Comments on: South Dakota Takes Another Step Backwards http://dancody.org/archives/south-dakota-takes-another-step-backwards.html Progressive commentary & Wisconsin politics by Daniel Cody of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Wed, 20 Aug 2008 06:54:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Yeah Boy http://dancody.org/archives/south-dakota-takes-another-step-backwards.html#comment-2395 Yeah Boy Wed, 08 Mar 2006 23:45:04 +0000 http://dancody.org/wordpress/?p=838#comment-2395 <i>It's not a baby</i> When does it become a baby? I understand your argument - and to the be fair, your argument applies to "the left" defining abortion as "women's rights", "the right to choose", etc. instead of calling it what it is. (Thanks for your explanation, BTW) It’s not a baby

When does it become a baby?

I understand your argument - and to the be fair, your argument applies to “the left” defining abortion as “women’s rights”, “the right to choose”, etc. instead of calling it what it is.

(Thanks for your explanation, BTW)

]]> By: Dan http://dancody.org/archives/south-dakota-takes-another-step-backwards.html#comment-2394 Dan Wed, 08 Mar 2006 23:37:52 +0000 http://dancody.org/wordpress/?p=838#comment-2394 The same reason that hostages are referred to by name when family members make pleas for their lives... it's an attempt to personalize the situation and try to get an emotional response out of the people they're trying to communicate with by seeing their hostage not just as that, but as a real person with a life and family. Which of course they are, and I'm not comparing a person who's a hostage to a embryo before you make that point.. I'm talking about emotional responses. Similar, although not exactly the same, to an anti-abortion advocate calling an embryo a 'baby'. It's not a baby, but they want us to think of a giggling cooing 'baby' and elicit the emotional response that comes along with thinking about a baby when they're talking about abortion. The same reason that hostages are referred to by name when family members make pleas for their lives… it’s an attempt to personalize the situation and try to get an emotional response out of the people they’re trying to communicate with by seeing their hostage not just as that, but as a real person with a life and family. Which of course they are, and I’m not comparing a person who’s a hostage to a embryo before you make that point.. I’m talking about emotional responses.

Similar, although not exactly the same, to an anti-abortion advocate calling an embryo a ‘baby’. It’s not a baby, but they want us to think of a giggling cooing ‘baby’ and elicit the emotional response that comes along with thinking about a baby when they’re talking about abortion.

]]> By: Yeah Boy http://dancody.org/archives/south-dakota-takes-another-step-backwards.html#comment-2393 Yeah Boy Wed, 08 Mar 2006 23:24:08 +0000 http://dancody.org/wordpress/?p=838#comment-2393 <i>it's based more off a cicumstancial emotional respose than anything else</i> Can you explain this statement further? it’s based more off a cicumstancial emotional respose than anything else

Can you explain this statement further?

]]> By: Dan http://dancody.org/archives/south-dakota-takes-another-step-backwards.html#comment-2392 Dan Wed, 08 Mar 2006 16:11:49 +0000 http://dancody.org/wordpress/?p=838#comment-2392 Well the courts and a majority of American's disagree with you in terms of who controls a womans body and her right to make her own choices about her own health. And the attempt to personalize a collection of cells as a real person who would be 'murdered' is commonly used by the anti-choice people, but like most of the canned argument from that side of the fence, it's based more off a cicumstancial emotional respose than anything else. I see you're from SDSU.. Student? Well the courts and a majority of American’s disagree with you in terms of who controls a womans body and her right to make her own choices about her own health.

And the attempt to personalize a collection of cells as a real person who would be ‘murdered’ is commonly used by the anti-choice people, but like most of the canned argument from that side of the fence, it’s based more off a cicumstancial emotional respose than anything else.

I see you’re from SDSU.. Student?

]]> By: Michael http://dancody.org/archives/south-dakota-takes-another-step-backwards.html#comment-2391 Michael Tue, 07 Mar 2006 23:01:13 +0000 http://dancody.org/wordpress/?p=838#comment-2391 you may have sovereignty over your own body, but not over the body of the baby growing in the womb. That is a separate individual and killing him/her would not be less than murder. you may have sovereignty over your own body, but not over the body of the baby growing in the womb. That is a separate individual and killing him/her would not be less than murder.

]]> By: mxp http://dancody.org/archives/south-dakota-takes-another-step-backwards.html#comment-2390 mxp Sat, 25 Feb 2006 05:47:47 +0000 http://dancody.org/wordpress/?p=838#comment-2390 what a shame that such a beautiful landscape doesn't enlighten them to issues like, well, sovereignty over your body and not just your property. what a shame that such a beautiful landscape doesn’t enlighten them to issues like, well, sovereignty over your body and not just your property.

]]> By: Mich http://dancody.org/archives/south-dakota-takes-another-step-backwards.html#comment-2389 Mich Sat, 25 Feb 2006 04:18:23 +0000 http://dancody.org/wordpress/?p=838#comment-2389 This ruling caught my attention way up here too. A sad day for sure. This ruling caught my attention way up here too. A sad day for sure.

]]>