Photos
After the jump, I have posted a speech from New York’s 9th District Representative, Anthony Weiner, a democrat, expounding upon a Republican-sponsored bill that would redefine the definition of rape in order to curtail government funding of abortion, and I’m not really sure how to describe the speech other than “very good,” which admittedly sounds weird when you are talking about a speech about “abortion funding.” Perhaps “very thoughtful” and “pretty forceful” and “intellectually annihilating if you are in a certain segment of the population that uses a particularly complicated form of rhetorical distraction to combine your excessively stringent social values with your supposedly free-wheeling political philosophy.” Is that better? Also, let me say this: for a lot of years I have believed that the abortion issue was “complicated,” which Anthony Weiner reiterates in this “very good” and also “those other things I said” speech, but the more I think about it, the less complicated it gets. In fact, it seems pretty uncomplicated. It is called MIND YOUR OWN FUCKING BUSINESS. (It should also not surprise you that I am PRO assisted suicide. And also pro gay-rights. And also pro anything where people get to decide how they would like to live their lives because that is a hard enough endeavor even with all of the options being made available to you.)
Like, I know that people who are against abortion consider it to be murder, and I’m sure that feels like a very morally defensible position to take. Who wouldn’t want to stand up against murder?! The problem is that morality is relatively flexible, and it’s unfair and unreasonable to impose your morality on other people*. “But Gabe, does this mean you also support actual murder, because isn’t the criminalization of murder just the imposition of one person’s morality on another person’s morality?” Oh please. Come on. That is basically the “if gays can marry then can I marry my roommate’s pet snake” argument. No, I do not believe that. (Also: the wiggle room on murder murder–not to be confused with rape rape–is pretty small. Outside of sociopaths, many murderers agree with and accept the associated punishment. Although I’m also not a doctor or a scientist or even a very smart person, so don’t quote me on that statistic that I kind of just made up but which you have to admit sounds about right.) Anthony Weiner also points out something that I have seen very few people in positions of power discuss, which is the ECONOMIC BURDEN of restricting abortions, as this only affects poor people. Rich people BEEN HAD getting abortions forever, and will continue to do so because CASH RULES EVERYTHING AROUND ABORTIONS. So, you know, that’s super gross.
It’s not complicated! Sorry. Just watch the speech.
Good speech. (Via @BobPowers1.)
*Not to mention the fact that raising kids is really really hard? And a lot of people are not in a position to do so in a responsible way? So maybe they shouldn’t? I am not sure why this particular aspect of the issue is so rarely discussed. I guess because of how it is “complicated.”
 |
 |
Hehe. Weiner.
Hehe. Johnson.
Cool, so Abortion is officially
Man I really feel like a shot my wad with this one.
I also really feel like that was gross to type.
Does this mean Gabe is the anti-Bieber?
I’m just a rube, so pardon my ignorance in advance, but it annoys me when people reference philosophers when they try to win an argument. Philosophy offers ways of thinking about things, but I’m not sure it offers any definitive answers. So to say Rawls or Irwin or Homer Simpson have squashed the notion of relative morality means nothing to me, a simple-minded rube who’s open to every side of this debate. I don’t doubt CornellWestside’s sincerity about this debate, I’m just saying from my point of view, the way this is being argued is not persuasive.
Moreover, this business about absolute or relative morality seems like a red herring to the broader debate Gabe is offering about abortion rights. Please explain to me why I’m wrong, though.
I may have represented it wrong. I didn’t mean “relative morality is wrong because Terry Irwin thinks so and a lot of people do.” I meant it in the sense that “relative morality is wrong because people REALLY REALLY often don’t know what it actually entails and when real philosophical rigor is applied, it doesn’t stand up to even the smallest criticism. It’s not like it’s just a widely held opinion, it’s as close to fact as there is in philosophy. It’s the same way that “evolution is just a theory.” Evolution is a theory with shit tons of evidence for it and backed up by so much science but it isn’t analytically proven because microbiology can’t technically reproduce it (although it is has been observed in action). In the same vein, relative morality has been all but disproved, the only real opposition is in anti-morality or whether you should prescribe against it.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Oh, and for some additional background: I am pro-choice, but for apparently very different reasons than Gabe. Also, my favorite philosopher is John Rawls, everyone should go read everything he’s ever written.
