Wednesday, April 05, 2006

SURPRISE, SURPRISE

Wednesday's Springfield News-Leader: Another white man rants about abortion. Maybe James Eden wouldn't be so quick to type if women were in charge of his testicles.

9 comments:

John Stone said...

That has to be pretty close to the dumbest argument I have ever heard in my life .... my nit'quotient is tapped out for today.

Anonymous said...

I do not at all agree with Mr. Eden's commentary. I do find it curious, though, that you would choose to inject race ("another white man") into your criticism of his viewpoint.

Why would you stoop to play the race card? Where in his letter is there any invocation of race or ethnicity as a bearing point on the issue or his views?

Seems kind of ironic, if not rather hypocritical of you, given the stated topic for this week's edition of your television project...

Larry Litle said...

I agree with the last comments.

Does someone's race or gender exclude them from having an opinion on Abortion? Bashing someone's ideas and opinions is one thing but to bash them because they are a white guy is another. I can not help that I was born a white male.

Do I not get an opinion on the problem with poverty since I am middle class?

I guess we should throw Roe V. Wade out the window since it was decided by a majority of white males.

I enjoy reading your blog because most of the time you challenge my beliefs. I am usually on the other side of issues from you but I like to get exposed to different opinions. But when I read posts like this, you lose credibility in my opinion.

Ron Davis said...

Anon: You're right. My injection of the writer's race was wrong. Too much focus on race over the past couple of weeks has seeped into this daily nattering.

Larry: Everyone is entitled to an opinion. But your poverty analogy isn't apt -- unless you are in a position to legally impact an impoverished person's ability to seek help. My problem with men arguing against abortion is rooted in one fact: Men can't get pregnant. Why do men (legislatures are almost all male-ruled) insist on trying to tell women what they can do with their bodies?

busplunge said...

Gee Ron, I was just typing the same thoughts.

Does it look like Eden has scrubs on in the photo?

I know a couple of OB/GYNs and they are adamantly against abortion.

Heck in this part of the world, anybody who don't think like they tell you to is suspect. Lots of good godly xtians down here.

I remember someone telling me a story about an AG person who HAD to get an abortion because she was going on a mission trip and couldn't be pregnant.

Pro choice doesn't mean pro abortion.

Larry Litle said...

Ron,
you made really good points in your comments back to me here and at my blog. Thanks for the comments.

Fat Jack said...

I'd like to point out, if you follow the link to the News-Leader's site, the page only gives you half of Eden's article. The last four paragraphs are mistakenly missing. I viewed this with two different browsers to make sure. If you click "Printer-Friendly Version" then you will get his whole text. Not that it will change any view points, but we should get the whole story.

Thank you, Mr. Davis, for recognizing the err in your comments. In the heat of battle, even the best of us can mis-speak. I certainly took issue with your interjection of race into this issue.

I am curious, are there any other systemic issues facing our nation, that you feel one particular group or another should not be able to argue for or against?

John Stone said...

Wile it's OK to fuss at Ron for his characterization, let's not straw-man the really stupid argument that the editorial writer was trying to make. It was dump, stupid, and ignorant ... and that was Ron's real point.

Along the same lines look at my blog a couple of entries down to see the one about Rick Santorum .... now THAT is bizzare.

Anonymous said...

I, too, give Mr. Davis credit for admitting he was wrong. His attempt at an excuse or explanation needs a little work, though.

Ask yourself: If a different writer had used the term "another black man" or, heaven forbid, "another yellow man," do any of you really think that he would be able to so quickly dismiss it with the excuse that "too much focus on race these past couple of weeks has seeped into the daily nattering?"

Seeped? I'll wager that the only thing that really "seeped" was the writer's own underlying prejudice, no matter how strongly he may wish to profess to the contrary. Mr. Davis has typed publicly for enough years to know that highly-charged terms such as "another white man" don't just accidentally fall from his fingers.