Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Vector]

I am unconcerned.

[CoughDrop]

If I have to argue under the banner of "Pro-Death" in order to get women their reproductive rights, I'll do it.

I do not like the "pro-life" moniker, because it ignores the life of the woman; often, literally so, and is thus mendacious in the extreme.  Certainly, the "pro-choice" moniker ignores the choice-making ability of the fetus; on the other hand, I do not see anyone asking newborns what their major will be.

I don't think these terms are quite equal by way of truth-value.  Opinions?

Strongly Agree. It's not like you're going to keep people from changing the titles of their righteous quests to match current euphemisms, though.

[Willfor]

Right, well, I only have problems with "pro-life" because of the implication that anybody else must logically be "anti-life" or "pro-death" or however you want to phrase it.

Then you must have equal concerns with Progressive?

[Vector]

Given that one group is attempting to generally keep the status quo, or something already experienced, and the other is attempting to chart new territory, I see no issue with the co-option of this terminology.

[G-Flex]

Given that one group is attempting to generally keep the status quo, or something already experienced, and the other is attempting to chart new territory, I see no issue with the co-option of this terminology.

And if someone wants to change the status quo and chart new territory in a way or in a direction that happens to be contrary to the social and economic views held by progressives?

[Willfor]

Given that one group is attempting to generally keep the status quo, or something already experienced, and the other is attempting to chart new territory, I see no issue with the co-option of this terminology.

Charting new territory is a bit a false name for what is happening. The territory has already been charted, and there is a plan to move toward it. Whether this is progress or not is yet to be determined, and will only be determined in retrospect. You only know that you have progressed when you reach a further position down the road.

Eugenics attempted to move forward into new places too, and people called it a progressive move in its time. Surprisingly, it was not.

There are other movements out there not related to the political battles you're engaged in, or moving in another direction that could equally be described as Progressive.

[Bauglir]

I'm not quite sure how to phrase the problem I see with the terminology as it stands. "Life" is too broad a term? Not quite that, the same charge can be leveled at "Choice", but the latter seems to better summarize the position being endorsed. The "pro-life" thing is very much a movement aimed at achieving a negative result (by which I mean, it's meant to ensure something is not the case, not that it is; nothing ethical in that description), so "pro-" anything doesn't exactly work. Fuck, even if they called it "anti-death", that'd be slightly better, if still rather disingenuous.

This is very much rambling, yeah.

Then you must have equal concerns with Progressive?

Actually, no! Progressive doesn't necessarily imply moral value unless you already think that change is inherently good. I suppose the word does have positive connotations associated with it, but hardly to the same extent as "life"; so maybe, on further consideration, I might have similar problems, but definitely not equal. The magnitude is pretty different, even being charitable.

For that matter, I'd argue that those movements you mentioned in your more recent post actually were "progressive", but they weren't progressive toward a goal I'd care to see approached. Honestly, you made my point better than I did.

EDIT: Ah-ha! I have got it. Here's the problem.

As a pro-choice guy, I would be satisfied on the issue if every woman had the option, no matter what she chose. Every woman could choose not to have an abortion, and assuming they made that decision freely (a huge assumption, but bear with me), I would be okay with that as far as my arguments about this are concerned (there might be individual issues like income and all that, but that's a different thing as far as I'm concerned; it's not about principle). The implication of that is that my opposition does not want women to have that choice, which is true (and necessarily so).

Were I a pro-life guy, I would be satisfied if every fetus was saved. That is true. The implication with the language, though, is that your opposition wants the fetuses to die. Nobody (who is taken seriously, I hope) argues that pro-choice people want mandatory abortions whenever it's considered, but the implication is still there in the language. "Hey, this guy wants babies to die". That isn't true; I could be perfectly happy if no abortion ever happened, as long as the option existed. A pro-life guy would only be happy if the option didn't exist, because if it does, then either it's being used or it is pretty pointless.

[Vector]

*shrug*

As long as people are trying something new, I really don't care.  Not all progressives are made equal.

Hell, if you like I'd almost rename this the "equal rights rage thread," because that's what it's really about--and I'd have little issue with folks who prefer inequality taking whatever name they like to oppose that, though I've got no idea what they'd call themselves.  The "Protect the children" party?

Feh.

[Willfor]

Actually, no! Progressive doesn't necessarily imply moral value unless you already think that change is inherently good. I suppose the word does have positive connotations associated with it, but hardly to the same extent as "life"; so maybe, on further consideration, I might have similar problems, but definitely not equal. The magnitude is pretty different, even being charitable.

I think you're underestimating the weight people give the term "progress". It's possibly the most charged word I know. If you look back at the 20th Century, and look at the word that got people from point A to point B, it was the notion that we were moving forward through a new period of unprecedented social and technological progress. This is a concept that people have invested their entire lives into. There were World Fairs dedicated to it. It was used to justify everything from weapons systems to massive infrastructure projects to going to the moon.

This is a word people have died for, quite literally. And I think you'll find that there is a number of people who would rather have progress than life. Not as large, perhaps, but enough to ensure that this is a word that should at least be given some value.

It may not be tied to morals directly, but it is a driving force behind the morals we have, because it creates new things that we must have morals for.


I think people are misunderstanding me. I don't care if you use the word Progressive for yourself. All I want you to do is think about how you're using it, and what it means to the people who are around you.

[Vector]

There's a reason why I identify myself neither as a feminist, nor as a progressive, offline.

[Heron TSG]

I don't identify with most 'movements', because there are few that I fully agree with. 'Liberal' is about the closest I get.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I don't even bother with the Liberal/Moderate/Conservative labels anymore. It's too much of a pain to identify as any of them. I used to call myself a "Moderate" just to get away from the label connotations, but now even that is too troublesome. 

[Kay12]

I have a hard time finding political labels that suit my views too... probably because I'm both cynic and utopistic at the same time.

[Siquo]

I don't identify with most 'movements', because there are few that I fully agree with. 'Liberal' is about the closest I get.

Yes, I had that as a sig a long time ago. I wish there was a movement I could 100% agree with and blindly side myself with to crusade against the unjust.

Instead I'm burdened with a critical mind and my own moral compass and have to think everything over myself. It's lonely.

[Rose]

regarding politics and political parties, I'll happily side with whichever one will give me well maintained roads and steady power.