Thanks go to Harold for this gem. . . .
I’ve always observed a profound lack of common sense as a core symptom of liberalism. This is a older article published some 7 or 8 years ago, it is still pertinent today as a good number (if not all) of these characteristics and Saul Alinsky 12 rules seem so interfaced in today’s Liberal Ideology.
Liberalism and Narcissistic Personality Disorder
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth Edition (henceforth “DSM-IV”) describes the clinical criteria necessary for a diagnosis of “Narcissistic Personality Disorder”. In what follows, the clinical diagnostic criteria of DSM-IV are given in bold
Diagnostic criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder
A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts;
As indicated by five (or more) of the following:
(1) Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
How often have we seen this, not only among liberal politicians (Ted Kennedy was an NPD poster) the idea that since they have gone to college everyone should take their word as Gospel. And has anyone exaggerated their achievements and talents more than John Kerry and Joseph Wilson?
(2) Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power or brilliance,
Nothing turns me off faster than some petty little liberal who believes the need and want to “carve their initials in the universe”.
(3) Believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
Example; today’s current Administration and those that support it
(4) Requires excessive admiration
Yes. Liberals require that one admire his politically correct stance on issues regardless of the actual concrete results of following his prescriptions…
(5) Has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
Like Nietzsche, I think I have the ability to smell whiners. And no one whines more than a liberal. They all whine about how the world doesn’t take them seriously and how they should have a higher place in the world than the one they actually occupy.
(6) Is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
There is perhaps nothing that separates liberals from conservatives more than this: that conservatives will weigh the means to achieving an end . Whereas for liberals it is the end that counts and any means are acceptable (including lying, exaggerating, eco-terrorism, or REAL terrorism for that matter…)
(7) Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
Whereas the DSM-III put the clinical emphasis for NPD on the idea of “grandiosity”, the “DSM-IV Revised” rightly places the emphasis here. Empathy is not sympathy. Empathy is the ability to see or perceive that others are different. Others have different life experiences and different goals. That liberals literally can’t understand this leads to two typical liberal responses:
For those who really are different (Islam fascists, neo-communists, dictators), the idea that “They really are just like us! If only we could get Obama, Putin and Kim Jong un together for a game of pool and a coupla beers, we could work this whole thing out!”
And for those who should be like us (the “red states”): That we are being willfully ignorant or evil. After all, the truth is self evident (and I am the judge). So if another American disagrees with me it MUST be because he hasn’t been enlightened (most likely because the capitalist media has brainwashed him) or because he willfully ignores the truth to pursue his own evil agenda
(8) is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her
No comment required.
(9) Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
none here neither.
Thank you Harold. The above so well describes “progressives”, including those who visit this blog. It also is an excellent description of a sociopath. I am convinced that the terms “progressive” and “sociopath” are interchangeable.
Speaking of narcissist personality disorders, how about this from the Hispanic progressive “students” with far too much time on their hands …
http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/17401/
Good post Harold and timely too.
Pie it seems the re-education camp harassment team is out in force these days. I thought democracy was based on majority rule, sure seems like small ankle biting groups rule today…they’re so intolerant too.
Re #4 Tina : Recall when the Soros whore racist (racist by his own criteria) wanna-be-propagandist tried to black-out paint a Princeton student’s reaction to “white privilege” on campus?
Classic.
http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/17230/
Brandeis University cancels a woman who speaks out to inform of the injustice for the way women are treated in Islamic countries. She’s vilified and her life is threatened.
Yet, when 300 girls are taken Michelle Obama holds up a card and is raised to sainthood level for a stupid tweet.
One woman has dedicated her life to save all women from Sharia Law and the other spent 5 minutes to free 300.
Hypocrisy to the extreme.
Klaven sums up the past six years in just over two minutes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dqh2OfsIHQ
Re #6 Peggy : Brilliant.
“Empathy is the ability to see or perceive that others are different.”
Uh, no. It is the ability to identify with people different than you, enabling understanding, and hopefully compromise. (Hence the hopeful beer-bash.)
You dudes cannot get past the “different” part. Hence your incomplete and somewhat corrupted understanding of the term.
And would I be hanging around here if I required “excessive admiration”? No, I just think you’re feeling picked on.
So, don’t post anymore distress and dismay over the economic empowerment of people “different” from you … and I won’t pick on you. I swear, you’d all like to hang a sign around your tax dollars: “Whites Only.”
Norway! You want to learn to speak Norwegian! There you go! You wanna fix those lower orders. You take your social security check (funded by those self-same lower orders) to Norway!
But Libby, we’re different than you, or so you keep telling us. When have you ever identified with us, enabled understanding or sought compromise? We do that all the time with you, but you almost never throw us a bone.
“Empathy is the ability to see or perceive that others are different.”
What this person is saying, is that in order to have empathy for another, one must be able to perceive difference. Liberals think we are all basically good (the same) and so, since they are smart and magnificent, they can clear up the “misunderstandings” in the world just with the addition of their presence. “”We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.” (The sun ‘l come out tomorrow…betcher bottom dollar that tomorrow….)
The writer continues:
It’s quite evident that the writer does understand the words meaning and can apply it to the narcissistic left (We are the world…).
Re #9 Post Scripts :”But Libby, we’re different than you, or so you keep telling us. When have you ever identified with us, enabled understanding or sought compromise? We do that all the time with you, but you almost never throw us a bone.”
Yup, but who needs a bone from Libbya? Seriously.
Shocking! Student loan debt soars to a record $1.11 TRILLION in first three months of year.
Congress increases student aid…universities raise tuition and the money goes into the pockets of the top administrators.
The rich keep on getting richer and the middle-class keep footing the bills. These poor graduates will never be able to afford to buy a home.
Another shocker!
Obama’s buddy Warren Buffett: The Billion-Dollar King of Abortion
‘Oracle of Omaha’ gave $1.2 billion to support pro-abortion groups.
To put that in perspective, Warren Buffett donated enough money to abortion groups to perform as many abortions as there are people in the entire city of Chicago.”
http://www.mrc.org/articles/warren-buffett-billion-dollar-king-abortion?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Marketing&utm_term=Facebook&utm_content=socialflow&utm_campaign=warren-buffett
Peggy, Planned Parenthood has done more to reduce abortion than you ever will.
Wrong Chris. I gave birth to two healthy full-term babies. Planned Parenthood has killed MILLIONS!
My two at least had a chance to grow up and give back to their community. One is even saving lives and homes in the Sacramento Metro area as a firefighter and paramedic.
So, if your house catches fire or you get into a bad accident you can thank me for not aborting him so he could be there to save your sorry a$$.
Actually I don’t have a solid position on Abortion, I feel it it a decision best made by both parties involved.
But I do have this observation to make regarding the post #14.
Peggy’s article was informative on the subject matter as presented.
The comment from poster #14 just reinforced the “Liberals and Narcissistic Personality Disorder” theory to me.
2012 Planned Parenthood Stats (from Planned Parenthood)
327,166 Abortions
1,590,133 “After Morning” pill abortions
2,197 Adoption referrals
Re #14 Chris :
Here are the Planned Parenthood self reported stats from 2000-2012. Note the enormous change in adoption referrals compared to abortion (pill and surgical) from 2000 to 2012.
http://www.lifeissues.org/PP/
Re #16 Harold : “Actually I don’t have a solid position on Abortion, I feel it it a decision best made by both parties involved.
But I do have this observation to make regarding the post #14.
Peggy’s article was informative on the subject matter as presented.
The comment from poster #14 just reinforced the “Liberals and Narcissistic Personality Disorder” theory to me.”
Ditto. Moving from theory to accepted fact.
Regarding abortion, since it is blacks as a group who disproportionally avail themselves of abortion (chemical and surgical) and liberals who champion child execution, who are the racist eugenicists?
Required Reading from David Limbaugh.
Michael Sam Saga Proof That Leftist Thought Police Are On a Tear
“I don’t care that Sam is gay and he will play in the NFL. More power to him. I do care about our society’s becoming Stalinist. Do you?”
