Free Choices and Free Dialogue

Why This Webring?
What Kind of Sites in this Webring?
How to Join the Webring?

There are a number of pro-life webrings. There are pro-choice websites and pro-life websites.

There used to be a pro-dialogue website, Celebrating Choices, for sites that respected all freedom of choice.

I miss having a pro-choice webring. Most of all, I miss the the "Celebrating Choices" webring and its message of dialogue and respect between differing opinions, instead of polarization.

I have started this webring for all other webmasters who respect free choice: those who choose not to have an abortion but respect the right of others to choose for themselves; those who choose to have an abortion but respect the right of another to choose not to have one. And most of all, those who encourage finding common ground and dialogue between different sides on the same issue.

I am pro-choice in reproductive decisions, by religion. I believe that we are here to make our souls, and we can only do so by the choices we make for ourselves. By that same religion, I must allow others their own choices.

These are some of the sites I admire:

Abortion in Law, History & Religion

Abortion: Ethics

The Abortion Debate

From the work on Search for Common Ground, these are some of the differences between a dialogue and a polarized debate:

POLARIZED DEBATE DIALOGUE

Participants hardly talk to each other before the meeting; what talk there is does not affect the meeting. Participants talk to each other regularly and their talk is an essential part of the full process.

The atmosphere is threatening; attacks and interruptions are expected by participants and are usually permitted by moderators. Facilitators propose, get agreement on and enforce clear ground rules to enhance safety and respectful exchange.

Participants speak as representatives of groups (including religions and ideologies). Participants speak as individuals, from their own unique experience.

Participants speak to their own constituents and, perhaps, to the undecided middle. Participants speak to each other.

Differences within "sides" are denied or minimized. Differences among participants on the same "side" are revealed, as individual and personal foundations of beliefs and values are explored.

Participants express unswerving commitment to a point of view, approach, or idea. Participants express uncertainties, as well as deeply held beliefs.

Participants listen in order to refute the other side's data and to expose faulty logic in their arguments. Questions are asked from position of certainty. These questions are often rhetorical challenges or disguised statements. Participants listen to understand and gain insight into the beliefs and concerns of the others. Questions are asked from a position of curiosity.

Everybody knows what's going to be said on both sides; there are no surprises. Statements are predictable and offer little new information. Individual participants have different viewpoints, come up with new ideas in the meeting. New information surfaces.

Success requires simple impassioned statements. Success requires exploration of the complexities of the issue being discussed.

Everyone speaks within a framework already taken for granted -- the local culture or customs, the dominant group ideology, whatever. Any solutions have to fit within the assumptions of that framework. Participants feel free to question the framework and "go outside the lines" for a solution. Participants may discover inadequacies in the problem-solving system itself.

A webring is a way of linking similar sites to make it easier to visit them one after the other. All that each site need to do is to post a small amount of standardized code; the webring database tracks the rest.

When you click on the Join link, you will have a form to fill out, giving information about your site. For the site address, you must enter the address of the page that you are going to put the webring code on. This should be a page with content relevant to the ring topic, and the page should have clear links to the rest of your site, which should also have clear links back to the page that the webring code is on. All of this will make navigating through the ring much easier for our visitors.

After you submit your answers to the form, you will be assigned a position number in the ring. Then click on "Ring Hub" and "Get Nav Bar" to copy the navigation code and insert it into your page. (If you have already posted a Webring Navigation Bar on your page, you don't have to do this again.) If you need the code again for any reason, you can get it displayed at any time by signing in at Webring.

This code includes an HTML alternative that will display in browsers that do not do JavaScript. It looks like this:

This site is a member of WebRing.
To browse visit Here.

If you want something more subtle, you can copy the following code and post it on your page. You will have to change #SITE to your own site number; you will find this number by highlighting one of the links on your navbar.



<A HREF="http://O.webring.com/hub?ring=choices&id=#SITE&hub">
Free Choice Webring</A>
 
Choice
<A HREF="http://O.webring.com/go?ring=choices&id=#SITE&prev">
<<</A>
Dialogue
<A HREF="http://O.webring.com/go?ring=choices&id=#SITE&next">
>></A>
Choice

It should look like this:

Free Choice Webring
Choice << Dialogue >> Choice

next :: previous :: Pro Choice Is Not Anti Life :: random :: list

This Pro-Choice Ring Site is owned by Anitra Freeman
Next site | Previous Site
List of Sites
Join the Pro-Choice Ring!

My Personal Beliefs on Abortion

My Political Views
and Activism

Back to Anitra, Poet & Activist, Meta-Page

POLARIZED DEBATE	DIALOGUE
Participants hardly talk to each other before the meeting; what talk there is does not affect the meeting.	Participants talk to each other regularly and their talk is an essential part of the full process.
The atmosphere is threatening; attacks and interruptions are expected by participants and are usually permitted by moderators.	Facilitators propose, get agreement on and enforce clear ground rules to enhance safety and respectful exchange.
Participants speak as representatives of groups (including religions and ideologies).	Participants speak as individuals, from their own unique experience.
Participants speak to their own constituents and, perhaps, to the undecided middle.	Participants speak to each other.
Differences within "sides" are denied or minimized.	Differences among participants on the same "side" are revealed, as individual and personal foundations of beliefs and values are explored.
Participants express unswerving commitment to a point of view, approach, or idea.	Participants express uncertainties, as well as deeply held beliefs.
Participants listen in order to refute the other side's data and to expose faulty logic in their arguments. Questions are asked from position of certainty. These questions are often rhetorical challenges or disguised statements.	Participants listen to understand and gain insight into the beliefs and concerns of the others. Questions are asked from a position of curiosity.
Everybody knows what's going to be said on both sides; there are no surprises. Statements are predictable and offer little new information.	Individual participants have different viewpoints, come up with new ideas in the meeting. New information surfaces.
Success requires simple impassioned statements.	Success requires exploration of the complexities of the issue being discussed.
Everyone speaks within a framework already taken for granted -- the local culture or customs, the dominant group ideology, whatever. Any solutions have to fit within the assumptions of that framework.	Participants feel free to question the framework and "go outside the lines" for a solution. Participants may discover inadequacies in the problem-solving system itself.