Not two different concepts. Two intricately related concepts. One of those opposite-sides-of-the-same-coin deals. It actually sounds if we want the same thing, just in different form.
Although your abortion example is precisely the kind of micro-managing, nitpicking, and hairsplitting that... well, that I expect from the Republican side. And, bluntly, abortion never will be made illegal -- it's far too useful as a motivational and fundraising tool, which shows how crass, cynical, manipulative, and untrue to their purported causes the Repubs are, the ones who stir up the diehard evangelicals on this. 'Cause, jeez, if it's baby-killing, it's baby-killing. If not, get the superstitious fucktards out of women's wombs. That's one paragraph.
Six hundred pages of law -- gee, why does that sound like the abomination that was and is the 1,300 pages of the PATRIOT Act? That's why Congress should take the time to hammer out details, and why laws should be written one at a time. If one bad thing outweighs 600 pages of good things, either it's really bad, the other stuff isn't as good as somebody thought, or it's a badly written law.
And if you think Congress, even a Dem-controlled Congress, will deny funding for this sort of thing, you have no idea of how afraid of political spin and fallout these people are. And how would they deny funding!? The directive is to do nothing. To ignore the rights of the woman, who wants some freakin' medical treatment. You seem to think that denying funding to HHS will result in something other than Repubs, led by the President, saying, "Look, see? The Democrats shut down the entire Department of Health and Human Services, rather than give doctors and other health professionals the right to act on their consciences."
(This is yet another tale of the kind of bullshit started by the pharmacists who won't hand out RU486/Plan B/whatever. And it comes down to one simple thing: If you aren't prepared to do what the job entails, don't train for, apply for, or get the job.)
You really should be sure of what you're arguing before you argue it.
You Wanna Play Snark? I Can Play Snark
Although your abortion example is precisely the kind of micro-managing, nitpicking, and hairsplitting that... well, that I expect from the Republican side. And, bluntly, abortion never will be made illegal -- it's far too useful as a motivational and fundraising tool, which shows how crass, cynical, manipulative, and untrue to their purported causes the Repubs are, the ones who stir up the diehard evangelicals on this. 'Cause, jeez, if it's baby-killing, it's baby-killing. If not, get the superstitious fucktards out of women's wombs. That's one paragraph.
Six hundred pages of law -- gee, why does that sound like the abomination that was and is the 1,300 pages of the PATRIOT Act? That's why Congress should take the time to hammer out details, and why laws should be written one at a time. If one bad thing outweighs 600 pages of good things, either it's really bad, the other stuff isn't as good as somebody thought, or it's a badly written law.
And if you think Congress, even a Dem-controlled Congress, will deny funding for this sort of thing, you have no idea of how afraid of political spin and fallout these people are. And how would they deny funding!? The directive is to do nothing. To ignore the rights of the woman, who wants some freakin' medical treatment. You seem to think that denying funding to HHS will result in something other than Repubs, led by the President, saying, "Look, see? The Democrats shut down the entire Department of Health and Human Services, rather than give doctors and other health professionals the right to act on their consciences."
(This is yet another tale of the kind of bullshit started by the pharmacists who won't hand out RU486/Plan B/whatever. And it comes down to one simple thing: If you aren't prepared to do what the job entails, don't train for, apply for, or get the job.)
You really should be sure of what you're arguing before you argue it.