champu 1
Recommended Posts
QuoteIs it then also ok for a woman to get the abortion against the "partner's" consent.
The final choice is the womans' and hers alone - it's her body.
(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome
rushmc 18
Quote>I pay attention sir, I just pointed out the extrem of your example.
No, you didn't. You made something up, and are now backpedaling furiously to try to avoid admitting that you were wrong. Your next post will be "come on baby, do the twist" and/or "does your neck get sore?"
To return to the discussion you tried valiantly to derail - about 2% of the people who get late-term abortions do so for health reasons. So at best he may have saved 1200 women - which is far more than I've saved. Does it make him a hero? No. Does it make him a good doctor? Yes, by most measures.
I back pedaling??
I guess if pointing out how use extrems to try and solidify your poisition then I will admit it
Yyyaaaaaaa, right
I glad he saved 60,000 mother however, even if it means the death of 60,000 babies
By the way, how do you square this one?
In his state it is legal for him to do abortions, so, to you, he is a hero and a good Dr. But, if the womens lover kills her and the yet unborn baby, he is charged with a double murder? Can you help here?
And again, I dont deny your 2% number, it is irelavant to the discussion. You needed to bring it in to make some sort of point. Ok, I concede that point. Care to speak to the rest? You know, the other 98%
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
tkhayes 126
rushmc, the staunch defender of the US constitution objects to a 'constitutional right' granted in the SUPREME COURT of this great country? wow, I must be still asleep or something.
but it is a free country and anyone is entitled to their wrong opinion.
1973, the decision was made by the top court in the country. the decision has stood the test of time, more than 30 years. Oh yes, but that was based on the 14th Amendment - obviously the Constitution was/is flawed. Maybe we should have stopped making amendments right after the 2nd one. It's hard to beat 'perfect' when it comes to a Constitution (sarcasm)
late term abortions are nasty, but sometimes they are medically necessary. i.e. sometimes people do not find out that the baby's organs are outside of the body until 6-7 months.
and many of the people do not find that out until it is 'too late' because they do not get decent (if any) pre-natal care. But that is because the health care system is BROKEN. But that's right, these are just poor people who "if-they-just-got-off-their-asses-and-got-a-job' they could afford that health care.
but now I am really splitting hairs. And yes, occasionally, late term abortion is used as birth control, so I guess we should ban ALL ABORTIONS because someone did one that might not have been 'medically necessary'.
that would be like banning all GUNS because some whack-job got ahold of one and shot up a school......
30,000 children starve to death in the world every day. 400,000+ people die in the USA because of smoking each year, but no one is shooting tobacco executives.
1.3 million abortions are done each year and a lot of them are medically necessary. either way, that is 1.3 million people (each year) who obviously feel that they have the right to get one. Times 30 years for Roe v Wade, that is some 39 millions Americans that have had an abortion since then (about). A sizable chunk of the population.
and if you do not like it - then you can raise millions of dollars, and put together a grass-root movement and challenge & CHANGE the law - but yes that has been tried too. And we still won that right.
At least something works right in this country.
"every sperm is sacred, every sperm is great. If a sperm gets wasted, God gets quite irate...."
but it is a free country and anyone is entitled to their wrong opinion.
1973, the decision was made by the top court in the country. the decision has stood the test of time, more than 30 years. Oh yes, but that was based on the 14th Amendment - obviously the Constitution was/is flawed. Maybe we should have stopped making amendments right after the 2nd one. It's hard to beat 'perfect' when it comes to a Constitution (sarcasm)
late term abortions are nasty, but sometimes they are medically necessary. i.e. sometimes people do not find out that the baby's organs are outside of the body until 6-7 months.
and many of the people do not find that out until it is 'too late' because they do not get decent (if any) pre-natal care. But that is because the health care system is BROKEN. But that's right, these are just poor people who "if-they-just-got-off-their-asses-and-got-a-job' they could afford that health care.
but now I am really splitting hairs. And yes, occasionally, late term abortion is used as birth control, so I guess we should ban ALL ABORTIONS because someone did one that might not have been 'medically necessary'.
that would be like banning all GUNS because some whack-job got ahold of one and shot up a school......
30,000 children starve to death in the world every day. 400,000+ people die in the USA because of smoking each year, but no one is shooting tobacco executives.
1.3 million abortions are done each year and a lot of them are medically necessary. either way, that is 1.3 million people (each year) who obviously feel that they have the right to get one. Times 30 years for Roe v Wade, that is some 39 millions Americans that have had an abortion since then (about). A sizable chunk of the population.
and if you do not like it - then you can raise millions of dollars, and put together a grass-root movement and challenge & CHANGE the law - but yes that has been tried too. And we still won that right.
At least something works right in this country.
"every sperm is sacred, every sperm is great. If a sperm gets wasted, God gets quite irate...."
rushmc 18
Quoterushmc, the staunch defender of the US constitution objects to a 'constitutional right' granted in the SUPREME COURT of this great country? wow, I must be still asleep or something.
but it is a free country and anyone is entitled to their wrong opinion.
1973, the decision was made by the top court in the country. the decision has stood the test of time, more than 30 years. Oh yes, but that was based on the 14th Amendment - obviously the Constitution was/is flawed. Maybe we should have stopped making amendments right after the 2nd one. It's hard to beat 'perfect' when it comes to a Constitution (sarcasm)
late term abortions are nasty, but sometimes they are medically necessary. i.e. sometimes people do not find out that the baby's organs are outside of the body until 6-7 months.
and many of the people do not find that out until it is 'too late' because they do not get decent (if any) pre-natal care. But that is because the health care system is BROKEN. But that's right, these are just poor people who "if-they-just-got-off-their-asses-and-got-a-job' they could afford that health care.
but now I am really splitting hairs. And yes, occasionally, late term abortion is used as birth control, so I guess we should ban ALL ABORTIONS because someone did one that might not have been 'medically necessary'.
that would be like banning all GUNS because some whack-job got ahold of one and shot up a school......
30,000 children starve to death in the world every day. 400,000+ people die in the USA because of smoking each year, but no one is shooting tobacco executives.
1.3 million abortions are done each year and a lot of them are medically necessary. either way, that is 1.3 million people (each year) who obviously feel that they have the right to get one. Times 30 years for Roe v Wade, that is some 39 millions Americans that have had an abortion since then (about). A sizable chunk of the population.
and if you do not like it - then you can raise millions of dollars, and put together a grass-root movement and challenge & CHANGE the law - but yes that has been tried too. And we still won that right.
At least something works right in this country.
"every sperm is sacred, every sperm is great. If a sperm gets wasted, God gets quite irate...."
Your post here is a great example of why I usually stay away from this topic, Nutty emotionalism.
Thanks
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
Butters 0
Quote1973, the decision was made by the top court in the country. the decision has stood the test of time, more than 30 years. Oh yes, but that was based on the 14th Amendment - obviously the Constitution was/is flawed. Maybe we should have stopped making amendments right after the 2nd one. It's hard to beat 'perfect' when it comes to a Constitution (sarcasm)
It wasn't based on the Fourteenth Amendment. It was based on the Supreme Court's decision that the fetus should not be defined as a legal person and thus was not entitled to the rights given to a legal person by the Fourteenth Amendment. Much in the same way that blacks and women weren't considered legal people at one point in time ...
"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
Ion01 1
QuoteThe pro-life protests can't get any more hypocritical than that.
So one guy goes extreme and kills somebody.....that makes every pro-life protester a hypocrit?
SkyDekker 1,123
QuoteI guess by billvon logic we should consider Tiller a hero. By that I mean he (Tiller) admited in an inteview that he aborted at least 60,000 babies. Holy son of bitch I has no idea he has saved so many women from certin death had they carried those babies (almost)to full term.
How about the fetusses he spared a horrific, painful death after they were born? He provided a fully legal service. I am sure it was misused by some, but to paint him as some horrific killer is completely missing the picture and turns this into a purely emotional argument, which is senseless.
In a sense he is a hero. He refused to back down from what he believed in, even though that put his life in danger. he had been shot before in both arms, but didn't let that deter him. I have respect for somebody who continues on standing tall for his legal belief.
he wanted to be a dermatologist early on in his career, but ended up taking over his father's practice. he then found out that his father had bene performing abortions illegally. Why was his father doing that? because he had watched a patient of his die after he refused to perform an abortion on her.
It is a sad day when an extremist takes the life of a law abiding citizen of the United States, takes away a husband, father and grandfather and people cannot bring themselves to show some sympathy and respect.
I believe Dr Tiller to be a hero. Not for his actions as a doctor, but for his actions as a person.
rushmc 18
QuoteQuoteI guess by billvon logic we should consider Tiller a hero. By that I mean he (Tiller) admited in an inteview that he aborted at least 60,000 babies. Holy son of bitch I has no idea he has saved so many women from certin death had they carried those babies (almost)to full term.
How about the fetusses he spared a horrific, painful death after they were born? He provided a fully legal service. I am sure it was misused by some, but to paint him as some horrific killer is completely missing the picture and turns this into a purely emotional argument, which is senseless.
In a sense he is a hero.Hmm, like Bush? He refused to back down from what he believed in,Hmm, like Bush? even though that put his life in danger. he had been shot before in both arms, but didn't let that deter him. I have respect for somebody who continues on standing tall for his legal belief.
he wanted to be a dermatologist early on in his career, but ended up taking over his father's practice. he then found out that his father had bene performing abortions illegally. Why was his father doing that? because he had watched a patient of his die after he refused to perform an abortion on her.
It is a sad day when an extremist takes the life of a law abiding citizen of the United States, takes away a husband, father and grandfather and people cannot bring themselves to show some sympathy and respect.
I believe Dr Tiller to be a hero. Not for his actions as a doctor, but for his actions as a person.
You can have your heros. I dont think I will let you pick mine.
All any of you can do is distort my position cause you cant answer to what the late term procedure really is. (and that is ALL I have been posting to here if any of you can remember past your emotional tirades)
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
SkyDekker 1,123
Really Tiller and Bush?
For the record, I do see a difference, but one you wont agree with I am sure.
Tiller stood up for what he believed in. Bush stood up for what he was told to believe in.
For the record, I do see a difference, but one you wont agree with I am sure.
Tiller stood up for what he believed in. Bush stood up for what he was told to believe in.
Butters 0
QuoteTiller stood up for what he believed in. Bush stood up for what he was told to believe in.
Are you sure?
Quotehe wanted to be a dermatologist early on in his career, but ended up taking over his father's practice. he then found out that his father had bene performing abortions illegally. Why was his father doing that? because he had watched a patient of his die after he refused to perform an abortion on her.
"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
SkyDekker 1,123
QuoteAre you sure?
He took over his father's practice after his father died, so what you are insinuating is a little silly.
Butters 0
QuoteQuoteAre you sure?
He took over his father's practice after his father died, so what you are insinuating is a little silly.
I think it's a little silly that two men follow in their father's footsteps and you declare one is doing it because of what he believes and the other is doing it because of what he's told to believe ... when you don't know either of the men.
"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
billvon 2,400
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>I glad he saved 60,000 mother however . . . .
Try a third time! You may eventually read what I wrote.
>In his state it is legal for him to do abortions, so, to you, he is a hero and a
>good Dr. But, if the womens lover kills her and the yet unborn baby, he is charged
>with a double murder?
If you have bone cancer and you want to remove your arm to give you a better chance at survival, and a doctor amputates it, he's a hero to you. If you are walking home and a guy hacks off your arm with a machete, he's a criminal.
If you can understand the difference between those two things, you may answer your own question.
>Care to speak to the rest? You know, the other 98%
The other 98% are (in my opinion) very bad decisions by the mother. I am glad they live in a free country where they can make such decisions, but I strongly disagree with their choice.
Try a third time! You may eventually read what I wrote.
>In his state it is legal for him to do abortions, so, to you, he is a hero and a
>good Dr. But, if the womens lover kills her and the yet unborn baby, he is charged
>with a double murder?
If you have bone cancer and you want to remove your arm to give you a better chance at survival, and a doctor amputates it, he's a hero to you. If you are walking home and a guy hacks off your arm with a machete, he's a criminal.
If you can understand the difference between those two things, you may answer your own question.
>Care to speak to the rest? You know, the other 98%
The other 98% are (in my opinion) very bad decisions by the mother. I am glad they live in a free country where they can make such decisions, but I strongly disagree with their choice.
lewmonst 0
QuoteQuoteThe pro-life protests can't get any more hypocritical than that.
So one guy goes extreme and kills somebody.....that makes every pro-life protester a hypocrit?
I did not say "every". I was only referring to this one act by one person.
http://www.exitshot.com
SkyDekker 1,123
Must be something about their subsequent actions.....
Ion01 1
How sick is that! To call a man who has killed so many children, no matter what stage they are in, as a hero!
"He refused to back down from what he believed in, even though that put his life in danger. he had been shot before in both arms, but didn't let that deter him. I have respect for somebody who continues on standing tall for his legal belief. "
Well, that makes men like Hilter, Saddam, Mussolini! Everything they did was legal in thier country! Does that make it okay or right?
And how is he sparing children from a horrible death after they are born? If I come kill you in your sleep am I a hero for sparing you a horrible death later in life?
to kill is defined as "to deprive of life". Thats what he did! he deprived 60,000 people of life! What a great compasionate man?
A hero? Get real!
"He refused to back down from what he believed in, even though that put his life in danger. he had been shot before in both arms, but didn't let that deter him. I have respect for somebody who continues on standing tall for his legal belief. "
Well, that makes men like Hilter, Saddam, Mussolini! Everything they did was legal in thier country! Does that make it okay or right?
And how is he sparing children from a horrible death after they are born? If I come kill you in your sleep am I a hero for sparing you a horrible death later in life?
to kill is defined as "to deprive of life". Thats what he did! he deprived 60,000 people of life! What a great compasionate man?
A hero? Get real!
rushmc 18
Quote>I glad he saved 60,000 mother however . . . .
Try a third time! You may eventually read what I wrote.
>In his state it is legal for him to do abortions, so, to you, he is a hero and a
>good Dr. But, if the womens lover kills her and the yet unborn baby, he is charged
>with a double murder?
If you have bone cancer and you want to remove your arm to give you a better chance at survival, and a doctor amputates it, he's a hero to you. If you are walking home and a guy hacks off your arm with a machete, he's a criminal.
If you can understand the difference between those two things, you may answer your own question.
>Care to speak to the rest? You know, the other 98%
The other 98% are (in my opinion) very bad decisions by the mother. I am glad they live in a free country where they can make such decisions, but I strongly disagree with their choice.
I did not mis-read what you wrote. I am just using your style of making a reply.
As for the last sentence, I agree with most of it.
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
TomAiello 25
Quoterushmc, the staunch defender of the US constitution objects to a 'constitutional right' granted in the SUPREME COURT of this great country?...1973, the decision was made by the top court in the country.
I'm pro choice. That's actually one of the reasons I think Roe is bad law. I believe that the right to be free of government intrusion in reproductive decisions could quite easily be found in the 9th Amendment. I am disappointed that the court went through the mental gymnastics they did to create a weaker right founded in the 1st and 14th amendments. "Privacy" is not an afterthought found in the "penumbra" of other, more important rights.
The right to be let alone is, to misquote some dead white guy, the right most prized by civilized man. To find it only as an afterthought created by other rights is, in my opinion, both a travesty and an error.
billvon 2,400
>To call a man who has killed so many children, no matter what stage they are in, as a hero!
Not a hero, just an innocent doctor killed for doing his job.
>I have respect for somebody who continues on standing tall for his legal belief.
I also respect people who put their life on the line to do what they think is right.
>And how is he sparing children from a horrible death after they are born?
In thanatophoric dysplasia, a child is born without the ability to breathe. They slowly suffocate over a few hours. The "lucky" ones live a few years on ventilators. By killing them before they are born, they are saved from a far more horrible death.
>Well, that makes men like Hilter, Saddam, Mussolini!
And George Washington, and Paul Revere, and Martin Luther King, and Nelson Mandela, and Neil Armstrong.
Not a hero, just an innocent doctor killed for doing his job.
>I have respect for somebody who continues on standing tall for his legal belief.
I also respect people who put their life on the line to do what they think is right.
>And how is he sparing children from a horrible death after they are born?
In thanatophoric dysplasia, a child is born without the ability to breathe. They slowly suffocate over a few hours. The "lucky" ones live a few years on ventilators. By killing them before they are born, they are saved from a far more horrible death.
>Well, that makes men like Hilter, Saddam, Mussolini!
And George Washington, and Paul Revere, and Martin Luther King, and Nelson Mandela, and Neil Armstrong.
Quote
In a sense he is a hero.Hmm, like Bush? He refused to back down from what he believed in,Hmm, like Bush? even though that put his life in danger. he had been shot before in both arms, but didn't let that deter him. I have respect for somebody who continues on standing tall for his legal belief.
I can't think of any Bush actions that would be categorized as heroic, by any definition. He didn't put himself in harms way - he didn't even show for the state national guard.
Standing resolute in ones convictions against political opposition has been labeled courageous at times, but I don't believe I can point to any of those that were made either. Going to war against Iraq was very popular politically in 2003, and up until the 2006 midterm elections which hurt the GOP, not Bush.
As you'll find in most if not all abortion debates, there are varying values of "people".
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites