Romney Picks Paul Ryan...

[elder999]

It is also funny that the same people here on the study who are willing to allow a death sentence performed on an unborn baby, for as little reason that it may have to be raised in an orphanage, are more than willing to spend tax dollars to keep the theater killer, or the norway killer alive, living in a prison environment. Priorities are way mixed up on that.

Again, for the record, I'm neither for nor against abortion-maybe I'm "pro-choice," but that's because I'll never have the choice, and wouldn't take it away from those who could. I find the idea morally repugnant, personally. Likewise, I'm neither for nor against the death penalty-I just don't buy into the typical justifications for it-I think that life in prison is more of a "punishment," personally, and don't think it's any deterrent against murder.

In short, your premise is more than a little out to lunch, and in no way negates the lack of science behind your viewpoint-which is okay, really-it's perfectly all right to base your position-which isn't that different from mine, morally-on an emotional/moral stance. The only real difference between us is that I refuse to force my moral viewpoint on others by force of law. You may be right: it may be that even an embryo is a "baby," but there's no more evidence of that now than there was in the stone age, or there was of whales' intelligence when my ancestors were whaling....their bad.

 

[billc]

I was mistaken, obama voted 4 times against the born alive infant protection act...the act where the baby, outside the womb, and breathing on it's own, is allowed to die without emergency medical treatment from the doctors in the clinic...and this is supposed to be a "nice" guy...

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/08/27/Barack-Obama-the-extremist-not-Akin

[h=2]Barack Obama has made a career out of posing as a moderate when, in fact, he is an extremist. And no issue makes that clearer than his agenda to kill the unborn.[/h]As Rich Lowry cogently points out, when the Anointed One was in the Illinois Legislature, he opposed the “Born-Alive Infants Protection Act” three times. That act required doctors to care for babies if they survived attempted abortions. When Obama was confronted with this information in 2008, his team tried to muddy the waters by saying the bill had been redundant – that it wasn’t needed to protect the newborns.
That was a lie. There were loopholes that allowed the suffering newborns to be left alone so they could die. Obama supporters said the bill threatened abortion rights in toto, which was also a lie; the version Obama nixed didn’t affect in utero babies.
Obama was against banning partial-birth abortion; then, after joining the Senate, denounced the Supreme Court for upholding the ban on those abortions. As a candidate for president in 2007, he told the Planned Parenthood Action Fund that his very first act as president would be signing the Freedom of Choice Act., which outstripped Roe v. Wade and virtually eviscerated all federal and state-level restrictions on abortion.
Believe it or not, it gets even worse. Not only does Obama favor killing the unborn; he even condones choosing to have an abortion because the baby is the wrong sex. Just this past May, the House of Representatives, with 20 Democrats joining Republicans on the issue, voted to ban sex-selecrtive abortion. When asked by Jake Tapper what the White House position was, a spokeswoman said: “The government should not intrude in medical decisions or private family matters in this way.” So if you need someone who can do the heavy lifting, make sure that girl in your uterus never sees the light of day.

 

[shesulsa]

Sorry, no one has ever said these women are on their own. Some of us want private groups to do more, and they often do, when the government doesn't put them out of business, as in the catholic church ending adoption services because of government mandates on who they can arrange adoptions for. Their are lots of religious groups who help unwed mothers and their children, so don't try to say we don't want these women to get help.

Have you ever even MET a woman who took precautions against pregnancy, who is poor, who is ... say ... abused, whose family rejects her, who has no one to turn to and nowhere to go?

Have you ever ONCE applied for government assistance?

Some people think it's as simple as showing up with a dirty smile and a hand outstretched to the local DSHS office and they get money piled upon them.

Just because these agencies and services exist doesn't mean people get them.

I tried to leave my abusive spouse to get into a woman's shelter. All the shelters from Sacramento south to the border had a TWO YEAR WAITING LIST. HUD had a THREE year waiting list. Know how long it took me to get my autistic son into the system? FIFTEEN YEARS.

