Re: [Marxism] WHY NADER? by Peter Miguel Camejo

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

> Nader's opposition to abortion rights for women and his
> backing of that loony family of right-to-lifers in Florida,
> the relatives of Terri Schiavo, who fought to keep that
> comatose woman alive, makes a terribly negative statement 
> about a possible Nader candidacy. I'm sorry to see that 
> Peter does not address that exceptionally important issue
> while giving Nader a full-tilt endorsement.
> 
> Nader is mostly known as a consumer advocate, which is a
> good thing. He's not particularly known as a campaigner
> against imperialism. He was miserably treated by those on
> the left who cannot contemplate life outside the Democratic
> Party, as Peter eloquently explains. But with such a strong
> anti-choice political position, how can he possibly present
> the face of a possibly better world? I cannot see him in a
> role of that importance.
> 
> 
> Walter Lippmann

http://www.issues2000.org/2004/Ralph_Nader_Abortion.htm

Q: What is your response to RU-486?
A: It’s up to the woman, not the government. This is a pill that’s been 
shown to be safe in Europe for numerous years. And it’s preferable to 
surgical procedure.

Source: Nader-Buchanan debate on ‘Meet the Press’ Oct 1, 2000

Q: So you are for abortion rights?
A: I don’t think government has the proper role in forcing a woman to 
have a child or forcing a woman not to have a child. And we’ve seen that 
around the world. This is something that should be privately decided 
with the family, woman, all the other private factors of it, but we 
should work toward preventing the necessity of abortion.

Source: Interview on ‘Meet the Press’ May 7, 2000

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism