Dr Guy Dr Guy

Wrong President?

▼

Wrong President?

I Think Hillary is losing her trolley!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,145342,00.html
from JoeUser Forums

Seems Hillary Clinton is blaming Bush for the rise in Abortions.  Now does not that sound strange in light of the numerous affairs that Bill has had?

But I guess cigars are non-impregnating!

If there was ever a reason to support abortion, it was in the case of Mrs. Rodham, about 55 years ago!

politics
10,327 views 44 replies
Reply #26 from PolMach Forums Top
Sorry, but that's just not funny--and don't tell me I don't have a sense of humor. I'm just plain old tired of attacking people instead of issues. You can hate what Hillary says all you'd like, but wishing a retroactive abortion on her is just plain cruel.


Unlike NARAL, I dont beleive in post partum abortions. Sorry, you have the wrong guy.
Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top

I didn't say post-partum (which we are going to agree to disagree on anyway--you should actually read up on NARALs website before you put words in their mouth--we've actually had this conversation before), I said, "retroactive." Which is exactly what you implied in your comment.

Sorry, my point still stands--it wasn't funny.


Sorry, i dont buy into platitudes,  I go for actions.  They stood against Ca when they wanted to do a double murder charge against Scott Peterson.  Even tho, at the time, and even today, it is not known if his son was born before or after the act.


and saying I wish someone had never been born may not be funny if you think she is the smartest woman on this planet, but that is not mean, and I had no hahas after it, so it was not funny.  Simply put, there are many people that, had they not been born (Stalin, Jack the Ripper, Son Of Sam), the world would have been better off for.


My Opinion?  We would be better off if she had not been born.

Galactic Civilizations III
Reply #28 from JoeUser Forums Top
Post partum abortions????!!!!

That's pretty funny.
Reply #29 from JoeUser Forums Top
Let's just clarify here--being pro-choice does not mean being pro-abortion. Simply because I think that the government does not have jurisdiction over my body does not mean that I am going to run out and have abortions willy-nilly.


One doesn't have to want more abortions, but wanting less abortions, even though nothing's wrong with abortions? Why?

The comments seem to suggest that people think that the majority of women having abortions are teenagers unable to contain their hormones. That is not true. Since the early 1990s more than forty percent of abortions are performed on women over the age of 25.


Either way, it's less unwanted pregnancies, and isn't that what we all want?
Reply #30 from PolMach Forums Top
Let's just clarify here--being pro-choice does not mean being pro-abortion.


Pure and unadulterated BS!!! "Pro Choice" is nothing more than a buzzword that means "Pro Abortion on Demand". Saying that it doesn't flies in the face of reason, logic and truth. When a person says they are "Pro Choice" they are expressing an opinion that, while they may or may not consider abortion right for them, they want the option legally open for others. So, they are, in reality, Pro Abortion on demand.

Of course, the buzzwords are not restricted to the pro side of the abortion issue. "Pro Life" works the same way. People who say they are "Pro Life" are against abortion on demand. They may be for abortion in specific situations, so they can' t really say they are "anti abortion". They aren't really "pro life" either, since they are willing to allow for a few reasons to kill a fetus. Especially if they fall into the rhetoric of "abortion is murder". Of course, there are those who are against abortion in any situation, but I guess their willing to see the mother die, just to aviod an abortion, so there's not much pro life in that either.

I guess my point is, we should say what we mean and just dump all the "buzzword" stupidity.
Reply #31 from PolMach Forums Top
Post partum abortions????!!!!

That's pretty funny.


Wether you say it, "Post Partum Abortion" or "Retroactive abortion" it is still funny since neither are actually possible. The whole idea of either word is pretty oxymoronic, and few puns are more fun than those based on oxymoron. ;~D
Reply #32 from JoeUser Forums Top

Post partum abortions????!!!!

That's pretty funny.

Watch South Park. Cartman's mother.

Reply #33 from JoeUser Forums Top

Wether you say it, "Post Partum Abortion" or "Retroactive abortion" it is still funny since neither are actually possible. The whole idea of either word is pretty oxymoronic, and few puns are more fun than those based on oxymoron. ;~D

Think so?  Wait till a defense lawyer uses that in a case where a mother abandons a new born baby.  It wont be funny then, and you know NARAL will support the defense, as they supported Scott Peterson.

Reply #34 from JoeUser Forums Top
Think so? Wait till a defense lawyer uses that in a case where a mother abandons a new born baby. It wont be funny then, and you know NARAL will support the defense, as they supported Scott Peterson.


Actually I think most things that lawyers do are funny, and they would be considered jokes if the educated idiot on the bench had the common sense to laugh in the face of the lawyers as they thow them out of their courts and into jail for wasting the overtaxed court system's time and resources. ;~D

NARAL? Just another special interest group who replace facts for mindless buzzwords and get rich off others who don't know the difference.
Reply #35 from JoeUser Forums Top
Sorry, i dont buy into platitudes, I go for actions. They stood against Ca when they wanted to do a double murder charge against Scott Peterson. Even tho, at the time, and even today, it is not known if his son was born before or after the act.


I am not sure what you are referring to here. There is a rumor flying around that NARAL helped to pay Peterson's defense fees, but that was bogus. As for viability, NARAL's position is:

NARAL Pro-Choice America supports the legal framework established in Roe v. Wade and does not oppose restrictions on post-viability abortions, such as California's, that contain adequate exceptions to protect the life and health of the woman.


Pure and unadulterated BS!!!


Really? Are you going to tell me what I believe too? I am pro-choice but not pro-abortion. My position has nothing to do with the actual act of abortion-- I just don't think the government should regulate my uterus. Please, do not be so arrogant as to think that you know all. My statement stands and I am a testiment to the fact that pro-choice doesn't mean pro-abortion. You might think it is just a buzzword--but pro-choice sums up my position much better than pro-abortion. I also think pro-life is a bad term because I am not anti-life. I think the camps are pro-choice and anti-choice. It is about the right to legislate a woman's body.
Reply #36 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #35 By: shadesofgrey - 1/28/2005 11:41:22 AM Really? Are you going to tell me what I believe too? I am pro-choice but not pro-abortion. My position has nothing to do with the actual act of abortion-- I just don't think the government should regulate my uterus. Please, do not be so arrogant as to think that you know all. My statement stands and I am a testiment to the fact that pro-choice doesn't mean pro-abortion. You might think it is just a buzzword--but pro-choice sums up my position much better than pro-abortion. I also think pro-life is a bad term because I am not anti-life. I think the camps are pro-choice and anti-choice. It is about the right to legislate a woman's body.


No! It's about the taking or giving of human life. The original abortion bill was a good thing. But what they have now is a perverted pile of crapola! BTW if you don't like the term pro-life then talk to the abortionists. They're the ones who coined the phrase.
Reply #37 from JoeUser Forums Top
apparently bush okayed 157 post-partum abortions while governor of texas.  that would make him pro-death/life?  talk about a flip-flopper
Reply #38 from JoeUser Forums Top
BTW if you don't like the term pro-life then talk to the abortionists.


I can't tell you who coined the phrase, nor do I know who you are referring to when you say "abortionists" (I assume the medical doctors who perform the abortions, but I can't be sure), but I do know that when I was temping for NARAL Pro-choice America, they used "pro-choice" and "anti-choice."

No! It's about the taking or giving of human life.


That is what the issue is for you. For me the issue is legislating my body. I was explaining why I use the terminology that I use, not saying that you had to agree with me. Did you catch the part where I say: "I think"? Your response of "No" is pretty amusing--are you in my brain? Do you know what I think? Probably not.

You are intitled to your opinions, and I to mine.

Reply #39 from JoeUser Forums Top
f there was ever a reason to support abortion, it was in the case of Mrs. Rodham, about 55 years ago!


This here is an example of being so far right that you are kissing left's ass...
Reply #40 from JoeUser Forums Top

This here is an example of being so far right that you are kissing left's ass...


and an insightful to ms watkins.

Reply #41 from JoeUser Forums Top

I am not sure what you are referring to here. There is a rumor flying around that NARAL helped to pay Peterson's defense fees, but that was bogus. As for viability, NARAL's position is:

When the DA wanted to charge Peterson with 2 counts of Murder, NARAL fought it on the grounds it would infringe on the rights of women to have abortions.  That without the knowledge that Conner had been born alive or not.  They can talk the talk, but they cannot walk the walk.

Reply #42 from JoeUser Forums Top

apparently bush okayed 157 post-partum abortions while governor of texas. that would make him pro-death/life? talk about a flip-flopper

No, a Post Partum Abortion is the abortion of an innocent life, just like Abortion. It is just a matter of time.

And if you read even a modicum on the power of the texas Governor, you would see that he does not have the power to commute a sentence, only delay an execution.  Their power is very limited.

Reply #43 from JoeUser Forums Top

This here is an example of being so far right that you are kissing left's ass...

Au Contraire.  I did not say all liberals, or even some or most.  I specifically stated one.  WOuld you think the world would be better off had Stalin not been born?

Dont Assume.

Reply #44 from JoeUser Forums Top
I also think pro-life is a bad term because I am not anti-life. I think the camps are pro-choice and anti-choice. It is about the right to legislate a woman's body.


Ironic that you agree that "pro life" is a mindless buzzword, but dive into the "pro choice" rhetoric hook, line and sinker. No, I'm not so arrogant that I would try to tell you what you believe. You did a great job of describing it yourself. I merely shared my opinion that "pro choice" is a buzzword just like "pro life".

I think the camps are pro-choice and anti-choice. It is about the right to legislate a woman's body.


It's not just about "the right to legislate a woman's body", it's about the "choosing" whether another human being should live or die at the mother's convenience and whim. Unless you can explain to me how an organism with its own metabolism, and Human DNA that doesn't match any other organism, can be anything other than an a living human being, then we are talking about the right to choose death for her offspring.

Also, if it's truly all about "the right to legislate a woman's body" try finding a reputable doctor who would remove a healthy uterus from you and throw it away. It would be hard to find one because, well, mutilation is both unethical and illegal.