[eDebate] ???Overturning Roe v Wade????

dbteam dbteam
Mon Apr 10 11:55:13 CDT 2006


i see several intelligent people posting in this thread, and am shocked that 
the thoughts are so myopic.

set aside the notion that debate may actually have educational benefits for a 
person if they are encouraged/required to research and - yes - even advocate a 
position they personally don't believe in.

set that aside because it's not even necessary to answer the outrage posted.

hello? Overturning Roe v Wade does not automatically equate to outlawing 
abortion. the fuckin decision actually LIMITS a woman's right to terminate 
pregnancy and the state's authority to circumscribe that right based on a 
trimester sliding scale.

i can't believe i'm having to point out that it could be topical to decide 
against Roe v Wade because it doesn't go FAR ENOUGH in protecting a woman's  
right to terminate her pregnancy. sure, there'll be some T debates about what 
it means to "overrule" or whatever specific language is used, but that's why 
they call it debate.

the claim implicit in these posts - that Roe is some iron-clad shield for 
pregnant women - is absurd and has been denied over the past 20 years alone, 
as states have had no problem limiting abortion rights via various regulations 
based on parental consent, age, type of procedure, etc.

hester


>===== Original Message From nrichter at umsis.miami.edu =====
>I am sure Nicole Colston will respond to this, but I feel the need to do so 
as
>well:
>
>Quoting Steven D'Amico <stevendamico at gmail.com>:
>
>> I'm really confused by this post. I see to two different points. The
>> topic
>> process is not open (fair opinion, while I disagree with it) and
>> debating
>> roe v wade is bad for women in debate.
>
>
>What do you think is good about the topic selection process? Do you not think
>the lack of womyn on the committee is a problem?
>
>
>> My opinion is that it's about time the community debates roe. Not
>> because
>> it's a womyns issue (which it obviously is) but because it's a timely
>> issue
>> which is about to be adressed by our government. Remember all those SC
>> nominations?
>
>You conceed that this is a womyn's issue (which seems like perhaps womyn 
should
>be consulted about this issue), but that is not as important as the fact that
>it is a current event. There are tons of other current events we could be
>debating (refer to the list Nicole made in her original post like 
pornography),
>why are we choosing to focus on this particular issue?
>
>
>
>
>
>> Nicole, I'm not trying to be a patriarchal asshole (I've been accused of
>> it
>> before, I like to point out I'm just an asshole to everyone, not just
>> womyn)
>> But I just do not understand this statement:
>>
>> "I will WITHDRAW my squad's participation in NDT/CEDA debate without
>> hesitation next year if Roe vs. Wade is included on the ballot.  I am
>> sick
>> over the extent in which this "activity" has no respect for women and
>> fear
>> the effects on female participation if Roe v Wade is included."
>>
>> I do not understand how including Roe means the community has no respect
>> for
>> Women. Please explain it to me. If the lack of this fact seeming obvious
>> to
>> me is an indication of me being a patriarch or whatever, tell me why so
>> I
>> can understand.
>
>Explain to me how debating this issue will increase female participation in 
the
>activity? There is only a risk that some womyn will feel personally excluded
>emotionally or intellectually from this debate, thus decreasing female
>participation. Because this is a womyn's issue, as you yourself have 
mentioned,
>of course it will effect womyn in this community and the fact that womyn were
>not consulted seems to prove the lack of respect. Moreover, the way it
>was "mentioned" in the e-debate posts with ZERO discussion on how this would
>effect womyn in the community is major oversight.
>
>Nicole Richter
>University of Miami
>
>_______________________________________________
>eDebate mailing list
>eDebate at ndtceda.com
>http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate





More information about the Mailman mailing list