So, looooongtime lurker (ah! he’s lurking!) but I feel I have to Wade (get it? get it?) in here because what the world absolutely absolutely needs is more Phil majors arguing. Anywhos, the idea that Gabe’s making isn’t that there is a REAL moral relativity, that is: that there are people all over the country with different moral beliefs and all of those beliefs are true. That’s a big metaethical argument that I don’t think Gabe would want to make (and duh, I know every big metaethical argument Gabe wants to make).
Instead, I think what Gabe is saying is that there are a lot of people around the country with different ethical beliefs. PERIOD. This seems like a pretty good and pretty valid statement. Gabe isn’t a moral relativist, he’s not arguing that his “opinion of the morality of the act” would change, so he doesn’t “invalidate all [his] moral consistency.” He’s simply saying that there are a pluality of values, and in the way government should be organized, we are best to leave these kind of tough moral decisions up to the people. Now, this is a simplification on the latter part of the argument, because you could be like, “what’s that, H.E. Pennypacker Wealthy Industrialist, you think the government ought to step out of big moral disagreements? Well boom goes the civil rightsamyte, but those are questions of political philosophy and not ethics. (and the difference is something on the order of, like, some issues are issues of people and laws, like civil rights and some are between people and people, like people who disagree on abortion)
In other words, tl;dnr, and go look at the adorable kitties a post or two up.
Yeah that’s what I thought, but I always like to make the distinction because people going “well morality is relative,” like it’s a fact and only stubborn intolerant people think otherwise is a pet peeve of mine. I also take opportunities to promote John Rawls and Terry Irwin whenever possible.
I know the government shouldn’t be making fine-tuned moral statements, but in general, the government should pay attention to ethics. I can’t stand it when the primary argument about Universal Healthcare is “can we afford it?” THAT IS SO SHORTSIGHTED. The real question is “is the government morally obligated to provide us with healthcare?” The bottom line for things like this should always be whether or not it is the right thing to do. Everything else is just logistics.
And, and… I’m a Mechanical Engineering major.
I disagree that the question about healthcare is “is the government morally obligated to provide us with healthcare?” Sure, that is one question. But it’s far from the only one, or even the most important one.
Like you, I disagree with moral relativity, and not just because it says that, say, it’s okay for certain countries to stone women to death for adultery, because that’s just the cultural moral code, but because it’s logically shakey. It presupposes that the cultures are all infalliable and a) makes no room for progress b) is metaphysically problematic i.e. the Nazis thought it was fine to kill Jews, but the Polish Jews definitely didn’t think that, and when the Nazis invaded Poland, whose cultural moral values are the golden standard? Etc.
Logic is really the structure of morality. I think we can all agree that the objective of morality is to minimize suffering (unless you don’t agree in which case that’s a funny position to take and probably get away from me.) Doesn’t it follow that position that minimizes suffering is better than one that makes more suffering?
Yeah, Gabe’s is kind of a weird take? Like, supporting access to abortion basically requires supporting the rights of more complex, intelligent organisms over less complex , intelligent organisms AND/OR the rights of property owners against theft and trespassing ASSUMING THAT we own our organs and that we can say we’d like to keep both our kidneys the same way we’d like to keep our uteri un-squatted in. And the fact that fetuses eventually become outside-the-body babies and babies is cute is less an argument than it is sentimentalist weirdness and the idea that fetuses are more valuable than people because they haven’t had the agency/opportunity to think/do bad things seems indicative of a mindset of those who prefer the idea of life to actually living, who should maybe call themselves pro-the-CONCEPT-of-life-not-the-messy-reality-so-much.
OH NO WHY AM I EVEN TALKING ABOUT THIS ON THE INTERNET WHAT A MISTAKE SOMEBODY SHUT THIS DOWN
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
I don’t really know why I can’t respond directly to Napoleon Complex, so I’m doing it here. You didn’t really say what the most important question is, so I don’t really know what you’re going for. But I don’t see how the most important question for debates about the proper government position about any issue isn’t “is the government morally obligated to it?”
Based on the Skins fight, I think we all know what Gabe thinks of John Rawls
I’m just a rube, so pardon my ignorance in advance, but it annoys me when people reference philosophers when they try to win an argument. Philosophy offers ways of thinking about things, but I’m not sure it offers any definitive answers. So to say Rawls or Irwin or Homer Simpson have squashed the notion of relative morality means nothing to me, a simple-minded rube who’s open to every side of this debate. I don’t doubt CornellWestside’s sincerity about this debate, I’m just saying from my point of view, the way this is being argued is not persuasive.
Moreover, this business about absolute or relative morality seems like a red herring to the broader debate Gabe is offering about abortion rights. Please explain to me why I’m wrong, though.
Should I go prepare my ABANDON THREAD gif of the cats running away right now, or should I wait until the moment is right?
ha ha…..weiner
for serious though. this is good. and the write up was good
that is what you get for hitting submit after watching the whole thing papes.
Ha ha…plagiarist.
A dude with the last name Weiner for abortion? Color me not shocked. Props.
stop imposing your amorality on us, Gabester.
I bet you’re also PRO-MASTURBATION!! ew.
Why do you think he posted a video that starts with the phrase “Mr. Weiner for 5 minutes…”?
The only thing I don’t like about Anthony Weiner is that he’s from a district in Queens, which prevents me from being able to vote for him.
I know, right?! I love this guy so much. He needs to be higher up in government, so I can vote for him so hard.
It’s true! I love Weiner!
It sucks that there’s not going to be an opening for a NY senate seat any time soon. He’ll have to run for governor! Or he could run for mayor again. He’s already got my vote.
I voted for him before I got the hell out of Queens. This totally makes up for/adds to the terribleness/awesomeness of his “play the republicans lie about health care reform drinking game.”
I kind of want to move to Queens for a bit just to vote for him. He sounds awesome.
Except he’s a total “Israel is always right and if you disagree you hate Jews!” douche. Which hurts, because I appreciate and agree with his stance on most things, but then you get to his pro-Israeli-forces-storming-aid-ships-and-killing-peeps position and it’s like, why you breakin’ my heart, Weiner? (incidentally, “Why you breaking my heart, weiner?” will obvs be the title of my tell-all memoir)
Yeah, that’s why I’ve stopped talking about foreign policy with my Jewish friends… And as a Jew, that’s a really unfortunate consequence. Israelies are a dangerous Brood to Libel.
Good job, Queens! you get one every thirty years or so..
*GABBA GABBA HEY WEINER!*
THE RAMONES WEREN’T BRITISH??
OASIS ISNT AN AMERICAN GROUP? BUT WONDERWALL IS ON THE RADIO HERE
Yes, but what we’re all really wondering is what Justin Bieber has to say about this. Why did no one invite him to speak?
I think I’ll ask the question we’re all thinking: What does Steve Winwood think?
how dare he inject logic into this argument… the truth and common sense have NO place in the house of representatives… and he wasnt even yelling, so how can we REALLY take him seriously… jeeez
OMG New Foo Fighters!
What is this, AbortionGum?
That sounds like the morning after pill in gum form.
Downvotes? For this? I don’t get it.
I think it’s the lack of a funny avatar.
I can’t believe I’m going to be that pedantic person on partypoopergum, but the morning after pill is not the abortion pill.
Also, don’t forget – for those 17 and up, the morning after pill is available without a prescription at your local pharmacy when needed.
Thank you for pointing this out. The morning after pill prevents implantation of the embryo it does not interfere if the embryo has already been implanted so it works the same as the birth control pill and does not cause abortion. It bothers me when people act like it’s the same thing.
But how does he feel about tiny American flags?
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
FLW, don’t you understand that by having a ‘Monster’s Ball EGOT minus lowest-rated’, you actually have the most legitimate of the EGOTs?
Lets be honest, a certain Steve Winwood only got on anyone’s radar by making a name for himself with nasty comments, and his subsequent great comments were partly (only?) picked up on because it fulfilled our desire to see a redemption-myth play out in the community. But you on the other hand, YOU, FLW, have made a name for yourself just by playing the game right and wowing us with your funny and/or insightful comments. And for my money, that’s the truer EGOT.
Thanks, Ben. Much appreciated.
Fuck you Ben!
dammnit
Ben : Frank Lloyd Wrong :: Stevie Janowski : Kenny Powers
I’d say you finally found the perfect GIF, you sycophant!
DN : Reality :: Winwood : Initial Assumption
“Can I finish my answer?”
“Well, it doesn’t sound terribly enticing. No.”
I wouldn’t mind being Weiner’d!
So long as you aren’t Weiner’d against your will.
I want to have so many of his babies!
i want to have so many of his abortions!
I thought about going there and now I wish I had. Good job!
say government regulation one more time…
This is what pisses me off about government an politics. Someone can make a passsionate well thought argument to a complicated issue, eliquently explaining why the passage of a particular peice of legislation is wrong (Mr. Weiner) only to get a response that basically disregards the whole argument and panders to peoples emotions and irrationality (Mr. Johnson). We can never get to an actual intelligent discussion because there are too many voices that just trash the discussion and create noise that the thoughtful people have to muddle through. It must be exhausting for people like Mr. Weiner.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
And if you think there’s still room for the heart-of-gold idealist/Mr. Smith Goes to Washington types, just look at what happened with Obama. From the latest Rolling Stone:
As for President Obama, what is there to be said? Goldman Sachs was his number-one private campaign contributor. He put a Citigroup executive in charge of his economic transition team, and he just named an executive of JP Morgan Chase, the proud owner of $7.7 million in Chase stock, his new chief of staff. “The betrayal that this represents by Obama to everybody is just — we’re not ready to believe it,” says Budde, a classmate of the president from their Columbia days. “He’s really fucking us over like that? Really? That’s really a JP Morgan guy, really?”
Which is not to say that the Obama era has meant an end to law enforcement. On the contrary: In the past few years, the administration has allocated massive amounts of federal resources to catching wrongdoers — of a certain type. Last year, the government deported 393,000 people, at a cost of $5 billion. Since 2007, felony immigration prosecutions along the Mexican border have surged 77 percent; nonfelony prosecutions by 259 percent. In Ohio last month, a single mother was caught lying about where she lived to put her kids into a better school district; the judge in the case tried to sentence her to 10 days in jail for fraud, declaring that letting her go free would “demean the seriousness” of the offenses.
This is the exact trash and noise I was talking about.
Yes, Obama has done almost nothing to keep his campaign promises. What a corrupt liar he is. Never mind for a minute the health care reform meant to help lower income Americans, financial regulatory reform, the winding down of the Iraq war, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, Race to the Top, college tuition reform, etc etc etc. Yeah. Forget all that.
Gabe wants to marry a pet snake and then murder it for the insurance money I think
Someone’s seen too many episodes of Snapped (and that someone would be me).
In fact, a friend of mine (who also obsessively watches Snapped) determined that we could probably plan the perfect murder at this point because of all information and mistakes we’ve encountered from that show.
Shit, this is horribly written. I apologize, I haven’t taken my adderall yet
The gentleman is correct in appreciating this
http://touchmyweiner.tumblr.com/
Wonks I’d Like To Bonk
Am I the only one who thinks he looks like Congressman Screech from Saved By the Bell: The Capitol Years?
I want Michael Moore to start ambushing these reps on the street and asking them if they’d ever force their daughters to carry a child to term if they got pregnant when they were 14 and then be open and up front about it.
” Her father had wanted to send her to New York for a legal D & C, but Milo had pointed out that it
would look kind of funny to some people for the daughter of a high KCUF spokesman to have an
official abortion. “Besides,” Smiling Jim had added, “you don’t want to fool around with them New York Jew doctors. They might do dirty things to you. Just trust me, child; we’ve got the country’s
best-qualified criminal abortionists in Cincinnati.” ” -Robert Anton Wilson in 1975. I wonder what he’d make of our current kerfuffle. He saw the fnords almost before anybody.
This is pretty much a microcosm of the entire debate over abortion.
Person #1: Woman’s right to choose, economic factors, etc.
Person #2: Waves picture of baby around, accuses person #1 of advocating murder
That a thousand times over.
The Capitol: What a weird-looking doctor’s office.
Not only is Weiner right in that this stance hardly falls in line with the Republican Party’s calls for less government regulation, but given the way they’ve fought against Obama’s (admitedly pitiful) healthcare reforms, not to mention the way local states are going after Medicare, if said child is born with any sort of health problem, he or she is basically fucked. There was an Op-Ed in the NY Times over the weekend from a co-founder of Palm who was rejected for health insurance because she once had a corn on her foot. Anyway, way to go GOP! You sure do care about the children!
This comment was brought to you by stephilepsy who supports a single payer healthcare system.
As a mostly pro-life democrat who still thinks the abortion debate is complicated after watching this video I must say redefining rape to ‘forcible rape’ feels a bit like the people trying to get this to pass are committing intellectual rape on everyone who even slightly disagrees with their view. Its a complicated issue that people on both sides really feel strongly about to the point where reason is almost always thrown out the window in the form of pictures of dead babies and/or bumper stickers. Also it forced Principle Tami Taylor to resign which was sad cause she really cared for those students at Dillon even if JD McCoy is such a douche!…I digress
JD was most certainly a douche, but what else could he be with Joe as his main influence? With his douchey mirrored sunglasses and his fucking smirk, and child abuse. I HATE HIM! HAAAAAAAAAATE! What were we talking about, again?
About how Friday Night Lights defines real life?
gooooood tweet
oh, balls.
http://twitter.com/#!/kanyewest
6 down, okay?
The Internet: making me feel incompetent always and forever.
Am I the only one getting sick of government and corporate shenanigans?
“[I am] pro anything where people get to decide how they would like to live their lives.”
Except the right to bear arms, right?
Sure, but I’ve always felt you need to balance that with a bear’s right to keep his or her arms.
Hey! I know what would be fun. Lets talk about the founding fathers, slavery and non-voting womenfolk.
Oh, and how about we start with enslaved black women who couldn’t vote and had no right to bear arms? That one is a doozy.
(and that’s how you respond to a ridiculous argument)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Your tax dollars don’t pay for abortions, and haven’t done so since the Hyde Amendment was passed in 1976, so shut up about it. Your tax dollars pay for cervical cancer screenings, STI and HIV tests, and routine gynecological care. In addition, they also provide basic medical care and routine physicals to low income families. Abortions at Planned Parenthood are paid for by private contributions and grants from other philanthropic organizations, or by the women themselves.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
“I can’t believe a total stranger went out of their way to answer my question and didn’t also employ a sufficiently deferent tone. (Of course it was a question I could have answered myself because internet.) That is exactly the type of inconsiderate behavior that forces people to vote against human rights.
“Also, I am reasonable and humble. Because that is a cool way to talk about yourself, it doesn’t make me sound like a tool at all “
touch-ee!
