Page 16 of 30 FirstFirst ... 612131415161718192026 ... LastLast
Results 226 to 240 of 438

Thread: Supreme court to mull partial-birth abortion bans

  1. #226
    Friend of Gossip Rocks! buttmunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Uranus
    Posts
    31,885

    Default Re: Supreme court to mull partial-birth abortion bans

    I'd hazard a guess that Soj, Grimm and Dakotas would love to see no more abortions - but if they are going to happen (and they are) then lets ensure the women getting them are getting good medical care, that they have somewhere safe and clean to go. If abortions are criminalized then we are left with blackmarket medical procedures ... coathangers, rusty knives ...

    You said it. Everyone should pick up a copy of Our Bodies...Ourselves and see what it was like before it became legal.
    'Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.' Ben Franklin

    "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross."
    --Sinclair Lewis

  2. #227
    Elite Member crumpet's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    If I was up your ass you'd know where I am!
    Posts
    7,751

    Default Re: Supreme court to mull partial-birth abortion bans

    But dates constitute human life?

    Well, is your birthday dated the day you were born or the day you were conceived?

    Uh, 145 posts before yours, and not ONE of them seriously said that women were having them because of changing their minds at the last minute.

    You know, it doesn't matter that no one came out and said that. If they don't believe that it's true, why be so upset over the late term abortion? Are you saying you'd oopse it even if it meant a woman losing her life?

  3. #228
    Elite Member Lobelia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    a backwards hillbilly state
    Posts
    20,801

    Default Re: Supreme court to mull partial-birth abortion bans

    Well, is your birthday dated the day you were born or the day you were conceived?
    As far as my birthday, duh, it's BIRTH - day. The day of my birth. It is the day I was BORN. It's a stretch of logic to say that it explains anything more than that.

    You know, it doesn't matter that no one came out and said that. If they don't believe that it's true, why be so upset over the late term abortion? Are you saying you'd oopse it even if it meant a woman losing her life?
    Again, I refer to the numerous posts that were made before you jumped in. I already explained my position on this several times. If you're that interested, go back & read it. But to respond to you now...

    I don't believe that it's true that women are going in & casually requesting & receiving late term abortions. However, for the fifteenth freakin' time, if they get one to save their lives or health, why the hell does the baby have to die? Why not just take it early?


    And Sojita, back to our discussion, there are countless babies in cemeteries who were stillborn, and on their tombstones is the birth & death date. So they really do have dates, for what it's worth.

    Sure we all have dates associated with us. That does not validate our existance as humans. There were humans back before calendars were even invented. They didn't have dates, and they were human.

    I don't understand how a fetus couldn't be considered alive. It's not dead. Is there some alternate form of existance reserved only for embryos & fetuses?

    I don't understand how a fetus couldn't be considered a human life. It's just an undeveloped form of a human being. It is not its own species.

    We're just going to have to disagree on this one, Sojita, but that's ok. I think the laws are wrong on a lot of things, and yes, you may be correct in saying that life begins with birth in this country (legally) but gays are people without the right to marry. I think both classifications are dead wrong.
    "I've cautiously embraced jeggings"
    Emma Peel aka Pacific Breeze aka Wilde1 aka gogodancer aka maribou

    Yip, yip, yip in your tiny indignation. Bark furiously on, lady dog.

  4. #229
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default Re: Supreme court to mull partial-birth abortion bans

    Quote Originally Posted by Lobelia

    It IS dramatic. Very dramatic. I am not making it so. If you believe that life starts at conception, abortion is very akin to genocide.
    Except it's NOT genocide. The human race is in no way, even fantastical, threatened by abortion, for gods sake. There's almost 7 BILLION of us. We aren't going anywhere.


    The hypothetical "I" (since I never advocated abolishing abortion in general, just partial-birth) would STILL believe that I was saving human life, that the mothers & her accomplices were trying to snuff out. If that wasn't going on, you'd never be pestered by the hypothetical me.
    Even with your language, you criminalize the mother for something that is HER CHOICE. Not yours.

    Cognisance & hopes & dreams constitute human life? There are people all over the planet with none of these three things.
    A fetus isn't a person. It has the potential to be a person.

    Not born a person... hmmm... I'm not going to go look up "person" on dictionary.com but this is a new one for me. To say that a baby isn't a person? That's so out in left field for me that I can't even address it. It's most certainly human life. How do you define person?
    My left foot has life. Is my left foot a person?

    Because I strongly believe that it's murder to partially pull out a viable fetus & kill it.
    Good for you, then don't have an abortion. You have no right to take that decision out of someone elses hands when it concerns THEIR body.


