in sunday ny times........

"Yet two years into the Bush presidency, it is apparent that reversing or otherwise eviscerating the Supreme Court's momentous 1973 ruling that recognized a woman's fundamental right to make her own childbearing decisions is indeed Mr. Bush's mission. The lengthening string of anti-choice executive orders, regulations, legal briefs, legislative maneuvers and key appointments emanating from his administration suggests that undermining the reproductive freedom essential to women's health, privacy and equality is a major preoccupation of his administration — second only, perhaps, to the war on terrorism.


•

As the 30th anniversary of the Roe decision approaches, women's right to safe, legal abortions is in dire peril.

President Bush's assault on reproductive rights is part of a larger ongoing cultural battle. If abortion were the only target, the administration would not be attempting to block women's access to contraceptives, which drive down the number of abortions. His administration would not be declaring war on any sex education that discusses ways, beyond abstinence, to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Scientifically accurate information about contraceptives and abortion would not have begun disappearing from federal government Web sites."

This may not be a board dedicated to politics,  so what? The points raised are important, and relevant, I thank seventhson to bring it up here ... lighten up

The other topics raised here are trivial compare to the matters we are faced with these days with.

It is the place because if things go Bush's way hobbiest could be doing serious time for what is now just a slap on the hand.

looks like this business always ends up being somebody's poster child for human depravity. The short of it is that everything is politics... did you happen to notice that TBD has a First Amendment board... however flawed it may be, or that TER has a legal board ? THIS board, unless I can't read, is titled General Discussion, which I assume is intended to mean whatever has any bearing on the hobby. If you would care to offer a more precise definition of what a General Discussion ought to be, please be my guest.

No, the sky isn't falling, and nobody said it was. The weather might be changing, though.

If Bush is re-elected,  may become impossible for an American to raise his head anywhere around the globe with pride!  

Even now I am forced to concede we are a nation of morons led by a moron-king/village idiot when challenged by anyone from a real country....

Hard to have to back up in front of italians and french people, but our present predicament is too obvious to cover for.

Ralph Nader screwed us all one time too many... and I love that guy!

Alas, Ralph Nader of today is not the Ralph Nader of 1970. One of the best things about that earlier version was Nader's total lack of self-aggrandizement.

One thing that the George W. administration is doing is introducing a strong ideological bent into the governmental scientific advisory boards. The first of their targets is to outlaw RU-486 as an abortion-inducing drug, which is consistent with their anti-abortion views. My guess is that they will next be going after the birth-control pill. Everyone knows that these pills (in sufficient numbers) are an excellent "morning-after" pill to prevent pregnancy. Since the far right considers this to be an early-term abortion, I would imagine it will be next on the hit parade.

So your (joking?) reference to needing prescriptions for condoms may not be too far off the mark.

-- Modified on 1/13/2003 3:50:09 PM

-- Modified on 1/13/2003 10:06:05 PM

If you want to argue politics with other nuts, there are lots of websites that will accomodate you. Go to DNC.com or Freerepublic.com or somewhere like that.

At least half the members of this board are probably conservative or republican.

Stop with the hysterical postings for a bit.

how many of these buttoned down family men are quietly losing it as they conform to their socially approved roles ?

The story I'm hearing is that most of the customers ( of the higher priced beautiful young thang ) are conservative professionals or business guys. Pillars of the community types and all that.

Better start taking a dose of saltpeter with breakfast, fellas, or they'll be making you wear a scarlet H on your navy blue blazers.

I am conservative, Republican, etc.   I think that my body is my business; your body is your business, etc.  It always amazed me how the Republicans and the Democrats ended up on their respective sides of the abortion argument.  Republicans are basically laissez-faire, so why dictate what a woman can do with her body?  Democrats basically want a nanny state, so they *should* say what a woman can do with her body. This is simplistic, but I think you can get my reasoning without my having to write some huge essay on the topic.

-Hoot.

term certainly accurately describes their approach to business.

The religious right dictates their approach to sex laws.

To this you are 100% correct and this is where I part company with my brethren.

-Hoot.

And my hat's off to you for it.  We need more Republicans like you.  

Now if could just get you to see the liberal side on a few more issues...

Cheers

The religious right doesnt represent the views of all republicans any more than Barbara Streisand represents the views of all democrats (at least i hope not for the sake of all you guys).

For easygoing liberals, you guys are awfully judgemental. Live and let live for a bit.

represents the views of all members of either major party.  However, it remains a fair statement that the views of the national Republican party on laws related to sex are dictated by the religious right, who have in my view become far too powerful a force in your party.  

What I would suggest is that you and HootOwl and other clear-thinking Republicans "take back" your party from those in the religious right and others who do not represent your views.  They tend to have a very punitive attitude toward those Republicans who disagree with them (just ask Ronald Reagan), but that doesn't mean you have to buckle under them. (and I assure you I will do the same with elements of the Democratic party that I disagree with).

Look at Former FBI Directors William Webster's outspoken oppostion to Bush/Ashcroft's attempts to undermine our freedoms as Americans in the name of protecting us from terrorists.  I invite you to join him in defending freedom, even if it means allying yourself with the ACLU, as he has done on this issue.  

By the way, who said liberals were "easy going".  Personally, I get fairly riled up when my freedom is at stake.  I suspect you do too.

the influence of the religious right, then we will have a more balanced and middle of the road debate on various issues.  Unfortunately, most of them fell for the doomsday rhetoric of the left and became single issue voters.  Similiarly that is what happened to the African American electorate.

The political reality is that Democrats and Republicans will switch control every few years.  It works to participate and affect the internal dynamics of each party.