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/david-limbaugh/2014/05/13/column-michael-sam-saga-proof-leftist-thought-police-are-tear
Read the column and compare and contrast what is described there to the posts from the anonymous racist cowards Chris, Dewey, and Libby make.
Peggy, Planned Parenthood provides access to contraception to millions of women each year. Affordable contraception is the only measure proven to reduce the abortion rate by 70 percent.
http://healthland.time.com/2012/10/05/study-free-birth-control-significantly-cuts-abortion-rates/
Cutting funds to Planned Parenthood would only increase the rates of unplanned pregnancies and abortions.
Over 90% of abortions occur within the first trimester, before the fetus has a functioning cerebral cortex. That means that at that point the fetus is incapable of producing thought or of feeling anything.
Now, I believe abortion is a tragic circumstance. I believe we should do everything we can to reduce it. But in my opinion, the rights of a thinking, feeling human being to bodily autonomy will always outweigh the rights of a non-thinking, non-feeling human being to live in their body. The moral calculus gets trickier once the fetus has consciousness, which is why most abortions are banned after 28 weeks.
Chris: “But in my opinion, the rights of a thinking, feeling human being to bodily autonomy will always outweigh the rights of a non-thinking, non-feeling human being to live in their body.”
Therein lies the difference. You believe a fetus is not a human being until it can think and feel. And I believe it’s a human being at the time of conception.
I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again. Women don’t give birth to kittens and puppies. The life that is growing in them is a child.
One has to ask if the next George Washington, Albert Einstein, or the scientist that finds a cure for all cancers ended up in a garbage bag in a landfill someplace.
“The moral calculus gets trickier once the fetus has consciousness, which is why most abortions are banned after 28 weeks.”
Moral calculus? Are you kidding me?!! There is no moral calculus. It’s either right or wrong. It can’t be factored by the scale of moral vs. immoral.
You believe it’s all right to kill a baby that’s been alive for less than 28 weeks and I believe it’s wrong.
Margaret Sanger’s goal of reducing the minority population is being fulfilled by people like you, while I and other conservatives believe ALL babies have a right to live.
PS. I’m 100% in favor of birth control. If PP wants to provide free pills that prevent pregnancy and condoms I have no problem at all.
But, when they start giving the morning after pill to 12 year olds without notifying her parents first and doing abortions on demand I can’t and won’t support it ever.
Re #22 Chris : “I believe abortion is a tragic circumstance.”
While ignoring that it is a federally funded practice of murder/torture execution that “outweighs” the rights of the most disenfranchised and innocent among us.
Re-read that statement from this horror monkey from hell — “non-thinking, non-feeling”.
That is absolute bullshit from a creep more evil than Nazis gassing human beings.
THIS is the sort of mentality we are up against.
Re: #26,,,, Pay the man ,, he is!
Me: “But in my opinion, the rights of a thinking, feeling human being to bodily autonomy will always outweigh the rights of a non-thinking, non-feeling human being to live in their body.”
Peggy: “Therein lies the difference. You believe a fetus is not a human being until it can think and feel. And I believe it’s a human being at the time of conception.”
Peggy, as you can see quite clearly by the portion of my comment that you quoted, I do acknowledge that the fetus is a human being. I simply said that they are a non-thinking, non-feeling human being.
Pie takes issue with this and accuses me of being worse than a Nazi (hm, looks like I got off easy today!) but he ignores that this is a simple scientific fact. Without a functioning cerebral cortex, a human is incapable of producing thought or of sensing anything around them.
Certainly many pro-choice people have said that fetuses are not “human beings,” but that is a dumb argument. Of course they are human beings. The question is over whether they should be considered legal persons. And if so, if their rights should outweigh the rights of a pregnant woman who wants to abort.
I don’t believe we as a society should give legal personhood to humans without a functioning cerebral cortex. It’s the same logic behind our treatment of braindead medical patients; we don’t require that hospitals keep them on life support until they regain function, we leave that decision to the families. The same decision should be left to pregnant women when it comes to the human being they are carrying inside of them.
I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again. Women don’t give birth to kittens and puppies. The life that is growing in them is a child.
One has to ask if the next George Washington, Albert Einstein, or the scientist that finds a cure for all cancers ended up in a garbage bag in a landfill someplace.
“The moral calculus gets trickier once the fetus has consciousness, which is why most abortions are banned after 28 weeks.”
Moral calculus? Are you kidding me?!! There is no moral calculus. It’s either right or wrong. It can’t be factored by the scale of moral vs. immoral.
You believe it’s all right to kill a baby that’s been alive for less than 28 weeks and I believe it’s wrong.
Margaret Sanger’s goal of reducing the minority population is being fulfilled by people like you, while I and other conservatives believe ALL babies have a right to live.
– See more at: http://www.norcalblogs.com/postscripts/2014/05/12/liberals-narcissistic-personality-disorder/#comment-37645
Chris: “I simply said that they are a non-thinking, non-feeling human being.”
Sad so admit you are the best example for your own argument.
This discussion is over since it’s impossible to reason with someone without feelings and the ability to understand anything beyond their own point of view.
Re #28 Chris: Without a functioning cerebral cortex, a human is incapable of producing thought or of sensing anything around them.
Including you. May I suggest a late term abortion on Chris?
This is the calculus of the left. Of the progressive — to remove humanity from humanity. To disenfranchise the innocent potential and treat them like so much protein paste garbage.
This is Chris.
Peggy: “Sad so admit you are the best example for your own argument.
This discussion is over since it’s impossible to reason with someone without feelings and the ability to understand anything beyond their own point of view.”
Peggy, what are you talking about?
Are you disputing my factual claim that fetuses with no functional cerebral cortex do not have the ability to think and feel?
Are you arguing that fetuses have the ability to think and feel prior to having a functional cerebral cortex?
Do you have any scientific evidence to show that I am wrong?
It’s interesting that conservatives so frequently accuse liberals of relying on emotion in arguments rather than logic, but in this particular discussion, you and Pie have provided no logical counterpoint to the fact that fetuses without a cerebral cortex do not have the capacity to think or feel. You have instead accused me of having no emotions and attempted to shame me for presenting biological facts.
Which is it? Am I too emotional, or not emotional enough?
Peggy: “One has to ask if the next George Washington, Albert Einstein, or the scientist that finds a cure for all cancers ended up in a garbage bag in a landfill someplace.”
This is a bad argument; a pro-choicer could just as easily argue that the next Charles Manson or Adolf Hitler is just as likely to be aborted.
“Moral calculus? Are you kidding me?!! There is no moral calculus. It’s either right or wrong. It can’t be factored by the scale of moral vs. immoral.”
That’s silly. Abortion is a case where there are rights in conflict. The pregnant woman has the right to bodily autonomy, and the fetus has the right to life. (I actually don’t believe one can have rights until they have neural activity, but for the sake of argument, let’s say fetuses have the right to life at conception.) When a woman wants an abortion, these rights are in conflict. The phrase “moral calculus” is perfectly reasonable when it comes to assessing whose rights are outweighed in this situation.
There are grey areas in life, and this is one of them.
“You believe it’s all right to kill a baby that’s been alive for less than 28 weeks and I believe it’s wrong.”
I believe it’s important to distinguish a fetus from a baby. A baby is a born human who lives outside of a woman’s body, so of course killing a baby is unjustifiable; there is no conflict of rights (life v. bodily autonomy) in such a case.
I understand there are a few crackpots who argue that born children should be able to be killed too, but that makes no sense and is in fact just as sexist as anything, in that it erases women’s bodily autonomy from the argument. People don’t have an indiscriminate right to kill their children. They have the right to control their bodies. Born children cannot be killed because they are not occupying the body of another to live. (Yes, they do take a lot of taking care of, but the existence of adoption means that killing is not a legitimate option. If artificial wombs existed that fetuses could be transferred to, killing fetuses would not be morally permissible either. Maybe some day.)
“Margaret Sanger’s goal of reducing the minority population is being fulfilled by people like you, while I and other conservatives believe ALL babies have a right to live.”
Margaret Sanger believed in providing black families the ability to choose and plan their families. She worked closely with black leaders, and even MLK said he was honored to receive the Margaret Sanger award from Planned Parenthood. Yes, she had a very patronizing attitude toward the black community, as did most people, but she was progressive on race for her time.
The goal today is not to reduce the black population (why would liberals, who benefit from the black vote, even want that?), it’s to provide choice so that already-born African-Americans can have more opportunities.
Re #32 Chris : “The goal today is not to reduce the black population (why would liberals, who benefit from the black vote, even want that?), it’s to provide choice so that already-born African-Americans can have more opportunities.”
Chris, thank you so much for the clarification. The GOAL TODAY of the progressive Hitler Youth left is to execute the unborn — in particular the black unborn — in order to provide more opportunities for the black living.
Got it.
Please allow me to rephrase the above …
Re #32 Chris : “The goal today is not to reduce the black population (why would liberals, who benefit from the black vote, even want that?), it’s to provide choice so that already-born African-Americans can have more opportunities.”
Chris, thank you so much for the clarification. The GOAL TODAY of the progressive Hitler Youth left is to execute the unborn — in particular the more melanin endowed unborn — in order to provide more opportunities for the more melanin endowed living.
Got it.
Will Chris still feel the same after his first child is conceived? Will he only want to protect and love it after it becomes a “thinking and feeling” human being as defined by some cold scientific study? How about after his child is born? Will he look in its face and ever consider it as other than a precious, vulnerable human being of his and his wife’s creation from its conception on?
I hope the experience, if and when it comes, fundamentally transforms this practicing “intellectual”.
“Abortion is a case where there are rights in conflict. The pregnant woman has the right to bodily autonomy”
A complete lie, fabricated to justify an irresponsible “choice” to end the new life that she, together with a man of her choice in most cases, put in her body. She made her choice but doesn’t want to responsibly handle the consequences of that choice. Anyone who embarks on a plan to do something he/she knows to be morally wrong NEEDS such lofty justifications. In an awful lot of cases it doesn’t work and deep guilt, remorse and regret is the price she pays in this life.
There could be others. New research finds higher incidences of breast cancer in women that have had an abortion.
Abortion is a get out of jail free card…temporary but expedient.
#35 Tina : Perhaps I should not be so subtle. I do tend to vacillate between the subtle and the outrageously obvious.
The point here is that The GOAL TODAY, as expressed by the our progressive Hitler Youth is to execute the unborn — in particular the more melanin endowed unborn — in order to provide more opportunities for the more melanin endowed living.
That is one hell of an economic policy.
It seems to me that instead of destroying the family and practicing progressive eugenics there could be more effective, practical, and humane economic policies.
But heck, who am I to argue with a left-wing progressive Hitler youth who thinks unborn human beings are little more than a protein paste drag on the economy.
Like Telly Savalas said when playing the television character “Kojack”, “Who loves ya, baby?”
Er, “Kojak”.
Tina: “Will Chris still feel the same after his first child is conceived?”
I wish you could see my eyes rolling right now. This is such a terrible, emotionally manipulative, silly argument. Do you think there is no such thing as pro-choice parents? My stepmom has had four children and she still believes in a woman’s right to choose. Does that make her cold and unfeeling? Does that make her love her children any less?
Me: “Abortion is a case where there are rights in conflict. The pregnant woman has the right to bodily autonomy”
Tina: “A complete lie…”
Wow. It’s nice to know that you don’t believe women have a right to bodily autonomy; no wonder you think a fetus’ rights outweigh those of the woman. I guess this conversation is over, since if you believe women’s rights simply don’t even enter into the equation (much like those who believe children can be killed after they are born), then there’s no sense in talking to you.