Talk to me with a qualified opinion when 1. you can get pregnant and are in these dire circumstances, 2. have actually *tried and tried and tried* to get help and 3. have been denied.

Because THAT is the reality these women face. I've seen it, I've lived it. Pontificate on your soap box all you want - don't mean a thing unless you've been there.

 

[crushing]

Apparently the abolitionist party skipped over rainbow and went to fetus as the new Black.

 

[ballen0351]

I find it fascinating that religious figureheads and moral wannabees talk about sex and the resultant consequences as though we are all to live our lives as monks or priests ... perhaps THAT'S the kind of birth control you're looking for ... homosexual rape of minors rarely results in unwanted babies.

I lived my life FAR from a monk when I was in the military and when I first became a police officer. For some reason woman seem to really like young guys in unforms. Even then I was able not get anyone pregnant. Its really not that hard.

The logical, sensible mind cannot deny that sex is an innate, biological drive that can rarely be abated to the order of nil even at great cost to children. So I would ask what is worse? Ending the life of an as-yet not fully formed human being before social injustice, rape, abuse and neglect potentially take its toll or murdering the innocence of an already-living young person?

I dont understand what your asking here
But I digress.

I would like a show of hands, please, of each and every user here posting who seeks to end abortion who has in the past or currently does:

1. mentor a "little brother/sister"
2. fosters displaced children
3. adopted an unwanted child
4. taken in and raised a displaced older child
5. even *visited* a children's group home in your lifetime

#1 Yes I have been a mentor for over 10 years thru a program that pairs Police officers with troubled youth. Oh and my wife is a volunteer here http://www.casaforchildren.org/site/c.mtJSJ7MPIsE/b.5301295/k.BE9A/Home.htm

#2 Does my sisters kid count we have had her for a little over a year
#3 my wife wants to we hhave discussed it. We may at some point once are youngest gets into school
#4 again does my sisters kid count
#5 Yes I have Ive also visited childrens prisions as well

How about you?

 

[ballen0351]

Sometimes.

I have an adopted sister. My first wife was adopted. Rita-that's the wife-was adopted.

They all have-or had-their own scars and traumas from that. It doesn't necessarily "work." And it's kind of funny-all these "smaller government" people: don't have an abortion, but if you have that baby, you and the baby are on your own.

Makes me wanna :barf:

So do you thnk they would rather be alive with the scars or have never existed at all and had been aborted?

 

[ballen0351]

Have you ever even MET a woman who took precautions against pregnancy, who is poor, who is ... say ... abused, whose family rejects her, who has no one to turn to and nowhere to go?

Sure have meet them all the time and you know what there is always a way. But if you were in such a bad place why are you having sex to begin with?
Oh I forgot I cant expect people to be RESPONSIBLE were not that far along in our human development

Have you ever ONCE applied for government assistance?

Never have never will. My sisters used enough for my whole family

Some people think it's as simple as showing up with a dirty smile and a hand outstretched to the local DSHS office and they get money piled upon them.

Thats about right. not only do they pay my sisters medical care, they pay for her kids day care, they pay her morgage, even gave her a $30k grant to furnish her house

Just because these agencies and services exist doesn't mean people get them.

If you claim your poor enough you will seen it. My sister brags about cutting her hours and taking a low pay check in and getting her portion of her morgage payment reduced

I tried to leave my abusive spouse to get into a woman's shelter. All the shelters from Sacramento south to the border had a TWO YEAR WAITING LIST. HUD had a THREE year waiting list. Know how long it took me to get my autistic son into the system? FIFTEEN YEARS.

Then you need to move. I get woman in to shelters all the time here no waiting.
And
When my youngest was digansed with aspergers syndrome we had to fight to keep my son out of the system, The state tried for months to get us to put him in a program. I had to send multiple letter requesting they stop calling me and coming to my house.

Talk to me with a qualified opinion when 1. you can get pregnant and are in these dire circumstances, 2. have actually *tried and tried and tried* to get help and 3. have been denied.

Because THAT is the reality these women face. I've seen it, I've lived it. Pontificate on your soap box all you want - don't mean a thing unless you've been there.

Thats what a small % of these woman face most are just, wait what did Obama say about his daughter "dont want to be burdend with a baby"

 

[elder999]

So do you thnk they would rather be alive with the scars or have never existed at all and had been aborted?

An existential irrelevance:better to ask a fetus, but you can't.In both cases, though, what they'd "rather" doesn't matter.

 

[ballen0351]

An existential irrelevance:better to ask a fetus, but you can't.In both cases, though, what they'd "rather" doesn't matter.

thats right you cant ask the baby so Id rather error on the side of caution and not kill them

 

[Tgace]

Lots of mental gymnastics and rationalization being performed to ignore the stench of death and killing in this thread here.



Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

 

[Tgace]

Imo the Democrats stand to come out on the same side of history as the confederacy did during the Civil War. The Souths stated cause was States rights...and that the federal gvt was exceeding their Constitutional authority. But the real reason was that the South didn't like the feds trying to limit slavery. It was really a property issue you know...because slaves weren't really people in their minds.

This philosophical stance that the abortion fight is really about a woman's right to do what she wants with "her body" is being pursued with noses plugged over the real issue..the value of human life in the womb...but that's alright because they are "part of the woman's body".

When a woman appendix pops out and starts walking around on its own ill buy into that "easy out".

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

 

[Steve]

Imo the Democrats stand to come out on the same side of history as the confederacy did during the Civil War. The Souths stated cause was States rights...and that the federal gvt was exceeding their Constitutional authority. But the real reason was that the South didn't like the feds trying to limit slavery. It was really a property issue you know...because slaves weren't really people in their minds.

This philosophical stance that the abortion fight is really about a woman's right to do what she wants with "her body" is being pursued with noses plugged over the real issue..the value of human life in the womb...but that's alright because they are "part of the woman's body".

When a woman appendix pops out and starts walking around on its own ill buy into that "easy out".

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

I think there's a larger issue on the table here. That your position, tgace (And ballen and billcihak) is absolutely okay for you to have. But, as conservatives, don't you think that the government should butt out? You should 100% do what you think is right. AND you should respect other peoples' freedom to choose their own path. You have every right to disapprove.

Less government means exactly that. And in this case, the constitution is on the side of pro-choice. That's the function that the Supreme Court serves... interpreting the constitutionality of legislation and establishing constitutional precedent.

 

[granfire]

Lots of mental gymnastics and rationalization being performed to ignore the stench of death and killing in this thread here.



Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

Get over it.
Everything dies. Eventually.
In the grand scheme of things now or 80 years from now does not make a significant difference.


now to the mental gymnastics:
There should be a bit more from the side of those guys who don't have a vagina and therefore won't ever be able to intelligently discuss the effects of pregnancy on a women, let alone of one who was violated and will have to relive that trauma for the next 9 month.

A little less mental gymnastics please from the guys who think that 'legitimate rape' does not result in pregnancy. The conclusion to draw from such statements would be that women who got knocked up could not have possibly been raped.

And of course there are those who think all life is worth protecting...of course all life except that of the woman carrying the child...or the child once it pops out of the womb.
ballen himself estimated that a good 80% of rapes go unreported. That means the numbers of resulting pregnancies are much higher than the statistics show....(damn, I am glad he does not work rape cases...)

And why do people have sex when they can't afford to raise a child?

i think there have been many books written about that.
And I don't think I need to tell a LEO in the drug enforcement segment how this works:
it's a currency. And it has been a currency for women since antiquity and will remain one as long as men rule society.

many people mistake sex for love and there are plenty of people who pray on the weak. yes, be poor and feel unloved, I suppose you deserve it.

Sex is primal. The Good Lord gave us the equipment and the instinctive knowledge how to use it.


As to when life begins, that, too is up for debate.
it was at one time not uncommon to take infants into the woods. They had not been inducted into the circle of the living by food intake...

If it can't survive outside the womb, it is not alive.


And seriously, some of the suggestions that have been made in regards of women and their needs is beyond disgusting.

 

[ballen0351]

Get over it.
Everything dies. Eventually.
In the grand scheme of things now or 80 years from now does not make a significant difference.

So why stop at abortions? If I loose my job and now can't afford my four kids is it OK for me to post birth abort 2 of them? They will die anyway according to you either tomorrow or 80 years from now so what's the big deal right?

now to the mental gymnastics:
There should be a bit more from the side of those guys who don't have a vagina and therefore won't ever be able to intelligently discuss the effects of pregnancy on a women, let alone of one who was violated and will have to relive that trauma for the next 9 month.

So the baby has to die because your trauma for 9 months as to say had you not gotten pregnant you wouldn't be still in trauma over the rape either way.

A little less mental gymnastics please from the guys who think that 'legitimate rape' does not result in pregnancy. The conclusion to draw from such statements would be that women who got knocked up could not have possibly been raped.

And of course there are those who think all life is worth protecting...of course all life except that of the woman carrying the child...or the child once it pops out of the womb.
ballen himself estimated that a good 80% of rapes go unreported. That means the numbers of resulting pregnancies are much higher than the statistics show....(damn, I am glad he does not work rape cases...)

That's not what the man said he said rarely results in pregnancies which is true.
Oh and by the way I've worked about 14 rapes as a detective before I went to narcotics and solved them ALL I've actually met with talked to and still keep in touch with rape victims I've spoken at rape survivors support groups and have taught self defense classes to rape survivors so don't act like your the authority on rapes because you don't have a penis. I've been to numerous sexual assault investigation classes and its actually the main reason I asked to go to narcotics because my last rape case was a 6 year old female raped by two brothers 21 and 24 year old and destroyed her body and almost killed her. So don't tell me I don't know about it I'm veryfamiliar with the crime and its aftermath long after the media outrage has.moved on. Not to mention my own sexual abuse I received as a boy by a babysitters teenage son.

And why do people have sex when they can't afford to raise a child?

i think there have been many books written about that.

Why do they do it? Easy because they know there is nothing to loose if they get pregnant a short trip to planned parenthood and poof all gone.

And I don't think I need to tell a LEO in the drug enforcement segment how this works:
it's a currency. And it has been a currency for women since antiquity and will remain one as long as men rule society.

many people mistake sex for love and there are plenty of people who pray on the weak. yes, be poor and feel unloved, I suppose you deserve it.

Sex is primal. The Good Lord gave us the equipment and the instinctive knowledge how to use it.

True the lord did give us the parts he also gave us morals but some seem to be lacking in that department.

As to when life begins, that, too is up for debate.
it was at one time not uncommon to take infants into the woods. They had not been inducted into the circle of the living by food intake...

If it can't survive outside the womb, it is not alive.

So I'll remember that next time someone is charged with murder for stabbing a preganat woman in the belly to kill the baby and the mom survives. Sorry mom it wasn't alive anyway get over it. You know the leading cause of death for pregnant woman is murder

And seriously, some of the suggestions that have been made in regards of women and their needs is beyond disgusting.

What's more disgusting then sucking a living human out of a woman's body because she wants to not be burden with a baby

 

[ballen0351]

I think there's a larger issue on the table here. That your position, tgace (And ballen and billcihak) is absolutely okay for you to have. But, as conservatives, don't you think that the government should butt out? You should 100% do what you think is right. AND you should respect other peoples' freedom to choose their own path. You have every right to disapprove.

Less government means exactly that. And in this case, the constitution is on the side of pro-choice. That's the function that the Supreme Court serves... interpreting the constitutionality of legislation and establishing constitutional precedent.

Again you either don't see what I wrote or choose to ignore it. Less govt does not mean no govt. Govt should be there to protect innocent lives regardless of age. So I'm all for laws against murder rape kidnapping abortion stealing ect.

 

[Tgace]

Get over it.
Everything dies. Eventually.
In the grand scheme of things now or 80 years from now does not make a significant difference.

Wow.

Id hate to Godwin this thread so soon, but....wow.


Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

 

[granfire]

I am glad you read the whole post </sarcasm>

This isn't about the pro life thing, it's about control
Just like rape isn't about sex but power.

The doctrine stems from patriarchal principles: he owns the woman. He owns the power to rape her and to force her to have his children.

Man has no control over the human body. And lets face it, it's a thorn in their side.

Women get second rate health care not only because their body chemistry fluctuates so much during their lifetime and even from month to month. It is so much cheaper to research it on men.

And always, things that help men are on the market in no time...
Things that are good for women have to be fought over and the activists get called sluts.

Wyoming almost was not granted statehood because they refused to revoke a woman's right to vote.

Everybody knows the one person milking the system...
Always causing callous remarks toward others who depend on it for survival.
Yes, there is an abundance of abusers.
And there is an abundance of people who need it, who get their benefits cut every turn.

There are not enough loving homes for all the unwanted babies.

If they were white and drug free...maybe....
But not the black ones, or the crack babies...


But yeah, lets force women to carry children to term that they don't want.
For whatever reason...
I mean, it can't be rape when they get pregnant, right...
medical conditions?
She should have kept her legs closed...


This is what causes so many unwanted pregnancies:
[yt]zXCDv0IorMQ[/yt]

Little girls being objectified.

:barf:


Seriously, grow a uterus and carry a child, then we talk again.

You want less government?
Start by cutting the involvement where it doesn't belong!

 

[ballen0351]

I am glad you read the whole post </sarcasm>

This isn't about the pro life thing, it's about control
Just like rape isn't about sex but power.

The doctrine stems from patriarchal principles: he owns the woman. He owns the power to rape her and to force her to have his children.

Man has no control over the human body. And lets face it, it's a thorn in their side.

Women get second rate health care not only because their body chemistry fluctuates so much during their lifetime and even from month to month. It is so much cheaper to research it on men.

And always, things that help men are on the market in no time...
Things that are good for women have to be fought over and the activists get called sluts.

Wyoming almost was not granted statehood because they refused to revoke a woman's right to vote.

Everybody knows the one person milking the system...
Always causing callous remarks toward others who depend on it for survival.
Yes, there is an abundance of abusers.
And there is an abundance of people who need it, who get their benefits cut every turn.

There are not enough loving homes for all the unwanted babies.

If they were white and drug free...maybe....
But not the black ones, or the crack babies...


But yeah, lets force women to carry children to term that they don't want.
For whatever reason...
I mean, it can't be rape when they get pregnant, right...
medical conditions?
She should have kept her legs closed...


This is what causes so many unwanted pregnancies:
[yt]zXCDv0IorMQ[/yt]

Little girls being objectified.

:barf:


Seriously, grow a uterus and carry a child, then we talk again.

You want less government?
Start by cutting the involvement where it doesn't belong!

So when you have lost the argument you resort to grow a uterus huh you can't justify killing an innocent baby so you change the argument to woman's health care and how its not as good as men's well my doc and my wife's doctor are the same person and she's a great doctor so if your not happy with your services then find a better doctor.

 

[Steve]

Again you either don't see what I wrote or choose to ignore it. Less govt does not mean no govt. Govt should be there to protect innocent lives regardless of age. So I'm all for laws against murder rape kidnapping abortion stealing ect.

Who's talking about no government? i'm with you for laws against murder, rape, kidnapping and such. I personally disagree with you on when a fetus becomes a "baby," and I don't believe that abortion is murder.

More to the point, though, the supreme court agrees with me, and their entire job is to determine the constitutionality of our laws. So, if you believe in the foundation of constitutionality, you're on the wrong side of this one.

 

[ballen0351]

Who's talking about no government? i'm with you for laws against murder, rape, kidnapping and such. I personally disagree with you on when a fetus becomes a "baby," and I don't believe that abortion is murder.

More to the point, though, the supreme court agrees with me, and their entire job is to determine the constitutionality of our laws. So, if you believe in the foundation of constitutionality, you're on the wrong side of this one.

The courts also believed at one time segregation was OK and so was putting the Japanese Americans into camps so they have been wrong before.