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Being a physician allows me the responsibility of signing the death certificate of this conversation. It also allows me to use the corpse for weekend at bernie’s-style hijinks!
Not dicks, unionman. Weiners.
My taxes pay for a lot of things I find more offensive than abortion.
Wait, people still use the “abortion as birth control” argument? I assure you, there are more costly and more offensive things to worry about your tax dollars going to.
I love Weiner. I mean, I wish there was a little bit of Weiner in everyone. I mean, sure you might not agree with him, but you have to admire Weiner’s enthusiasm. I give up. It’s impossible to compliment this guy.
Thanks for this Gabe. No snark. Good post and good work!
Wanna know the real reason Republicans are always on the anti-abortion side of legislation? They’re in bed with the poster board and Sharpie big businesses.
A more emotional but nonetheless amazing rant from him is here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_O_GRkMZJn4
He makes me wish I was American, which is not a common wish for me to have.
Hillary Clinton already gave an incredible speech about this in 2009. I have watched this like five times already. No equivocation, no apologies.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UH9rC0MaBJc
The phrase “wild philosophical bank shot” just made a stupendous debut.
(This still makes me laugh so much, guys!)
It’s true. Republicans (most of them, I know some who aren’t half bad) don’t want to make government smaller, they just want to selfishly keep all their money to themselves. Too bad taking money out of an economy and holding it all for oneself, never giving an ounce back doesn’t keep an economy going. At some point we will all be forced to admit that we rely on one another in order to survive and maintain our well-being. Beyond and above morality, this is a good reason for treating others well that has nothing to do with “bleeding hearts”
Johnson is saying that the fetus has rights. A right to life. Now, correct me if I am wrong, but in order to be a citizen in the United States and to have the rights as a citizen, you must be BORN in the country. Well, that fetus has not been born. So does it really have any rights?
#justsayin
#prochoice
#teammysterybutt
my mind = BLOWN.
Ahhh, nothing like a little bit of restored faith in humanity on a Thursday. Thanks, monsters!
This must be Nation Give An Opinion On Abortion Day.
This billboard went up in SoHo http://thedailywh.at/2011/02/24/controversial-campaign-of-the-day/
And Yeezy is teaching about “baller abortions” or something. http://www.avclub.com/articles/kanye-west-also-has-an-opinion-on-abortion-in-case,52343/
All Of The Yikes.
What. About. Jesus?
Actually an abortee. That came back. Hallelujah.
I’m sure those who defend the right of unborn fetuses to be born into this world would also defend having some kind of guaranteed healthcare for infants and children too. Ya know, so a poor woman who needed medicine to keep her poor child alive could get it…so the child wouldn’t die…because legislators fought so hard for the child to get this far, they wouldn’t want to see it die. It would seem almost absurd if that poor child died, you know, after legislation fought so hard to make sure it would live in the first place.
No? They’re not for some system of healthcare? Weird. And sad. Weird and sad.
It’s why I do drugs bro. I honestly can’t understand the world we live in, so… yeah. Buy some weed.
“Marijuana: Because shit’s already stupid, and you probably can’t fix it.”
Could you sign this dispensary form for me, Dr. Tayne?
Man, I’m as gay as Christmas but I really want to make sweet sweet love to Weiner.
OMG.
a) i loved this,
b) can we talk about how amazing that speech was, and then how…
c) the rebuttal was given by a ROBOT.
d) this didn’t need to be a list!
e) i’m just excited!
f)
Gott aappreciate Weiner stickin up for Vagina’s
As much as I’d like to think we have a rational-minded someone in government, I have to dash those hopes with this video where Weiner has takes the inspiring conviction of this speech on abortion and sneakily changing the definition of rape and brings it to a misguided speech about how there isn’t any Israeli occupation in the West Bank or Jerusalem.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0OGBbrHA3M&feature=player_embedded
Aw! everything IS terrible