Extending America's Influence
So many people worldwide, so little time to battle for their souls, play ideological ping-pong, and, in the process, negatively impact their lives:
NEW YORK - From Peru to the Philippines to Poland, U.S.-based conservative groups are increasingly engaged in abortion and family-planning debates overseas, emboldened by their ties with the Bush administration and eager to compete with more liberal rivals.
The result is that U.S. advocacy groups are now waging their culture war skirmishes worldwide as they try to influence other countries' laws and wrangle over how U.S. aid money should be spent.
"We don't expect to see the United Nations change, or Western Europe change," said Joseph d'Agostino of the Population Research Institute, a Virginia-based anti-abortion group. "But with the Bush administration, pro-lifers feel there's a real opportunity to stop the U.S. government from promoting abortion and sex education and population control in the Third World."
posted by ema @ 2:55 PM
10 comments
![[logo]](http://tbn2.google.com/images?q=tbn:me2GMPeOIa_I_M:http://tcoyp.com/images/squares.gif){kind=small}
Books
10 Comments:
Liz here from I Speak of Dreams. Sorry, this is off-topic but I couldn't find an email link for you.
FYI, Over at Modestly Yours, there's a post against the HPV vaccination, with pro and con commentators. Excellent peek at the rationale of the anti-HPV-vaccinators, plus good arguments from the pro-vaccinators.
I'd love to have you weigh in.
It WAS an excellent peek at the arguments of those who object to mass vaccination of kids as young as nine; however, the arguments in favor were weak, and either emotion-based or lacking in the effective use of reasoned persuasion. But a nice try!!
Anon,
Is your comment directed at me/my post over at Modestly Yours [you know, the one where I make no pro/con argument, but rather offer an informed explanation of the medical reason for vaccinating preteens]?
Yup.
however, the arguments in favor were weak, and either emotion-based or lacking in the effective use of reasoned persuasion.
Okay. So, what about the HPV's/vaccine's mode of action do you find emotion-based or lacking in the effective use of reasoned persuasion?
Again, you misrepresent. I said that the arguments were weak and emotion-based, not the vaccine's mode of action. Do you really want to keep going here?
anon,
Let's recap:
1. I post an explanation of the medical reason for vaccinating preteens [having to do with mode of action]
2. You comment that you find [I assume, and you confirm] my post weak, and either emotion-based or lacking in the effective use of reasoned persuasion.
3. I then ask for clarification; what specifically in my post did you find weak, etc.
4. You state that I (again?) misrepresent [what? I've only posted on the medical reason for the vaccine, having made no pro/con argument].
5. You inquire if I really want to keep going here. Where? To the substance of my post? Um, yes, since that is the topic under discussion.
I'm sorry-- what did you say?
I'm sorry, I couldn't resist that last. You seem to be really getting in a twist over the fact that people disagree with you. As was argued on the Modesty blog, I think there's more to this story than the simple medical action of a vaccine on which you seem to be fixated. I am concerned about larger issues on how we are raising our children. Why don't we just agree to disagree?
Heh, no need to project. I appreciate the concern, but I'm still trying to figure out what we're disagreeing about.
Post a Comment
<< Home