Abortion doctor killed...

[Peevo]

If I'm considering driving through a red light, am I obviously ill equipped to drive a car? I'd say no. I'd say most drivers, maybe 75% or more, have at one time considered driving through a red light. Humans consider all sorts of things, all the time. I'm sure 99.9% of people have considered doing something illegal.

 

 

 

If you believe that abortion is the *killing of innocent human life*, don't you think this would override any ideological position, such as fiscal conservatism?

 

 

You're completely missing my point. If you want this unfit mother to raise a child that she is ill-equipped at best to care for for the rest of its life, you really think that's the best way an "innocent life" will live?

 

Furthermore, an abortion is a legal act within the 1st trimester. Running a red light deliberately and getting abortion cannot be compared to the same metric. What calculus are using to compute that? Seriously, thats a petty crime, we are talking about "innocent life," right?

 

And no, I don't believe abortion is the "killing of innocent human life" as I said twice already in my previous posts. I'd rather have 1 wasted life than 2. That's the way I look at it. If you're considering getting an abortion as a means of birth control, you're most likely not going to be a loving, responsible, committed parent. A little realism would really help the arguments against abortion here. And no, young/old people will not stop having sex. This is totally unrealistic too. The only way to prevent this is through contraception. No one yet has yet to respond to my point. If abortion becomes illegal, which it might, we still must have as much access as possible to birth control, or we're going to have a lot more problems.

 

Are contraceptives (birth control, condoms, etc) restrictions on human life too? Or are they responsible ways of protecting oneself from disease and unwanted pregnancy? Once again, this argument needs some sense of reasonable balance and discourse. If we live in a world with no access to protection, you really think that we're living in a safer, cleaner, healthier society? I'm not saying "free love" like its 1966; disease can spread. But, be a little reasonable here, that's all I'm asking.

[Steely Dan]

I don't think I could do this, no. That doesn't change what I believe....namely, the fact that an abortion kills an innocent child, regardless of the circumstances behind the pregnancy.

 

 

 

Both. I believe that land is the primary issue in the minds of the Arab political leaders in the region.

 

 

 

Are white parents hesitant to adopt black children? Sure. And the fact remains, the primary issue is not babies (black or other) not being adopted, but the large numbers of children in foster care.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/17/us/17adopt.html?_r=1

 

Not sure what the point is. Is the point that there are pregnant women getting abortions because they feel that if they give birth, their child will not be adopted? If that is the point, how informed is that point, do tell?

 

 

 

The hypocrisy of sinners...I won't accept that as a reason for overriding the fact, or an opinion, that abortion is the killing of innocent life.

 

Meaning...if we both accept, or believe, that abortion is the killing of innocent life, we diverge in that you would use the fact of hypocrite Christians to make abortion acceptable. I don't believe that the existence of hypocrisy makes abortion acceptable.

 

No, it means your a wuss. You can say it to anyone except a victim. If you truly believe what you say you should be willing to say it to anyone at any time. I guess if you can't tell her that she's a murderer if she aborts the fetus, then you're leaving it to a choice the parents should make. Could you look at your 13 year old raped daughter and make her carry the baby to term? If so you are one cold blooded bastard. JMO

 

It's sacred land they want. Both parties feel they have a claim to the land they call holy.

 

No, the point is that a lot of anti-abortionists think removing fewer cells than in your fingernail is more important than taking care of the kids who really need them.

 

Why are people hesitant to adopt black kids? If they truly care about kids it shouldn't matter. I guess racism is ok for anti-abortionists. (BTW, you were wrong about the number of unadopted children in the U.S.)

 

Why is fighting against removing a few cells more important than taking care of living kids who desperately need help.

 

Aborting a fetus that has brain activity and a beating heart is something I'm against. Before that it's not killing baby it's removing cells. JMO

 

Throwing away a pack of yeast isn't killing a loaf of bread.

[Steely Dan]

You're completely missing my point. If you want this unfit mother to raise a child that she is ill-equipped at best to care for for the rest of its life, you really think that's the best way an "innocent life" will live?

 

Furthermore, an abortion is a legal act within the 1st trimester. Running a red light deliberately and getting abortion cannot be compared to the same metric. What calculus are using to compute that? Seriously, thats a petty crime, we are talking about "innocent life," right?

 

And no, I don't believe abortion is the "killing of innocent human life" as I said twice already in my previous posts. I'd rather have 1 wasted life than 2. That's the way I look at it. If you're considering getting an abortion as a means of birth control, you're most likely not going to be a loving, responsible, committed parent. A little realism would really help the arguments against abortion here. And no, young/old people will not stop having sex. This is totally unrealistic too. The only way to prevent this is through contraception. No one yet has yet to respond to my point. If abortion becomes illegal, which it might, we still must have as much access as possible to birth control, or we're going to have a lot more problems.

 

Are contraceptives (birth control, condoms, etc) restrictions on human life too? Or are they responsible ways of protecting oneself from disease and unwanted pregnancy? Once again, this argument needs some sense of reasonable balance and discourse. If we live in a world with no access to protection, you really think that we're living in a safer, cleaner, healthier society? I'm not saying "free love" like its 1966; disease can spread. But, be a little reasonable here, that's all I'm asking.

 

I think anti-abortionists believe that the child should be put up for adoption so they won't adopt it.

 

I agree it must be some kind of voodoo logic.

 

A parents insistence on abstinence and abstinence pledges work. Just look at Bristol Palin...oops bad choice.

[Peevo]

Two things:

 

1) Steely Dan is sweet. Both the band and the poster. I really like Aja a lot. Jim Keltner/Bernard Purdie/Steve Gadd are all amazing drummers.

 

2) Thank you for being sensible.

[tennesseeboy]

Your hypothetical has never existed in the history of the world. Pass.

That's the reason its called a hypothetical, moron. The fact is the "life" is connected to the mother by an umbilical cord and actually residing in her body as opposed to on the gurney next to her. Just like I would have the "right" (whether it was ethically or morally correct) to cut the tube and walk out of the hospital, the mother should legally (not necessarily morally or ethically) to cut the cord and walk. We call that the right to liberty. Read Brandeis' law review article on the right to privacy and the line of cases from Griswold and get back in touch, dickwad.

[Steely Dan]

Two things:

 

1) Steely Dan is sweet. Both the band and the poster. I really like Aja a lot. Jim Keltner/Bernard Purdie/Steve Gadd are all amazing drummers.

 

2) Thank you for being sensible.

 

Thanks.

 

Will Lee, the bassist for Letterman's band, played on some songs from Gaucho.

[GoodBye]

No, it means your a wuss. You can say it to anyone except a victim. If you truly believe what you say you should be willing to say it to anyone at any time. I guess if you can't tell her that she's a murderer if she aborts the fetus, then you're leaving it to a choice the parents should make. Could you look at your 13 year old raped daughter and make her carry the baby to term? If so you are one cold blooded bastard. JMO

 

It's sacred land they want. Both parties feel they have a claim to the land they call holy.

 

No, the point is that a lot of anti-abortionists think removing fewer cells than in your fingernail is more important than taking care of the kids who really need them.

 

Why are people hesitant to adopt black kids? If they truly care about kids it shouldn't matter. I guess racism is ok for anti-abortionists. (BTW, you were wrong about the number of unadopted children in the U.S.)

 

Why is fighting against removing a few cells more important than taking care of living kids who desperately need help.

 

Aborting a fetus that has brain activity and a beating heart is something I'm against. Before that it's not killing baby it's removing cells. JMO

 

Throwing away a pack of yeast isn't killing a loaf of bread.

So, if your parents decided that you were just "cells" and aborted you because they weren't ready to have a child, or whatever the reason, wouldn't you think that was unfair that they didn't let you decide if you wanted to live or not? We all started off as "cells."

[DrDawkinstein]

So, if your parents decided that you were just "cells" and aborted you because they weren't ready to have a child, or whatever the reason, wouldn't you think that was unfair that they didn't let you decide if you wanted to live or not? We all started off as "cells."

 

but thats not what happens at all...

 

thats like caring what happens after you are dead too. good luck with that.

[The Dean]

So, if your parents decided that you were just "cells" and aborted you because they weren't ready to have a child, or whatever the reason, wouldn't you think that was unfair that they didn't let you decide if you wanted to live or not? We all started off as "cells."

 

If you weren't born, you wouldn't exist, or think anything.

[woolley]

You're completely missing my point. If you want this unfit mother to raise a child that she is ill-equipped at best to care for for the rest of its life, you really think that's the best way an "innocent life" will live?

 

I don't know what's the best way for any life to live. Do you? Rich parents can have kids who are drug addicts, poor single mothers can have kids become nuclear physicists. Let life live, that's what I say.

 

Furthermore, an abortion is a legal act within the 1st trimester. Running a red light deliberately and getting abortion cannot be compared to the same metric. What calculus are using to compute that? Seriously, thats a petty crime, we are talking about "innocent life," right?

 

Given that abortion is legal, there may be countless millions of women who have considered abortion before giving birth, maybe for a few minutes, maybe for a few days. I think consideration of abortion is not a litmus test for anything.

 

And no, I don't believe abortion is the "killing of innocent human life" as I said twice already in my previous posts. I'd rather have 1 wasted life than 2. That's the way I look at it.

 

Ok, our disagreement is fundamental then.

[Steely Dan]

If you weren't born, you wouldn't exist, or think anything.

 

 

I wouldn't be aware of it at all and therefore couldn't care, at all.

[woolley]

No, it means your a wuss. You can say it to anyone except a victim. If you truly believe what you say you should be willing to say it to anyone at any time.

 

Some people would extend this to say if I truly believe what I say, I should shoot an abortionist.

 

I don't live my life black and white style. There are inarticulable calculi that determine my behavior. To try to articulate, I don't see what good it would do to track down 15 year olds who are going to get abortions and make them feel miserable. Maybe you see this as a litmus test for courage, or non-wussiness. This way of thinking that you have makes no impression on me. Scratching an itch to make a point?

 

I'm not for the imprisonment of women who get abortions. Abortion is legal. Do I still believe abortion kills innocent life? Absolutely. If you find this irreconcilable, let me tell you that it isn't. I'm not as simplistic as you'd like me to be, perhaps.

 

I guess if you can't tell her that she's a murderer if she aborts the fetus, then you're leaving it to a choice the parents should make. Could you look at your 13 year old raped daughter and make her carry the baby to term? If so you are one cold blooded bastard. JMO

 

What do you mean by make her carry it to term? If she asked me to drive her to a Planned Parenthood clinic, I would refuse. I wouldn't chain her to her bed. If she really wanted an abortion I guess she could climb out a window or threaten to commit suicide, or something. I dunno. Nothing she does will take the fact that a rape occurred away. If looking at the baby makes her remember the rape, we could look into adoption or something.

 

Personally, I think I would truly be cold-blooded if I freely allowed her to get an abortion, washing my hands of the matter like Pilate.

 

No, the point is that a lot of anti-abortionists think removing fewer cells than in your fingernail is more important than taking care of the kids who really need them.

 

OK, point taken. Those people ought to fix themselves. This changes nothing re: my opinion about abortion.

 

Why are people hesitant to adopt black kids? If they truly care about kids it shouldn't matter. I guess racism is ok for anti-abortionists. (BTW, you were wrong about the number of unadopted children in the U.S.)

 

It's tough. I had a hard time as a mixed kid living in an all white neighborhood. Kind of like choosing a spouse...sometimes you'll take factors into consideration when you consider difficulties that may arise in life. You can call it anything you like. I'll spare you the personal anecdotes I could share, better to just think that white people hesitant to adopt black babies are racist.

 

If you think that unadopted babies are a greater issue than unadopted children in foster care, that's on you. It doesn't matter I guess.

 

Why is fighting against removing a few cells more important than taking care of living kids who desperately need help.

 

They're both important. In general, yes, I think that killing someone is worse than not actively helping someone who is alive.

 

Aborting a fetus that has brain activity and a beating heart is something I'm against. Before that it's not killing baby it's removing cells. JMO

 

OK.

 

Throwing away a pack of yeast isn't killing a loaf of bread.

 

Yeast is an ingredient in bread. I think the better analogy is the sperm, or the egg, before they merge to become zygote. Once the ingredients are mixed, the ingredients are no longer distinct, and yeast would be a distinct ingredient.

[woolley]

That's the reason its called a hypothetical, moron. The fact is the "life" is connected to the mother by an umbilical cord and actually residing in her body as opposed to on the gurney next to her. Just like I would have the "right" (whether it was ethically or morally correct) to cut the tube and walk out of the hospital, the mother should legally (not necessarily morally or ethically) to cut the cord and walk. We call that the right to liberty. Read Brandeis' law review article on the right to privacy and the line of cases from Griswold and get back in touch, dickwad.

 

Hypotheticals detached from reality are absolutely useless. I could call a non-origamied piece of paper a monkey. I mean, you know, just hypothetically. It's a non-starter.

 

Nice job with the name calling there, that is certainly one way to respond to stress.

[The Dean]

Hypotheticals detached from reality are absolutely useless. I could call a non-origamied piece of paper a monkey. I mean, you know, just hypothetically. It's a non-starter.

 

Nice job with the name calling there, that is certainly one way to respond to stress.

 

 

You really don't understand the hypothetical, do you?

[erynthered]

So, if your parents decided that you were just "cells" and aborted you because they weren't ready to have a child, or whatever the reason, wouldn't you think that was unfair that they didn't let you decide if you wanted to live or not? We all started off as "cells."

 

 

Lana, dont back off from these men. Tell them what you think, please. These opinionated men are not women. Tell them what you think.

[buckeyemike]

Whats so unfortunate about this argument, is as soon someone considerably religious brings up their dogma into the conversation, it becomes an unwinable argument. "I accept Christ and am going to heaven, regardless of how I treat people or consider my actions in the world, everyone that doesn't, too bad." That, quite frankly, is why a lot of people have a very big issue with the modern Christian in the world.

Surprisingly, I tend to agree with that statement. But, in my beliefs, the theology is incorrect.

 

It DOES matter to God how you treat people. Enough that you might go to hell for it instead of heaven. This is the principle of the Arminian and Wesleyan doctrines of grace, which state that you can lose your salvation. The key to the Christian life is lifestyle change and heart change. If you're going to live the same way after redemption as before, why even bother? Admittedly, some Christians believe in "eternal security", meaning no matter what sins you commit, you are under God's grace. I am not one of them.

 

Bottom line, women are going to seek abortions if they are legal or not. Girls will continue to DIE because of dirty abortions, and those in support of life would then say, that an abortion should be legal, right? Isn't any life precious, regardless of its stages? Furthermore, how far does this go? Is it right for us to restrict stem cell research to save potentially THOUSANDS if not MILLIONS of real, actually born, living people suffering from untold terrible terminal diseases, even at the cost of embryos that don't get fertilized, and ultimately, destroyed anyway? This is also completely constructed by the religious right to prove a point, because studies are finding that umbilical cord stem cells are just as effective and that doesn't require an abortion to harvest the cells.

 

What basically the religious right wants is a total Catch-22. ABSOLUTELY NO contraceptives of any kind, because of course, that would restrict "life." Forget the amount of disease that could spread, that potentially destroy life, we need to protect this baby from not being conceived. And then when an unwanted pregnancy occurs because birth control, condoms and other safe sex methods are all restricted, girls are forced to raise a child they are ill equipped to raise, and drain the societal welfare system even more. That goes back to the tax payer dollar, that, of course, conservatives raive that we can never raise, or spend, right?

 

Those against responsible, reasonable birth control are just using sexual contact as nothing more than a means of procreation and ownership of a woman's body as that of a man's ultimate possession. Woman have fought for a generation to escape this stupidity. It's very sad that "Octomom" and the "Jon and Kate" are terrible examples of fertilization and medical science used to an extreme means. But seriously, these right to life people need to chill out. 7 billion people live on this planet, is there REALLY room for another billion more?

 

I believe in responsible and reasonable birth control, and complete and total access to it. I just don't support abortion. You can tell I'm not Catholic b/c of that statement, but a surprising amount of Protestant leaders have spoken out against birth control in recent years. I believe that is probably so the faithful have more kids so that this country stays mostly Protestant...and white.

 

My wife and I still use birth control, even though we've been married nearly 10 years. A lot of Christians do.

 

I do not own my wife's body. She's a bright, intelligent, beautiful 40 year old woman who has become a respected RN in her work. I don't need to "own" her, because I am confident enough in my masculinity, and because she is my partner. I do not need to feel the weight of my own scrotum.

 

 

A lot of so-called Christians could care less about black American kids.

 

Sadly, I think this statement is 99% accurate. Racism is alive and well in this country.

[VABills]

Sadly, I think this statement is 99% accurate. Racism is alive and well in this country.

 

Yeah because there are no black Christians.....

 

WTF. Did you go to the dean, billsfan4life, steely dan school of stats????

 

You know the one where they teach you to make up sh-- as you go?

[buckeyemike]

Yeah because there are no black Christians.....

 

WTF. Did you go to the dean, billsfan4life, steely dan school of stats????

 

You know the one where they teach you to make up sh-- as you go?

 

Should have said white Christians.

 

I am a proud graduate -- magna cum mea culpa -- of the buckeyemike school for the mentally distraught.

[VABills]

Should have said white Christians.

 

I am a proud graduate -- magna cum mea culpa -- of the buckeyemike school for the mentally distraught.

I still disagree with the original premise however. I think it's a cop out and just another excuse for people to tear down religion first and the majority second. Too mnay people have heard it so much from the media that they believe it, even if it's not true. I mean give me a break, this country elected a black man with a pretty good majority. Blacks are only maybe 13% of the country, the rest of those votes came from somewhere. Certainly a large percent of those Christians who make up about 75% percent of this country must have voted for him. Racism is gone and has been gone for a while. Sure there are small pockets everywhere, but that goes both ways. Black to white, black to korean, white to black, white to asian,, etc.... that will always exist, but the percent of people truely racist is minor and the last election proved it. Cetainly not enough to sway anything except local electioons. And then it goes both ways, look at DC vs. say Utah.

[The Dean]

Yeah because there are no black Christians.....

 

WTF. Did you go to the dean, billsfan4life, steely dan school of stats????

 

You know the one where they teach you to make up sh-- as you go?

 

 

Care to backup your claim that I make up stats?