One thing I wish people like him would understand: forced pregnancy is extremist. The opposite extremist position is forced abortion. Which feminists do not advocate-they advocate the moderate position, letting women choose what they want to do with their bodies. I think the insinuation that feminists are the radical ones is ridiculous- we think women shouldn’t die from back-alley abortions and should choose their path in life the same way men do. And no, they are not evil for doing so.

I think basically the guy is out to do two things:
1) Set himself up as looking intelligent and moderate, as opposed to those ‘crazy’ right and left-wingers. Since he’s actually neither of these things he has to stereotype both sides as being nuts.
2) Sell a lot of books by writing politics as some sort of black and white clash of civilizations type story. Its an emotionaly satisfying story where there are the evils of both sides, and him sitting being all moderate in the middle, but it isn’t anything close to what real life is like.

I think your 2) is more likely his 1), and his subsequent numbers are likely ancillary.

But then it’s been a long day, and I’m feeling particularly cynical.

No kings,

Robert

“Derisive” Air Quotes

In an ideal world, people would use contraception so that abortions were unnecessary.

This is a pretty useless argument since we do not live in an ideal world.

There is a right side on the issues, and we have the evidence.

Way to think in black in white, and to cite “evidence” that you don’t back up.

Judging from Zar’s second paragraph, the first paragraph looks awfully sarcastic.

I was wondering how long it would be before someone picked up this (obvious) fact. Of course Zar is being sarcastic. It is beyond hilarious that anyone would take it as serious and then use those arguments. It’s like Pat Buchanan just started citing Steven Colbert as his number one source.

Although if I am wrong and Zar is not being sarcastic then…well…its a sad day when your arguments are so absurd you seem like you’re making a joke, man.

Anybody watch Jon Stewart’s segment on abortion night before last? I don’t remember specifically, but it was pretty similar…

Two misogynists is not equivalent to inciting a mob to violence. It’s not.

Two misogynists don’t make a right, they make a religious right, yah?

*Two misogynists is not equivalent to inciting a mob to violence. It’s not.

In an ideal world, people would use contraception so that abortions were unnecessary. Abortion is not just like any other medical procedure, it’s usually the result of a painful decision-making process and it often has serious long-term emotional consequences.

I’m a man, so I haven’t myself had an abortion, but I know women who have. I think you are taking it lightly in exactly the way that Beckerman’s comment suggests that you shouldn’t.

Also, Rose

PS – I don’t foam at the mouth – it would ruin my lipstick.

Haha, okay that made me laugh out loud. Although don’t forget, what’s the difference between a hockey mom and a pitbull…

Jack is dead on about the fallacy of his argument. Argumentum ad temperantiam isn’t seen often nowadays, but it is still out there. Sigh, THIS is why they need to teach rhetoric classes in schools! People ought to be trained in rhetoric at least somewhat so that they don’t fall for nutty stuff like this. Do you have any idea how much the face of politics would be changed if people just learned their fallacies? Politicians would actually have to make logical arguments, instead of the ethos/pathos BS they spew all too often.