    There's that person word again. I am wondering if you mean something different than "human" or something. At the beginning of this thread, you mentioned legal definitions as evidence against my points. Well, back at'cha. Babies in incubators are definitely legal persons. If the one in OR 4 didn't get its brains sucked out, it would have been a legal person.
    Yeah, had it been born and grown up. You're attributing characteristics to something that hasn't developed them on its own.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  5. #230
    Elite Member moomies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    pretending to be a lurker but I'm not quiet enough
    Posts
    15,515

    Default Re: Supreme court to mull partial-birth abortion bans

    Well, is your birthday dated the day you were born or the day you were conceived?
    In some countries (including mine and a few others in Asia) the traditional way to count your age is to include the months you were in your momma's tummy.

    In the Asian tradition of counting a person's age (called kazoedoshi in Japan), a person is counted as a year old upon birth and is then immediately aged another year on the following New Year's Day.
    Actually, it doesn't have much to do with the date of conception...but more to do with the New Year's celebration...so it seems.
    http://forums.meijitales.com/viewtop...5a37de59204ad0

    If you think it's crazy, you ain't seen a thing. Just wait until we're goin down in flames.

  6. #231
    Elite Member Lobelia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    a backwards hillbilly state
    Posts
    20,801

    Default Re: Supreme court to mull partial-birth abortion bans

    Except it's NOT genocide. The human race is in no way, even fantastical, threatened by abortion, for gods sake. There's almost 7 BILLION of us. We aren't going anywhere
    Then there is no genocide, ever. We've never been wiped out, to my knowledge. Instead of the word genocide, let me use "mass murder" instead. The point was, which you ignored, was that all kinds of nasty people in history have advocated the killing of substandard forms of humanity, in the name of mercy.

    Even with your language, you criminalize the mother for something that is HER CHOICE. Not yours.
    You're damn skippy. If you kill a human life form that would live outside of your body by using a technicality (but it's only halfway out!) then you're a murderer in my book. Yes, it's just my book, but I can only speak for myself.

    A fetus isn't a person. It has the potential to be a person.
    That's your opinion. It's as good as my opinion, but it's still just an opinion.

    My left foot has life. Is my left foot a person?
    Obviously not. I don't know what you require a life form to possess or exhibit in order to qualify as a person, though. I daresay that whatever list you put together, many people won't possess everything on that list.


    Good for you, then don't have an abortion. You have no right to take that decision out of someone elses hands when it concerns THEIR body.
    I don't have the right to stop someone from raping a child or mugging an old lady? But it's THEIR body (the rapist's or criminal's)! What right do I have to stop them? Well, here we go with the old circular argument on its gazillionth round. Pro-lifers sincerely believe that abortion is murder. Obviously it's acceptable to oppose murder.

    The difference is that you don't believe the embryo or fetus to be a human life worthy of being protected. I don't understand why this "what gives you the right" question keeps being asked, when it's been answered repeatedly.

    You just don't AGREE with it, but you know the answer.

    Yeah, had it been born and grown up. You're attributing characteristics to something that hasn't developed them on its own.
    That makes no sense considering the text of mine that you were responding to. I attributed NO characteristics to anything. I was trying to make a point that a being that is alive in an incubator is the same identical being it was 5, 10, 15 minutes earlier, before it came out of a womb. Identical, except for the umbilical cord, etc. Now it can live on its own. Except if you kill it, it would not have the chance to live on its own. In both cases, it's capable of living. The decision to kill it is based on personal preference.
    "I've cautiously embraced jeggings"
    Emma Peel aka Pacific Breeze aka Wilde1 aka gogodancer aka maribou

    Yip, yip, yip in your tiny indignation. Bark furiously on, lady dog.

  7. #232
    Gold Member equallydivided's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    YeeHawVille
    Posts
    1,156

    Default Re: Supreme court to mull partial-birth abortion bans

    ^^^^^Very well said Lobelia....I couldn't agree with you more!

  8. #233
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default Re: Supreme court to mull partial-birth abortion bans

    Quote Originally Posted by Lobelia
    Then there is no genocide, ever. We've never been wiped out, to my knowledge. Instead of the word genocide, let me use "mass murder" instead. The point was, which you ignored, was that all kinds of nasty people in history have advocated the killing of substandard forms of humanity, in the name of mercy.
    Your concept of murder differs from what the medical profession would use. Still, you're trying to legislate it.

    You're damn skippy. If you kill a human life form that would live outside of your body by using a technicality (but it's only halfway out!) then you're a murderer in my book. Yes, it's just my book, but I can only speak for myself.
    Yes, except your ilk are trying to use that one technicality to take control of women's bodies away from them.

    That's your opinion. It's as good as my opinion, but it's still just an opinion.
    And everyone has one. However, opinions aren't legislation.


    Obviously not. I don't know what you require a life form to possess or exhibit in order to qualify as a person, though. I daresay that whatever list you put together, many people won't possess everything on that list.
    Irrelevant.

    I don't have the right to stop someone from raping a child or mugging an old lady? But it's THEIR body (the rapist's or criminal's)! What right do I have to stop them?
    Big difference: The old lady didn't walk into Muggers-R-Us and pay to be robbed, she didn't make that choice, she was not in control of the situation.

    You want to be the mugger.

    Well, here we go with the old circular argument on its gazillionth round. Pro-lifers sincerely believe that abortion is murder. Obviously it's acceptable to oppose murder.
    Obviously, except that your concept of abortion = murder only applies to you. You have no right applying it to anybody else. What people do with their own bodies is not your concern.

    The difference is that you don't believe the embryo or fetus to be a human life worthy of being protected.
    Untrue, I just refuse to live in a world where control of someone's body is not their own. That's the problem with choice: sometimes it's unpleasant.

    I don't understand why this "what gives you the right" question keeps being asked, when it's been answered repeatedly.
    No, it hasn't been answered. What gives you the right to control someone elses body? It's not YOUR body, so obviously you feel as if some over-arching cosmic power imbues you with the narcissism that you can tell people what to do with their lives.

    You just don't AGREE with it, but you know the answer.
    I don't believe in people ceding control of themselves to others. That's fascism.

    That makes no sense considering the text of mine that you were responding to. I attributed NO characteristics to anything.
    LOL your whole argument revolves around the concept that fetuses are fully formed human beings, who are already people, with hopes, dreams, the whole shmear. That's why anti-choicers are so ticked off.. they've basically given what is a lump of instinct a muppet makeover in their heads.. it walks, it talks, it thinks!

    I was trying to make a point that a being that is alive in an incubator is the same identical being it was 5, 10, 15 minutes earlier, before it came out of a womb. Identical, except for the umbilical cord, etc. Now it can live on its own. Except if you kill it, it would not have the chance to live on its own. In both cases, it's capable of living. The decision to kill it is based on personal preference.
    I'm sorry my dear, generally when they do these things it's not because the baby can live.. it's because it's killing the mother and unable to live on the outside.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  9. #234
    Hit By Ban Bus! DirtyPool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    chicago
    Posts
    639

    Default Re: Supreme court to mull partial-birth abortion bans

    Quote Originally Posted by cloud
    then lets ensure the women getting them are getting good medical care, that they have somewhere safe and clean to go. If abortions are criminalized then we are left with blackmarket medical procedures ... coathangers, rusty knives ...
    ..Oh sure if you want to be treated by the lowest form of human trash: abortion personnel. Planned Parenthood and the like all should be rounded up in each state and forced to stand trial for murder and then sentenced to 40 years hard labor. If you can't be woman enough to have the baby then you have a serious character problem- at least give the baby up for adoption.

    No CHOICE for women. It's a racket to profit off of your hardship.

  10. #235
    Elite Member Lobelia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    a backwards hillbilly state
    Posts
    20,801

    Default Re: Supreme court to mull partial-birth abortion bans

    *sigh* Before I read this, I was really going to just say that I'm pretty much exhausted with this subject, and that I've said everything that I can possibly say already. However, I can't let a couple of things go.

    Your concept of murder differs from what the medical profession would use. Still, you're trying to legislate it.
    You can't speak for the entire medical community. You just can't.

    Yes, except your ilk are trying to use that one technicality to take control of women's bodies away from them.
    I don't give a hoot what they do with their bodies. I'm just politely requesting that they not kill the fetus that they've pulled halfway out. Pull it out if you like, just don't kill it.

    Big difference: The old lady didn't walk into Muggers-R-Us and pay to be robbed, she didn't make that choice, she was not in control of the situation.

    You want to be the mugger.
    Makes no sense at all. In my example, the old lady = the fetus, not the mother. In my example, neither the fetus nor the old lady have any control, nor have they paid for anything.

    And everyone has one. However, opinions aren't legislation.
    No, but legislations evolve from opinions. All legislators have them. And we very well know that their opinions aren't always moral or ethical or right.

    Obviously, except that your concept of abortion = murder only applies to you. You have no right applying it to anybody else. What people do with their own bodies is not your concern.
    See above comment about not giving a hoot what people do with their bodies. Even so, I'm sure you'll say it again. And again. And again...

    I don't believe in people ceding control of themselves to others. That's fascism.
    With that broad definition, we should have NO LAWS WHATSOEVER. Every law we have cedes some control of ourselves to others. Every single one. Even the law against rape... you're taking control of the rapist's life. What if the rapist doesn't believe you should have that control? What if he believes that he is completely 100% justified in raping? Who are you to tell him what to do with his body? You're being a fascist, and making him cede control.

    LOL your whole argument revolves around the concept that fetuses are fully formed human beings, who are already people, with hopes, dreams, the whole shmear. That's why anti-choicers are so ticked off.. they've basically given what is a lump of instinct a muppet makeover in their heads.. it walks, it talks, it thinks!
    Grimm, you are way off-base here. You won't be able to quote me anywhere to support that first sentence. You're assuming something, to help your argument. I don't think that at all. None of my arguments are based on your erroneous assumption.

    Human life exists in all forms within the continuum. Some people are well actualized, so to speak- thank you Maslow- and have all the stuff you think is essential to be qualified & validated as a person. Hopes, dreams, intelligence, self-awareness, you name it.

    The poor folks at the other end of the continuum may not have any of that. They may be psychotic, or retarded, or deformed in any conceivable way, or even be a tiny human life form with a long way to go toward the other end of the continuum. But we're all human, and we're all somewhere on the continuum.

    Who are any of us to say that anyone on the continuum doesn't deserve to live?

    I'm sorry my dear, generally when they do these things it's not because the baby can live.. it's because it's killing the mother and unable to live on the outside.
    You may very well be 100% correct in this. I don't have statistics. I'll cede the point. However, if it's not going to live, seems pretty pointless to go to the trouble of plugging in the brain sucker, doesn't it?


    I don't have all the answers, as I've said. I don't have enough wisdom. That's why, despite my vehement arguing on this thread, I'm actually pretty ambivalent regarding abortion in general. This late-term business is pretty much the only part of it that I'll argue with conviction.
    "I've cautiously embraced jeggings"
    Emma Peel aka Pacific Breeze aka Wilde1 aka gogodancer aka maribou

    Yip, yip, yip in your tiny indignation. Bark furiously on, lady dog.

  11. #236
    Elite Member moomies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    pretending to be a lurker but I'm not quiet enough
    Posts
    15,515

    Default Re: Supreme court to mull partial-birth abortion bans

    Quote Originally Posted by DirtyPool
    ..Oh sure if you want to be treated by the lowest form of human trash: abortion personnel. Planned Parenthood and the like all should be rounded up in each state and forced to stand trial for murder and then sentenced to 40 years hard labor. If you can't be woman enough to have the baby then you have a serious character problem- at least give the baby up for adoption.

    No CHOICE for women. It's a racket to profit off of your hardship.

    why don't ya go bomb all the abortion clinics and sniper at all the abortion doctors? That sounds very meaningful.

    If you think it's crazy, you ain't seen a thing. Just wait until we're goin down in flames.

  12. #237
    Hit By Ban Bus! DirtyPool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    chicago
    Posts
    639

    Default Re: Supreme court to mull partial-birth abortion bans

    Quote Originally Posted by moomies
    why don't ya go bomb all the abortion clinics and sniper at all the abortion doctors? That sounds very meaningful.
    Why don't you go scoop yourself an extra helping of dumb.

  13. #238
    Elite Member Lobelia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    a backwards hillbilly state
    Posts
    20,801

    Default Re: Supreme court to mull partial-birth abortion bans

    Moomies isn't dumb!
    "I've cautiously embraced jeggings"
    Emma Peel aka Pacific Breeze aka Wilde1 aka gogodancer aka maribou

    Yip, yip, yip in your tiny indignation. Bark furiously on, lady dog.

  14. #239
    Gold Member equallydivided's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    YeeHawVille
    Posts
    1,156

    Default Re: Supreme court to mull partial-birth abortion bans

    Please don't mistake my passion with Dirty Pool. Although I'm pro-life, I'm not an extreme-ist. I don't think that people who assist in abortions should be hurt in any way. But I DO feel that what they are doing is the same as murder because it's a deliberate ending of a life...what my beliefs of 'life' are (at conception).

    Again, if a woman were to become pregnant through NO ACTIONS of her own, then I would buy the argument 'the right to choose'. Pregnancy is the Reaction...therefore the ACTION is the point of choice.

  15. #240
    Hit By Ban Bus! DirtyPool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    chicago
    Posts
    639

    Default Re: Supreme court to mull partial-birth abortion bans

    Quote Originally Posted by equallydivided
    Please don't mistake my passion with Dirty Pool. Although I'm pro-life, I'm not an extreme-ist. I don't think that people who assist in abortions should be hurt in any way. But I DO feel that what they are doing is the same as murder because it's a deliberate ending of a life...what my beliefs of 'life' are (at conception).

    Again, if a woman were to become pregnant through NO ACTIONS of her own, then I would buy the argument 'the right to choose'. Pregnancy is the Reaction...therefore the ACTION is the point of choice.
    I never said hurt- i said arrested and sentenced to hard labor. Sorry if i sound extremist but I would like to see the rights protected of the unborn babies- not baby killers.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Supreme Court to hear abortion rights case.
    By buttmunch in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: December 1st, 2005, 04:28 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •