating to abortion: Would you take the life of Osama Bin Laden given the chance; or Adolf Hitler had you been in the position to do so?

1973 to 2008; Let's see - is my math correct - that's 35 years? For 35 years many of those supporting Roe vs Wade have tried to terrify people into believing that if this particular case were overturned that the US would immediately fall back to back room, dirty-handed, untrained, money-grubbing murders performing abortions. Frankly, nothing is further from reality. #1 - despite 28 years of Republican administrations - Roe vs Wade hasn't been overturned and McCain-Palin are highly unlikely to get it overturned. But even if it was overturned, what is most likely to happen is that State legislatures would pass their own laws. Now many don't want State legislatures to be involved because - ooohhhh, small-minded parochial state legislators aren't beholden enough to those who support Roe vs Wade. If you support democracy - you support it even when the State legislators don't vote your way. You don't like how they vote - organize, promote, publicize, advocate and get new state legislators. But, please please stop throwing up false premises about Roe vs Wade that 35 years of reality have proven to be false.

it appears that if you haven't aborted at least once the Dems don't want you ...

Fine!

The Dems have the trash - we get the creme dela creme.

No news here!

Ms. Lithwick, you and most of the rest of your party gravely miss the premise of the pro-choice argument. It is not, as you claim, whether grown women are fit to decide to abort a pregnancy. It is that fit or not, abortion is murder. To understand how we feel, please try a simple exercise. Imagine a fully born 1 week-old baby, maybe the result of a rape, maybe with defects, or maybe just not wanted or unexpected. What are the mother's options? Would you argue in that case that the anyone who advocates for that baby's right to live are questioning "whether women are fit" to decide to terminate that baby's life? Of course you wouldn't.

Go ahead, argue that babies aren't alive, or an individual, or a soul, or however you phrase it, until a certain number of weeks or until after labor or whatever the latest science journal has written. We believe that babies are people at the moment of conception, and that they are entitled to the most basic of human rights - life. That has nothing to do with how " fit to decide to abort a pregnancy" a grown woman is. It has everything to do with advocating for the most vulnerable of society for the most fundamental of gifts.

So, let???s get this straight: Palin has requested privacy and compassion for her daughter (which Bristol deserves, btw), but wants to make my daughter???s choices, including sex education and contraception, her business and dictate it through legislature.

Abortion is a hot topic, but let???s make it perfectly clear ??? pro-choice is just that, about choice. Abortion is the last option for the truly pro-choice because it is such a difficult choice. No one is running around willy-nilly saying ???Hey, I think I???ll have an abortion today.??? The preference for pro-choice is Prevention First which includes comprehensive sex education, not abstinence-only, but abstinence along with accurate information about how to protect yourself physically and emotionally. After prevention fails, the choices then fall to keeping the child, adoption or abortion ??? with, again, abortion being the last option. Speak of protecting life all you want, but for those women who have made that extremely difficult decision to have an abortion, at least protect their health and keep them from having to go to back-alley ???doctors??? or doing self-abortions which have lead to numerous women???s deaths as well.

For those who want to make this a religious issue: remember the 1st Amendment, folks? It didn???t say freedom of the religious right ??? it said religion, period. And before anyone gets bent out of shape claiming this country was based on Christianity, let???s remember that Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin were Deists and that John Adams and Robert Treat Paine were Unitarians. Thomas Jefferson was the most ardent supporter of our religious freedom and was the principle author of the Declaration of Independence. Image that ??? a Deist fighting for your rights and everyone else???s. How about keep your theocracy out of our democracy.

If you???re fiscally conservative and worry about handouts, exactly what do you propose to do with the extra population of unwanted children? Many teenage parents end up not going to college and work low-paying jobs, unable to pay for insurance. Our foster care system is overflowing with children that weren???t adopted and broken in so many ways that you can???t even imagine. So, support an unborn child, but as soon as they???re born, ditch them onto the poverty wheel where they belong, right? Worried about big government and spending? Well, your good ole Bushy boy has spent more money than any president in 30 years and has created new department after new department after new department.

Both McCain and Palin have cut budgets for pregnant teens (good thing Bristol comes from a rich family worth $9 mil), continue imposing abstinence-only programs full of lies re: contraceptives, and want insurance companies to stop coverage for birth control. What message does that send out? Consider this warning from Sinclair Lewis when choosing McCain/Palin: "When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.???

There is no "Right to Privacy" in the Constitution. Read it. It is a judicial fiction. Overturning Roe v. Wade would not make abortion illeagal. It would just make states free to pass laws restricting--partially or completly--abortion. I would not support a total ban on abortion personally. However, this matter should be decided by the representive elected by the people--not judges appointed for life. There simply is no constitutional right to an abortion. If you think their should be, support a constitutional amendment. granting a right to an abortion. Even Ginsburg has acknowledged that Roe is a thinly reasoned peice of judicial activism. So much misinformation--from both sides--on this issue.