asehpe says: Now, the reasonable people of both sides should talk to see what can be achieved together--as many have pointed out, if there is some common ground and some measures that would please both sides, then working together is a good idea.

Unlike a situation with tribes feuding over land, what's at stake in this situation is a bit different.

On one side, you have forces who believe women have the right to make decisions about their own bodies. No pro-choice groups are preventing women from carrying pregnancies to term or forcing them to have abotions.

On the other side, you have forces who believe women should be forced to carry and deliver babies. These people are actively seeking to force actions on women's bodies.

The anti-choice group can try to work it around the fringes, but their goal is to restrict women's rights to bodily integrity. Seems like that was outlawed along with slavery.

knecht says: Start work towards solutions that most people do favor like availability of contraceptives and decent, affordable healthcare.

catnmus says: On the topic of sex ed, pro-choicers have to realize that there's nothing wrong with encouraging abstinence.

I haven't seen pro-choice advocates standing in the way of either of these directions, rather reproductive health groups like Planned Parenthood on in front fighting for the availability of contraception, general healthcare and encouraging teens and adults to make informed decisions about their sexuality, including practicing abstinence.

So I don't see how the anti-choice groups can add anything to the discussion, as right now they are often standing in the way - by harassing women going to clinics for medical care, preventing teens from getting accurate information about their bodies, reducing access to contraception with pharmacists refusing to dispense birth control, etc.

It could be compared to Obama and the House Dems changing the stimulus package to suit the requests of house GOPers, who end up voting against it anyway.

All I can say to Judith Warner, the dopes in her article and Salon for publishing this dreck - Get a Life!

imnobody says: Before feminism, women HAD TO be stay-at-home moms. Now women have choices: they can be stay-at-home moms or they can work.

I'm sure a lot of black, white, asian, hispanic working class women like my mother, aunts, grandmothers would beg to differ with you. For most women throughout American's history, being a stay-at-home mom was not an option.

I second what the previous posters said. Salon has turned into US Magazine or some other celebrity dreck when it comes to coverage of First Lady Obama. Enough, already!

I've cancelled my subscription because Salon's content has become purile and boring, I assume you'd like to drive the rest of your readers away, too?

other than checking for gender-related diseases, I suspect just a few rich silly people are using this technology. few healthcare plans cover this stuff, so it's all out of pocket. I doubt most healthy couples are going to be wasting thousands in this tough economy.

What is it about Rush that is turning GOP officials into ass kissing idiots? I know MC Steele said he had a PR plan that was off the hook, but really, guys!

MC Steele's groveling before Limpballs is sure going to encourage lots of black folks and young people to want to join the GOP...NOT!

According to the CDC, the mean age for first intercourse (in 2002) was 17 for males, 17.4 for females.

As for having sex, among unmarried teens, by age 18-19, 64.3% of males and 68.8% of females have had intercourse.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/major/nsfg/abclist_t.htm#teenagers

The GOP, via FauxNews is trying to recapture some image of "leadership". However, the vast majority of Americans are in favor (or don't care about) embryonic stem cell research, and further bloviating by tthe rightwingnuts on this issue will probably blowback on them like the Terri Schiavo fiasco.

Now, what am I going to do with those His & Hers polar bear towels I ordered for them off the Wasilla Bait & ChiliDog Bridal registry?

Obama to Sanford - "go Cheney yourself".

Hopefully, the voters of South Carolina tell him the same in the next election.

Sanford, the fool, fancies himself presidential material, or at least a worthy successor to Michael Steele, so he's milking his 15 minutes of political fame for all it's worth, hoping to ride it to greater glory

While being an obstructionist idiot might get him the sub80 IQ vote in the GOP primary, he will have NO appeal to the rest of the voters in a general election. The massive failure that was Sarah Palin should have given these dopes a clue.

And after we have 4 years with an intelligent, insightful President Obama , why would they think anyone wants to return to the dumbed-downed days under GOP rule?

Our experience couldn’t be more different: We have friends and colleagues who hold positions of "serious power." They are doctors, lawyers, sales executives, television producers, writers and government lobbyists -- and they all breastfed for as little and as long as they wanted to -- with careers intact

It's often easier to accommodate breastpumping when you are in a power position. You can find a private place and time or force your company to do so. If you are working an assembly line, or in a fast food restaurant or in most working class jobs - accommodations are few. Some of these women find themselves "downsized" if they take too much time off.

Finally, maybe if we treated domestic violence as assult we could unwrap it from the relationship part that doens't matter. You hit someone no matter the gender or relationship that is assault.

You bring up a good point. The relationship is what allows for all of the rationalizing (by all parties). Same thing with parents hitting (spanking) their children. If not for that relationship, they'd be arrested.