Political rant

[clarinka.livejournal.com]

So there was this new thread on the school message boards this morning, and it was all about women's rights, the Democratic party, and how Kerry and Edwards each failed to mention them in their speeches. I consider myself to be reasonably educated on matters of women's rights, since I read up on these things all the time, went to the March for Women's Lives, and volunteer at Planned Parenthood. Things on the boards at school can get ugly, but I try to follow the rules.



I've got to say that I'm all about Anyone But Bush in 2004, provided it's more liberal, and not more conservative. But for me, the deciding arguments are women's and gay rights. Why? They're civil rights in many cases. This is complete and utter bullshit that the ruling party feels like it's somehow okay to marginalize a reasonably large minority (the GLBTQ community). Also, apparently there's been an upswing in pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions for birth control pills and the morning after pill on moral grounds (here's your article: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/Living/birth_control_pharmacists_040406-1.html or you can just google anything along the lines of "refusal to fill birth control prescription").

This is a huge step backwards from the progress that was made in women's rights. The term "partial birth abortion" medically means absolutely nothing, and the procedure that was banned was used almost entirely in terminating catastrophic pregnancies. Last year, the presidents of the Feminist Majority and N.O.W. gave speeches at Bryn Mawr, and while the Great Hall may have been packed to the gills, there should have been more Fords there. The right to plan a family is truly a right that will go away if we fail to protect it. If any one of the judges step down on the Supreme Court, the replacement, if appointed by Bush, will almost surely be anti-choice on the same order that Scalia is anti-gay. This is a huge issue this election year, and while I plan on voting for Kerry, I can only do so with confidence gleaned from the fact that I am quite certain that should Bush win again, not only will abortion be outlawed, but I wouldn't be terribly surprised if hormonal contraception was made next to impossible to obtain.

That is a terrifying thought. An FDA panel reccomended this year that the morning-after pill (which is NOT the same as RU-486, or the "abortion pill") be made available over the counter. That reccomendation was completely ignored. We are one of very few industrialized nations where a prescription is required for EC, and that's totally backwards.

I, too, cannot wait for the Democratic party to grow a spine (thanks, HCO), but until then, I've got to go with Kerry, even though he refuses to talk about women's and gay rights.



Also posted in clarinka.

Comments

[jigglyqueen.livejournal.com]

This angers me and I don't even live in America. Seems like a very frustrating situation.

[silverpixiedust.livejournal.com]

Didn't Kerry mention it in passing during his convention speech? I remember him mentioning how hard he watched his mother work to raise him and that he would fight for equal rights for women. It's certainly not the distinction the topic needed (I don't recall him mentioning gay rights at all), but is it horrible of me to say that it was better than nothing? I remember him mentioning stem cell research as well. Maybe thats a topic not for VP, but it made me happy to hear that he would help the research progress.

I'm not old enough to vote, but I too wish that some spines would appear.

[famecity.livejournal.com]

He did indeed mention women's rights. He also alluded to gay marriage *quite* obliquely.

[aimingforpeace.livejournal.com]

I think the closing remark about not violating the constitution was a jab at Georgie's homophobia. It may not have been, but that's how I'd like to interpret it.

[immaginarylife.livejournal.com]

i wish i could move out of this disgusting country, but i don't want to leave my boyfriend and friends behind. but if king bush the second gets re-elected, i will have to. i'm going to kidnap them and stick them in my suitcase ^-^
this election, it's the vote for the better of the two evils, to me, you know?
kerry isn't really for full gay rights or women's rights, but he's not against it. it's my understanding that he wants to let it be up to the state to allow gay marriages, and then make it to where gays anywhere can have a... sorta civil union type thing, but more rights. it's like, actual marriage for them, but he doesn't call it marriage.
bush on the otherhand wants to illegalize abortion AND gay marriage completely, and he's trying to get away with CHANGING THE CONSTITUTION and making it say that gay marriage is illegal and "morally wrong", which is a load of crap. i can look for the article i found on that and give it to you if you want, though it might make you want to go set fire to the white house and shoot that evil monkey king (oops, am i not allowed to say that because of our lovley "patriot (*cough* communist) act"? whoops. john ashcroft is always watching, boys and girls.
sorry for the rant there
-aya-

[immaginarylife.livejournal.com]

and to add to this, what the hell is up with bush and trying to mainly convince the african americans now (i don't mean to offend with that term, so many apologies if i do) he was the one who ignored their votes in 2000, was he not?
-aya-

[clarinka.livejournal.com]

the patriot act is anything but communist, because it doesn't address economic issues. "Communism" is an economic system, and is fantastic in theory, but never works. You are confusing the totalilarian/fascist state with a communist economic system. The Patriot Act is a fascist act, though. Not communist.

Pet Peeve.

[immaginarylife.livejournal.com]

sorry about that, i do agree with you about communism. it's a wonderful idea, but people take advantage of it and it ends up in dictatorship.
i tend to blurt things out when i'm ranting like that because i'm typing so fast and typing exactly what i'm thinking at that very moment.