If you have any desire to actually convince others, Tina, it would be advisable to stop picking out the worst possible arguments from the rhetorical garbage bin to support your position. If all you wish to do here is preach to the choir and bitch and moan about eeeevil Democrats together, then party on, Garth.
With any luck, Chris will have the government pay to abort any of the protein paste he has the luck to create.
Chris: “My stepmom has had four children and she still believes in a woman’s right to choose. Does that make her cold and unfeeling?”
I’m not here to discuss your stepmom and I’ve never said I oppose women having the right to choose. I reserve the right to tell them over and over that they also have the responsibility to make better choices and to insist they get behind doing that. Much too often women are choosing badly and irresponsibly and it’s because “choice” offers a sense of entitlement…entitlement without strings.
I reserve the right to insist that if they find themselves seeking an abortion they have already made their choice and should then do what is right for the human being their choice to couple produced.
I reserve the right to demand an accounting…RARE…that was the promise in the plea for the legal decision we now call “a womans’s right to choose”!
I have a right to express my opinion that when they embrace this phony entitlement they make women appear selfish, unfeeling, irresponsible, and infantile…pretending that the act procreation does not produce the very thing it was intended to produce!
A woman’s right to choose…justification to assuage guilt allowing the easy way out.
The time to induce responsible choice is before you choose to do the deed! We should be pounding that into young girls heads instead of this phony “choice” BS.
But no, Chris…I was wondering what it will be like for you.
” It’s nice to know that you don’t believe women have a right to bodily autonomy; no wonder you think a fetus’ rights outweigh those of the woman.”
Yeah, because everybody knows a woman’s rights are above everything, right trump life every time by golly! Including a completely innocent and vulnerable human life that she, by her own actions, her choice has placed in her womb. Don’t bother with exceptions and excuses; I am speaking of the general standards we aspire to meet!
“…since if you believe women’s rights simply don’t even enter into the equation”
No! Since if she believes herself qualified to be called a woman and act like a grown woman, she is also qualified, should be/feel compelled, to do the right thing by that baby!
“If you have any desire to actually convince others, Tina, it would be advisable to stop picking out the worst possible arguments ”
The reason you can say this with that outlandish sense of superiority is that you have killed any discussion by banning certain opinions. Your words of advice and derision are meant to be discussion stoppers…you know that. Great bubble formation. Not buying the feminist crap. Most women who do haven’t thought much about it in my opinion…they do want to fit in and feel included.
One of the ugliest of all pretenses of the left is that they frame their bad ideas in pretty/attractive sounding words. “A woman’s right to choose” sounds reasonable if you never look closely at what the choice is and what it means.
” If all you wish to do here is preach to the choir and bitch and moan about eeeevil Democrats together, then party on, Garth.”
You are not the choir. I’ve engaged most often with you. the last retort shows me you are still happy to just be a jerk.
Pie: “That is one hell of an economic policy”
If you’ll pardon the expression, it’s the “killing two birds with one stone” approach…and it doesn’t give life to the economy either!
Dewey: Why should we start with what a book said 2000 years ago? People are being murdered in the name of Allah right now Dewey. Look Dewey, in case you haven’t noticed this fact, but Christians aren’t practicing the burning, stoning, hanging bit anymore, they quit. They realized how barbaric it was…get it? But, Muslims are still doing it and worse and it’s spreading…and that ought to have your attention more than some old passage in the Bible that nobody in their right mind subscribes too.
“New research finds higher incidences of breast cancer in women that have had an abortion.”
Tina, darling … you are one sick puppy … and a female puppy … pain you though I’m sure it does.
Why because I read?
Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer:
See also here and here.
The deniers are abortion supporters and providers…no large leap required.
Re #41 Tina: “You are not the choir. I’ve engaged most often with you. the last retort shows me you are still happy to just be a jerk.”
Tina, it is one thing to believe that a fetus’ right to life outweighs a woman’s right to bodily autonomy, even if the fetus does not yet have any neural activity.
But that is not what you said. You said that it was a “lie” to say that a woman has the right to bodily autonomy at all.
