Comcast rejects antiwar ad

[Liza Featherstone]

This may seem "not unreasonable" to some people. But it is unreasonable to
me, and I daresay I'm not alone. I agree that a single-focus on abortion
rights is ridiculous, and agree that abortion rights without full social
supports for motherhood amount to mandatory abortion for some women -- just
as horrible a form of gender oppression as anything. Agree that supporting
pro-choice Republicans is obscene and makes a mockery of feminism. BUT while
a position like Casey's may be more palatable than that of your run-of-the
mill right-to lifer, it basically amounts to "we support mandatory
motherhood but we'll just try to make it as nice for you as possible." It is
a benevolent patriarchal despotism. You might as well say, well, we've
decided you still have to wear a burka but you can go to medical school. I'm
all for finding common ground and making alliance with enemies -- I even
liked that recent times op-ed on how pro-choicers and pro-lifers could work
together against policies both find horrendous -- but it's pious and
sentimental to tout progressive anti-choicers as "reasonable."

over my limit. sorry.

Liza 


> From: "Nathan Newman" <nathanne at nathannewman.org>
> Reply-To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 12:26:30 -0500
> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>
> Subject: Re: Comcast rejects antiwar ad
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "budge" <budge at el-pleasant.org>
> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>
> Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 12:11 PM
> Subject: Re: Comcast rejects antiwar ad
> 
> 
> On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 at 11:51am Nathan Newman wrote:
>> 
>> I wouldn't vote for this platform but I also wouldn't want
>> to censor the discussion by those who might want to
>> promote it.
> 
> -So Casey wanted to have a discussion about universal health
> -care?  who knew!
> 
> Well, here is how Nat Hentoff, a progressive anti-abortion writer, described
> Bob Casey's priorities.  See
> http://www.swiss.ai.mit.edu/~rauch/nvp/civil/hentoff_casey.html
> 
> "As governor of Pennsylvania from 1987 to 1994, Casey created model
> school-based child-care programs that offered infants and
> preschoolers--including poor children--full-day services and before- and
> after-school programs. That way, teenage parents could stay in school and
> poor adults could go to work knowing their children were safe. He lobbied
> unsuccessfully for universal health care in his state, but, failing that, as
> The New York Times reported in its May 31 obituary, "he did sign a bill
> providing health insurance for children whose families were too poor to pay
> for it but whose incomes were too high to be eligible for public
> assistance." Before breast cancer became a political cliche, Casey invested
> $1 million in awareness and screening for the disease and required HMOs to
> pay for annual mammograms for women over 40. Harvard University pediatrician
> T. Berry Brazelton described Casey's multidimensional health care programs
> for women and children as "a model for the rest of the country."
> 
> This is not an unreasonable program from which to discuss commitments to
> opposing abortion AND supporting women being independent as well.
> 
> -- Nathan Newman
> 
> 
> 
> 
>