Hello,

Righty's think lefty's are in LOVE with abortion.. They think liberal women get pregnant or even raped just to get one. However, what's TRUE, and what right wingers BELIEVE, are TWO different things..

A lefty believes abortions are TERRIBLE. They SHOULD be prevented. It's a GOOD IDEA to make them ILLEGAL. It's even the MORAL thing to do.

The only problem, is that no matter how many abortion cops we put on the beat, like marijuana, we're NOT going to stop people from getting what they want. All making abortion illegal would do, is force poor women into doing back alley ones on themselves. RICH women, of course, will still be able to get theirs..

So, although it would be a good idea to outlaw abortion, it would also be a good idea to outlaw earthquakes... But, in reality, we're not going to stop either one.

BETTER that they be legal and SAFE. No?

excon

Obama is in support of Abortion up to and including right after delivery... (research his stand on this as a senator in Illinoise)

Exactly when do democrats think it's the right time to NOT kill the baby? 5 years old, 18 years old?

Funny how they have more sympathy for convicted murderers on death row than they have for a baby that never hurt anyone.

smoothy's response represents the conservatives views perfectly. :-)

Legal and safe, the only problem is getting good care after. A woman can have an abortion, but she must be well informed about after care; she may have the money for an abortion, but will she have the money for after care when she does not have healthcare benefits.

Abortions are relatively easy to come by here Canada through a proper medical source, meaning one's own doctor giving a proper referral and of course covered by socialized healthcare.

Murders happen even though they are illegal . So although it's a good idea to outlaw murder ,murders are going to happen anyway and people who are going to murder will do so anyway. We know that's true because we have tried making marijuana illegal?? Why have any laws ;people are going to break them anyway ? The raw numbers ;since Roe v Wade ;over 50 million babies killed .

What we learned from the Dem platform is that they favor unfettered taxpayer funded abortion up to the moment of birth.

What we learned from the Dem platform is that they favor unfettered taxpayer funded abortion up to the moment of birth.And the lies continue... That doesn't help your cause. Especially when you paint with the wide brush.

Here is the exact language...
"The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay."

The dropped language about making abortion 'rare ' in 2008 ;and this year added the implied taxpayer funding into the language.

Here is the exact language ...
"The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay."

The dropped language about making abortion 'rare ' in 2008 ;and this year added the implied taxpayer funding into the language.

From your previous post 'What we learned from the Dem platform is that they favor unfettered taxpayer funded abortion up to the moment of birth.'

Do you know what you are saying here? Did they actually state this?

Okay, so a woman who is carrying a DEAD baby should be forced to carry to term and give birth as if everything is normal---is that what you're saying? AND she should have to pay for it 100% out of her own pocket, with no help from the government for her medical bills?

Late term abortions are almost ALWAYS to save the mother's life or because the life of the fetus is not viable.

I am staunchly pro-choice---mostly because I had to MAKE that choice. I didn't choose abortion, but at least I had the right to decide for myself what was the right option for me.

What I don't get is that people who are anti-choice (I refuse to use "pro-life" because you're only counting heartbeats, not quality of life) don't exactly offer up a lot of other choices. They're the same people who hate welfare (which a single teen mom of an unplanned baby is GOING to use) and who seem to think that adoption is a walk in the park. I mean, if you don't WANT the baby, just give it up. There can't POSSIBLY be emotional repercussions for that at ALL. (yes, there is sarcasm there).

If the anti-choice people got together and used all of the money they spend on their propaganda to stop abortions for things like--oh--EDUCATION and SUPPORT for unplanned pregnancies, I'm betting that 1. There would be a lot fewer unplanned pregnancies and 2. More people would be willing to choose other options.

And let's face it--recent Republican statements make it very clear that conservatives need to get Sex Education back into the schools because we have people who actually BELIEVE that you can't get pregnant from a "true" rape and that HIV can't be spread between heterosexual couples. Maybe those same people think that every single unplanned pregnancy is stupid people having mass amounts of sex with no birth control, too---because OBVIOUSLY, that's the ONLY way you can get pregnant.

What we learned from the Dem platform is that they favor unfettered taxpayer funded abortion up to the moment of birth.Hello again, tom:

Kind of like Paul Ryan, are you?? Criticizing the left for moving leftward, while you took leaps and bounds toward the right...

excon

I'm not against abortion totally, just after the first trimester.

I do believe the project dwellers should pay for their own abortions... they have money for cell phones and $200 tennis shoes... they can afford their own abortions too.

Hello again, tom:

Kinda like Paul Ryan, are you??? Criticizing the left for moving leftward, while you took leaps and bounds toward the right...

excon

My position hasn't changed . How could I compromise when I think it's a killing ? Only when the mother's life is in threatened should it be considered a legal procedure.

My position hasn't changed . How could I compromise when I think it's a killing ? Only when the mother's life is in threatened should it be considered a legal procedure.
Empathy time. You'd feel that way if you had been raped by a stranger or an uncle or your volleyball coach and would have to carry that crime around in your belly and be reminded of that rape every moment of the day for NINE months?

And it's the baby's fault how ? I'm unsubscribing from this post. No one will change the other's mind .

and it's the baby's fault how ?
No, it's the rapist's fault. Stop rape from happening.

On the medical viewpoint, a fetus is not viable outside of the mother's womb until at least 24 weeks gestation. It is, for lack of a better term, a parasite that will not live without the mother. Just because there is a heartbeat does not make it a living being.

it's really simple to me, if you didn't like abortion you'd show more concern for the natural byproduct of intercourse, the child.

it's really simple to me, if you didn't like abortion you'd show more concern for the natural byproduct of intercourse, the child.
No, back up the bus. If you don't like abortion, you will do everything to avoid getting pregnant including abstaining from sex.

No, back up the bus. If you don't like abortion, you will do everything to avoid getting pregnant including abstaining from sex.

And how many libs are promoting abstinence? Four?

And how many libs are promoting abstinence? Four?About the same amount as catholics I guess.

Who is "they"?

Obama for one... as a senator in Illinois... REFUSED to vote against partial birth abortions... and in fact to prevent killing a still living baby that was still alive after it was OUTSIDE the womb.

He didn't vote yes... to prevent partial birth abortions... its a matter of public record and got news coverage a couple years ago... as long as you didn't watch the liberal news who avoided it by choice.

He voted present which allowed it to fail. And present is the same as a no vote in such a case.

90th General Assembly
SB0230

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/legisnet90/status/900SB0230.html


And the rabid pro-abortion groups which is most of them have the same stance... hack the bits off as they exit the vagina is OK and acceptable to these types.

I am OK up to the FIRST trimester...

3 months is plenty of time in case of rape or other to decide.

Obama for one....as a senator in Illinois....REFUSED to vote against partial birth abortions....and in fact to prevent killing a still living baby that was still alive after it was OUTSIDE the womb.

He didn't vote yes...to prevent partial birth abortions...its a matter of public record and got news coverage a couple years ago....as long as you didn't watch the liberal news who avoided it by choice.

He voted present which allowed it to fail. And present is the same as a no vote in such a case.

90th General Assembly
SB0230

Status of SB0230 (http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/legisnet90/status/900SB0230.html)


And the rabid pro-abortion groups which is most of them have the same stance....hack the bits off as they exit the vagina is ok and acceptable to these types.

I am ok up to the FIRST trimester...

3 months is plenty of time in case of rape or other to decide.
You do not understand the "present" vote in Illinois.

You do not understand the "present" vote in Illinois.

I do very well... Its so they can sit on the fence while claiming to be there... so they don't upset either side...

Its really no different than just not showing up at all...

In such a case as clear as preventing LIVE BIRTH ABORTIONS... its an absolutely disgusting exhibition of human callousness.

Because what is a live birth abortion... killing the baby after delivery starts, but before it can fully emerge.

Only a sick SOB can support that... because a minute later it's a crying baby ready to have the umbillical cord cut... its not premature.. it doesn't NEED in incubator to finish developing... there is NOT question at that point of viability.

He voted present which allowed it to fail. Did you understand his reasoning for that vote? Did you read what he said?

I do very well.....Its so they can sit on the fence while claiming to be there....

Its really no different than just not showing up at all....
You couldn't be more wrong. He had the floor and explained in detail why.

I do very well.....Its so they can sit on the fence while claiming to be there....so they don't upset either side....
Not true.

Did you understand his reasoning for that vote? Did you read what he said?

I know EXACTLY what he said...

He refused to vote to oppose partial birth Abortion. That by its very nature means he approved it..,. just didn't have the balls to go on the record as voting against it.

If you stood on the street and watched some kid rape an old lady... and you didn't try to stop him or go after sloppy seconds... does that absolve your responsibility for letting it happen by doing nothing?

I know EXACTLY what he said....I don't have the same problems you have understanding clear and obvious issues.

He refused to vote to oppose partial birth Abortion. That by its very nature means he approved it.,..just didn't have the balls to go on the record as voting against it.
Nope, you're wrong again.
You're told us so many times how high level you are, how you are privy to governemnt stuff that would amaze us, etc. Amaze me and show me the unedited transcript of what he said.

Clearly this is a hot button topic. But we are not going to let this become a personal fight.

Too much rehtoric and generalities are being thrown around.

I anm also pro-choice and I detest the label pro-life for the same reasons Synnen cited.

From my experience most pro choicers are NOT pro abortion. They generally do not agree with having an abortion but do not feel they have the right to deny that choice to others. However, anti choice proponents think nothing of imposing their moralityand their opinions on others. To me that's the whole crux of the matter. It really matters little whether the choice is abortion or hair color. I know that will anger some people but that's my feeling and I'm sticking to it.

This country was founded on "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". So it amazes me that anyone can advocate denying someone simply because they have a different religious belief. And that's what it comes down to. It is a religious belief that life begins at conception. As J_9 pointed out, a fetus cannot survive until about 24 weeks.

Now, if anyone wants to continue a CIVIL discussion feel free. But keep it civil or it will be removed.

Not true.


Prove it then... you are either For something or you are against it... read my post above to Needkarma...

Voting present is like standing there watching the rape happen. No different. If you do nothing then you allow it to continue.. which means you supported the rapist and not the victim.

Its like Bill Clinton try and argue he didn't have sex with Monica Lewinsky AFTER the Blue dress incident. Or try the "It depends on what the definition of "is" is." argument.

Prove it then....you are either For something or you are against it....read my post above to Needkarma...

Voting present is like standing there watching the rape happen. No different. If you do nothing then you allow it to conitnue..which means you supported the rapist and not the victim.
The "present" vote in Illinois means "not enough information" and "may be unconstitutional" and "this needs more thought and discussion."

No, back up the bus. If you don't like abortion, you will do everything to avoid getting pregnant including abstaining from sex.

Which, when you are raped or being sexually abused by a relative, isn't exactly the top thing on your mind. "Gee, Uncle Albert, let's not have sex because I might get pregnant and we don't want to contribute to the number of women getting abortions because that's just EVIL"

Yeah. That.

Which, when you are raped or being sexually abused by a relative, isn't exactly the top thing on your mind. "Gee, Uncle Albert, let's not have sex because I might get pregnant and we don't want to contribute to the number of women getting abortions because that's just EVIL"

Yeah. That.
Consensual sex. I don't consider rape as "having sex."

Smoothy--if the child has a horrible abnormality or genetic disease and it's not FOUND until 20 weeks (that's when they looked for it during MY pregnancy)---what do you think the parents should do? Give birth to a child that will only live a year? Go through the rest of the pregnancy and give birth to a child that will never eat without a feeding tube or progress beyond the vegetable state? Could you REALLY condemn parents for aborting a child that would be in pain for all of its short life, and make them deal with all of the emotions that go with that?

I realize that not all abortions, including second trimester abortions, are for medical reasons. But some ARE. Would you consign the ones that ARE using it for valid medical reasons to hell just because some people abuse it?

Hello again, righty's:

I know you would require one of those lefty sluts to bear the child of her rapist... But, if your own daughter was raped and became pregnant, would you really further traumatize her by MAKING her bear the child of her rapist?

Nahhhh.. You wouldn't.

excon

Just throwing this out there.

FactCheck.org : Obama and 'Infanticide' (http://factcheck.org/2008/08/obama-and-infanticide/)

The "present" vote in Illinois means "not enough information" and "may be unconstitutional" and "this needs more thought and discussion."

Its appears to be the same as voting "no"

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




Voting in the Illinois Senate is done by members pushing one of three buttons. Unlike most states, the Illinois Senate allows members to vote yes, no, or present. It takes 30 affirmative votes to pass legislation during final action. The number of negative votes does not matter. Therefore the use of the present vote has the same effect as voting no.

Hello, again:

Personally, I'm not here to discuss Obama's views on abortion.. I'm interested in YOURS.

Tell me how you'd MAKE your daughter bear her rapists kid... What if it was your WIFE? You'd take the rapists child in?? You'd raise him? Nahhh, you wouldn't.. Who're you trying to kid?

excon

I think if we all practice our religion and family values at home then you should NOT be telling your neighbors how to practice their religion and family values. Since its legal in America to have an abortion in the first trimester, its between you, your god(?) and your doctor, so just butt out of my business.

See how easy that was? I can't help it if you are so backwards that you were never properly educated at HOME by informed and properly educated adults, that you have no clue about what to do about taking care of your own bodies.

If you depend on your church to tell you what to do, have at it. But I am not comfortable about another religion telling me what to do about about sex or anything else in my house.

I trust my wife on these matters, not Obama, or yo mama! And certainly not some self righteous politician. Or nosy self righteous citizen.

I'm pro-life and pro-choice. I'm for life and I like a woman's right to choose what to do with her body.

I think if we all practice our religion and family values at home then you should NOT be telling your neighbors how to practice their religion and family values. Since its legal in America to have an abortion in the first trimester, its between you, your god(?) and your doctor, so just butt out of my business.

I'm not butting in or dictating your beliefs and values. There is a tremendous and obvious difference between dictating and persuading. Dictating is mandating the church buy contraceptives against beliefs in clear violation of first amendment rights. Dictating is banning sodas and Happy Meals, perfectly legal items. Persuading is convincing you to give the child a chance.

See how easy that was?

I'm not butting in or dictating your beliefs and values. There is a tremendous and obvious difference between dictating and persuading. Dictating is mandating the church buy contraceptives against beliefs in clear violation of first amendment rights. Dictating is banning sodas and Happy Meals, perfectly legal items. Persuading is convincing you to give the child a chance.

See how easy that was?

YOU may not be doing that. But it is clear that the anti-abortion lobby would like to make any abortion illegal. By advocating laws that would remove the right to choose they are trying to impose their religious beliefs on people who believe differently.

If you want to offer reasons a fetus is a child or when it becomes a child. If you want to offer reasons you feel current laws do not "give a child a chance", feel free to do so. Just as I feel free to explain why I believe in giving the mother the choice. Lets try to keep this from personalities.

YOU may not be doing that. But it is clear that the anti-abortion lobby would like to make any abortion illegal. By advocating laws that would remove the right to choose they are trying to impose their religious beliefs on people who believe differently.

And that's different from what this administration has already done by executive fiat with the contraception mandate how? This is why all this outrage over the "anti-choice" crowd as you label them doesn't move me. The left LOVES restricting choice and dictating beliefs, and they don't even bother with legalities now, they just decree it so.


If you want to offer reasons a fetus is a child or when it becomes a child. If you want to offer reasons you feel current laws do not "give a child a chance", feel free to do so. Just as I feel free to explain why I believe in giving the mother the choice.

In other words, feel free to discuss on your terms?



Lets try to keep this from personalities.
Comment here would be pointless.

Dictating is mandating the church buy contraceptives against beliefs in clear violation of first amendment rights.
Once again the church is not forced to buy any contraceptives. In any case people still have the choice not to use them, I would assume that if all church attendees were like yourself then there would be no demand for contraceptives so nothing changes. If you ban abortions then you remove the choice and dictate what people can or cannot do.

But why should my tax money pay for someone's abortion,

if it is legal, let them write a check and pay for it. Let the babies daddy write the check. Why should I, who believe they are a sin and against moral values, have to have my tax money pay for someone abortion.

Thus my issue, it is a women's choice, I may not like it or agree, but that is the current law. So she should have to chose to pay for it.

I would like to chose to drive a Lincoln , but I can't get other people to pay for it, so I drive a Honda.

An abortion is not a "right" given under the Constitution, it is not a life saving medical procedure, it is as noted, a "choice" so with all choices in life, the person chosing it, should have to pay for it.

Once again the church is not forced to buy any contraceptives. In any case people still have the choice not to use them, I would assume that if all church attendees were like yourself then there would be no demand for contraceptives so nothing changes. If you ban abortions then you remove the choice and dictate what people can or cannot do.

You can't any further from the truth than your first sentence.

In other words, feel free to discuss on your terms?
.

The only "terms" to this discussion is the rules of this site that prevent personal attacks. As long as posts do not involve such they will be allowed. Nothing has been removed from this thread other than personal attacks.

You can't any further from the truth than your first sentence.

I'm not arguing with this, I'm just asking both of you to provide proof.

But why should my tax money pay for someones abortion,
I agree with you here. Keep it legal but it should be part of the individual's insurance plan. Unfortunately I understand people don't have that much choice in insurers at times.

Hello again,

Yeah, it's a double post... I assume you're NOT answering, because you DON'T have an answer... Yeah... We already KNEW that.

Personally, I'm not here to discuss Obama's views on abortion.. I'm interested in YOURS.

Tell me how you'd MAKE your daughter bear her rapists kid... What if it was your WIFE? You'd take the rapists child in?? You'd raise him? Nahhh, you wouldn't.. Who're you trying to kid?

excon
____________

I'm not arguing with this, I'm just asking both of you to provide proof.

The only his statement can be true is if the government redefines the church.

But why should my tax money pay for someones abortion,

if it is legal, let them write a check and pay for it. let the babies daddy write the check. why should I, who beleive they are a sin and and against moral values, have to have my tax money pay for someone abortion.

Thus my issue, it is a womens choice, I may not like it or agree, but that is the current law. so she should have to chose to pay for it.

I would like to chose to drive a Lincoln , but i can't get other people to pay for it, so I drive a Honda.

An abortion is not a "right" given under the Constitution, it is not a life saving medical procedure, it is as noted, a "choice" so with all choices in life, the person chosing it, should have to pay for it.


But it IS a life-saving procedure sometimes. Shouldn't it be covered for those women? Or does the life of the fetus trump their own right to life? And sometimes the choice is between raising your rapist's child and keeping your sanity--what kind of choice is THAT? And pretty please do not bring up adoption as a "better" choice than abortion. Adoption has it's own scars and battles, and being designated as "at least you didn't get an abortion" is one of the most common comments I got when I chose adoption. I honestly think I'd have fewer scars had I chose an abortion, but I knew that wasn't the right choice for me.

Honestly, MOST women aren't sitting there thinking "thank god I can get an abortion any time I want to, because that means I can just have as much sex as I want and not worry about it!" Every single woman I know that chose abortion thought long and hard about it, and still required counseling afterwards. It's not something that you just go "oops! I'm pregnant! Guess I'd better just pop on down and get an abortion!"---but that's the way it gets presented over and over by the anti-choice crowd. I know 5 women who have had abortions. For 2, it was a serious medical reason--the fetus was not going to live in either case. For 1, it was because she'd been raped by her uncle. For 1, it was that she was in an emotional state that she felt was impossible to sustain a pregnancy. And for the final 1, she already had 3 kids, could not afford another, and knew that when it came down to it she couldn't give her child that she carried to term to someone else. It literally came down to that her other children would suffer if she had another child.

4 of the 5 women were using birth control. The 5th--the one that was raped--was a virgin and hadn't had a need for birth control at that point in her life.

I really think that men have no concept of all of the changes that happen during pregnancy, and that while pregnancy can be truly wonderful and a blessing in every way---it can also be a horrible nightmare that a woman can't walk away from like a man can. You can't distance yourself, you can't ignore it, and you certainly can't just decide it's not yours and have nothing more to do with it. Pregnancy changes you in EVERY way. Some women simply are not up for that change, or cannot bear to go through an entire pregnancy for a child that will not (or is not already) live.

We had to have the discussion before my 20 week ultrasound on what we would do if the child had serious genetic issues or problems that would cause the child's life to be horrible. And this was with a longed-for and wanted pregnancy! I don't know what we would have done if we'd been told the child showed signs of a disease that would condemn the child to death (and us to so many medical bills we would have never had the money for another child) before the child even reached a year old. Worse, I read a story of a mother (and I cannot find it now) who chose to give birth even after the blood test and ultrasound findings, and she watched her child slowly die. Could you REALLY condemn someone to this? Both the child and the parents?

I understand not wanting to pay for abortion used as birth control--but there are so many OTHER reasons for abortions to happen, how can you deny financial help to parents who have to make such a horrible decision to begin with?

Sorry excon, but time to close this one.
This is a subject we will all never agree on so rather than descending further into well known territory lets salvage some sense of respectability...

I understand not wanting to pay for abortion used as birth control--but there are so many OTHER reasons for abortions to happen, how can you deny financial help to parents who have to make such a horrible decision to begin with?

I just had to respond to this with an AMEN!