So I started my Voting series for the November elections in an attempt to go beyond voting and to actually get more involved with campaigns and stuff. Sadly, with the move and all, I’ve gotten woefully behind.
However — There’s still time! So I’m gonna work to defeat Prop. 85.
Never underestimate my ability to turn a prop I don’t like into a party with cocktails. Yes, that’s right. I’m throwing a Cocktails for Choice party, complete with organic cocktails and organic SquareOne vodka.
When: October 19, 2006, 7 pm – ?
Where: My new apartment
To attend, visit my party site here to RSVP — The program’s a lil more catankerous than Evite, but I didn’t wanna post my address publicly for all to see. Just put in your name, email, and zip — no need to put in your address. Feel free to bring friends —
The goal’s both partying and fundraising. More deets on the site — Hope to see you in a few weeks.
Maybe it is the long lost Catholic in me.
But Abortion is far too delicate a subject to get a cocktail party. Both sides of the arguement (Well America might be a bit different it seems a bit physco from here) have very sensitive feelings on the subject and throwing a party just seems to be in very bad taste.
Comment by simon — October 3, 2006 @ 11:21 am
I think cocktails are a great way to get conversations going about subjects that’re often shoved under the table as “too sensitive” to talk about. Good thing I’m not Catholic :)
Comment by Siel — October 3, 2006 @ 12:34 pm
Also, keep in mind it’s a fundraising party. (A very American thing ;)
I doubt there’ll be any prop 85 opponents, so not much chance of hurting feelings.
Comment by Robert 'Groby' Blum — October 3, 2006 @ 12:39 pm
But by calling it “Cocktails for Choice” you are already stating what the answer to the question is. It is not being open to people who disagree with it.
Would you be terribly inticed to go to a party called “Cocktails For Life” and expect to get a civilised debate? It is the same the other way around.
Good thing I’m not Catholic :)
lol ya it has its downsides. I am not one anymore but was raised one but one advantage of it is that they believe creationism is a load of Bull. Their thing is that god is watchful rather the interfering. (That people have free choice) and hence god would be more likely to be evolutionairy then creationist.
By the way if you are ever debating a creationist and they use the arguement that it is statistically improbably for life to happen this way just say.
“if god is all know, thus he knew this would be the way it would turn out after millions of years of evoultion so if you believe in god it is not improbably at all in fact if you say it is statistically improbably are you saying that god is not all knowing”
Then watch them go pop due to logic
Comment by simon — October 4, 2006 @ 5:02 am
Hey simon — As Groby pointed out, I think you’re totally misinterpreting the intent of this partay. I’m not looking for a “debate” partie where I have to argue with fundies over cocktails. I’m throwing a fundraiser and inviting people who believe preserving the right to choose is important to raise money to defeat an anti-choice proposition.
So yes, I’m clearly stating my opinion on the issue, and no, the party’s not open to people who’re anti-choice. That would sorta defeat the purpose of the fundraiser.
Comment by Siel — October 4, 2006 @ 10:04 am
But you said
I think cocktails are a great way to get conversations going about subjects that’re often shoved under the table as “too sensitive†to talk about
which to me seems totally different to this sentance.
I’m not looking for a “debate†partie where I have to argue with fundies over cocktails.
Also you seem to be also dismissing people who differ from your position as “fundies” which is not very open and not very tolerant. There are many people who are pro-life and not even religious by dismissint them as “fundies” you are just being intolerant of different views.
How are people ever going to be able to sit together and talk over something when people continually throw insults around. “Fundies”, “hippies”, “nazis” “uber-liberal” none of that aids debate. It just turns into a punch and judy contest of who can come up with the best insult not the best idea.
Also just becauses the “fundies” do it does not mean that you have to do. You do not need to desend further into this paritisan bull. You can be better and let the force of your arguement win the day.
America needs to cop itself on all of it. It looks like a joke from over here.
Comment by simon — October 5, 2006 @ 4:31 am
Okay dude — Lemme clarify. I think cocktails are good in general for bringing issues into debate — but at this fundraiser, all attendees are expected to be on one side of this proposition in question. Thus, there’ll be more drinking than debating.
How is uber-liberal an insult? And yes, I am dismissing fundies as fundies. I don’t wish them harm, but that doesn’t mean I should be open and tolerant of opinions based on misguided beliefs. I think I should point them out for what they are.
Comment by Siel — October 5, 2006 @ 2:43 pm
How is uber-liberal an insult?
No idea just seen it on the some of the more conservative websites I read. ( i give out to them to for being partisan. :) )
I am dismissing fundies as fundies. I don’t wish them harm, but that doesn’t mean I should be open and tolerant of opinions based on misguided beliefs. I think I should point them out for what they are.
By all means do but by calling them fundies you are not pointing out what is wrong with their beliefs you are just calling them names.
Sorry if the last posts seem a bit angry. But try living in Belfast for a while and not getting angry at parisan rethoric.
Comment by simon — October 6, 2006 @ 1:23 am
Well, re: calling fundies fundies — I’m inclined to think that I’m pointing out that being anti-choice is less about arguments about women’s right to choose than about following weird religious dogma — but maybe I need to explain more…
Comment by Siel — October 6, 2006 @ 5:58 pm