Press "Enter" to skip to content

We Are All Pro-Life; Policy Disagreement is Not Lying

Hey, Pat! Spencer! I'm pro-life. Want to call me a liar?

Dakota War College exudes its distaste for Rep. Kathy Tyler (D-4/Big Stone City) and for truth by running two columns calling her a liar who wants to kill disabled babies.

The main thesis of these attacks (other than political intimidation and character assassination) is that in testifying against an expansion of South Dakota's legal hurdles to abortion, Rep. Tyler is lying when she calls herself as "pro-life." (The same must be true for DWC's friend and Brookings Republican Rep. Scott Munsterman, who voted against the same bill Rep. Tyler opposed, HB 1240.)

In the over-simplified world of DWC's Pat Powers and South Dakota Right to Life screecher Spencer Cody, you're either pro-life or pro-abort, the foul term Cody throws at Rep. Tyler right alongside liar.

We've discussed this before: pro-life is an empty, mindless term. No one is pro-death. Everyone is in favor of life. We have honest, passionate disagreements about how best to make life better. Some of us think we best support life by supporting education, health care, Medicaid expansion, paid maternity leave, environmental protection, and income support for poor families. Spencer and Pat think we support life best by drowning out such policy conversations by screaming provocatively about abortion. I don't call them liars for that; I just call them wrong.

84 Comments

  1. owen reitzel 2014.03.10

    Exactly Cory. I'm not in favor of abortion or abortion on demand. I'm in favor of choice.
    My wife and I have 3 healthy children and never would have thought about having an abortion. But if something had happened to my wife's health during her pregnancy it would have been our choice to have an abortion. Not some middle-age man sitting in a chair in Pierre or Washington.
    My feeling is that I'm more pro-life than the people who claim to be pro-life. I'm for the ACA and I don't support cutting food stamps. I'm for expanding medicaid for people who can't afford insurance.

  2. 108 2014.03.10

    Meh, I think they are calling her out for campaigning one way and then voting something completely different... It is my understanding that this has happened on multiple issues, just just "Pro-Life/Choice/Abort" issues. I'm all for calling people out who misrepresent where they stand. I would much rather know where someone stands and see them vote the way they talk, regardless of whether I agree with them or not, vs say one thing and vote something else.

  3. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.03.10

    Please expand on that "understanding" with facts. It sounds like pre-election propaganda, trying to lay the groundwork for some District 4 Republican to challenge Tyler.

  4. Disgusted Dakotan 2014.03.10

    Typical Powers. How about Larry Tiedman, Mike Vehle, Craig Tiezen, Deb Soholt? SD GOP has a pro-life platform and those "Republicans" are distinctly not pro-life.

  5. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.03.10

    On Owen's point: we have to not let Republicans control the language of the debate. We have to take back the word pro-life and either defuse it or right-define it back into meaningfulness.

  6. larry kurtz 2014.03.10

    Powers will have nowhere to go after Stace wins the nomination: pathetic, really.

  7. 108 2014.03.10

    My understanding came from other peoples comments and what I felt was the tone of the story. It could be propaganda - Probably is ... I know so little about District 4 that I didn't realize that it was a blue seat, now that story does not make much sense to me at all...

    I will step aside now and keep my nose out of topics I really don't follow ;)

  8. Laura 2014.03.10

    Larry - you are kidding right? Rep. Nelson is not going to win the GOP nomination. That is not topic here, but there is just no way!
    I agree with Cory on this issue, the term pro-life is mindless. I do think that Rep. Tyler had made some statements/campaign materials during her initial campaign that may have led people to believe that she would have voted differently on this bill. However, maybe her reasoning for her vote was wording in the bill, or missing wording. She has not spoken as to the reason why, so before anyone judges, ask her why?

  9. larry kurtz 2014.03.10

    Ms. Laura: expect Mike Rounds to suspend his candidacy some time next month.

  10. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.03.10

    Laura, can we get on the record the statements/campaign materials in which candidate Tyler may have led people to believe that she would have voted differently on HB 1240? Materials that show her speaking as strongly in favor of further abortion restrictions as candidate Munsterman?

  11. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.03.10

    108, I have great respect for the comment section, but 95% of what you read in the DWC comment section is anonymous propaganda. When we're talking about determining whether an individual has lied, I want to see that individual's original words, not the assertion of DWC's anonymous ax-grinders.

  12. Kathy Tyler 2014.03.10

    I did not vote on the bill--it never made it to the House floor. It was voted down by the RTF life members of the committee. In fact RTL did not testify--they were told to leave this bill alone. And, as I have said may times, if anyone wants to know why I voted any way...just ask!

  13. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.03.10

    Thanks, Rep. Tyler! If RTL did not testify on this bill, why are they kicking up a stink now? Is there a rift between the harder-right base of the party and the cautious GOP leadership?

  14. BrotherBeaker 2014.03.10

    I have grave concerns about using a term that has a well-understood meaning and claiming that you mean something else. It is not reasonable in this decade to describe Planned Parenthood as "pro-life," any more than Sarah Palin can call herself a "feminist" and complain that she merely disagrees with what is best for women.

    Put the shoe on the other foot. Say I run for public office and describe myself as "pro-choice." Post-election, I decry the way that the term has been hijacked by NARAL and their ilk. I clarify that what I meant was that I believe in personal choices until they clash with individual rights, including those of the unborn. After all, no one, not even the most ardent libertarian, believes that ALL choices can be made at the individual level. I am, therefor, pro-choice by my preferred definition of the word.

    Understand, I do not claim to know if Rep. Tyler was hiding her true colors behind a pedantic, misleading interpretation of "pro-life." If she expressed it as Owen did, above, with full disclosure, I would have no problem with it. But in the sound bite world that we live in, I don't think you can use the term without adhering to its common meaning. At best, it's sneaky and we have more than enough of that.

  15. Laura 2014.03.10

    Larry - not a Rounds supporter! So if he withdraws, I don't much care. But I am going to disagree with you that as well. Rounds is going to June and will win.

  16. larry kurtz 2014.03.10

    If you register independent you could vote in the earth hater primary, Laura.

  17. Laura 2014.03.10

    Now why would I want to do that? Is that where you align yourself?

  18. Laura 2014.03.10

    I am a registered Republican...lots of time to decide. Candidates need to be confirmed and issues discussed. I actually don't like any of them yet.

  19. larry kurtz 2014.03.10

    I vote in a sky blue district in New Mexico, Miss Laura having fled your chemical toilet after forty some years of living in a white supremacist frozen tundra. You can make your vote count by changing your registration and still vote for either Rep. Wismer or Joe Lowe, right, Cory?

  20. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.03.10

    BrotherB may have a point. I may be no better than Jenna Haggar in trying to appropriate my opponents' verbage for my own political purposes. But I'll defend my rhetorical actions on two fronts.

    (1) I'm trying to point out the meainglessness of a term used by those who seek a complete ban on abortion to unfairly club their opponents. Pro-life is a meaningless term when its logical antonyms (anti-life? pro-death?) apply to no participant in the public debate.

    (2) Is pro-life absolute? Does pro-life mean one must support every abortion restriction proposed? And should pro-life apply only to discussions of women's reproductive rights?

    I'm willing to argue that everyone, Kathy Tyler included, using pro-life in current political discourse is misusing language and over-simplifying an issue. I'm happy to demand that Spencer Cody and Kathy Tyler use more exact language.

    But until such exactitude, I stand by my expanded use of the term pro-life and stand by my statement that calling Rep. Kathy Tyler a liar for calling herself pro-life is an overheated and unfair accusation.

  21. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.03.10

    Laura: really? Not satisfied with anyone in the GOP U.S. Senate field yet? Are their positions on reproductive rights and women's issues part of your dissatisfaction? If so, what's a Republican to do: vote for Pressler in November, or try to recruit some new passionate, articulate Republican to the primary race?

  22. Laura 2014.03.10

    Thanks Cory, appreciate your advice and pointing out the obvious! I really haven't heard the prospective candidates really discuss the issues. Alot of hate and other things being thrown around, but not much on the how and why, as of yet. There is time! Not sure I am a Pressler fan either, kind of smarmie to me.
    Your post on verbage is spot on!

  23. Roger Cornelius 2014.03.10

    I refuse to allow those that have declared an open war on women to define me or label me.

    Those that continue to simplify women's choices with overused and tireless labels never utter the words that matter the most, women's rights.

    "No one is pro-death", no one except the Republican legislature that voted against abolishing the death penalty.

  24. Deb Geelsdottir 2014.03.10

    I have sometimes described myself as Ultra Pro-Life, because I am for many more lives than only fetuses. I am pro-women's lives, children's, soldiers', American Indians', Latinas', men's, elders', Iraqi family's, convicted criminals' lives, etc.

    To me, pro-life is an encompassing term, covering humanity. "Pro-life," as it has come to be understood in common use, is much too limited, too exclusive, and therefore very inaccurate.

    I understand the earlier comment concerned about common usage. However, when common usage is so far in error, I feel it is important to correct that error.

    I don't refer to myself as Pro-Choice because I believe that is also too limited. It's not simply that I believe a woman has the right to choose whether to bear or abort a fetus. I think all her choices ought to be her own. In the physical sense, that includes the right to decide where she will live, what medical procedures to have, what medications to ingest, when and with whom to enjoy sex, what to eat, etc.