I’ll give you a chance to correct yourself, if this is not what you meant. Do you believe that women have a general right to bodily autonomy? (Note that this is a separate question from whether or not you believe that women have the right to have an abortion. You can believe that women have the right to control their own bodies, AND believe that a 0-week old fetus’ right to life outweighs that right.)
I don’t think anyone has the right to take the life of a child in the womb except in very limited cases and then it should be a private decision between the couple (wishfull thinking), the doctor, and God.
“Bodily autonomy” is a made up phrase that I think was/is mumbo jumbo used to justify an abhorrent practice.
I will take this opportunity to apologize in advance if I miss responding to questions in some of our recent discussions. I’m on my way out of town for about a week. I may get an opportunity to post an occasional comment but it’s not very likely. I’ll still be around tomorrow in and out.
You guys enjoy yourselves and don’t fight 😉
Tina: ““Bodily autonomy” is a made up phrase that I think was/is mumbo jumbo used to justify an abhorrent practice.”
Well, that’s just ignorant. The concept of bodily autonomy is very old and applies to a lot more than just abortion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodily_integrity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomy
I was unaware of the word as a legal construct.
I was referring to the social use by those who push abortion, “It’s my body and I can do what I want.”
However, to challenge you legal point, we do have laws relating to suicide:
And, your own second Wikipedia link offers this:
Autonomy is not about selfish interest, particularly when another life is involved.
So ignorance is using what has been a moral and ethical guide as an excuse for self interest over the life of another human being. The level of personal responsibility in creating that other human being is enormous…giant…and, in my opinion, that life should take precedence over personal self-interest in most cases! The woman has a high level of responsibility to protect that human being through birth (and beyond). When a woman has irresponsible engaged in activities that lead to pregnancy (unmarried) she has already betrayed her responsibility to any child she conceives because morally and ethically she has a responsibility to see that any child she conceives has the best possible chance in life. I strongly believe that a society that has any lesser level of respect for human reproduction, a lesser standard that marriage with a committed father and mother, has no chance of remaining civil…failure is only a matter of time.
Our nation has traveled down the path of personal rights to a ridiculous degree. As human beings we have responsibilities, many of them concern serious consequences, and it’s long past time for us to start looking at those responsibilities. Infants are absolutely demanding without awareness of the needs of others. An adult is aware and responsible. We have been teaching people to be infantile.
Tina: “So ignorance is using what has been a moral and ethical guide as an excuse for self interest over the life of another human being.”
I wasn’t using bodily autonomy as an excuse. I was saying that one needs to at least recognize the right of bodily autonomy in a conversation about abortion, even if one believes that the fetus’ right to life outweighs the woman’s right to bodily autonomy.
Thanks for acknowledging that the right to bodily autonomy does exist. I understand that your argument is that this right is compromised once a person consents to sex, and that once that is done a woman’s responsibility to care for the new life outweighs her right to bodily autonomy. I disagree with this, but it is at least the best argument from the pro-life side, so I can respect your position.
Chris: “I wasn’t using bodily autonomy as an excuse.”
Good for you. But that doesn’t mean it hasn’t been used in mumbo jumbo fashion as an excuse. Women, particularly young women (girls really) are not served by such moral mumbo jumbo justifications!
“Thanks for acknowledging that the right to bodily autonomy does exist.”
Certainly. I have always said I enjoy PS because it offers an opportunity to learn and expand understanding and knowledge!
“I can respect your position”
Thanks…it’s a beginning.
I don’t agree that it’s “mumbo jumbo.” When people use the bodily autonomy argument in the abortion debate, they are saying that a person’s right to bodily autonomy outweighs the fetus’ right to life. Again, you may disagree with that argument, but that’s where the real debate is, and I think pro-lifers and pro-choicers could stop talking past each other if they both realized that. There is quite a body of work supporting the idea that bodily autonomy allows for abortion, and a lot of thought has been put into this argument, so I don’t think it’s fair to dismiss it as “mumbo jumbo.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Defense_of_Abortion
““Bodily autonomy” is a made up phrase that I think was/is mumbo jumbo used to justify an abhorrent practice.”
Good God, Tina … how about you give me one of your kidneys. I need it. You can get by with one. Come on. Hand it over.
(Geez, you can be dim.)
Libby dear we have laws that protect your kidneys. Thanks to the legal shenanigans that was the Roe V. Wade decision, and years of mumbo jumbo propaganda, unborn children have not faired so well!
Legal and RARE, remember! Women would be too moral to let this get out of hand. Girls that had been raped and babies that were badly malformed, yada, yada, yada!
(You too can be dim)
And we have, still, a legal tradition that protects me from fundamentalist idealogues and/or baby farmers based in this doctrine that you can’t tell me what to do with my body parts.
Why can you not grasp this?
Why can you not grasp that I have not attempted to “tell” you “what to do”. I have not proposed a single law.
I have proposed to women that reproduction is a big responsibility that we should take more seriously! I have expressed my opinion about the standard I believe we should uphold as women. I have put my voice out into the universe to say a civilized society should maintain a high standard in order to maintain a civil society. Why is it that just expressing this opinion bothers you so much?
Unless, it makes sense on some level?
I know it’s a conundrum. YOU don’t want to tell other women what to do. YOU don’t even like the suggestion that women should seriously rethink their value system and how and when they choose to “relate”.
But Libby…millions of babies conceived when they should not have been, especially with all of the methods of birth control available to women.
Why is it just fine that we can simply flush the kid…rid ourselves of the little problem…avoid the responsibility of our choices…as if that “thing” had perpetrated an invasion (As Chris often seems to suggest)?
Women who can think like this do not deserve the terms liberated, independent, or adult. They don’t demonstrate the ability to make sound judgements. they don’t demonstrate human concern and yet they pass themselves off as role models to young women.
Geez its like Dracula and the cross. You can’t even consider that maybe we’ve not done right with this option that was supposed to be rare because we are such moral people?
I do!
So, you are divorcing yourself from the legion of conservatives who’ve been fomenting restrictive state legislation all across the land?
Well … that’s good to hear.
But it does not negate the fact that restrictive state legislation has been enacted the length and breadth of the land … which kind of belies your assertion that individual women would make the right choices … sans such legislation … and barring our pernicious influence, of course.
In fact, if you really believe what you just said, we would not be having this discussion. You would be content to live your principles, and let it be … but you’re not … are you?
Libby: “So, you are divorcing yourself from the legion of conservatives who’ve been fomenting restrictive state legislation all across the land?”
I know, you can’t comprehend individuals, you’re used to liberals who run only in packs.
“But it does not negate the fact that restrictive state legislation has been enacted the length and breadth of the land..”
Oh my! People in other states daring to exercise their Constitutional right to petition within state governments and express their collective preferences.
“which kind of belies your assertion that individual women would make the right choices ”
Go back and read again. The assertion that individuals would make right choices was the trash that liberals spewed to get Roe won. People will often take the easy way out or slide to the lowest standard. If they didn’t we wouldn’t need laws. We are talking about human life, not whether its okay to wear black after Easter. This is important weighty stuff.
” You would be content to live your principles, and let it be … but you’re not … are you? ”
Not any more than the next guy. Feminists are not content to “live their principles; they are constantly telling people what to do and how to live…in fact they kinda earned that “bossy” label. Besides, you’re the one who is always saying, “You will do it and like it.”
Hey, it’s been fun and I look forward to more discussions in the future.
Right now I got catch some Zzzzzzzzzzzz. And tomorrow I’m off on a six day adventure.
Night all.
“Feminists are not content to “live their principles; they are constantly telling people what to do and how to live ….”
Ah, but that is not true. If that were true, there would be legally mandated restrictions to child-bearing: psychological assessments and income requirements.
You are the ones making restrictive legislation.
Lecturing is not legislation. You don’t want to be talked down to, then don’t say horrible things in public … that’s a consequence of free speech, and you have to stick it.
But nobody is MAKING you DO anything.
Merry Christmas and much happiness in the New Year!