[pacificnic.livejournal.com]

it's a wonderful idea, but people take advantage of it and it ends up in dictatorship.

Not true... it's what has happened in the past, emphasized by the media so less people would want communism. It's possible to have a democratic communist system, just like the U.S. currently has a democratic capitalist system.

[jennifer0246.livejournal.com]

mm, political rantage. i heart political rantage.

as for Kerry - I think he's very carefully walking the middleground. doesn't make me happy, but i understand it. you and me, we're the lefties. the people who would rather head to canada than see another Bush term. so basically, we're gonna vote for Kerry anyway. he's trying to appeal to the few who haven't made up their minds. they're likely moderate or slightly conservative, and aren't thrilled with Bush, but not sold on Kerry either. right now, Kerry's got my vote, and that can't change. so i'm honestly okay with him ignoring me in favor of those middleground voters.

in short, i'm not happy that he's not catering to my interests. but i understand it, and am happier having my interests ignored in favor of winning the election, than being catered to and losing.

[pacificnic.livejournal.com]

I suppose you could say, it's better to have our interests ignored under Kerry than have our interests stomped on by Bush?

[jennifer0246.livejournal.com]

for the time being, yes. i don't think Kerry intends to walk the line for the duration of his term, just long enough to get to where he has a term.

[finding_helena]

Yeah, that is about what I am thinking too. I know that all of the extreme lefties would adore to have a president like, oh, say, Dean or whoever, who's very left, but in order to have a president who can get the mandate, they need to be more centrist.

[jennifer0246.livejournal.com]

I'm an extreme leftie. Which gives me no choice other than Kerry.

I understand where you're coming from....

[feckalyn.livejournal.com]

This (http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/women/) made me feel somewhat better as far as women's issues go.

And on gay rights, it's really tough because if he comes out for legalized gay marriage now he risks losing a large portion of his voting block (blue collar workers, people of color). Though I don't agree with the tactic, per se, I think it's politically savvy to leave that issue out for the time being until he wins.

He's WAYYYYY more "liberal" than Gore ever was.

(And, all that said, I still think the man is a putz and really wish we had another choice....)

[septembergrrl.livejournal.com]

Kerry mentioned women's issues at least three times. Here are the passages, from a transcript of his speech (http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/4902000.html):

And by the power of [my mother's] example, she showed me that we can and must finish the march toward full equality for all women in our country.

John Kennedy called my generation to service. It was the beginning of a great journey, a time to march for civil rights, for voting rights, for the environment, for women, and for peace. We believed we could change the world.

As a young prosecutor, I fought for victims' rights and made prosecuting violence against women a priority.

He also specifically mentioned female soldiers and firefighters. Granted, none of this is very specific -- but most of his speech wasn't, and it's good to have a presidential candidate who acknowledges women's issues.

As far as I can tell, Edwards (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/27/politics/campaign/28TEXT-EDWARDS.html) didn't specifically mention women's issues. But he did talk quite a bit about overcoming poverty, which certainly affects women disproportionately.

I agree with your basic point, but I just wanted to point out it wasn't quite as bad as you thought.

[disclaimher.livejournal.com]

The way I see it is, I am going to vote for Kerry because he doesn't seem so set in his ways that he wouldn't buckle to public pressure. A president like Bush scares me to no end becaue he has his own agenda, and regardless of what the populace says, he will continue to push said agenda.
Presidents, if anything, are simply representatives of the country. Bush hasn't really listened to anyone since he got elected (or even before, when he stole the election). I think the protests against the war in Iraq (the largest mass world protest in history) is the perfect example.

Go Kerry!

[clarinka.livejournal.com]

I love Bush's new campaign slogan: "We've turned a corner and we're not turning back!" or something to that effect. Way to alienate all swing voters and liberals, dude. Makes me hate him even more.

[disclaimher.livejournal.com]

Yeah, exactly.
I don't want a leader, I just want someone that will listen.
I was waiting for the perfunctory, "you don't change horses mid-stream!" slogan. I guess, "We've turned a corner and we're not turning back!" just about does it. Gross.

[alryssa.livejournal.com]

Bush/Cheney 04: Why change horses mid-Apocalypse?

;)

[disclaimher.livejournal.com]

Haha.

[cailin-t.livejournal.com]

kerry discussed women's rights in his speech, more than once actually - what?

[jaclyn.livejournal.com]

Kerry's daughter also touched on the abortion debate, stating something along the lines of 'children having control over their own bodies' which brought applause from the crowd.

[clarinka.livejournal.com]

I should amend this, it occurs to me: outside of the original forum, it isn't readily obvious that by "women's issues" I mean "reproductive rights," not "a woman's right to have a job." I forget sometimes how much a post can be extremely forum-dependant, sorry.

That said, all the references Kerry made to women's or gay "issues" or what have you were quite oblique, and for someone like me, that is simply not enough. I live in the Southeastern United States, where getting birth control can be a bit of a debacle and getting an abortion well nigh impossible, and I volunteer at Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania when I'm at college. Some contextual information was necessary that I left out.

Ooops.

Sorry.