    Now that's Pro-Choice.

    Maybe I should refer to myself as Ultra Pro-Life and Ultra Pro-Choice.

  25. Troy 2014.03.10

    Maybe I'd take your reaction to the term Pro-Life a bit more seriously if you didn't claim to be be Pro-Worker, Pro-Woman, Pro-Environment, etc. and then label those who disagree with you as anti-worker, anti-woman or practicing a "war on women," or anti-environment.

    When I look a the list of things you all list of what you are are "pro," who is anti- any of them? Oh, yeah, those who disagree with you.

  26. Lanny V Stricherz 2014.03.10

    Roger and Deb have it almost exactly right, except how can either party claim to be pro women when women doing equal jobs still only receive 70% of the pay of men 40 years after the movement to give women equal rights.

    But the main issue that PP has against Rep Tyler has been missed by all of you. She is the one who introduced the bill to investigate EB-5 and asked for it before the session started.

  27. Deb Geelsdottir 2014.03.10

    Troy, who are you talking to?

  28. mike from iowa 2014.03.10

    I guess if you don't want to be labeled anti-everything,maybe you should join the good guys-us. Labels are used as weapons by wingnuts,especially during election season. Their favorite trick is to label Dems and Libs as anti-American and America haters. Voters on the right are the most gullible,ill-informed voters ever and it keeps getting worse. Another favorite falsehood is Libs and the ACLU forced god out of public schools.

  29. Donald Pay 2014.03.10

    Everyone looks at the issue differently. Some folks consider being "pro-life" as one small point at the extreme edge of a univariate universe centered around abortion. Others have a range in that univariate universe that they consider "pro-life." Others look at the issue within a multivariate universe, where the abortion issue is just one of several issues that are considered. Other issues in a multi-variate consideration of the issue might be end-of-life matters, or health care issues, or environmental issues.

    For some, the abortion issue is itself a multi-variate universe within a multivariate universe. To them it might matter what trimester an abortion is performed, who is making the decision, why they are making the decision. People are going to bring their own ideas about when life begins, when society should protect life, when and how society should balance various rights, what is the role of religion and science in how people decide what is right, etc.

    The folks who see the issue as simple are not going to understand those who see it as more complex, and vice versa.

    Anyway, I view the issue as a very complex one, and I resent folks who try to impose their simplistic way of thinking about the issue on me by declaring that only they are "pro-life."

  30. Deb Geelsdottir 2014.03.10

    Yup, exactly what Don said.

  31. Deb Geelsdottir 2014.03.10

    Here is the major difference I see between the "pro-lifers" and everyone else: The "pro-lifers" want to impose their views on everyone. The rest do not.

  32. mike from iowa 2014.03.11

    Make that-impose their religious views on everyone else and I'm on board 100%.

  33. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.03.11

    Troy, there are two inappropriate labels in Spencer Cody's screed against Rep. Tyler: "pro-life" and "liar". Even if we ceded the point on "pro-life", could we still agree that Cody goes too far in calling Rep. Tyler a liar? Cody's article seems less interested in truth (I could call myself pro-labor, vote against one bill that would give unions too much power, and still not be a liar) and more interested in undermining Rep. Tyler's reputation by throwing a provocative headline into Google searches.

    But I'm not ceding the "pro-life" point. I don't brand myself with any of the terms you capitalize. I don't make WOMEN or WORKER or ENVIRONMENT and all-caps mantra the way Cody and RTL LORD-ify LIFE. I don't cast those issues as single-issue absolutes that shout out consideration of everything else.

    And even when I sound that way, I don't think you've called me a liar, have you, Troy? You've just said I'm woefully mistaken.

    Plus, I'm, a lot more considerate of inconsistency in my principles than those who shout pro-life. The intensity with which RTL shouts pro-LIFE on one issue, abortion, contrasts with the utter absence of that term from their discussion of other issues concerning life, like environmental protection, the death penalty, Medicare and Medicaid. The only time RTL talks about LIFE seems to be when we're talking about making women pay the consequences for having sex. I don't cloak myself in the "pro-" terms you offer above with the same frequency as RTL uses "pro-life", but those terms surface (time for a word-frequency analysis?) in conjunction with a wider variety of issues. I'm pro-worker when I talk about minimum wage, but I'm also pro-worker when I talk about unions and health care and whistle-blower protections.

    Troy, you're not lying; you're just wrong. You also make the comment section even more interesting. Those of us who are "pro-lively conversation" welcome you.

