So, NARAL is about "the full range of reproductive choice" eh?

NARAL - "National Abortion Rights Action League".  Then they changed their name, but not their letters.  No one's fooled.  This organization exists for one reason only - abortion - and their website is so centered on Roe v. Wade it's silly to pretend otherwise.

NARAL exists for many reasons, including protecting a woman's right to choose a safe, legal abortion.  But unlike anti-choice republicans, NARAL is also interested in common sense approaches to reducing the number of unintended pregnancies, such as comprehensive sex education and access to contraception.  Somehow republicans think that by denying such things to people it is in their favor, but when they are implemented they can actually reduce the need for abortions (which shouldn't that be their goal?).  I just love the hypocrisy of republicans saying how much they hate abortion but not doing a damn thing to help reduce abortions besides telling kids not to have sex, which doesn't work and luckily Governor Kaine understands that.  We are lucky that NARAL exists to ensure women do have the right to, yes, the full range of reproductive choices, which means that women have the right to take care of their personal health and their child's health.  

At any rate, NARAL Virginia had a great event last night in Alexandria with 8 amazing, pro-choice Delegates and Senators discussing how the legislative session went and how we were fortunate that all of the crazy anti-choice legislation introduced was killed.  I'm proud to be a member and I look forward to the 2009 fight to keep rabid anti-choice guys like McDonnell, Bolling and Cuccinelli out of statewide office in Virginia.

the formulation, "safe, legal and rare." Except for the fanatic types like "Sideshow Bob" Marshall and "Ayatollah" Ken Cuccinelli who think abortion should be banned even in cases of rape, incest, or the life of the mother.

A group with "abortion rights" in its name isn't interested in a "full range" of anything.

By that reasoning, the National Rifle Association is only about...uh, rifles?  Yeah, that's it! :)

i'm sure the NRA defends all kinds of guns, just like the National Abortion Rights Action League defends all kinds of abortions.

if you want to continue this analogy in a way that makes any sense at all.

to know how you feel about the main point of HokieDem's comment.  If a comprehensive sex education program in combination with, say, condom distribution reduces demand for abortions, why are so many Republicans against such approaches?   It seems to me that an abortion is a worse action than an education.  And, aside from silly naming arguments, where do you stand on these proactive measures to dissuade demand for abortions?

And, Eric, it's a fine question.  I don't think it's government's job to give condoms to minors.  As for what "so many Republicans" think, you'll have to ask them.  I only speak for myself.  I don't think minors should be able to have secret abortions that their parents never know about, even though Obama thinks differently.

And I don't think government should hand out condoms that parents don't know about.  Quite frankly, there are no age limits for buying condoms, and they aren't that expensive.  It's the absence of parents in these discussions that give me the most problem.

then you might ask the Republicans in the House why they would not even hear HB283 in committee, which simply "requires school divisions to distribute to the parents or guardians of a student participating in the family life education program a summary of the program implemented by the school division."

Here's the message sent if its an abstinence-only program -
"our child is receiving abstinence-only education. When discussing pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease, abstinence is the only prevention information discussed. This program does not conform to the Virginia Board of Education's Family Life Education Guidelines in which abstinence is stressed, and information on birth control to prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases(STDs) is also included."

Is that the Left's view of unbiased, educational information?

typo

condom distribution to minors reduces abortion?  Or comprehensive sex ed?  

The point is that there is significant resistance in the conservative community to any solution that isn't "abstinence only eduction" when the reality of the situation is that there are alternatives that can reduce the worst possible outcome - abortion.  Or is that not the goal?

reducing abortions, they'd obviously support the methods that are proven to work best.  The fact that they don't support those methods speaks volumes.  Which makes me wonder, what's their real agenda, since it's obviously not first and foremost to reduce abortions?

And here's a list of five bills NARAL publicly supported this year that have to do with access to contraception and medically accurate sex education, as well as improving prenatal care to reduce infant mortality.  

HB283, HB1071, HB1190, HB1403, SB155

See for yourself here.  

so they're incompetent, too

rigid, right-wing ideologues who believe the GOVERNMENT should control women's bodies.  You know the type, I presume... :)

there are 80 such rigid, right-wing ideologues according to the scorecard, which if you're keeping score is well over 50% of the General Assembly.  That makes it a little hard to enact proactive legislation.

or you're horribly out of step with the rest of Virginia on this issue.

"A Washington Post poll taken during the 2005 governor's race found that 61 percent of Virginia residents think abortion should be legal in all or most cases; 38 percent said they want to outlaw the practice."

Source

Also, see SurveyUSA, which has 54% of Virginians "pro-choice" and 39% "pro-life."

Don't the same polls support traditional marriage, too?

Also, I'd point out that views on "traditional marriage" have been changing rapidly...and not in the direction you'd like, I would think.

I'll favor marriage and life.  You can favor destruction of the family and abortions galore.  I can live with that.

We all favor "destruction of family and abortions galore." And eating children and puppy dogs for dinner.  Yum! :)

Thus Brian returns to the safety of his laughable right-wing talking points, having nothing of any substance or seriousness to add to the discussion.  

And Lowell returns to insults....as usual.

to get you to engage in a serious, substantive discussion using facts, logic, etc.  When I call you out for using standard, right-wing talking points instead of doing so, you call that "insults."  But it's ok for you to say that we're all out to destroy the family and abort fetuses.  Nice...

You wrote this in a comment - " "Sideshow Bob" Marshall and "Ayatollah" Ken Cuccinelli ".

Engaging in a serious, substantive discussion using facts and logic, huh?

Here's one of NARAL's report card scores
"SB 30, Budget Amendment Item 297 - Abstinence-Only Funding
Senator Ken Cuccinelli (R-Fairfax)
A "No" vote was a pro-choice vote."

If you choose abstinence, you aren't choosing.  Notice there are only some choices that "pro-choicers" think count as "choice."

That's the problem with Cooch's bill.  Comprensive eduction funding - therefore encouraging informed choice - is fine.

Who gets to do the informing?

I'm represented by Del. Bob Marshall and Sen. Chuck Colgan. :(