Moderateman Moderateman

Why does it always come down to ABORTION?

▼

Why does it always come down to ABORTION?

One issue ain't so damn important!

from JoeUser Forums
It seems no matter what else is happening in the world and America, hurricanes, disease, war, huge gas prices, the only thing that matters to the left is the abortion issue, or thinking of ways to Trash Bush.

Judge Roberts has incredible credentials, a brilliant mind a sense of how a REAL JUDGE should behave {no legislating from the bench} interpreting the law as written and adhering to precedent.

But the left with no real policies or solutions are hammering away on the abortion issue! Why is this damn thing so important to the loony left? I guess that's the only way the left can continue to get support from its base! I do mean base in both senses of the word BTW.

Main Entry: base
Part of Speech: adjective
Definition: vulgar
Synonyms: abject, abominable, cheap, coarse, common, contemptible, corrupt, depraved, despicable, disgraceful, dishonorable, disreputable, foul, grovelling, humble, ignoble, immoral, indelicate, loathsome, lowly, mean, menial, offensive, paltry, pitiful, plebeian, poor, scandalous, servile, shameful, shoddy, sleazy, sordid, sorry, squalid, trashy, ugly, unworthy, vile, worthless, wretched

The above pretty much defines the Democratic BASE.
28,810 views 120 replies
Reply #26 from JoeUser Forums Top
Personally, the right to choose what I do with my own body is central to my political affliations. It's not a method for grand-standing the political area, or throwing a wrench in an otherwise effective political structure--it is something that honestly effects me and my rights


Fine...leave MY tax dollars out of it, is all I ask!
Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top
24 by shadesofgrey
Tuesday, September 13, 2005


MM--I'm the other side--did you see me blame bush? Do I appear to be afraid of the truth?


notice the "most not all" comment?

I appreciate your views btw.

elie

MM
Multiplicity - Control multiple PCs using one keyboard and mouse
Reply #28 from JoeUser Forums Top
From listening, I'm starting to wonder whose hearing it is... Judge Roberts or the pedophile lover Justice Ruth Buzzie Ginsberg? Someone needs to smack Sen. Biden up side the head and remind him that Justice Ginsberg is not the U.S. Constitution.
Reply #29 from JoeUser Forums Top
#25 by drmiler
Tuesday, September 13, 2005


#25 by drmiler
Tuesday, September 13, 2005


It keeps coming down to abortion because like certain people on this site who shall remain nameless (colon gene). They are fast becoming "one trick ponies"!


If you took away bush private gene would not have a thought in his vacuous head
Reply #30 from JoeUser Forums Top
#26 by Gideon MacLeish
Tuesday, September 13, 2005


Personally, the right to choose what I do with my own body is central to my political affliations. It's not a method for grand-standing the political area, or throwing a wrench in an otherwise effective political structure--it is something that honestly effects me and my rights


Fine...leave MY tax dollars out of it, is all I ask!


nope not gonna happen, we will continue to pay for the misdeeds of careless women.
Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top
28 by ParaTed2k
Tuesday, September 13, 2005


From listening, I'm starting to wonder whose hearing it is... Judge Roberts or the pedophile lover Justice Ruth Buzzie Ginsberg? Someone needs to smack Sen. Biden up side the head and remind him that Justice Ginsberg is not the U.S. Constitution.


Biden as a leader hahahahahahah snorttttttt oh God, what was I saying? oh yeh biden is an idiot and a perfect example of the the left will continue to sink into obscurity.
Reply #32 from JoeUser Forums Top
Baker, can you prove to me that it is an unborn child, and not a mass of cells? If I take it out of its environment will it not just die? Was it even alive in the first place?

It's an argument of semantics and gut feel on both sides. It's a pretty big grey area, and as long as anyone says that they'd be willing to accept the other sides reasoning if only it could be proven, no accord will ever be reached. In all likelihood, no one's right and everyone's right, because it's too philosophical of a question to have a rigidly defined answer. Everyone's definition of it is based on part science, part belief, and part finger to the wind.
Reply #33 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply By: shadesofgreyPosted: Tuesday, September 13, 2005
It's interesting to me that only men responded to this article.

You're a man?????

Reply #34 from JoeUser Forums Top

I have yet to be convinced that the fetus has a soul.

Do people have souls?  The Living ones.  If so, when does the poof happen?

Reply #35 from JoeUser Forums Top

Baker, can you prove to me that it is an unborn child, and not a mass of cells? If I take it out of its environment will it not just die? Was it even alive in the first place?

If you take a post partum fetus out of its environment, will it survive?  And we are talking about a difference of environments, not different locations.

Reply #36 from JoeUser Forums Top
Do people have souls? The Living ones. If so, when does the poof happen?


Now THAT is a good question. When does the body become the vessel for the soul? Is intellect needed, which means the formation of a brain. Is a physical body required? A fully formed vessel to carry the soul.

Is the formation of four cells all that is required? This could be fun.

IG
Reply #37 from JoeUser Forums Top
You're a man?????


Ha ha ha--until me--and then HC chimed in (I believe I didn't do one of those gender mistakes there, did I , HC?.

Do people have souls? The Living ones. If so, when does the poof happen?


Are you asking for a public policy stance, or my personal belief--because I believe the two have been conflated. I do not know of any scientific procedure that will prove the existence of a soul--but my point is, that I have not been convinced that it is a human life.

Fine...leave MY tax dollars out of it, is all I ask!

Ok, as soon as you stop using my tax dollars to pay for military equipment that is used against civilian populations in the West Bank and Gaza. You see, we all pay taxes, and there are programs that our government runs that I don't particularly support either...but that's one of the things about living in a society--sometimes our taxes go to fund programs we don't personally agree with or want.
Reply #38 from JoeUser Forums Top
Ok, as soon as you stop using my tax dollars to pay for military equipment that is used against civilian populations in the West Bank and Gaza.


umm, I'm not in charge of Military Spending, sorry!

Frankly, I don't think the government SHOULD be used as a universal bank account (I'm Libertarian, remember?), and these two examples perfectly illustrate why!
Reply #39 from JoeUser Forums Top
32 by Demosthenes Locke
Tuesday, September 13, 2005


Baker, can you prove to me that it is an unborn child, and not a mass of cells? If I take it out of its environment will it not just die? Was it even alive in the first place?

It's an argument of semantics and gut feel on both sides. It's a pretty big grey area, and as long as anyone says that they'd be willing to accept the other sides reasoning if only it could be proven, no accord will ever be reached. In all likelihood, no one's right and everyone's right, because it's too philosophical of a question to have a rigidly defined answer. Everyone's definition of it is based on part science, part belief, and part finger to the wind.


excatly and both opinions should carry equal weight.!
Reply #40 from JoeUser Forums Top
34 by Dr. Guy
Tuesday, September 13, 2005


have yet to be convinced that the fetus has a soul.

Do people have souls? The Living ones. If so, when does the poof happen?


I think they have souls inserted on conception.
Reply #41 from JoeUser Forums Top
umm, I'm not in charge of Military Spending, sorry!


that was precisely my point--I'm not in charge of Health and Human Services spending, either, now am I? But the way you wrote your post implied that I was, and that I support the use of government funds for abortions. Hmm...quite the assumption, doncha think?
Reply #42 from JoeUser Forums Top
" I have yet to be convinced that the fetus has a soul. "


Myrrander has yet to be convinced that I have a soul. The whole sentience/soul criterea opens a nasty can of worms, huh? I couldn't prove that YOU have a soul any more than I could prove that a fetus has one.

" Baker, can you prove to me that it is an unborn child, and not a mass of cells? If I take it out of its environment will it not just die? Was it even alive in the first place?"


You are just a mass of cells, that taken out of your habitable environment would die. Babies, aren't sentient or self-sustaining. Leave one alone on a table for more than a day or two and it dies too. How long does something need to be able to last left alone on a table?

In terms of a true definition of life, I think it is silly to even debate. Of course a fetus is alive. I can be jailed for drowning newborn puppies that are no more sentient or self-sustaining than a fetus.
Reply #43 from JoeUser Forums Top
Hmm...quite the assumption, doncha think?


Actually, my statement was made against the prochoice lobby in general. For many (not all, by a longshot)of them, it IS a matter of federal funding when it all comes down to it, and that is someting I DO not, and WILL not support!
Reply #44 from JoeUser Forums Top
In terms of a true definition of life, I think it is silly to even debate. Of course a fetus is alive.


Did you not just chide me for "pretending we all agree" and then proceed to do the very same thing? You believe that a fetus is alive--but there is no "of course" about it. For as elementary as it seems to you that it is a living being, it is just as elementary to me that it is not.


Actually, my statement was made against the prochoice lobby in general.


I'll take your word that that was your intent--but your statement was actually made in response to (and you even quoted it) my statement that was clearly my personal views.

Personally, the right to choose what I do with my own body is central to my political affliations. It's not a method for grand-standing the political area, or throwing a wrench in an otherwise effective political structure--it is something that honestly effects me and my rights


Fine...leave MY tax dollars out of it, is all I ask!


Reply #45 from JoeUser Forums Top
shades? question, if somehow the feds took the right of abortion away how would that change how you think and vote?
Reply #46 from JoeUser Forums Top
#42 by BakerStreet
Tuesday, September 13, 2005


Myrrander has yet to be convinced that I have a soul.



that's because he has no soul. none at all.
Reply #47 from JoeUser Forums Top
Baker, can you prove to me that it is an unborn child, and not a mass of cells? If I take it out of its environment will it not just die? Was it even alive in the first place?


I can.

Science tells us that if an organism has DNA and a metabolism, it is alive. A fetus has both DNA and a metabolism so, according to science, it is alive.

The DNA of a species seperates it from all other species. A fetus created by the sperm and ovum of a male and female Homo Sapien has DNA consistent with Homo Sapiens. Not only does it have DNA consistent with Homo Sapiens, but the fetal DNA does not match any other Homo Sapien, which means it is a living individual organism that is Homo Sapien.

The whole myth of "viability" is shot down by modern science since we know that whether the individual is inside the womb or outside, it is completely dependent on someone other than itself for nutrients, waste removal and providing a suitable environment. The only difference is a fetus depends on one mother but anyone around a neonate can provide those needs. Whether fetus or neonate, the individual's own system regulates it's own metabolism.

Now, with the above all being true, prove to ME that the fetus is neither Homo Sapien nor Alive.
Reply #48 from JoeUser Forums Top
shades? question, if somehow the feds took the right of abortion away how would that change how you think and vote?


Since the majority of the candidates that I support are already pro-choice, it wouldn't change how I vote. I would continue to support pro-choice candidates--but I would step up my donations and volunteer hours for organizations that try to ensure reproductive rights.

You see, abortion is simply the tip of the iceberg when it comes to reproductive rights and there is a great fear in the pro-choice camp that any whittling away of the rights will mean the gradual elimination of all rights-- and that includes access to birth control (how many insurance companies cover perscriptions of viagra but not the pill?)

Because I do not believe that the fetus is a life starting at conception--I view any attempts to limit first trimester abortions as the federal government legislating sexual morality. If you, or the President, want to be pro-life, that's great. I'm not going to stop you--but stay out of mine--don't push your morality on me (or any other woman).
Reply #49 from JoeUser Forums Top
A fetus has both DNA and a metabolism so, according to science, it is alive.


This is why I used the word "soul" because just because something is alive does not make it human. Are viruses and flu-bugs not "alive"? Aren't parasitical infections "alive"? But we do not think twice about "killing" them.