  34. mike from iowa 2014.03.11

    Wingnuts swear dumb bass dubya never told one le about war in Iraq. No he didn't. Last count was 946 false statements Bush made(and have been documented). On its face,their statement is true,but certainly not accurate. I guess the proof is in everyone's personal perception. It would be nice if we could get beyond the petty rancor between us and them. Until then,I'm more than happy to jump into the muck with "them". Monica Lewinski's blue dress with Bill Clinton's DNA on it only conclusively proves that Clinton had sexual relations with a blue dress. Not a crime or even immoral.

  35. Troy 2014.03.11

    Cory,

    Did Cody go too far? Probably. While in Tyler's mind, she considers herself "Pro-Life" by redefining the word. At the same time, there is an element of truth as Tyler's use of the word that is used in the vernacular as synonymous with "anti-abortion" which she is not has an element of deception. Liar for sure lacks decorum that I'd prefer come from SDRTL.

    At the end of the day, both sides have to make some concessions in charity to those they disagree with regarding vernacular and branding.

    While those who are anti-abortion are rankled by the branding/vernacular of Pro-Life, it is a branding choice to communicate their focus on stopping killing of babies, they have made and it doesn't mean they have to focus on every issue others think are "life issues. The Cancer Society could just was well have established themselves using the brand "pro-life" but they didn't. The anti-abortion movement did. That said, I get it when those who oppose the efforts of those opposed to the anti-abortion movement use euphemisms like "anti-abortion" rather than Pro-Life to describe us and take no offense.

    Similarly, those of us who oppose abortion don't like the "brand" Pro-Choice as in our mind it ignores the choice of the father and the child, it also doesn't mean the anti-abortion people has to spend efforts on choice to join a union or not to "deserve" the moniker. It is the "brand" chosen even if I usually just use something like pro-abortion choice. Like I don't take offense to calling us "anti-abortion," I hope nobody takes offense I don't say just "pro-choice."

    Between the two, if we want to have dialogue, even in disagreement, we should choose our words carefully both to not compromise/miscommunicate our views as well as used words intentionally incendiary on the other side.

  36. larry kurtz 2014.03.11

    jesus, mary and joseph: give me strength....

  37. Troy 2014.03.11

    PS> Read above carefully. Written small screen with small keys. A lot of small things that don't read right. Age (failing eyesight) and chubbiness has unintended consequences. Won't waste time to self-correct. Hope you can figure out what I intended to say.

  38. Lanny V Stricherz 2014.03.11

    Let's see if I have that straight Troy. We need to pay attention to the choice of the father, when he does not want the fetus aborted, but the State should then not make him responsible for the child that she bares, because of his (and her) carelessness or in the case of the Catholic Church failure to practice abstinence?

  39. Deb Geelsdottir 2014.03.11

    I prefer it when the individual defines the terms as she applies to herself. Pro-Life might mean one is ready to kill medical professionals whose work includes abortions. Pro-Life might also define one who passively wishes that abortions didn't exist. Usually I'd like the individual to say more about what Pro-Life means specifically to her. We may still argue about our positions, but we know specifically what we are arguing about.

    I disagree with Troy regarding the position that there is only one understood definition of Pro-Life. Very frequently I've heard the term used to mean more than simply opposed to abortion. The "one definition only" phrase is used by original intent to indicate that anyone in disagreement is therefore pro-death and happy with "killing babies," a very inaccurate, but highly incendiary meme.

    There are limitless variations within the debate over "a woman's right to control her own body." (My very short definition.) I see a continuum crowded to overflowing with positions on the issue. Pro-Choice or Pro-Life are much too limited and freighted with excess baggage.

  40. mike from iowa 2014.03.11

    How is it the fetus gets a choice? It is entirely dependent on Mom until years after it is born-if it is born. Then folks on the right choose not to support these children with food or education or healthcare. The parents-how ever many there are involved,are responsible(so says the state) for the child's actions and welfare at least until the age of majority or emancipation. If Junior messes up,Mom and Dad can be held financially responsible for that child's decisions. You,on the opposing side,wipe your hands of the whole mess once that bundle of cells is forced to be born,since the child is not of your DNA,just your immoral meddling.

  41. Roger Cornelius 2014.03.11

    Troy is attempting to restrict or contain Pro-Life by limiting it to the discussion on abortion only. No other pro-life situations are relevant to him, apparently.

    His reasoning is that if we discuss Pro-Life only in regards to abortion, Pro-Life advocates don't have to answer for their contradictions when it comes to the overall cost of raising a child, the responsibilities of the father, and their pro-death stance on capital punishment.

  42. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.03.11

    The curse of small screens and keys aside, here we go again, triangulating toward some common understanding. Dagnabit, Troy! Where do we get off seeking common ground in a blog comment section?

    Your description of what Kathy and I do with the word "pro-life" may be accurate. Kathy and I are not lying, but we have an obligation to explain to people what we mean when we say "pro-life". I hope Rep. Tyler will so elaborate: it would make for instructive campaign-trail culture-jamming. We should always seek open, detailed discourse over branding.

    Now wait a minute: how is "anti-abortion" a euphemism? You yourself, Troy call them the "anti-abortion movement" and take no offense when we use that accurate term. Does anyone in that movement take offense? We can quite accurately and honestly describe RTL as anti-abortion, since that is their be-all end-all.

    Pro-choice feels less like branding/euphemism than pro-life. Pro-choice describes my position more accurately than the charged "pro-abort" that Cody flings alongside "liar" (is he always like this? Did he train under Bob Ellis?). Is there any other term that could more directly describe the position I've expressed on abortion policy?

  43. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.03.11

    That's where we can go with this branding/euphemism discussion, Roger. Used as a brand for one narrow political movement, pro-life becomes empty. When we see that its logical opposite, anti-life, applies to no one but Charles Manson and Pol Pot, it becomes meaningless.

    I am open to the charge that "pro-choice" is too broad a term for narrow use to describe those of us defending abortion rights. Like "life", "choice" can cover a lot of ground. Do we also support "choice" (personal liberty, bodily autonomy, medical and sexual privacy) on sodomy laws (yup), drug legalization (depends), selling plasma and kidneys (hmm), euthanasia and suicide (uh oh)?

    And before I throw the conversation completely off the rails, if Senator Angie Buhl O'Donnell says she is pro-choice, then fails to sponsor legislation providing for state funding of abortion on demand for all Medicaid patients, can I call her a liar? (I wouldn't, but I wanted to make the comparison.)

    And when is Spencer Cody going to drop by and explain himself? I'd go say this to him directly on his post on DWC, but we all know how trying to comment over there goes.

  44. Lanny V Stricherz 2014.03.11

    Let me take a crack at this conundrum. The Republican Party is the party of cutting taxes. They don't have to cut the tax on new vehicles here in South Dakota as we are already 40% lower than our surrounding states. We even only charge that difference on cars sold to out of staters who then go back to their home state and pay that difference in tax to their home state. But one of the taxes that affects everyone, not just the folks who can afford to buy a new vehicle, is food at the grocery store. I and many other folks have asked for years that the State and in my case the City of Sioux Falls remove the tax from food in the grocery store. But session after session nothing happens. It has even gone so far that the sales tax collected in Sioux Falls by the City, is being offered back to property owners by the Republican candidate for Mayor. Forget that probably half the people in Sioux Falls who pay sales tax live in apartments, but rather than let all of the people share in the tax give back by taking the City's share of the sales tax of groceries, that Republican candidate wants to reward property owners, who already have their property taxes frozen by the legislature, unless the City, County or School District opt out, which of course is a tax cut that renters already don't get and have to pay higher rent because neither do their landlords get the tax break.

    So, if I said that Republicans are liars when they say they are tax cutters, because they are tax redistributors would I be wrong?

  45. Deb Geelsdottir 2014.03.11

    Not all anti-abortion/pro-lifers are anti-woman, but simple logic leads directly to the conclusion that the most vociferous, especially those in law making positions or leading "Pro-Life groups", are definitely anti-woman. Follow the logic, and if you see gaps or holes in my logic, please comment:

    If I want to end abortions, I look at the causes as revealed by a long and conclusive series of peer reviewed studies. I focus on that list- income, education, birth control, patriarchal culture, social support and assistance, housing, health care, etc. I'd ensure that the male's part in abortions was regarded equally. Tougher penalties and more streamlined procedures for sexual assault, deadbeat dads, domestic violence, ending any laws that give approval, tacit or explicit, to male inequality, require equality with very strong penalties for any businesses which are guilty of inequality. I'd make sure birth control for women And Men was easily available, and that the entire spectrum of women's health services was easily accessible and fully funded. And more and more.

    I don't see any of those things by the Pro-Lifers.

    Now on the other hand, if I was focused on controlling a woman's sexual and reproductive life I'd do many of the same things the Pro-Lifers are doing.

    I'd deeply diminish a woman's physical autonomy by requiring unnecessary medical procedures like 3D ultrasound, sharply restricting health insurance coverage like no birth control, writing laws that assume her ignorance and/or diminished mental capacity like waiting periods and forced listening to unscientific information, ordering shaming procedures like transvaginal ultrasound (aka-rape by object), reduced or diminish her political position, oppose strong anti rape/sexual assault/domestic violence laws, promote a macho and violent patriarchal culture, reinforce "male as norm" in all aspects of the social structure, use any means necessary to close women's health facilities that have even a distant connection with abortion, including terrorism, fire bombings and murder, and on and on.

    Okay, fellow Madizens? Help me out.

    BTW, those studies show that the first grouping is far more effective in reducing the number of abortions than the second.

  46. Jenny 2014.03.11

    I wonder how Mr Troy Jones feels about Welfare? We know that many of the women that have abortions are single and know of the struggles they will have to raise it.

    Addictions, low wage, dead end jobs, family dysfunction, sexual and physical abuse are all realities in today's world. So are they going to all of a sudden marry the father and have a nice sunshiny ideal neutral family?
    Put down the bong, Troy, or pass it to the single woman that's struggling her ass off to raise her kid(s) on a low wage job with a car that won't start, and the county just denied her section 8 housing cuz she's a couple hundred dollars over the limit to qualify. Yes, single women are just dying for a life like that, to have those disgraceful looks thrown at them when they take out their food stamp card at the grocery store, to have barely enough money left after the rent is paid. Let's just all stand in line ladies and pop those babies out. The "pro-lifers" care about us!

  47. Roger Cornelius 2014.03.11

    Cory,
    We can parse words and play games with definitions until hell freezes over.
    I'm not sure that the word "choice", pro or anti, has any place in a discussion about abortion. Women make a "decision" to keep a fetus or abort it, just as men make a decision to use a condom or not use one.
    What pro-life advocates continually disregard is that women have rights, and that right includes to make decisions that affect her health. That is her province and her's alone.
    As Deb has so eloquently pointed out, pro-lifers make the "choice" not to level the playing field by not having sanctions against men that recklessly father unwanted children. That in itself is the definition of the "war on women"
    When will the state of South Dakota take responsibility and hold accountable the fathers that impregnate women? There is needs to a law that scrutinizes men, physically and mentally, about their fitness as a father.

  48. Troy 2014.03.11

    Cory,

    Euphemism isn't the right word. I say I am Pro-life and you say anti-abortion. We both know where we are coming from. We know this is about abortion. No harm. Nobody is trying to obfuscate or deceive.

    You say you are Pro-life in your attempt to sound good because you support cancer research, I think you are intentionally trying to obfuscate.

    I say I am Pro-choice because I support the choice of the child and to make myself sound good, my intention is certainly not clarity.

    At the end of the day, the pro-abortion group has rallied around the brand pro-choice and we have chosen (pun intended) pro-life. Rather than trying to confuse terms, let's just talk about the issue.

  49. Roger Cornelius 2014.03.11

    Troy,

    Just how does a fetus make a choice?

  50. Deb Geelsdottir 2014.03.11

    Troy, the Terms are The Issue of this post. In the past you have refused to respond to questions and comments because you said they were not part of The Issue of that particular post.

    Which is it?

  51. MJL 2014.03.11

    Maybe the term that should be used for those trying to end abortion is not anti-choice, but pro-government control.
    As someone who would love to see a decrease in the need for abortions, I believe the best action is to not deny the choice, but to focus more on reducing the need for a person to feel that they must make a very, very, very difficult decision. If you really want to be anti-abortion, then step up to the plate and be pro-education (regular and sex education) and pro-proverty reduction. That would make the biggest dent in reducing the number of abortions in this country.

  52. mike from iowa 2014.03.12

    ....and there you have it ,folks. The never ending battle for male control over a females reproductive life rages on. The breakaway republic of women's autonomy has the mostly white,male crowd for total control stalemated in a battle of semantics- what to call each other's position? Forget Ukraine,the real fight is right here in "free" 'murrica. Have American women the absolute right to decide for themselves what is in their best interests? Vote yes(or don't vote). No bias here.

  53. Troy 2014.03.12

    Deb,

    I answered Cory. I wish I had time to answer every question on here asked of me but I don't. I know i get a lot of questions because many times I am the only conservative posting.

    Roger, i don't have time to get into the discussion. I was just using it as an example for trying to redefine a vernacular use a word to give a different impression.

  54. larry kurtz 2014.03.12

    Nothing says Con-rights like Pro-life.

  55. Bill Dithmer 2014.03.12

    WORDS!

    The Blindman

  56. Jenny 2014.03.12

    Troy Jones hasn't answered my welfare question yet.

    Do you want your taxes going to raise these babies, Troy? A lot of these babies have medical problems: fetal alcohol syndrome, drug babies, ADHD, mental retardation, low birth rate just to mention a few. Or perhaps you could adopt one of two of there precious babies since you're so lovingly prolife. I'd like to see Steve Hickey and Stace Nelson adopt some of these hi risk babies also, and give them the love, patience and attention that is needed 24/7.

