How can we STOP ABORTIONS?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Require that they be performed by using guns.

[sooneriniowa]

At minimum they should cost the same as having a child...most people wouldnt spend that amount of money and have nothing in return..if anything it would decrease the overall amount.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

At minimum they should cost the same as having a child...most people wouldnt spend that amount of money and have nothing in return..if anything it would decrease the overall amount.hey hey! Then, the democrats might be more amenable to tightening border security. More money coming to govt. coffers, through taxes if the doctors have to pay more taxes from their increased income. Also, the democrat pregnant females could have an American born future democrat voter. Fewer illegals coming in, and the democrats still get additional voters. It's all good!

[Blue]

http://ht.ly/h2yxN

[SicEmBaylor]

Abortions are most often performed on minority/low-income out of wedlock teenage mothers. Those kids will probably grow up to become criminals....sometimes murderers. The state and honest taxpayers not only suffer as a direct result of their crime but they suffer as well with having to cover the cost of their prosecution and incarceration. I don't like having my **** stolen, being mugged, or killed.

I find abortion to be disgusting and abhorrent, but if the people doing it or disgusting and abhorrent themselves then I don't get too worked up about it.

[Blue]

Abortions are most often performed on minority/low-income out of wedlock teenage mothers. Those kids will probably grow up to become criminals....sometimes murderers. The state and honest taxpayers not only suffer as a direct result of their crime but they suffer as well with having to cover the cost of their prosecution and incarceration. I don't like having my **** stolen, being mugged, or killed.

I find abortion to be disgusting and abhorrent, but if the people doing it or disgusting and abhorrent themselves then I don't get too worked up about it.


Whether joke or not. RED SPEK FOR YOU!

[SicEmBaylor]

Just keepin' it real. The country doesn't need more crack babies.

I mean who is supposed to care for and support these low-income out of wedlock children? Private charities are already stretched to the limit and they're not exactly doing a cracker jack job of ensuring these type of children grow up in a safe and positive environment.

Is the government supposed to do it? Why should the US taxpayers have to flip the bill to help pay for the raising of a kid every time some stupid teenage girl spreads her legs? And it isn't as if government programs are doing a crackerjack job either.

So, I ask, as abhorrent as the practice of abortion is -- who is going to raise and take care of all these kids? It's easy to say abortion is immoral and should be stopped but where is the support going to come from once they're born? Because most of these mothers sure as hell aren't coming from stable financially secure homes.

[Blue]

Just keepin' it real. The country doesn't need more crack babies.

I mean who is supposed to care for and support these low-income out of wedlock children? Private charities are already stretched to the limit and they're not exactly doing a cracker jack job of ensuring these type of children grow up in a safe and positive environment.

Is the government supposed to do it? Why should the US taxpayers have to flip the bill to help pay for the raising of a kid every time some stupid teenage girl spreads her legs? And it isn't as if government programs are doing a crackerjack job either.

So, I ask, as abhorrent as the practice of abortion is -- who is going to raise and take care of all these kids? It's easy to say abortion is immoral and should be stopped but where is the support going to come from once they're born? Because most of these mothers sure as hell aren't coming from stable financially secure homes.



Let the chips lie where they may.

As much as I admire your political stance, I have no admiration of your belief in the one who gives life. These problems are not for you to solve.

[Blue]

Abortion is absolute Murder. The worst kind of murder.

[sappstuf]

Abortions are most often performed on minority/low-income out of wedlock teenage mothers. Those kids will probably grow up to become criminals....sometimes murderers. The state and honest taxpayers not only suffer as a direct result of their crime but they suffer as well with having to cover the cost of their prosecution and incarceration. I don't like having my **** stolen, being mugged, or killed.

I find abortion to be disgusting and abhorrent, but if the people doing it or disgusting and abhorrent themselves then I don't get too worked up about it.

Nice card..

http://blogs-images.forbes.com/jonentine/files/2012/11/Eugenic-certificate3.jpg

[MR2-Sooner86]

Abortions are most often performed on minority/low-income out of wedlock teenage mothers. Those kids will probably grow up to become criminals....sometimes murderers. The state and honest taxpayers not only suffer as a direct result of their crime but they suffer as well with having to cover the cost of their prosecution and incarceration. I don't like having my **** stolen, being mugged, or killed.

I find abortion to be disgusting and abhorrent, but if the people doing it or disgusting and abhorrent themselves then I don't get too worked up about it.

Actually the easy answer is sexy education and contraception use with easy access to said contraceptions.

The thing is the religious-right has this idea that this isn't really a free country and having sex is a privilege granted to those in a state supported marriage. This is why there's so much "abstinence only" education, that we know is a failure. In fact children who receive such education are more likely to have unprotected sex.

What's really funny is these folks would rather pay billions in food stamps, Medicaid, section 8, and the justice system (majority of criminals come from single parent and broken homes) than for the $0.75 condom that could've saved so much trouble.

This is what happens when idiotic religious dogma tries to force itself into government. Christians, you're probably a little upset but it's true. Your religion is anti-sex. Go back to St. Augustine, who helped shape modern Christian views, and you'll see how he felt sex was the reason for the downfall of man and source of our sin.

I mean the Catholic Church had sex cops that would burn people at the stack if the wife was on top.

[Midtowner]

Let the chips lie where they may.

As much as I admire your political stance, I have no admiration of your belief in the one who gives life. These problems are not for you to solve.

Unless you believe in more benefits for children in poverty, you're even worse than SicEm.

[Curly Bill]

I'm with SicEm on this one!

[Fraggle145]

I'm with Sic 'Em, MR2, and to some extent Mid on this one...

[olevetonahill]

I'm with Sic 'Em, MR2, and to some extent Mid on this one...

Yup, If yer gonna Kill a Kid , Kill a Poor one.

[Midtowner]

I'm with Sic 'Em, MR2, and to some extent Mid on this one...

I haven't posted yet, so how do you already agree? :)

I don't really have an opinion as to whether abortion = killing anything because explaining when life begins is about the same as stating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin--and if that's all I've got for explaining that, I can't imagine stating that the government can dictate the medical care available to women based on my guess that there might be life.

[Fraggle145]

I haven't posted yet, so how do you already agree? :)

I don't really have an opinion as to whether abortion = killing anything because explaining when life begins is about the same as stating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin--and if that's all I've got for explaining that, I can't imagine stating that the government can dictate the medical care available to women based on my guess that there might be life.

I meant with what you said above.


Unless you believe in more benefits for children in poverty, you're even worse than SicEm.

[XingTheRubicon]

Christian-based ideals and abstinence doesn't work with secular parentless heathens. No amount of personal responsibility measure will work with secular parentless heathens. They're heathens.

What type of sex ed that works for animals that eat M&M's for lunch, doesn't really concern me or need to infiltrate my child's life. You want to throw condoms at the heathens...fine, just keep it away from my kids.

[Fraggle145]

Yup, If yer gonna Kill a Kid , Kill a Poor one.

Not what I am saying. If you are going to ensure that millions of poor children come into this world you should have some way to provide for them.

Killing them slow is more cruel than doing it quick.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Abortions are most often performed on minority/low-income out of wedlock teenage mothers. Those kids will probably grow up to become criminals....sometimes murderers. The state and honest taxpayers not only suffer as a direct result of their crime but they suffer as well with having to cover the cost of their prosecution and incarceration. I don't like having my **** stolen, being mugged, or killed.

I find abortion to be disgusting and abhorrent, but if the people doing it or disgusting and abhorrent themselves then I don't get too worked up about it.WHAT! You're against life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Nice card..

http://blogs-images.forbes.com/jonentine/files/2012/11/Eugenic-certificate3.jpgSo, let's hear more about this Eugene guy...and, why isn't it called Eugenism, or Eugeneology?

[olevetonahill]

Not what I am saying. If you are going to ensure that millions of poor children come into this world you should have some way to provide for them.

Killing them slow is more cruel than doing it quick.

:encouragement:

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I don't really have an opinion as to whether abortion = killing anything because explaining when life begins is about the same as stating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin--man, you know THAT IS a TRICKY ONE! The fertilized egg(zygote) could be something other than a new life. Heck yes, it could be just an amorphous blob. Or, a protein mass, or a preteen mass.

Could also be a Tricky Situation, or a Difficult Configuration, or maybe just a Can of Worms.

[Midtowner]

man, you know THAT IS a TRICKY ONE! The fertilized egg(zygote) could be something other than a new life. Heck yes, it could be just an amorphous blob. Or, a protein mass, or a preteen mass.

Could also be a Tricky Situation, or a Difficult Configuration.

Exactly.

And you don't know otherwise.

[olevetonahill]

Hey Matlock, 3 in one morning aint gonna get me red Boy , Ya need to get busy.

[cleller]

This is where I part with my brethren and side with the infidels. Abortion is not a pleasant business, but I believe a woman should have the final say.
My experiences in life have also shown me the effects rampant unwed, unplanned pregnancy has on society. I don't hold with the view that its only the poorest that use abortion services. I'd say its really a decent cross-section of society.

If you really want to ponder something interesting, some Yale professor wrote up a very interesting study tracking the drop in crime that began in the late 80s and continued till these days with the Roe v Wade decision. About 14 years after abortions became legal again, crime began to drop.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Impact_of_Legalized_Abortion_on_Crime

[Curly Bill]

This is where I part with my brethren and side with the infidels. Abortion is not a pleasant business, but I believe a woman should have the final say.
My experiences in life have also shown me the effects rampant unwed, unplanned pregnancy has on society. I don't hold with the view that its only the poorest that use abortion services. I'd say its really a decent cross-section of society.

If you really want to ponder something interesting, some Yale professor wrote up a very interesting study tracking the drop in crime that began in the late 80s and continued till these days with the Roe v Wade decision. About 14 years after abortions became legal again, crime began to drop.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Impact_of_Legalized_Abortion_on_Crime

Yup, this is where I'm at. And the drop in crime dealio relating to abortion is not surprising to me.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Not what I am saying. If you are going to ensure that millions of poor children come into this world you should have some way to provide for them.

Killing them slow is more cruel than doing it quick.We should at least be consistent in our pursuit of saving money as a nation, and not allow illegal border entry and subsidizing with medical care etc.

Getting real: abortion was made legal to allow for sex without financial consequences, ignoring that one is committing murder in order to do so. no biggee.

[XingTheRubicon]

This is where I part with my brethren and side with the infidels. Abortion is not a pleasant business, but I believe a woman should have the final say.
My experiences in life have also shown me the effects rampant unwed, unplanned pregnancy has on society. I don't hold with the view that its only the poorest that use abortion services. I'd say its really a decent cross-section of society.

If you really want to ponder something interesting, some Yale professor wrote up a very interesting study tracking the drop in crime that began in the late 80s and continued till these days with the Roe v Wade decision. About 14 years after abortions became legal again, crime began to drop.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Impact_of_Legalized_Abortion_on_Crime

genocide for the win

[Midtowner]

Hey Matlock, 3 in one morning aint gonna get me red Boy , Ya need to get busy.

It'll take time, but we'll get ya there :)

[olevetonahill]

It'll take time, but we'll get ya there :)

Keep it up I love it. I aint cryin and whinin like you an H 2-0
Give me all ya want

Oh and what does asdf stand for?

[tator]

I agree with SicEm, yet again.

[OU68]

I haven't posted yet, so how do you already agree? :)

I don't really have an opinion as to whether abortion = killing anything because explaining when life begins is about the same as stating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin--and if that's all I've got for explaining that, I can't imagine stating that the government can dictate the medical care available to women based on my guess that there might be life.

High risk pregnancy specialist, Dr. Steve Calvin, in a letter some years ago to the Arizona Daily Star, wrote, “There is inescapable schizophrenia in aborting a perfectly normal 22 week fetus while at the same hospital, performing intra-uterine surgery on its cousin.” When the unborn are wanted, they are treated as children and patients. When they are not wanted, they are not children. We know what we are doing. From Blue's link.

[Midtowner]

High risk pregnancy specialist, Dr. Steve Calvin, in a letter some years ago to the Arizona Daily Star, wrote, “There is inescapable schizophrenia in aborting a perfectly normal 22 week fetus while at the same hospital, performing intra-uterine surgery on its cousin.” When the unborn are wanted, they are treated as children and patients. When they are not wanted, they are not children. We know what we are doing. From Blue's link.

I don't really see the same disconnect. Some folks want kids, others don't. That said, abortions at 22 weeks are very rare.

[FaninAma]

Expect better behavior out of people.

[sappstuf]

I don't really see the same disconnect. Some folks want kids, others don't. That said, abortions at 22 weeks are very rare.

So it is a baby if the mother wants it and just a clump of cells if she doesn't?

[FaninAma]

I don't really see the same disconnect. Some folks want kids, others don't. That said, abortions at 22 weeks are very rare.

The fetal heart beat starts at about 5 to 6 weeks. I bet a fair number of abortions are prerformed then.
http://www.ehow.com/how-does_4922954_fetal-development-heart-beat.html

I bet just publically paying for and passing out more birth control will decrease and stop abortions.....and if you really believe that then you might be a progressive.

[Midtowner]

The fetal heart beat starts at about 5 to 6 weeks. I bet a fair number of abortions are prerformed then.
http://www.ehow.com/how-does_4922954_fetal-development-heart-beat.html

A fair number are performed before and after. Again, a beating heart doesn't mean anything more than filtering kidneys, a working liver, etc. etc.

[Midtowner]

So it is a baby if the mother wants it and just a clump of cells if she doesn't?

If you're talking about in utero surgery, it's a clump of cells being operated on in order to maintain a viable pregnancy. It ain't a child 'til it's born.

[olevetonahill]

If you're talking about in utero surgery, it's a clump of cells being operated on in order to maintain a viable pregnancy. It ain't a child 'til it's born.

Shouldnt you have added IMHO after that statement?

Now you a stickler fer the Law and such, If its Not a child until its Born, Why are peeps tried for 2 Murder's when they kill a Pregnant woman and the Baby dies?

[Midtowner]

Shouldnt you have added IMHO after that statement?

Now you a stickler fer the Law and such, If its Not a child until its Born, Why are peeps tried for 2 Murder's when they kill a Pregnant woman and the Baby dies?

'cuz that's what the law says.. and of course I've already stated that defining when life begins is like arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It's all subjective.

The murder thing was a law created by anti-choice folks with the sole purpose of being able to make the exact argument you're making.

[olevetonahill]

'cuz that's what the law says.. and of course I've already stated that defining when life begins is like arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It's all subjective.

The murder thing was a law created by anti-choice folks with the sole purpose of being able to make the exact argument you're making.

Im NOT making an argument ya dumas, I simply asked you a question :kiwi-fruit:

[Midtowner]

Im NOT making an argument ya dumas, I simply asked you a question :kiwi-fruit:

Now why do you have to cast all civility aside like that? I answered your question.

[olevetonahill]

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/presspreps/files/2010/12/thank_you_sir_may_i_have_another_postcard-p239039916577420491trdg_400.jpg

[virginiasooner]

Actually the easy answer is sexy education and contraception use with easy access to said contraceptions.

The thing is the religious-right has this idea that this isn't really a free country and having sex is a privilege granted to those in a state supported marriage. This is why there's so much "abstinence only" education, that we know is a failure. In fact children who receive such education are more likely to have unprotected sex.

What's really funny is these folks would rather pay billions in food stamps, Medicaid, section 8, and the justice system (majority of criminals come from single parent and broken homes) than for the $0.75 condom that could've saved so much trouble.

This is what happens when idiotic religious dogma tries to force itself into government. Christians, you're probably a little upset but it's true. Your religion is anti-sex. Go back to St. Augustine, who helped shape modern Christian views, and you'll see how he felt sex was the reason for the downfall of man and source of our sin.

I mean the Catholic Church had sex cops that would burn people at the stack if the wife was on top.

Agree totally. One thing this past election showed is that the Right Wing has gone completely around the bend on being against artificial contraception. A woman is NOT pregnant until an embryo implants in the uterine wall. So, if a woman uses Plan B to prevent IMPLANTATION, she is NOT having an abortion because she was never pregnant in the first place!

Sex education should be mandatory in high school (like 4 years of English). There is no opt-out. And the classes should be sex-segregated (because teenage boys are, well, you all know).

[OU68]

'cuz that's what the law says.. and of course I've already stated that defining when life begins is like arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It's all subjective.



Mid should be the poster child for post-delivery abortion.

[olevetonahill]

Mid should be the poster child for post-delivery abortion.

:cheerful:

[Ton Loc]

I'll trade abortion for paying people a large sum of money to get fixed. Somewhere around $2500 should do it. Then they can bang away and no more kids. Yeah!

[FaninAma]

A fair number are performed before and after. Again, a beating heart doesn't mean anything more than filtering kidneys, a working liver, etc. etc.
That is a very slippery slope.

BTW, for those of you who think we need even more access to free birth control I work with a population that has all the access they can handle to free birth control yet the rate of births to unwed mothers in this population is one of the highest in the state which means it is one of the highest in the nation. It's the old leading the horse to water idiom.

[XingTheRubicon]

Mid should be the poster child for post-delivery abortion.

Maybe in New York...I don't know, after the 100th trimester it gets a little dicey.

[XingTheRubicon]

I'll trade abortion for paying people a large sum of money to get fixed. Somewhere around $2500 should do it. Then they can bang away and no more kids. Yeah!

/thread

[FaninAma]

I'll trade abortion for paying people a large sum of money to get fixed. Somewhere around $2500 should do it. Then they can bang away and no more kids. Yeah!

Just the medical cost of having a kid on the state runs about $10,000. I'd probably offer 4 times the amount you suggested.

[Ton Loc]

Just the medical cost of having a kid on the state runs about $10,000. I'd probably offer 4 times the amount you suggested.

Hell, make it $20K. Just make it retroactive to about five years ago. (I want my money)

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Unless you believe in more benefits for children in poverty, you're even worse than SicEm.

So now you're a fiscal conservative?

[Bourbon St Sooner]

I love that all of these libs are all of a sudden worried about the cost of taking care of poor people when it comes to killing babies.

[Soonerjeepman]

Abortions are most often performed on minority/low-income out of wedlock teenage mothers. Those kids will probably grow up to become criminals....sometimes murderers. The state and honest taxpayers not only suffer as a direct result of their crime but they suffer as well with having to cover the cost of their prosecution and incarceration. I don't like having my **** stolen, being mugged, or killed.

I find abortion to be disgusting and abhorrent, but if the people doing it or disgusting and abhorrent themselves then I don't get too worked up about it.

where's the stats? just curious....here to tell you the poor don't give a **** about condoms...free or not. It's a societal issue that sex is just a fun recreational activity (which I agree that is part of it in an adult relationship)...it's on tv, songs, movies. It's as casual as shootin hoops...for 13/14/15 yr old KIDS.

[Soonerjeepman]

Agree totally. One thing this past election showed is that the Right Wing has gone completely around the bend on being against artificial contraception. A woman is NOT pregnant until an embryo implants in the uterine wall. So, if a woman uses Plan B to prevent IMPLANTATION, she is NOT having an abortion because she was never pregnant in the first place!

Sex education should be mandatory in high school (like 4 years of English). There is no opt-out. And the classes should be sex-segregated (because teenage boys are, well, you all know).

nope...I teach. It's the job of the family. I'm divorced (I say that to show my "family") but am very active with my kids, 17/20. I'm very open and up front with them about all issues. The fact that society continues to want and let the gov take control is unbelievable.

I have a right to NOT have my kids take this "class".

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

So it is a baby if the mother wants it and just a clump of cells if she doesn't?You dense? How hard is that to assimilate? tee hee

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Shouldnt you have added IMHO after that statement?

Now you a stickler fer the Law and such, If its Not a child until its Born, Why are peeps tried for 2 Murder's when they kill a Pregnant woman and the Baby dies?OH NO YOU DON'T...neg him. he must be silenced!

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I love that all of these libs are all of a sudden worried about the cost of taking care of poor people when it comes to killing babies.they just don't want to feel guilty about murder. After all, no biggee.

[Midtowner]

I'll trade abortion for paying people a large sum of money to get fixed. Somewhere around $2500 should do it. Then they can bang away and no more kids. Yeah!

I agree on this point. Louisiana actually had a law in the works which would have done this, but it got shot down because somehow someone thought it was racist.

[Midtowner]

So now you're a fiscal conservative?

The words conservative or liberal convey idiocy. I'm neither. Neither party is for both stopping the expansion of spending while not cutting anything either.

I'll be labeled a pragmatist, not much else.

[Ton Loc]

I agree on this point. Louisiana actually had a law in the works which would have done this, but it got shot down because somehow someone thought it was racist.

Ahh, the always reliable it's racist. When you don't have an intelligent leg to stand on its always there to prop you up.

Doesn't matter - its still a great idea. Better than any idea labeled liberal or conservative.

[Midtowner]

Ahh, the always reliable it's racist. When you don't have an intelligent leg to stand on its always there to prop you up.

Doesn't matter - its still a great idea. Better than any idea labeled liberal or conservative.

Go sit through a few juvenile deprived dockets and hear about the things bad parents do to their kids. They'll do it too for cheap and easy money. I don't care if that money goes to buy drugs or whatever. It's a bet gain for everyone and might fix poverty in a generation.

[KantoSooner]

Quick Answer to the question:

1. You can stop abortions by not having abortions.
Since men don't have abortions, you're halfway there already. Since something like, what? 30-40% of the female population are either Catholic or some flavor of born again, you ought to have those in the 'anti-' camp as well (we'll ignore, for a minute what precise conclusions we can draw regarding the cogency of a position that can not command obdience from religious followers of churchs who declare such policy to be God's will).
That leaves you only having to worry about eliminating abortions in something like 60% of the female half of humanity. And some of them are too young or too old to be sexually active so are out of the game. Seems like you could simply assign one of your zealots to each and every one of them and arm them with a cell phone and binoculars. They could follow those dirty free thinkers around and note times when they might be having sex and then bring in a swat team to follow them even more closely so that a pastor or priest could be HALO'd in for an intervention if they seemed headed toward a clinic.
Or you could just shoot the dirty sluts. (either before or after their sexual activity. Either way it prevents an abortion.)

2. If that doesn't seem feasible, you could aim at getting Roe overturned by the SCOTUS. All you'd need to do there is make sure to elect a president who would appoint an anti-Roe justice, maybe two. So, it's really a question of electing a president who is anti-Roe. Since the position commands such overwhelming majority support of the population, that should be no trick.
No, wait. Something seems unworkable with this strategy, too.
3. I know! you could get state governments to enact laws burdening women desiring abortions or providers. Even if they were blatantly illegal, they'd still stand until shot down by courts of appeal and at least you'd cost the pro-choice folks money. There! That's the ticket.
4. But, what if a hated rich guy, say George Soros, or Bill and Melinda Gates, start offering free bus fare for women who want abortions to travel to places where it is legal and unburdened by bizarro laws? What then? Well, then you might have to pass state laws (since the chances of getting this kind of thing past a federal level house is zippo) forcing women who are pregnant to be identified by medical authorities (maybe you could put little sensors on public toilets and, when a women's urine was detected as having horomonal markers of pregnancy, you could have officers of the law or of a local religious enforcement corps scramble and take her into custody. You could let her family know where they could go to visit her during her confinement) and either put into house arrest or into 'baby farm' facilities where you could keep 'em locked up, like maybe with priests in guard towers, perhaps some concertina wire or an electrified fence to keep 'em in.
Yeah, that'd do it.
Glad I sat down to give it some thought.

[Midtowner]

You're on a roll.

[Curly Bill]

Abortion is the big issue where entirely too many "conservatives," who generally want to be left alone, and want to leave others alone, attempt to do just the opposite of that by telling women what they can and can't do with their own bodies. As a fellow conservative that's never made any damn sense to me???

[Midtowner]

Abortion is the big issue where entirely too many "conservatives," who generally want to be left alone, and want to leave others alone, attempt to do just the opposite of that by telling women what they can and can't do with their own bodies. As a fellow conservative that's never made any damn sense to me???

I can agree with you there. It probably stems from the fact that many conservatives are religious and haven't really thought much about how inconsistent their belief system really is. They are not conservatives, they are Conservatives, the kind of folks who call folks RINOs if they don't subscribe to every plank of the party platform, which is in itself more indicative of not being able to think for yourself than having a sound ideology.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Abortion is the big issue where entirely too many "conservatives," who generally want to be left alone, and want to leave others alone, attempt to do just the opposite of that by telling women what they can and can't do with their own bodies. As a fellow conservative that's never made any damn sense to me???Well, it IS murder, and it's not about the woman's bedy. It's the child...tut tut, not a big deal.

[Curly Bill]

I think too many of the anti-abortion folks are against it because they're told they're supposed to be against it. Whether that be at church, by the party, or whatever?? Me, I believe what I believe, and I don't believe I have any right to tell any female, that's not my wife, significant other, or daughter, what she should be doing with her body.

[Curly Bill]

Well, it IS murder, and it's not about the woman's bedy. It's the child...tut tut, not a big deal.

We'll have to disagree on pretty much everything you said here.

[Midtowner]

Well, it IS murder, and it's not about the woman's bedy. It's the child...tut tut, not a big deal.

Murder is the unlawful taking of a human life with malice aforethought, so no, it's not murder.

And your opinion that it is the taking of a human life is just that--your opinion. Hardly grounds to justify the state interfering with the reproductive choices of women. That would be a really scary expansion of state power. If they could control a woman's uterus, what good would it be to call ourselves free anymore?

[KantoSooner]

Abortion is the big issue where entirely too many "conservatives," who generally want to be left alone, and want to leave others alone, attempt to do just the opposite of that by telling women what they can and can't do with their own bodies. As a fellow conservative that's never made any damn sense to me???

Might I guess that you're of a generation to remember Goldwater and what being a conservative is really about?

Massive applause, Sir. It's encountering people like you that makes it worth participating in public conversation.

[Curly Bill]

Might I guess that you're of a generation to remember Goldwater and what being a conservative is really about?

Massive applause, Sir. It's encountering people like you that makes it worth participating in public conversation.

Goldwater is a little before my time, though I am familiar with him. But yeah, if I want others and the govt to stay out of my pocketbook, leave my guns alone, just generally leave me alone, then I think I owe that same consideration to any female that is wrestling with the choice of carrying a child to term or not? Unless I'm related to her, or the unborn child is mine, it's just not ANY of my business.

[yermom]

so what is the difference to you if she drowns the same kid in the bathtub a few months later?

[cleller]

Abortion is the big issue where entirely too many "conservatives," who generally want to be left alone, and want to leave others alone, attempt to do just the opposite of that by telling women what they can and can't do with their own bodies. As a fellow conservative that's never made any damn sense to me???

Agreed. Other people's lives don't interest me until they start costing me money, or running down the country, hoss.

[Midtowner]

so what is the difference to you if she drowns the same kid in the bathtub a few months later?

If you can't tell the difference, you're not a smart person.

[Curly Bill]

so what is the difference to you if she drowns the same kid in the bathtub a few months later?

Now see, this would be murder.

But besides that, that's a pretty lame strawman to throw out there.

[OU68]

If you can't tell the difference, you're not a smart person.

High risk pregnancy specialist, Dr. Steve Calvin, in a letter some years ago to the Arizona Daily Star, wrote, “There is inescapable schizophrenia in aborting a perfectly normal 22 week fetus while at the same hospital, performing intra-uterine surgery on its cousin.” When the unborn are wanted, they are treated as children and patients. When they are not wanted, they are not children. We know what we are doing. From Blue's link. Yep, you're not a smart person.

[C&CDean]

Now see, this would be murder.

But besides that, that's a pretty lame strawman to throw out there.

No, it isn't.

Every time I see these lame-assed abortion threads I cringe. Here's what I suggest so that you all can be more enlightened on the subject instead of just talking out of your collective asses:

Go knock somebody up. Then wait for a couple months. Then take her down and be a part of the decision to abort the child. Be there when the child is aborted. Then a couple years later go ahead and have a couple kids. Let me know how that works out for you. If you don't nearly smother in guilt over your unborn child/children then you're a ****ing socio/psychopath.

Unless you've been an involved party to an abortion then you don't know WTF you're talking about. Sure, you can have a stupid opinion (lord knows there's plenty of them here) but you're pretty much all wet.

I've been there, done that, and trust me, killing a child is killing a child. It's wrong, it's immoral, it's sick, it's perverted, it's twisted, it's ****ing barbaric...but galdammit, it's legal so that makes it peachy OK. Meh.

[C&CDean]

My mom has it laid out pretty well. She's a staunch anti-abortion zealot. Her thesis is "if it's OK to kill an innocent unborn child then why isn't it OK to kill a teenager who darn well deserves it?" Can't argue much.

[Curly Bill]

The ol: you can't understand til you've done it yourself argument. An old one, but a good one. Oh wait...no it's not. Meh...

[C&CDean]

Oh. So knowing nothing about it and never being a part of it makes you a ****ing expert on it? Okey dokey.

Never shot a gun, but I know everything about them. Let me tell you what it's like to shoot one...

Never drove a car 200 mph, but I've seen it on TV. Let me tell you what it's like to drive 200...

meh.

[Curly Bill]

Oh. So knowing nothing about it and never being a part of it makes you a ****ing expert on it? Okey dokey.

Never shot a gun, but I know everything about them. Let me tell you what it's like to shoot one...

Never drove a car 200 mph, but I've seen it on TV. Let me tell you what it's like to drive 200...

meh.

Are you ok?

[KantoSooner]

so what is the difference to you if she drowns the same kid in the bathtub a few months later?

Yermom, you raise the classic point and one that deserves to be addressed. It's a slippery slope: if a person one day, what was he/she the day before? Where do you draw the line. When do we become people?

There have been different answers through history and in different societies. Even in our own, our major Christian sects have changed their minds during the past century.

The supreme court made a reasoned decision and drew a line. I'm sure we could try and tie their decision to 'viability', 'nocireception' (ability to feel pain), heart beat, any number of characteristics.The truth of the matter is that the court took their best effort at what was a reasonable line to draw. It was guaranteed to displease a fair number of people and it has.

But some sort of line had to be drawn. And no one can argue with the proposition that the relationship between a woman and the life/potential life/fetus/child within her is pretty much unique in human affairs. It is not something that can be compared in any meaningful way with soldiers at war, police/criminals, accidents or any of the other cases in which agency of one person causes death of another. Nor can the issues of liberty and sanctity of one's own body be trivialized.

It's a very hard call to make. The court arrived at what seemed a reasonable balance to them.

Ultimately, I think that's about all anyone can say about the matter.

[Curly Bill]

Oh. So knowing nothing about it and never being a part of it makes you a ****ing expert on it? Okey dokey.

Never shot a gun, but I know everything about them. Let me tell you what it's like to shoot one...

Never drove a car 200 mph, but I've seen it on TV. Let me tell you what it's like to drive 200...

meh.

I'm gonna go make a list of all the people in this thread that said they were an expert on it...

....there, that didn't take long!

[Curly Bill]

...and for the record: I'm not at all a fan of abortion.

I just don't think it's any of my business telling someone what to do with their unborn child, again, unless they're related to me, or the unborn child is mine.

[C&CDean]

Are you ok?

I'm fine. You? I ain't the one talking all stupid and ****. Hell man, you sound like Mid's echo on this subject.

You make a conscious decision to end a human life and tell me how it feels. Until you have, then you're (not just you, but anyone) opinion on the matter is just a steaming pile.

[yermom]

Yermom, you raise the classic point and one that deserves to be addressed. It's a slippery slope: if a person one day, what was he/she the day before? Where do you draw the line. When do we become people?

There have been different answers through history and in different societies. Even in our own, our major Christian sects have changed their minds during the past century.

The supreme court made a reasoned decision and drew a line. I'm sure we could try and tie their decision to 'viability', 'nocireception' (ability to feel pain), heart beat, any number of characteristics.The truth of the matter is that the court took their best effort at what was a reasonable line to draw. It was guaranteed to displease a fair number of people and it has.

But some sort of line had to be drawn. And no one can argue with the proposition that the relationship between a woman and the life/potential life/fetus/child within her is pretty much unique in human affairs. It is not something that can be compared in any meaningful way with soldiers at war, police/criminals, accidents or any of the other cases in which agency of one person causes death of another. Nor can the issues of liberty and sanctity of one's own body be trivialized.

It's a very hard call to make. The court arrived at what seemed a reasonable balance to them.

Ultimately, I think that's about all anyone can say about the matter.

well, except that the court calls it murder if i kill a woman's unborn baby that she wants.

if she doesn't want it, it's just tissue.

[Curly Bill]

I'm fine. You? I ain't the one talking all stupid and ****. Hell man, you sound like Mid's echo on this subject.

You make a conscious decision to end a human life and tell me how it feels. Until you have, then you're (not just you, but anyone) opinion on the matter is just a steaming pile.

Mid is finally right on something - I can't help that.

[C&CDean]

Mid is finally right on something - I can't help that.

Cool. Why don't you two go mangle and tear and vacuum out a couple of fetuses to celebrate being right.

[Curly Bill]

Cool. Why don't you two go mangle and tear and vacuum out a couple of fetuses to celebrate being right.

Unless those couple of fetuses are mine I don't have any right to do that.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

well, except that the court calls it murder if i kill a woman's unborn baby that she wants.

if she doesn't want it, it's just tissue.

^

[KantoSooner]

well, except that the court calls it murder if i kill a woman's unborn baby that she wants.

if she doesn't want it, it's just tissue.

Our laws are not consistent with one another in every case. That's the way it is when you make new laws every year in fifty state houses, a national legislature and kick in administrative rulings from umpteen agencies. And then interpret them against unique facts in court houses across the land adjudicating the disputes of over 300 million people.

Actually this case is a great example of how we accomodate opposing positions in the law. I don't recall murder of a pregnant woman being treated as a double homicide in common law or in law in this country until the last several decades. To kill a pregnant woman was certainly something that would get you a very cold eye from judge and jury; perhaps it was even an aggravating factor when considering punishment. But I think this is a creation of the modern abortion divide. A way for pro-life legislators to draw an emphatic legal line beneath their beliefs.

And they've passed muster with appellate courts, one suspects, because they are, too, not unreasonable.

Appellate courts, of whom the SCOTUS is the highest, make great efforts to stay away from legislating, in general. They are there to judge whether a given law is within that area constitutioinally set aside to be the province of the legislative branch of a state or of the federal government. If a law is outside that purview, they are tasked with striking it down. In the sort of case you cite, the courts have apparently decided that states can define double murder in this way. Just as they decided that governmental prohibition of abortion was beyond the scope of governmental authority.

We do not live in a world of absolutes.

[C&CDean]

Unless those couple of fetuses are mine I don't have any right to do that.

Go kill your unborn kids then and get back to me. Your opinion on this little matter would change. A lot.

I'm with you on the "I don't have the right to tell someone else what to do" deal. Alls I'm saying is that until you've experienced it first hand, you're talking out your *** on the subject. It's legal, and that's it. Everything else about it is as wrong as my dick in your ear.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

For those who view abortion as the murder of an unborn child,....

do you believe the use of birth control pills can lead to murder?

These pills make the lining of the womb inhospitable for implantation of a fertilized egg.

[C&CDean]

For those who view abortion as the murder of an unborn child,....

do you believe the use of birth control pills can lead to murder?

These pills make the lining of the womb inhospitable for implantation of a fertilized egg.

I wonder about it sometimes. Don't rightly know though. I do know my wife is on some pill and the doc said it's more for her health than for not making babies. Something about cancer/osteoporosis or some such.

[tator]

For those who view abortion as the murder of an unborn child,....

do you believe the use of birth control pills can lead to murder?

These pills make the lining of the womb inhospitable for implantation of a fertilized egg.

I hate to interject, but according to his own logic, he's not allowed to have an opinion until he's physically taken the pill himself.

[sooner_born_1960]

STEP and Dean figured out a way to have the sex without anyone getting pregnant. No abortions there.

[Midtowner]

For those who view abortion as the murder of an unborn child,....

do you believe the use of birth control pills can lead to murder?

These pills make the lining of the womb inhospitable for implantation of a fertilized egg.

This is why the Catholics are against BC.

[Midtowner]

High risk pregnancy specialist, Dr. Steve Calvin, in a letter some years ago to the Arizona Daily Star, wrote, “There is inescapable schizophrenia in aborting a perfectly normal 22 week fetus while at the same hospital, performing intra-uterine surgery on its cousin.” When the unborn are wanted, they are treated as children and patients. When they are not wanted, they are not children. We know what we are doing. From Blue's link. Yep, you're not a smart person.

Dr. Calvin is, I presume, not a Doctor of philosophy? Determining when life begins is completely subjective experience. I mean when is it? Fertilization? Implantation? Fetal heart beat? Ability to react to sensation? Viability? Birth? Medicine can tell us when each of those things happen. Which marks the beginning of a life or the beginning of a legally protected life is a question for philosophers and judges.

Our Supreme Court has said that the states have the power to absolutely forbid abortion for viable fetuses absent there being a risk to the health of the mother. So there's that.

[pphilfran]

This is why the Catholics are against BC.

Fundamentalist Catholics also believe sex should be used for procreation...fun isn't in the scope...

[C&CDean]

Fundamentalist Catholics also believe sex should be used for procreation...fun isn't in the scope...

Wrong. They believe sex with a woman is for procreation. They have sex with the altar boys for the fun...

[C&CDean]

I hate to interject, but according to his own logic, he's not allowed to have an opinion until he's physically taken the pill himself.

This would be correct. It would also be an example of someone being a dildonic dillweed.

[pphilfran]

Wrong. They believe sex with a woman is for procreation. They have sex with the altar boys for the fun...

Hey...I was an alter boy...

[Tulsa_Fireman]

It all becomes clear.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

For those who view abortion as the murder of an unborn child,....

do you believe the use of birth control pills can lead to murder?

These pills make the lining of the womb inhospitable for implantation of a fertilized egg.Are you trying to equate contraception to abortion? It isn't the same, and I'm pretty sure(hopefully) you know the difference. One(the former) is not murder, and the latter is murder. The existence of life is different from the nonexistence of life, ya see.

[C&CDean]

Are you trying to equate contraception to abortion? It isn't the same, and I'm pretty sure(hopefully) you know the difference. One(the former) is not murder, and the latter is murder. The existence of life is different from the nonexistence of life, ya see.

Yeah, I gotta go with the "if it has a heartbeat, it's alive" team. When you purposely stop a beating human heart it's pretty much murder.

[SicEmBaylor]

where's the stats? just curious....here to tell you the poor don't give a **** about condoms...free or not. It's a societal issue that sex is just a fun recreational activity (which I agree that is part of it in an adult relationship)...it's on tv, songs, movies. It's as casual as shootin hoops...for 13/14/15 yr old KIDS.
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/births_deaths_marriages_divorces/family_planning_abortions.html

There are also plenty of good sources for statistics looking for other demographic information. You can read it yourself since I don't want to sit here and type all that out when you can just click the link.

Let me also say that I'm not sure what on earth gave you the impression that I favor "free condoms." Hell, I don't know what gave you the impression that I favor free anything for anyone.

[SicEmBaylor]

Are you trying to equate contraception to abortion? It isn't the same, and I'm pretty sure(hopefully) you know the difference. One(the former) is not murder, and the latter is murder. The existence of life is different from the nonexistence of life, ya see.
I agree with this. Prevention is precisely that -- preventing the conditions for life to begin in the first place; abortion is the elimination of an existing/living thing. By Catholic standards, the use of a "condom" is murder.

[Ton Loc]

OK - You get one abortion but they also tie your tubes afterwards and the dude that got you pregnant. You obviously can't be trusted.

[SicEmBaylor]

OK - You get one abortion but they also tie your tubes afterwards and the dude that got you pregnant. You obviously can't be trusted.

Terrible idea. There is nothing scarier than the idea of the government deciding who can/should get pregnant and when. Now, that is truly getting into eugenics territory.

[Ton Loc]

Terrible idea. There is nothing scarier than the idea of the government deciding who can/should get pregnant and when. Now, that is truly getting into eugenics territory.

Yeah - I wasn't serious....but the government wouldn't be deciding. You would. Abortion and tubes tied or kid. blah, blah, blah

[Jacie]

If you really want to ponder something interesting, some Yale professor wrote up a very interesting study tracking the drop in crime that began in the late 80s and continued till these days with the Roe v Wade decision. About 14 years after abortions became legal again, crime began to drop.

It was the topic of the first chapter of Freakonomics. The author also pointed out that the number 1 predictor of whether someone would wind up serving time was that they were raised without a father, not as a result of death or divorce but that they never had one. As single women are the ones getting most of the abortions, the correlation to the drop in crime some 20 years after Roe v. Wade was obvious.

[Jacie]

Yeah, I gotta go with the "if it has a heartbeat, it's alive" team. When you purposely stop a beating human heart it's pretty much murder.

Since the embyonic fetus is little more than subdividing cells up to about 10 weeks, (i.e. there are no major organs in the little bugger, known as a blastocyst, including your "beating heart" during that time) then does that mean you are okay with first term abortions?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Since the embyonic fetus is little more than subdividing cells up to about 10 weeks, (i.e. there are no major organs in the little bugger, known as a blastocyst, including your "beating heart" during that time) then does that mean you are okay with first term abortions?Whether heartbeat or not, the fertilized egg is a living human in an early stage of life. I think the need for "heartbeat" isn't there. The name ""blastocyst" would lead one to wonder how that name came about.

[Jacie]

Whether heartbeat or not, the fertilized egg is a living human in an early stage of life. I think the need for "heartbeat" isn't there. The name ""blastocyst" would lead one to wonder how that name came about.

To anyone looking at a blastocyst under a microscope, it would look the same whether it was a human, horse, frog, fish, whatever. Now it certainly has the potential to become a human but for C&CD's sake, a sperm penetrating an egg does not start a beating heart because there isn't one there yet.

I always kinda liked the sound of it, blastocyst. As for where the term came from? IDK but from experience, I can say of all the sciences, biology has the most terms to learn by an order of magnitude over all the others combined.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

Are you trying to equate contraception to abortion? It isn't the same, and I'm pretty sure(hopefully) you know the difference. One(the former) is not murder, and the latter is murder. The existence of life is different from the nonexistence of life, ya see.

So the moment of conception, that some talk about, is not when the egg is fertilized?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

So the moment of conception, that some talk about, is not when the egg is fertilized?is that what you think?

Maybe what you call the moment of conception is the uncertainty. I would call that when the sperm joins the egg to create a zygote. Not when an egg is NOT joined by the sperm, even though intercourse has taken place.

[FaninAma]

Terrible idea. There is nothing scarier than the idea of the government deciding who can/should get pregnant and when. Now, that is truly getting into eugenics territory.

There's not an easy solution. I do think the advantages of 2 parent families should be stressed by society and the government should increase financial incentives for traditional families in the terms of tax incentives.

Personally I think abortion is dehumanizing and causes life-long psychological scars.

[Soonerjeepman]

Fundamentalist Catholics also believe sex should be used for procreation...fun isn't in the scope...

wrong

[Soonerjeepman]

Wrong. They believe sex with a woman is for procreation. They have sex with the altar boys for the fun...

double wrong, I know you nor anyone here gives a ****, but I find that offensive, joking or not. The reality is the % of Catholic priest who do that is lower than other clergy. I understand that wasn't your intent but it gets old.

Have a great day~

[Soonerjeepman]

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/births_deaths_marriages_divorces/family_planning_abortions.html

There are also plenty of good sources for statistics looking for other demographic information. You can read it yourself since I don't want to sit here and type all that out when you can just click the link.

Let me also say that I'm not sure what on earth gave you the impression that I favor "free condoms." Hell, I don't know what gave you the impression that I favor free anything for anyone.

thanks for the link, haven't looked yet...I will. Ya misunderstood, I wasn't insinuating YOU want to give out condoms, one of the other post...that seems to be one of the answers. Just saying poor folks don't want to use them.

[diverdog]

wrong

How is he wrong? That is what my wife and I were taught when we went through pre cana classes 25 years ago. I was not aware that this has changed.

[Midtowner]

double wrong, I know you nor anyone here gives a ****, but I find that offensive, joking or not. The reality is the % of Catholic priest who do that is lower than other clergy. I understand that wasn't your intent but it gets old.

Have a great day~

The difference is the widespread and systematic coverup of so many incidents.

To be fair, the Catholic church isn't the only church to do this. Similar things have happened in the Mormon church but for whatever reason haven't been as well publicized.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

is that what you think?

Maybe what you call the moment of conception is the uncertainty. I would call that when the sperm joins the egg to create a zygote. Not when an egg is NOT joined by the sperm, even though intercourse has taken place.

So if the woman takes a pill that is designed to keep the zygote from attaching to the wall of the uterus and developing into a newborn, she is not facilitating the termination of living human?

[soonerhubs]

The difference is the widespread and systematic coverup of so many incidents.

To be fair, the Catholic church isn't the only church to do this. Similar things have happened in the Mormon church, numerous protestant churches, secular humanist groups, and public schools, but for whatever reason haven't been as well publicized. FIFY
A little sample link: http://stopbaptistpredators.org/index.htm



It appears the creepy sex predator joke is most aptly applied to human kind.

Stereotypes are silly. You lawyers are all the same. ;)

[sappstuf]

At least she is honest..


When we on the pro-choice side get cagey around the life question, it makes us illogically contradictory. I have friends who have referred to their abortions in terms of “scraping out a bunch of cells” and then a few years later were exultant over the pregnancies that they unhesitatingly described in terms of “the baby” and “this kid.” I know women who have been relieved at their abortions and grieved over their miscarriages. Why can’t we agree that how they felt about their pregnancies was vastly different, but that it’s pretty silly to pretend that what was growing inside of them wasn’t the same? Fetuses aren’t selective like that. They don’t qualify as human life only if they’re intended to be born.

So what if abortion ends life? (http://www.salon.com/2013/01/23/so_what_if_abortion_ends_life/)

[OU68]

Dr. Calvin is, I presume, not a Doctor of philosophy? Determining when life begins is completely subjective experience. I mean when is it? Fertilization? Implantation? Fetal heart beat? Ability to react to sensation? Viability? Birth? Medicine can tell us when each of those things happen. Which marks the beginning of a life or the beginning of a legally protected life is a question for philosophers and judges.

Our Supreme Court has said that the states have the power to absolutely forbid abortion for viable fetuses absent there being a risk to the health of the mother. So there's that.

No dip-sh*t he's not a philosopher: Dr. Steven Calvin specializes in neonatal-perinatal medicine in Saint Paul, Minnesota. I get it, you're ok with killing kids - I'm done chatting with you.

[pphilfran]

How is he wrong? That is what my wife and I were taught when we went through pre cana classes 25 years ago. I was not aware that this has changed.

it hasn't

[C&CDean]

It appears the creepy sex predator joke is most aptly applied to human kind.

Yeah, but when someone who is supposed to be a Godly, righteous spiritual leader does it it's a wee bit different. At least it is to me. The school teacher thing is pretty close though. I remember when I was in school I thought I'd be a school teacher when I grew up so I could score on all the hot school girls. I wonder how many teachers/preachers go into their professions thinking "this is gonna be good..."

[olevetonahill]

I dont have a Dog in this fight so I dont really argue either way. My Feeling? Its killing an unborn baby , that simple. Yall can argue till the cows come home.
I'd Like to know the Number of those who say its only a clump of cells that are against the Death Penalty because 'What if the Dude is innocent" thinking.

Id say its a High percentage. You are ready willing and back the thot of Killing an unborn because in your mind what it is , is up to Philosophers and such Yet you want to spare Murderers because they just May be innocent.

Yall aint got a clue just how warped your thinking is.

[KantoSooner]

The reality is the % of Catholic priest who do that is lower than other clergy.

Wait, I just caught this.

Y'all keep statistics on stuff like that?!? What? And then you have some sort of ecumenical round table where you sit down and figure out who has bragging rights for the year? Is this for real?

If so, how good are the records? How detailed? Do you know, for instance, what percentage of the priests or pastors engaged in 'straight' pedophilia vs. same-sex? Do you keep records of the type of violation? Do these records include church worker child abuse? Or just that of ordained clergy? And why on earth would y'all be keeping records like this? I mean the Nazi's did, but they were, well, evil.

Where are these records and has any one had the brain wave to, you know, 'share' with the constabulary? Or will these offenders by 'fellowshipped' back to a state of grace?

I'm really curious how this whole record keeping dealio works as I had no idea anyone was keeping track so precisely.

How far back does the survey of abuse go? All the way back to institution of the church in Rome? Farther?

[Curly Bill]

I dont have a Dog in this fight so I dont really argue either way. My Feeling? Its killing an unborn baby , that simple. Yall can argue till the cows come home.
I'd Like to know the Number of those who say its only a clump of cells that are against the Death Penalty because 'What if the Dude is innocent" thinking.

Id say its a High percentage. You are ready willing and back the thot of Killing an unborn because in your mind what it is , is up to Philosophers and such Yet you want to spare Murderers because they just May be innocent.

Yall aint got a clue just how warped your thinking is.

Not me! I'm for killing convicted murders when there's no doubt they're guilty the day after they're convicted. As for telling women what they can and can't do with their bodies and the babies they might be carrying in them - none of my business!

[olevetonahill]

Not me! I'm for killing convicted murders when there's no doubt they're guilty the day after they're convicted. As for telling women what they can and can't do with their bodies and the babies they might be carrying in them - none of my business!

But yer just a Right wing Wacko :devilish:

[KantoSooner]

"Yet you want to spare Murderers because they just May be innocent."




Vet, if they're 'innocent' they're not 'murderers'. Just sayin'

[C&CDean]

Not me! I'm for killing convicted murders when there's no doubt they're guilty the day after they're convicted. As for telling women what they can and can't do with their bodies and the babies they might be carrying in them - none of my business!

To quote Marley "mankind IS your business."

[olevetonahill]

"Yet you want to spare Murderers because they just May be innocent."




Vet, if they're 'innocent' they're not 'murderers'. Just sayin'

But theres a Chance they were wrongly convicted bro. you know the mind set im talkin about.

[Curly Bill]

To quote Marley "mankind IS your business."

Marley smoked too much dope!

[Curly Bill]

But yer just a Right wing Wacko :devilish:

Pretty much! :triumphant:

[jkjsooner]

No dip-sh*t he's not a philosopher: Dr. Steven Calvin specializes in neonatal-perinatal medicine in Saint Paul, Minnesota. I get it, you're ok with killing kids - I'm done chatting with you.

The point I took out of Midtowner's post is that defining when human life begins is within the realm of philosophy and religion. Science adds relevant insight but in the end it's not a question of science.

The science is pretty well established and understood. You don't have to be a neonatal-perinatal MD to understand the relevant points.

I don't think Midtowner actually believed that Calvin has a PhD in philosphy. He was just emphasizing that the question goes beyond science itself. By pointing out that he is not a philosopher you essentially made Midtowner's point.

[C&CDean]

Marley smoked too much dope!

Jacob, not Bob ya ****in' maroon.

[tator]

I dont have a Dog in this fight so I dont really argue either way. My Feeling? Its killing an unborn baby , that simple. Yall can argue till the cows come home.
I'd Like to know the Number of those who say its only a clump of cells that are against the Death Penalty because 'What if the Dude is innocent" thinking.

Id say its a High percentage. You are ready willing and back the thot of Killing an unborn because in your mind what it is , is up to Philosophers and such Yet you want to spare Murderers because they just May be innocent.

Yall aint got a clue just how warped your thinking is.

Cliffnotes:

"I don't want to argue about it......here's my argument."

[olevetonahill]

Jacob, not Bob ya ****in' maroon.

Just as soon as I finish this Joint, Ima look that up. :devilish::devilish:

[C&CDean]

Just as soon as I finish this Joint, Ima look that up. :devilish::devilish:

You'll have forgotten by then.

[olevetonahill]

You'll have forgotten by then.

what?

[KantoSooner]

Just finished reading Willie Nelson's book.

Picture this, he has poker games with himself, Kris Kristofferson, Ziggy Marley (no ****), Owen Wilson, Woody Harrelson and some Maui restauranteur named Zeke.

My question: how do they ever remember who just dealt, or which way the deal is passed, or which card is wild, or what that guy across the table just bet/raised?

I'd like streaming video of that little game.

[OU68]

The point I took out of Midtowner's post is that defining when human life begins is within the realm of philosophy and religion. Science adds relevant insight but in the end it's not a question of science.

The science is pretty well established and understood. You don't have to be a neonatal-perinatal MD to understand the relevant points.

I don't think Midtowner actually believed that Calvin has a PhD in philosphy. He was just emphasizing that the question goes beyond science itself. By pointing out that he is not a philosopher you essentially made Midtowner's point.

You can dress it up as "philosophy" till the cows come home - when an ultrasound shows fingers, toes, etc. it ain't a blob of cells anymore.

[Curly Bill]

Jacob, not Bob ya ****in' maroon.

Both of em smoked too much!

[olevetonahill]

Both of em smoked too much!

Smoke? Sure ill take a toke.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

To quote Marley "mankind IS your business."If one refuses to consider that he's advocating murder, then it's not murder, but instead is telling a woman what she can do with her body. tra lala lala

[Midtowner]

No dip-sh*t he's not a philosopher: Dr. Steven Calvin specializes in neonatal-perinatal medicine in Saint Paul, Minnesota. I get it, you're ok with killing kids - I'm done chatting with you.

The trouble is you define it differently and that Dr. Calvin lacks the expertise to objectively define when life begins. I have no doubt he can perform surgery on a fetus or to perform an artificial insemination. I'm sure he can tell you when the heart begins to beat and when the fingernails begin to grow. At no point during the pregnancy does a little sign appear stating "I am now alive." That distinction is up to whomever is making that determination, and must, if you're the least bit intellectually honest about things, begin with "In my opinion...." because that's all you or Dr. Calvin have here are your opinions on when life begins, and neither of you are more or less capable of defining that because it's an unanswerable question like whether a tree falling in a forest makes a sound or how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

That's why threads over this subject are pointless. No one can even agree on what they disagree about and while I understand your definition of life, even if I agreed with you, I don't think you have to right to take away someone else's liberty based on your opinion when it is true that reasonable minds can disagree.

[Midtowner]

You can dress it up as "philosophy" till the cows come home - in my opinionwhen an ultrasound shows fingers, toes, etc. it ain't a blob of cells anymore.

FIFY.

[Curly Bill]

I rarely argue this issue because everyone is so steadfast in their views...I don't know why I waded in this time - I musta been feeling froggy!

[olevetonahill]

I rarely argue this issue because everyone is so steadfast in their views...I don't know why I waded in this time - I musta been feeling froggy!

Yup. Like I said I aint really got a Dog in this fight. But I do have my my opinions

[Curly Bill]

Yup. Like I said I aint really got a Dog in this fight. But I do have my my opinions

More than anything it's been kinda fun to stir up the especially devout on this issue - always worth a laugh to see em try so hard to convince me and others how wrong we are.

I even got a neg saying: abhorrent position. I laughed and laughed at that one. Not to mention he has a pissant little hammer! LOL

[olevetonahill]

More than anything it's been kinda fun to stir up the especially devout on this issue - always worth a laugh to see em try so hard to convince me and others how wrong we are.

I even got a neg saying: abhorrent position. I laughed and laughed at that one. Not to mention he has a pissant little hammer! LOL

You an I are a bit different than Most bro
Like I said there are those who are In Favor of Abortion while taking a strong stand against The DP. and Vice verse
**** dont make no sense to me.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

More than anything it's been kinda fun to stir up the especially devout on this issue - always worth a laugh to see em try so hard to convince me and others how wrong they are.

I even got a neg saying: abhorent position. I laughed and laughed at that one. Not to mention he has a pissant little hammer! LOLWell, devout position or not, as long as you realize it IS murder, then that's all I'm wanting to point out. If it's okay with you, then that's your stance. And no, if anybody is wondering, it is not I who negspekked you.

[OU68]

The trouble is you define it differently and that Dr. Calvin lacks the expertise to objectively define when life begins. I have no doubt he can perform surgery on a fetus or to perform an artificial insemination. I'm sure he can tell you when the heart begins to beat and when the fingernails begin to grow. At no point during the pregnancy does a little sign appear stating "I am now alive." That distinction is up to whomever is making that determination, and must, if you're the least bit intellectually honest about things, begin with "In my opinion...." because that's all you or Dr. Calvin have here are your opinions on when life begins, and neither of you are more or less capable of defining that because it's an unanswerable question like whether a tree falling in a forest makes a sound or how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

That's why threads over this subject are pointless. No one can even agree on what they disagree about and while I understand your definition of life, even if I agreed with you, I don't think you have to right to take away someone else's liberty based on your opinion when it is true that reasonable minds can disagree.

But taking their life is ok - like I said, I get your position, just adamantly disagree.

[MsProudSooner]

If you really want to lower the number of abortions do the following:

1) Make sure everyone has access to good healthcare.
2) Make sure everyone has access to sex education.
3) Make sure that birth control is affordable and available to everyone.

[Curly Bill]

Well, devout position or not, as long as you realize it IS murder, then that's all I'm wanting to point out. If it's okay with you, then that's your stance. And no, if anybody is wondering, it is not I who negspekked you.

I respect your views, but no, I don't accept that it is murder.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I respect your views, but no, I don't accept that it is murder.you might have forgotten to add the part about: unless it concerns your involvement as father or in the case of a daughter or son?

[Fraggle145]

But yer just a Right wing Wacko :devilish:

I am for the death penalty too, and I'm a dirty lib. After some of the crimes that have been committed against me I really have no problem with it. For example, if you ar eguilty of robbery, theft, home invasion... all should be killed.

[Fraggle145]

My mom has it laid out pretty well. She's a staunch anti-abortion zealot. Her thesis is "if it's OK to kill an innocent unborn child then why isn't it OK to kill a teenager who darn well deserves it?" Can't argue much.

Sure you can. (Just for the sake of argument) You've already invested a **** ton in a teenager. From a money standpoint because they are almost self sufficient you are about to reach the point where they are at their most valuable. Once they get out in the real world and they **** up then it all goes down hill...

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I am for the death penalty too, and I'm a dirty lib. After some of the crimes that have been committed against me I really have no problem with it. For example, if you ar eguilty of robbery, theft, home invasion... all should be killed.wouldn't solitary incarceration except for loss of anal privileges be good enough? (esp. if you don't brandish a weapon while attempting to do that stuff)

[Fraggle145]

wouldn't solitary incarceration except for loss of anal privileges be good enough? (esp. if you don't brandish a weapon while attempting to do that stuff)

then you gotta pay to feed 'em. And you gotta make all the housing. We are punishing ourselves. Its like the parents when the kid is grounded the parents are grounded type of thing. **** that ****.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

I am for the death penalty too, and I'm a dirty lib. After some of the crimes that have been committed against me I really have no problem with it. For example, if you ar eguilty of robbery, theft, home invasion... all should be killed.

eguilty..online guilt.

[Fraggle145]

eguilty..online guilt.

First judge Fraggle presiding.

[KantoSooner]

then you gotta pay to feed 'em. And you gotta make all the housing. We are punishing ourselves. Its like the parents when the kid is grounded the parents are grounded type of thing. **** that ****.

Life w/o parole is cheaper than death. No ****. Mandatory appeals process bulks up the cost mucho fasto.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

then you gotta pay to feed 'em. And you gotta make all the housing. We are punishing ourselves. Its like the parents when the kid is grounded the parents are grounded type of thing. **** that ****.well, it might be that Death Penalty could be a little harsh for theft. What, cut off their hands, or every other finger and coupla toes?

[Fraggle145]

Life w/o parole is cheaper than death. No ****. Mandatory appeals process bulks up the cost mucho fasto.

Skip that part. Appeals are for pussies.

[FaninAma]

Dr. Calvin is, I presume, not a Doctor of philosophy? Determining when life begins is completely subjective experience. I mean when is it? Fertilization? Implantation? Fetal heart beat? Ability to react to sensation? Viability? Birth? Medicine can tell us when each of those things happen. Which marks the beginning of a life or the beginning of a legally protected life is a question for philosophers and judges.

Our Supreme Court has said that the states have the power to absolutely forbid abortion for viable fetuses absent there being a risk to the health of the mother. So there's that.

You see, that's the slippery slope of your arguement. If a standard isn't set by experts who dedicate themselves to saving lives then society will be at the whim of whatever politically expedient policy is used to EXCUSE or curry favor with irresponsible people. That's what our whole political system has become....lowering standards in order to curry favor with irresponsible people so they will vote for you and your party. The Democrats have adopted this strategy without reservation. The GOP still has pangs of guilt about not pushing for standards but they **** in their pants when they think they have offended the irresponsible segments of our society.

I actually think the exact definition of when life begins should be established and codified by law.

[Fraggle145]

well, it might be that Death Penalty could be a little harsh for theft. What, cut off their hands, or every other finger and coupla toes?

What kind of theft are we talking about? Shoplifting is one thing, but if you rob someone's house violate someplace where they live? You should die. What if they were home? Would you kill them to get away with the crime? **** those *******s. Pull their guts out and feed them to them.

[FaninAma]

Sure you can. (Just for the sake of argument) You've already invested a **** ton in a teenager. From a money standpoint because they are almost self sufficient you are about to reach the point where they are at their most valuable. Once they get out in the real world and they **** up then it all goes down hill...
So abortion is about money and convenience. I agree. Abortion is just the easy way out of making a really bad choice.

[KantoSooner]

Fanin, your argument is perilously close to simply asserting that what you believe is principled and anyone who disagrees with you is, by definition, knowingly pandering. Do you truly believe that anyone who disagrees with you on any point is, by that act, both unscrupulous, unprincipled and illogical?

[olevetonahill]

Heres the easiest way to stop abortion, Every one quit ****in . Simple

[FaninAma]

Fanin, your argument is perilously close to simply asserting that what you believe is principled and anyone who disagrees with you is, by definition, knowingly pandering. Do you truly believe that anyone who disagrees with you on any point is, by that act, both unscrupulous, unprincipled and illogical?

Isn't that what politicians, especially of the progressive persuasion, do? My opinion is at least grounded in the fact that I have coded and stabilized infants that it would be legal to abort in this country. I think I have a pretty good idea of what abortion is really all about.

I really don't have a lot of hard principles but the respect for life, children and future generations are among the few I don't compromise on. If you don't make decisions that have this same respect for the miracle(and if you've ever held a dead child or infant in your arms you will understand it is a miracle) of life and promise of future generations as one of your principles then I will treat you as an "unscrupulous, unprincipled, and illogical" person. I would add selfish to that description, also. You have to have a set of unwavering principles that define you as a person and guide your actions or you really serve no purpose other than living life for today.

[KantoSooner]

It may be what politicians (or the majority of them) do. It is not what, in my opinion, judges and justices do.
I have had the life experience of holding onto people while they died and feel appreciative of the sanctity of life.
I have also been forced, through other life experiences, to understand that some of the things I once held to be utterly and completely beyond discussion were, in fact, very much open to differing opinions.
You go ahead and denigrate all who disagree with you, if that's what you feel you must do. Please try, once in a while, though to run a little thought exercise. Try challenging your own apriori assumptions. You're an intelligent person. Someday you might find that you've changed your mind on something. And that can be a remarkably broadening and humblling experience.

[FaninAma]

It may be what politicians (or the majority of them) do. It is not what, in my opinion, judges and justices do.
I have had the life experience of holding onto people while they died and feel appreciative of the sanctity of life.
I have also been forced, through other life experiences, to understand that some of the things I once held to be utterly and completely beyond discussion were, in fact, very much open to differing opinions.
You go ahead and denigrate all who disagree with you, if that's what you feel you must do. Please try, once in a while, though to run a little thought exercise. Try challenging your own apriori assumptions. You're an intelligent person. Someday you might find that you've changed your mind on something. And that can be a remarkably broadening and humblling experience.

I appreciate your insight. I have also coded and taken care of adults who died. The sense of loss is certainly present but it's not the same as it is with a child or infant. i don't know if i can make you understand. After I came to the realization that the only thing that connects us to any higher being/authority is the ability to produce and nuture children I have been pretty much single-minded in the way I view the actions of others.....especially our so called political leaders. I do give most people a pass from adhering to my standards because I recognize that most people are followers and will simply follow the path set out before them by society. People are by nature followers that is why principles and standards are so important to our society and it is very evident that our current political leaders and political system have been so corrupted by the overriding goal of holding onto power and have thus abandoned any attempt to lead by principle.

Some principles just shouldn't be compromised especially in a society whose purpose is to promote its own progress and survival.

[TAFBSooner]

Heres the easiest way to stop abortion, Every one quit ****in . Simple

Dude, STOP TOKIN for a coupl' hours!

[KantoSooner]

Fanin, in the nicest way possible, compare what you are saying about your principles with what the Taliban says about theirs. Not a sliver of difference. 'Do it my way or be damned'. Is that really your final redoubt?

[olevetonahill]

Dude, STOP TOKIN for a coupl' hours!

:highly_amused::devilish:

[Midtowner]

I actually think the exact definition of when life begins should be established and codified by law.

See Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

[TAFBSooner]

. . . I really don't have a lot of hard principles but the respect for life, children and future generations are among the few I don't compromise on. If you don't make decisions that have this same respect for the miracle(and if you've ever held a dead child or infant in your arms you will understand it is a miracle) of life and promise of future generations as one of your principles then I will treat you as an "unscrupulous, unprincipled, and illogical" person. I would add selfish to that description, also. You have to have a set of unwavering principles that define you as a person and guide your actions or you really serve no purpose other than living life for today.

Where do you stand in the case of a woman who has a pregnancy which is not viable, and will kill her if the pregnancy is not aborted? One woman recently died in Ireland when she was unable to get an abortion, and one woman in Arizona did get the abortion but the nun who ran the hospital got excommunicated?

I guess this is the other end of the slippery slope . . .

[FaninAma]

Where do you stand in the case of a woman who has a pregnancy which is not viable, and will kill her if the pregnancy is not aborted? One woman recently died in Ireland when she was unable to get an abortion, and one woman in Arizona did get the abortion but the nun who ran the hospital got excommunicated?

I guess this is the other end of the slippery slope . . .

I favor the use of common sense. If a pregnancy is going to kill the mother then you save the mother. How about rape and incest? I think that exceptions for personal choice should be allowed for those circumstances in documented cases. A woman who would carry the pregnancy to term due to her respect for life would be somebody very special but i would not expect women to do that.

I would not outlaw abortions overnight. I think establishing a fairly strict definition of when life begins would be a place to start and then educating the public more about fetal development and growth in order to chage the perception about abortion. I do think that abortion on demand is a very bad policy.

[OU68]

I favor the use of common sense. If a pregnancy is going to kill the mother then you save the mother. How about rape and incest? I think that exceptions for personal choice should be allowed for those circumstances in documented cases. A woman who would carry the pregnancy to term due to her respect for life would be somebody very special but i would not expect women to do that.

I would not outlaw abortions overnight. I think establishing a fairly strict definition of when life begins would be a place to start and then educating the public more about fetal development and growth in order to chage the perception about abortion. I do think that abortion on demand is a very bad policy.

I think you are very close to stating what the majority of us who oppose "pro-choice" believe. Abortion should not be a form of birth control for irresponsible morons. Rape, incest, life of the mother - absolutely agree.

[TAFBSooner]

Abortion should not be a form of birth control for irresponsible morons.

If you want to reduce the number of pregnancies due to "moron-osity," are you then in favor of comprehensive sex education?

[OU68]

If you want to reduce the number of pregnancies due to "moron-osity," are you then in favor of comprehensive sex education?

Absolutely - I believe it begins at home, and would want access to anything being taught. I'm not sure it's ignorance, hard to believe most teenagers (and younger) don't know that f**n leads to pregnancy - but, hey, I'm an old fart.

[C&CDean]

If you want to reduce the number of pregnancies due to "moron-osity," are you then in favor of comprehensive sex education?

I keep seeing/hearing people say that more/better sex ed is gonna save us from all the unwanted children...and I call major horse**** on that crapola.

Kids are gonna ****. It's in our nature. It's in our genes.

"But with better sex ed and access to more condoms and pills..." Horse****. I had a wallet full of condoms but I rarely ever pulled one out cause it felt like ****ing with a sock on my dick. I'm fairly confident most kids are the same.

There really isn't an answer to the epidemic. It is what it is. Kids are gonna ****, kids are gonna get preggers, kids are gonna have abortions.

These ones don't bother me nearly as badly as a 20 or 30-something whore using abortion as a means of birth control. "It would really **** up my career to have a kid right now..." **** you. You're a selfish whore.

[TAFBSooner]

Absolutely - I believe it begins at home, and would want access to anything being taught. I'm not sure it's ignorance, hard to believe most teenagers (and younger) don't know that f**n leads to pregnancy - but, hey, I'm an old fart.

I wouldn't want to get caught underestimating ignorance among the young, err, among people.

[Midtowner]

I keep seeing/hearing people say that more/better sex ed is gonna save us from all the unwanted children...

More abortions will save us from more unwanted children.

[C&CDean]

More abortions will save us from more unwanted children.

Quite true. Also quite disgusting, revolting, pathetic, barbaric, unhuman, and psychopathic.

[Midtowner]

(snip)disgusting, revolting, pathetic, barbaric, unhuman, and psychopathic.

Which is exactly how many of those children would turn out.

[C&CDean]

Which is exactly how many of those children would turn out.

And many would not. How about we kill everyone accused of murder? We'd get some guilty ones with all the ones who aren't.

Twisted logic dude.

[TAFBSooner]

I keep seeing/hearing people say that more/better sex ed is gonna save us from all the unwanted children...and I call major horse**** on that crapola.

Kids are gonna ****. It's in our nature. It's in our genes.

"But with better sex ed and access to more condoms and pills..." Horse****. I had a wallet full of condoms but I rarely ever pulled one out cause it felt like ****ing with a sock on my dick. I'm fairly confident most kids are the same.

There really isn't an answer to the epidemic. It is what it is. Kids are gonna ****, kids are gonna get preggers, kids are gonna have abortions.

These ones don't bother me nearly as badly as a 20 or 30-something whore using abortion as a means of birth control. "It would really **** up my career to have a kid right now..." **** you. You're a selfish whore.

"more/better sex ed is gonna save us from all the unwanted children." -- no, it sure won't stop it all, but it will bring down the numbers some. Comprehensive sex ed does a better job of getting kids to delay, and then use birth control, than "abstinence-only" sex ed. Apparently "abstinence-only" gets the kids scared and "committed to" just saying no, but then the hormones hit. As you say, it's in their jeans.

"Kids are gonna ****. It's in our nature. It's in our genes. " Hallelujah! IMHO, everyone in the debate needs to grok this. I would only change "kids" to "people."

I don't know about your distinction between kids (who presumably don't know better) and young adults. I sure doubt it would convince those who are hard-line anti-choicers. But it would sure bring out the people who think pregnancy is a punishment for sex.

[olevetonahill]

Easy way to stop this ****. If a child is born on the Gov. dime Implant a BC device in em. Leave it there until they can prove they are ready and able to raise a child on their own. The Woman who has a Child on the Gov. Dime Or abortion, Implant them too. Dont let it be taken out until they reach the same conditions
Easy Peasy

Notice I said Child in the 1st instance cause those horny lil welfare dudes will breed just as fast as the little girls will let em.

[TAFBSooner]

Easy way to stop this ****. If a child is born on the Gov. dime Implant a BC device in em. Leave it there until they can prove they are ready and able to raise a child on their own. The Woman who has a Child on the Gov. Dime Or abortion, Implant them too. Dont let it be taken out until they reach the same conditions
Easy Peasy

Notice I said Child in the 1st instance cause those horny lil welfare dudes will breed just as fast as the little girls will let em.


Hey! People on welfare are no hornier than the rest of us. Problem is they have more time and energy for sex than those of us that have to work for a living. BTW, they share that problem with the trust fund babies.

[TAFBSooner]

Oh, by the way, the simple answer to the original question: We can't.

[olevetonahill]

Hey! People on welfare are no hornier than the rest of us. Problem is they have more time and energy for sex than those of us that have to work for a living. BTW, they share that problem with the trust fund babies.

Let em **** all they want, Just put a Birth control chip in em. Problem solved. same thing with the dudes who cant or wont Pay Child support, Cept them Id say just castrate em

[C&CDean]

"more/better sex ed is gonna save us from all the unwanted children." -- no, it sure won't stop it all, but it will bring down the numbers some. Comprehensive sex ed does a better job of getting kids to delay, and then use birth control, than "abstinence-only" sex ed. Apparently "abstinence-only" gets the kids scared and "committed to" just saying no, but then the hormones hit. As you say, it's in their jeans.

"Kids are gonna ****. It's in our nature. It's in our genes. " Hallelujah! IMHO, everyone in the debate needs to grok this. I would only change "kids" to "people."

I don't know about your distinction between kids (who presumably don't know better) and young adults. I sure doubt it would convince those who are hard-line anti-choicers. But it would sure bring out the people who think pregnancy is a punishment for sex.

Who teaches "abstinence only" BC? Churches maybe? I'm pretty sure that schools are on the "condoms and pills for everybody" train.

Yes, young adults should know better than to use abortion as birth control. If you're serious about not getting knocked up do what it takes to prevent it. You know the whole "an ounce of prevention beats the hell out of having to murder an innocent child" deal?

[TAFBSooner]

Who teaches "abstinence only" BC? Churches maybe? I'm pretty sure that schools are on the "condoms and pills for everybody" train.

Whenever Republicans are in charge, they pass out aid to states that require "abstinence only" sex ed in schools. There is less of that, although still some, under Obama. Comprehensive sex education points out the advantages of abstinence, but does still teach young people about birth control. Some states, and school districts, teach one, some teach the other, and there are probably some with their fingers in their ears.

If I read you right, you understand that kids are gonna ****, but then you're not happy about teaching them how to reduce the chances of pregnancy or disease. Huh?


Yes, young adults should know better than to use abortion as birth control. If you're serious about not getting knocked up do what it takes to prevent it.

Oh, I agree with you on that. But so should teenagers.


You know the whole "an ounce of prevention beats the hell out of having to murder an innocent child" deal?

My earlier point was that if you believed that abortion were murder, it wouldn't make a difference whether the mother or father was 16 or 26.

[C&CDean]

Whenever Republicans are in charge, they pass out aid to states that require "abstinence only" sex ed in schools. There is less of that, although still some, under Obama. Comprehensive sex education points out the advantages of abstinence, but does still teach young people about birth control. Some states, and school districts, teach one, some teach the other, and there are probably some with their fingers in their ears.

If I read you right, you understand that kids are gonna ****, but then you're not happy about teaching them how to reduce the chances of pregnancy or disease. Huh?



Oh, I agree with you on that. But so should teenagers.



My earlier point was that if you believed that abortion were murder, it wouldn't make a difference whether the mother or father was 16 or 26.

Oh the act is still murder, but I try and give kids the benefit of the doubt. That's why we don't execute 15-year olds for murder. Also, I was a teenager who was involved in a couple and it's a way to assuage my own guilt. I know, FIRST HAND that it's wrong. I've come to terms with my involvement, and now I'm just at a stage where I hope God has mercy on my soul.

If there's people who've done it, and are still OK with it years later then IMO, they're socio/psychopaths. Especially if they can look at their children born later and not think "I wonder what your older sibling might have looked like, damn I made a terrible mistake aborting your sister/brother..."

[FaninAma]

Fanin, in the nicest way possible, compare what you are saying about your principles with what the Taliban says about theirs. Not a sliver of difference. 'Do it my way or be damned'. Is that really your final redoubt?

You're creating a strawman. You know the US has more people in prison per capita than most other nations. So are we being like the Taliban because we have rules and throw a bunch of people in prison for breaking those rules? Is having a society of laws where the law breakers are punished being like the Taliban or are we being like the Taliban because you don't like the laws favored by people you disagree with?

i disagree with on-demand abortion. I would change the law. Does that make me like the Taliban or are those who favor easy, on-demand abortion access like the racist founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, acting like Nazis who felt the lower, poorer class needed to reproduce less?

Just maybe if we respected life a bit more and expected more personal responsibility out of people, especially in regards to being parents and raising children, we wouldn't have as many people in prisons.

Rules and laws are put in place so a society functions smoothly and is able to prosper to the point that future generations build on the success of past generations. Every society has rules based on somebody's opinion or principles. I happen to think progressive opinion and principles have been detrimental for our society but according to today’s(and apparently your) rules of civil discourse one is supposed to pay deference to opinions and actions of other people you feel and know to be harmful to a stable society.

Conservative voices of principle are being cowed into silence by political correctness and moral relativism. Meanwhile our prisons fill up past capacity, more and more children are ending up in poverty with little hope for escape and current generations are saddling future generations with crushing debt because more and more individuals think the government needs to be taking care of all our needs while we avoid our individual responsibilities to family and society.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Oh the act is still murder, but I try and give kids the benefit of the doubt. That's why we don't execute 15-year olds for murder. Also, I was a teenager who was involved in a couple and it's a way to assuage my own guilt. I know, FIRST HAND that it's wrong. I've come to terms with my involvement, and now I'm just at a stage where I hope God has mercy on my soul.

If there's people who've done it, and are still OK with it years later then IMO, they're socio/psychopaths. Especially if they can look at their children born later and not think "I wonder what your older sibling might have looked like, damn I made a terrible mistake aborting your sister/brother..."kudos. That has to be difficult to contemplate, but your honesty IS commendable.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

You're creating a strawman. You know the US has more people in prison per capita than most other nations. So are we being like the Taliban because we have rules and throw a bunch of people in prison for breaking those rules? Is having a society of laws where the law breakers are punished being like the Taliban or are we being like the Taliban because you don't like the laws favored by people you disagree with?

i disagree with on-demand abortion. I would change the law. Does that make me like the Taliban or are those who favor easy, on-demand abortion access like the racist founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, acting like Nazis who felt the lower, poorer class needed to reproduce less?

Just maybe if we respected life a bit more and expected more personal responsibility out of people, especially in regards to being parents and raising children, we wouldn't have as many people in prisons.

Rules and laws are put in place so a society functions smoothly and is able to prosper to the point that future generations build on the success of past generations. Every society has rules based on somebody's opinion or principles. I happen to think progressive opinion and principles have been detrimental for our society but according to today’s(and apparently your) rules of civil discourse one is supposed to pay deference to opinions and actions of other people you feel and know to be harmful to a stable society.

Conservative voices of principle are being cowed into silence by political correctness and moral relativism. Meanwhile our prisons fill up past capacity, more and more children are ending up in poverty with little hope for escape and current generations are saddling future generations with crushing debt because more and more individuals think the government needs to be taking care of all our needs while we avoid our individual responsibilities to family and society.VERY well said, and oh, so true.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

RLIMC, you've dodged my question. There may be a perfectly good zygote floating inside a woman, and that woman has sentenced it to death by taking birth control pills which keep it from attaching to the wall of the uterus and coming to term.

If you believe killing a zygote is murder, then how can you be OK with birth control pills?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

RLIMC, you've dodged my question. There may be a perfectly good zygote floating inside a woman, and that woman has sentenced it to death by taking birth control pills which keep it from attaching to the wall of the uterus and coming to term.

If you believe killing a zygote is murder, then how can you be OK with birth control pills?horsesh*t. I answered your question. Contraception is NOT abortion. The purpose of contraception is to prevent pregnancy. If a zygote is formed and doesn't attach, the woman is not pregnant, and will not test as pregnant. How hard is that?

[diverdog]

Wow this is an interesting read.

Lawyers for Catholic hospital argue that a fetus is not a person


http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/26/us/colorado-fetus-lawsuit/index.html?hpt=hp_t2


What a horrible situation.

[SicEmBaylor]

At this point, let me answer the actual question in the thread title as directly as I possibly can:

How can you STOP abortions? Pass and ratify a constitutional amendment.

/thread

[cleller]

Wow this is an interesting read.

Lawyers for Catholic hospital argue that a fetus is not a person


http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/26/us/colorado-fetus-lawsuit/index.html?hpt=hp_t2


What a horrible situation.

Crazy story. Sorry for the guy, but I'm tired of people thinking that any time a person dies in the vicinity of a hospital they are due a big paycheck.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

horsesh*t. I answered your question. Contraception is NOT abortion. The purpose of contraception is to prevent pregnancy. If a zygote is formed and doesn't attach, the woman is not pregnant, and will not test as pregnant. How hard is that?

Ok, so from your viewpoint, life begins when the zygote attaches itself. I assume you are OK with morning after pills then.

[olevetonahill]

I aint the sharpest knife in the drawer but I done went an figured out, Most of Yall just wanta fuss an argue about this.
There aint a Dayum thing You or I can do about Abortion cept Vote the way we see fit.
We all have our Opinions, aint no one changing anyone else's.
So why Yall keep on pickin at each other?

[Turd_Ferguson]

I aint the sharpest knife in the drawer but I done went an figured out, Most of Yall just wanta fuss an argue about this.
There aint a Dayum thing You or I can do about Abortion cept Vote the way we see fit.
We all have our Opinions, aint no one changing anyone else's.
So why Yall keep on pickin at each other?

Cause they like to take a 55 gallon drum of ****, and stick their paddle in it...:biggrin:

[olevetonahill]

Cause they like to take a 55 gallon drum of ****, and stick their paddle in it...:biggrin:

Well hell that dont make em bad peeps. I do that fer a Livin :watermelon:

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Ok, so from your viewpoint, life begins when the zygote attaches itself. I assume you are OK with morning after pills then.How predictable! If one is using contraceptives, why would she need a morning after pill. IOW, no. If there's a pregnancy, that is abortion. This is not complicated, you know.

[yermom]

(psst, morning after pills are just stronger birth control pills)

[Midtowner]

(psst, morning after pills are just stronger birth control pills)

psst... science and basic biology have no place in this conversation.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

The concern is abortion. If the baby is formed and attached, it's abortion, regardless of the chemistry of the pill. The Left should ponder that situation. psst. it IS MURDER. You can play the stupid card all you want, but to abort is murder. It's legal, as of Roe v Wade, and that's what makes no sense.

[sooneriniowa]

(snip)disgusting, revolting, pathetic, barbaric, unhuman, and psychopathic.

Which is exactly how many of those children would turn out.

Most of those qualities you posses Mid...so in your words your mother should have chose abortion?

[Midtowner]

The concern is abortion. If the baby is formed and attached, it's abortion, regardless of the chemistry of the pill. The Left should ponder that situation. psst. it IS MURDER. You can play the stupid card all you want, but to abort is murder. It's legal, as of Roe v Wade, and that's what makes no sense.

Again, you're treating your subjective interpretation of things as if there can be no other reasonable alternative. Since at least 5 Supreme Court Justices always seem to disagree with you, that can't possibly be true.

[Midtowner]

How predictable! If one is using contraceptives, why would she need a morning after pill. IOW, no. If there's a pregnancy, that is abortion. This is not complicated, you know.

Again, you're treating your subjective interpretation of things as if there can be no other reasonable alternative. Since at least 5 Supreme Court Justices always seem to disagree with you, that can't possibly be true.

[Midtowner]

You're creating a strawman. You know the US has more people in prison per capita than most other nations. So are we being like the Taliban because we have rules and throw a bunch of people in prison for breaking those rules? Is having a society of laws where the law breakers are punished being like the Taliban or are we being like the Taliban because you don't like the laws favored by people you disagree with?

i disagree with on-demand abortion. I would change the law. Does that make me like the Taliban or are those who favor easy, on-demand abortion access like the racist founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, acting like Nazis who felt the lower, poorer class needed to reproduce less?

Just maybe if we respected life a bit more and expected more personal responsibility out of people, especially in regards to being parents and raising children, we wouldn't have as many people in prisons.

Rules and laws are put in place so a society functions smoothly and is able to prosper to the point that future generations build on the success of past generations. Every society has rules based on somebody's opinion or principles. I happen to think progressive opinion and principles have been detrimental for our society but according to today’s(and apparently your) rules of civil discourse one is supposed to pay deference to opinions and actions of other people you feel and know to be harmful to a stable society.

Conservative voices of principle are being cowed into silence by political correctness and moral relativism. Meanwhile our prisons fill up past capacity, more and more children are ending up in poverty with little hope for escape and current generations are saddling future generations with crushing debt because more and more individuals think the government needs to be taking care of all our needs while we avoid our individual responsibilities to family and society.

Again, you're treating your subjective interpretation of things as if there can be no other reasonable alternative. Since at least 5 Supreme Court Justices always seem to disagree with you, that can't possibly be true.

[sooneriniowa]

Copy/paste much? Typical lawyer saying the same crap and getting no where with it..if I say it enough it might stick...You can throw crap at the wall and it will stick also

[Midtowner]

Copy/paste much? Typical lawyer saying the same crap and getting no where with it..if I say it enough it might stick...You can throw crap at the wall and it will stick also

We just experienced the 40th anniversary of a ruling about a subject which no one ever changed anyone's mind in an internet forum (well maybe once or twice). I'm illustrating the simple fact that all of these "abortion is murder" type arguments stem from subjective conclusions about a subject which reasonable minds can differ. They are not objectively and absolutely correct. When life begins is a matter for philosophers, not scientists. Therefore, to restrict someone's fundamental liberty interest based upon a subjective conclusion about which reasonable minds can and do differ is not a step most Americans are comfortable with taking.

No matter how many times they re-order their arguments that abortion is murder, the response will always be the same--that their conclusions are based upon subjective assumptions about which reasonable minds can and do differ and nothing about that has changed since page 1 of this thread.

[Midtowner]

Most of those qualities you posses Mid...so in your words your mother should have chose abortion?

Go **** yourself. :)

[sooneriniowa]

Copy/paste much? Typical lawyer saying the same crap and getting no where with it..if I say it enough it might stick...You can throw crap at the wall and it will stick also

We just experienced the 40th anniversary of a ruling about a subject which no one ever changed anyone's mind in an internet forum (well maybe once or twice). I'm illustrating the simple fact that all of these "abortion is murder" type arguments stem from subjective conclusions about a subject which reasonable minds can differ. They are not objectively and absolutely correct. When life begins is a matter for philosophers, not scientists. Therefore, to restrict someone's fundamental liberty interest based upon a subjective conclusion about which reasonable minds can and do differ is not a step most Americans are comfortable with taking.

Question: Does God exist? If no, then how was the earth created?

[Midtowner]

Question: Does God exist? If no, then how was the earth created?

If God exists, how does that change anything about your subjective conclusions based upon data upon which reasonable minds can differ?

As to whether God exists, neither you nor I know.

As to what I'm guessing is the forthcoming recitation of Aquinas' ontalogical argument, quantum physics is a really interesting field about which my knowledge is limited to what I've heard on NPR's Science Fridays. That said, some of the theories (which are scientific theories, mind you) state crazy things like something comes from nothing and something becomes nothing all the time. Quantum physics has done to Aquinas what the field of chemistry did to Aristotle's 4 elements.

'cept it'll probably be a long time coming as far as universal understanding or acceptance because in my personal experience, math is hard--especially when you start involving lots of Greek letters.

[pphilfran]

The courts made a decision based on compromise...

There are strong arguments to both sides...

A women's ability to control her body...

A DNA strand from a zygote, embryo, or fetus will definitely be tested as human...

[sooneriniowa]

Question: Does God exist? If no, then how was the earth created?

If God exists, how does that change anything about your subjective conclusions based upon data upon which reasonable minds can differ?

You just stated that scientists play no part in when life begins...so what data are you using for your reasonable mind?

[Midtowner]

You just stated that scientists play no part in when life begins...so what data are you using for your reasonable mind?

The fact that there is no scientific data which says life begins at X time at Y second and upon the occurence of Z. To do so would require the scientist to import his own subjective conclusions which aren't provided by a developing zygote, fertilized egg, embryo or fetus.

If you think it does or someone says they have the answer, I can tell you definitively that they don't understand what science is or what it does.

[pphilfran]

If there are dividing cells it is alive...

[SanJoaquinSooner]

How predictable! If one is using contraceptives, why would she need a morning after pill. IOW, no. If there's a pregnancy, that is abortion. This is not complicated, you know.

That's not difficult to imagine. Suppose the guy is a clumsy brute and semen enters the vagina in spite of an attempt to use a condom. The female may choose to seek an after morning pill. Do you have any problem with her legally obtaining and using an after morning pill?

[sooneriniowa]

You just stated that scientists play no part in when life begins...so what data are you using for your reasonable mind?

The fact that there is no scientific data which says life begins at X time at Y second and upon the occurence of Z. To do so would require the scientist to import his own subjective conclusions which aren't provided by a developing zygote, fertilized egg, embryo or fetus.

If you think it does or someone says they have the answer, I can tell you definitively that they don't understand what science is or what it does.

So all the scientists who have "proven" evolution, "proven" big bang...etc have also added their own subjective conclusions?

[Midtowner]

If there are dividing cells it is alive...

And that's one of many possible subjective conclusions as to when life begins.

[Midtowner]

So all the scientists who have "proven" evolution, "proven" big bang...etc have also added their own subjective conclusions?

All of those are theories, they are not laws. They are not testable, demonstrable or immutable. However, they are extraordinarily likely, supported by literal mountains of data and are constantly being challenged with new data. They are also things which occurred over billions and trillions of years and are not remotely the same as the question as to when life begins, which is about as testable and demonstrable as the theory that exactly 79 angels can dance on the head of a pin (without discounting for the possibility of some of those angels being cherubs, and everyone knows .75 cherubs per angel).

And yes, I'm making fun of all of the folks who think they can objectively prove when life begins.... everyone knows that's when the Prophet Mohammad appears and breathes soul into the zygote 36 minutes after implantation.

[sooneriniowa]

Who says the earth is billions/trillions years old? The same scientists that cant tell when life begins? I think you're starting to talk in circles. ..

[Midtowner]

Who says the earth is billions/trillions years old? The same scientists that cant tell when life begins? I think you're starting to talk in circles. ..

Earth is billions of years old. 3.5 billion years. This is observable through dating, geology and what have you.

Kind of like how the Sun doesn't revolve around the Earth and if you try to sail from one end of the world to the other, you won't sail off the edge.

I'm only talking circles because I'm having to explain to you what science is and you're apparently not smart enough to grasp it.

Go read books.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Question: Does God exist? If no, then how was the earth created?Duh, Big Bang or First Cause...now, don't you DARE ask what created either of those, or the nature of the Creator. NOBODY knows that. BUT DON'T YOU CALL THAT (WHATEVER THING)GOD!

[Midtowner]

Duh, Big Bang or First Cause...now, don't you DARE ask what created either of those, or the nature of the Creator. NOBODY knows that. BUT DON'T YOU CALL THAT (WHATEVER THING)GOD!

Again, you're treating your subjective interpretation of things as if there can be no other reasonable alternative. Since at least 5 Supreme Court Justices always seem to disagree with you, that can't possibly be true.

[Midtowner]

Duh, Big Bang or First Cause...now, don't you DARE ask what created either of those, or the nature of the Creator. NOBODY knows that. BUT DON'T YOU CALL THAT (WHATEVER THING)GOD!

Again, as I said, quantum physics is a really interesting field and worth looking into.

[yermom]

Who says the earth is billions/trillions years old? The same scientists that cant tell when life begins? I think you're starting to talk in circles. ..

what is life?

[Midtowner]

what is life?

And that right there is about the most loaded question ever.

[yermom]

The concern is abortion. If the baby is formed and attached, it's abortion, regardless of the chemistry of the pill. The Left should ponder that situation. psst. it IS MURDER. You can play the stupid card all you want, but to abort is murder. It's legal, as of Roe v Wade, and that's what makes no sense.

the idea is to prevent it from implanting. at least if we are going to argue, know the facts that can be verified.

the morning after pill is basically letting you catch up like you have been taking the regular pill, from what i can tell.

i think equating it to abortion is likely the work of the people that are against birth control in the first place.

[sooneriniowa]

Who says the earth is billions/trillions years old? The same scientists that cant tell when life begins? I think you're starting to talk in circles. ..

Earth is billions of years old. 3.5 billion years. This is observable through dating, geology and what have you.

Kind of like how the Sun doesn't revolve around the Earth and if you try to sail from one end of the world to the other, you won't sail off the edge.

I'm only talking circles because I'm having to explain to you what science is and you're apparently not smart enough to grasp it.

Go read books.

Oh I read plenty of books, some with pictures even..so life is not observable or testable? Yet inanimate objects are. We can come to conclusions using similiar methods that the earth is billions of years old but not when life begins. Based on how your responses are arranged I can tell that you are going to pick and choose what you think is proof for the outcome that you want...you chose the correct profession

[Fraggle145]

If there are dividing cells it is alive...

No this isnt necessarily true. We combine sea urchin sperm and eggs in intro zoology labs across the country all the time. The cells divide in the petri dish. Same with a lot of in vitro stuff with humans. Just because something has the ability to replicate itself doesnt make it alive. Look at the formation of crystals. They self-replicate, are they alive?

[Fraggle145]

What is funny is that this thread is bringing out all the anti-science arguments now. Since science cant explain everything right now, everything that has been discovered or that we do know is obviously false. Effing ridiculous. Science isnt really about answering questions, it is about creating new ones. For every answer there are usually thousands more questions that throw it into doubt.

[pphilfran]

And that's one of many possible subjective conclusions as to when life begins.

It is not subjective...if there are dividing cells it is alive..no debate...

DNA says it is human...

So science says it is alive and it is human (at least a developing human)

The debate is about a "functioning" human...no debate on the science side of being alive or "human"...

[pphilfran]

And that right there is about the most loaded question ever.

It is not loaded...science says dividing cells are alive...

[Fraggle145]

All of those are theories, they are not laws. They are not testable, demonstrable or immutable. However, they are extraordinarily likely, supported by literal mountains of data and are constantly being challenged with new data. They are also things which occurred over billions and trillions of years and are not remotely the same as the question as to when life begins, which is about as testable and demonstrable as the theory that exactly 79 angels can dance on the head of a pin (without discounting for the possibility of some of those angels being cherubs, and everyone knows .75 cherubs per angel).

And yes, I'm making fun of all of the folks who think they can objectively prove when life begins.... everyone knows that's when the Prophet Mohammad appears and breathes soul into the zygote 36 minutes after implantation.

And Evolution is testable and has been tested thousands of times. You cant prove anything in science.

[Fraggle145]

It is not loaded...science says dividing cells are alive...

No it doesnt. Science says dividing cells are dividing.