Okay. I wrote you a couple of polite, sensible posts to have a look at the Gordian knot inherent in trying to reconcile a 'live and let live' philosophy with the abortion issue from the Catholic viewpoint. It's a rubic's cube, maybe irreconcilable conflict and it's pretty interesting. You've been rude in response. …

Hey, I'm not saying he isn't misogynist. I'm asking ItsARampageLana if his anti-abotion position is why *s/he* is calling him misogynist. Since so many women are anti-abortion (and for other reasons, too), I have trouble with the idea that opposing abortion is misogynist.

I think I made it pretty well: as much as your 'live and let live' philosophy suits me in just about any other context, it just doesn't work with the Catholic doctrine on abortion.

Welp, apparently it's a waste of time interacting with you. Take a look at our comments - mine are polite and sensible. Yours are sarcastic, 'bye now' and 'Wahhhh, Mommy...." It's pretty clear you fit the troll profile, not me. (It's often the case that those who call others 'troll' (or any other insult) are…

Ah yes, throw out the 'misogynist' name calling, followed by the 'troll' name calling. Quality work. I made a polite, sensible point.

What's your point? I explained the inherent conflict between Catholic doctrine and the "opposing it's fine, but outlawing it isn't" viewpoint.

Sooo then, that's a 'yes, women who oppose abortion are misogynists.'

Are you saying that opposing abortion is misogynist? I've never understood that point of view. Millions - tens of millions - of free, highly educated, modern women raised in liberal Western countries are against abortion. Are they self-hating women; are they misogynists?

That outlook reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the Catholic anti-abortion position.

Um, the actresses are selling a product. It's a good idea to try to meet the desires of one's customers.

Wait a sec. I don't know about Rebecca Rose individually, but Jezebel is one of the most blatant color- and gender- head counting sites there is.

The "because xyz" cutesyisms cannot die soon enough. What's next out of you, Barry - "squee"s?

Wanting to want to stop self-harmful behaviors is the first goal of the process. Don't be too hard on yourself just yet.

Thanks for the insight into your, and other women's, perspective. It's the best explanation I've seen and it's really helpful. Cheers.

Sure. And yeah, I think that is exactly where our opinions diverge. Cheers!

Not that it's relevant to my comments in this thread, but:

Blue Jeans wants a hula hoop is arguing a similar point. You can track our comments to each other to see my view. Cheers!

Lewis was not acquitted, he was charged and he plea bargained (not that his outcome is really important to our discussion). For the sake of an accurate thread, here is the text from Wikipedia:

Yeah, I am largely on board with you. The focus should be on whether the police, DA, etc. failed to do their jobs because it was a rape case and/or the accused is a star athlete. If they did, nail them.

I offered no replacement analogy. I crafted what Winston would have to say to come close to tracking with your peppercorn analogy. It worked: you now recognize that applying your analogy to the facts of this case results in an absurd defense that Winston would not, and I have not, propose(d).