Terrorism in Colorado Springs

[PlaysWellWithOthers]

Don't know how many people have read about this terrorist attack on a PP clinic in Colorado Springs?

Is it just me that thinks that the idea of "pro-life" people with firearms killing people is oxymoronic?

Why has no one described this obvious act of domestic terrorism as that?

There's been a lot of Tweets from anti-choice/anti-woman people supporting this terrorist. How do these people square the circle of which lives they are pro?

The way it's being reported is also interesting to me. I wonder if this man had had brown skin and been shouting pro daesh slogans, he would have been taken alive and have as much support from these people.

Well it's one uterus, one vote. The vote pertaining to your own uterus. It's also symbolic. All these men arguing over our bodies. In my case it's a general dislike of men talking about women's bodies as if their opinion is important.

In reality it's the same argument as gay marriage. Don't want gay marriage? Great, don't marry someone the same sex as yourself.

That's an interesting article. I wasn't aware that it came out so consistently that women outnumber men in wanting to reduce time limits or ban (though the article doesn't break that down, which I think is a key missing bit - are women more in favour of a lower cutoff or outright ban? If it's an outright ban I can only say Wow). It's very counter-intuitive.

It's a snapshot and i'd be interested in drilling down further into the why - and also correlation between those beliefs and likelihood of actually having an abortion, I wonder if that question has ever been asked?

@Bumbledumb: I agree - this article antjeschrupp.com/2014/09/02/warum-mehrheitsentscheidungen-oft-undemokratisch-sind/ states that it would not be democratic to have the majority (who is not affected by laws on abortion) vote on abortions.

IF someone must vote, it should only be women. But the ideal case be would every woman voting on her own uterus.

I now read that articile, and Freshwater, I think it is because men know (or fear) that fewer women would do PiV with them if abortion were outlawed and/or, as the article mentioned, they'd have to take responsibility for children.
Maybe the knowledge that many women would not abort makes this even more feasible - they can point at the theoretical possbility of abortion and declare themselves free of any responsibility for the child.

For the women, there could be a bit of holier than thou attitude in it - they might (think they can) abstain from (PiV-centric) sex when they don't want children, and they want to force everyone to do the same.

Maybe they are deeply unhappy themselves (already five children, or whatever) and want others to feel as unhappy.

I have often observed that kind of attitude in women who have to diet to stay thin - they are the most judgemental of overweight people.