Quote:
Originally Posted by nikkibong
The bhtv editors did an appalling job of labeling that section. The issue discussed was whether women who carry children to term and put them up for adoption should recieve some form of financial support; after all, pregnancy can be hugely expensive. (Health care, missed work/job loss etc.) It was not about giving a financial 'bonus' to women who don't have an abortion. The spirit of the converation was really lost by that shabby bit of labeling.
Give the diavlog a listen, it's not as bad as you seem to think.
|
Although it is a kind of obvious point, I also thought the part of the discussion about getting pro-lifers to sign on to universal health care was an interesting discussion. That's something that I've always found troubling about the debate, is that the abortion issue is too often isolated from many of the rest of the political debate, a critique that comes up in the "pro-lifers care about the child until just after they come out of the womb" cheap-shots, but too often doesn't make it into the actual policy debates themselves. I am hoping that the "common ground" measures will move more in changing that.