    You could read your bible to them as you rock them to sleep. Since you're against the ACA, the increased medical costs these babies have b/c of all their problems are financially up to you and you only, since you are probably are against welfare, food stamps and wouldn't want to look like a hypocrite if you did start using govt services.
    I know each of you probably have good jobs, and not mind the hundreds or thousands of extra dollars a month these babies will need with medical costs, doctor visits, dental, psychiatric, diapers, baby formula etc. It's bound to be a full time job, but I know you men all love babies since you're all so staunchly pro-life.
    I wouldn't want to do it. I work and have my own family wouldn't have the time or finances to take these babies under my wings. But I will staunchly advocate for food stamps, WIC, ACA to get all these babies the services they deserve. So what is it? I'll be waiting for your answer, men.

  57. Troy 2014.03.12

    Jenny,

    You are right. I haven't answered your "question." Because of the essence of your question is really a statement which denigrates the motives and sincerity of people who oppose abortion, I'm not going to engage with you. I've discussed all of the issues (each of which deserves its own discussion) many times.

  58. Jenny 2014.03.12

    Just admit the truth, Troy. You'd have a lot more respect on this blog if you did. Admit that you can't stand single moms that pop out babies and take welfare, WIC, foodstamps. Own up to it, Troy.

  59. Troy 2014.03.12

    Jenny,

    I have absolutely no desire to gain your respect or engage you in conversation. I'm wholly comfortable with you forming any opinion you want with regard to me, no matter how rash or inaccurate, because you've chosen to form it with no evidence except the reality I oppose abortion. I'm comfortable in my skin with regard to my social justice views.

  60. larry kurtz 2014.03.12

    Religious freedom means never having to stand trial for raping children because jesus.

  61. dancingcrane 2014.03.13

    Kathy Tyler did lie. She said her priest said that Jesus was prochoice, as in proabortion. What he said was that people are free to choose, as in free will. Yes, we are free to kill, or steal, or do any other evil, and we will reap the consequences. That is what her priest said he meant. Maybe Kathy just wasn't paying attention?

    Prolife is not an empty term. To be "prochoice", which is indeed empty, is to be prodeath in regards to an unborn person that that mother wants to kill. You are indeed, prodeath and proabortion, if you think at any time that the death of one, is a good thing.

  62. larry kurtz 2014.03.13

    gawd.

  63. owen reitzel 2014.03.13

    sorry dancingcrane but you're wrong. I'm pro-choice meaning that a choice will be made by the people effected. If my wife was pregnant and she could die because of this then the CHOICE should be with my wife and me. If we want to have our family involved or our minister it's our CHOICE.
    You or anybody else should not tell us what we can do. Every situation is different.

  64. owen reitzel 2014.03.13

    The sad part is dancingcrane that people like you don't care about what happens after a baby is born.
    SNAP was cut by Republicans and they wanted to make deeper cuts. I bet your against our Governor expanding Medicaid which would help kids and their parents.
    I bet you're against the ACA.

  65. Roger Cornelius 2014.03.13

    dancingcrane,

    As you are probably aware, the Republican led legislature once again refused to ban the death penalty, Republicans by nature are for the most part Pro-Life yet they enthusiastically support the death penalty.

    How is that you can be pro-life and pro-death at the same time?

  66. Jenny 2014.03.13

    Seems to me like the republicans in SD are 'pro-life' only if you have the money to raise your own babies. Other than that, it's the You're On Your Own Party. Cut food stamps for the poor, but keep those farm welfare checks coming for the wealthy.
    Why else would Troy Jones not answer my Welfare question?

  67. dancingcrane 2014.03.13

    Owen, you don't include the choice of the one who's going to be most affected, the child. Even abortionists agree that you don't need abortion to save mother's life, it just gives the doctor one less patient to worry about. The doctor should try to save both, failing that, the child is, or should be, an unintended casualty.

    You have no idea what I care about. I help women/babies/families after birth. I have single moms in my own family. It's hard. I'm also against rapists, deadbeat dads, and any other evildoers going unpunished.

    Yes, I am against the ACA. So are many burned liberals. It's a mess, designed to fail, to make way for single-payer, which won't be any better.

    I am against the death penalty, unless the murderer cannot be contained; is one who escapes, kills, and makes it clear that he can do so again. I am also against wars of aggression, though fighting to defend the innocent is just. I have friends in Lebanon, Syria and Ukraine, if that lends perspective.

    I also believe that all politicians lie, GOP, Dem, or otherwise. It's all about riling up the low-information voters, for their own benefit. Many GOP are pro-life the same way that Kathy Tyler is pro-life. That is, with all sorts of exceptions that make the term meaningless in their case.

    It is not meaningless in mine.

  68. owen reitzel 2014.03.13

    Dancingcrane I'm not for abortion. What I'm saying is that this is a personal decision. What gives you the right to stick your nose in a decision that is as personal as it can get.
    I'm glad that you women and babieas after birth. thank you.
    I'm guessing Kathy Tyler is pro-choice not pro-life.

    As far as the ACA the only reason I have insurance right now is because of the ACA. If the ACA is a mess it's because of Republican obstructionist.

  69. larry kurtz 2014.03.13

    Rich women have full reproductive freedom while women at middle and lower income levels experience chilling effects on their rights. South Dakota's repeated attempts to restrict access to medical care is not only mean-spirited, it's discriminatory anti choice extremism.

  70. mike from iowa 2014.03.13

    So,your unaborted baby needs a di-di-change because it smells awful and is unsanitary. Why doesn't the baby change its own diaper? Because it can't DECIDE to do that. It is dependent on someone else for every creature comfort until it has the requisite skills to fend for itself. And even then,should it decide not to change its diaper or pants,that decision will be made for that person. A fetus cannot decide anything,therefore it has no choice. Those decisions should be left up to the pregnant woman and not a bunch of meddling morons with nothing better to do. Get a freaking life and stay out of other people's personal and private decisions. Unless,of course,you accept 100% responsibility for that fetus you want to be forced to be born. But you won't because you can't. Focus on the living and make their lives better.

  71. Rorschach 2014.03.13

    I don't see in the Bible where Jesus urged government to pass laws telling people what to do. I guess that makes Jesus pro-choice. Seems to me that's what Rep. Tyler's priest was getting at.

  72. Roger Cornelius 2014.03.13

    dancingcraning says "I am against the death penalty, unless the murderer cannot be contained", there it is folks, dancing is against the death penalty with an "unless" thereby justifying the death penalty. Prisoners of all types are successfully "contained" throughout this country every day. Dancing surely must feel conflicted at this point. Either you are for capital punishment or you 100% opposed to it, surely you feel conflicted right now.

  73. dancingcrane 2014.03.13

    Not conflicted at all, Roger. All those who are safely contained, are fine. Let one escape, and go on a killing spree, or even point a loaded gun or whatever, at innocents with intent to kill, and my prolife instincts will be for his intended victims. That may mean letting their protectors kill him, or at the murderer's threat that he will do it again (including killing others in prison, for whom I am just as prolife), allow the court to determine that the risk is too great. That's killing in defence of self or others, not a justification of the death penalty. Something to grieve, but nothing to be conflicted over.

    Owen, I'm glad you have insurance. I grieve for the many more, like myself, who have lost theirs, and can't get any at all, do to their broken website, and abysmally-trained 'navigators '.

    Mike, a baby can indeed decide that changing is necessary, and last I looked, my 19 year old is still dependent on me. You too are dependent on others, as am I, unless you grow your own food on land you own, make your own clothes, etc. In fact, dependence on govt seems to be a sought after thing. Just wait til the govt gets to decide whether or not we get to live, when we are elderly and no longer useful. We are already seeing elderly and sick being denied treatment, but being offered euthanasia in Oregon. And why are you trying so hard to shove your views down my throat? So much for being the tolerant one. Your view is the only acceptable one, apparently.

    Rohrshach, Tyler's priest is already on record as saying he is not an advocate of abortion. He was talking about free will. Anyone is free to do good or evil. They will receive the consequences due to either one.

    Larry, if poor women have no freedom, why, for example, are most PP's in minority neighborhoods? That's where the money is. Follow the money trail.

  74. Jenny 2014.03.13

    "PPs" - Power Points; pound puppies?

  75. Lanny V Stricherz 2014.03.13

    dancingcrane, I would like to see the death of this as a political issue. You absolutely cannot legislate morality. For a political party to use this as a political issue year after year after year after year is so disingenuous. You have lost some really good people from your party, and allowed those who have other ideas about using your tax dollars, to do their conniving because all you will pay attention to is one issue, abortion.

    Do something to prevent the pregnancies. Do something to ensure that the babies are taken care of after they are born but don't keep harping on this one issue as the only reason to vote and or pay any attention to what a politician says or does. By watching this one issue, the voters have allowed their politicians to rob them blind, and ignore the things for which they are responsible such as education, upkeep of infrastructure, the legitimate use of our tax dollars, ways to keep our young people in State and a myriad of other issues.

  76. larry kurtz 2014.03.13

    Bree: howz that booble?

  77. Deb Geelsdottir 2014.03.13

    Whoa! We have a troll hanging out. There's nothing like the super righteous for a reasonable conversation.

    Larry said it best - "gawd"

    Save your breath people. I'm done.

Comments are closed.