GOP Dials Back the Clock on Progress for Women

[LadyGunSlinger]

About every other post from the Right criticizes the Left for passing laws and regulation that intrude into our lives. What can possibly be more intrusive than this?

Just what was ROE V/s Wade?? A poetic interlude with the Courts?? There is nothing more intrusive than your moronic belief that I should pay for you to kill your unborn child. NOT GONNA HAPPEN!

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

About every other post from the Right criticizes the Left for passing laws and regulation that intrude into our lives. What can possibly be more intrusive than this?

Uhm, how about being sucked out of the womb and run down the drain. Seems pretty intrusive to me. But, I could be wrong.

 

[gekaap]

A decent society openly promotes and subsidizes infanticide?

First of all, trying to charge the subject emotionally will not substantiate your position. The issue is a bill that would limit the availability of a medical procedure to victims of rape, and cases of life threatening conditions, for people who rely on government assistance for medical coverage.

Second, it is YOU who says it's infanticide. I say that a 4 week old embryo is not a human being. If there was significant medical knowledge available to guide us in shaping these opinions the question would be much easier. But at this point in time there is no consensus in the medical community about when that magical moment occurs when a collection of cells becomes a distinct human being. And indeed there may never come a day when that knowledge becomes available. In the meantime we must all come to our own conclusions. If that means that you or someone else looks to your faith to give you guidance, then by all means so be it. But in a decent society, we cannot as public policy accept your claim that failing to pass this bill "openly promotes and subsidizes infanticide" based on nothing more than a given person, or group of people's, religious beliefs. Because there are many people who hold very different religious beliefs.

 

[The T]

About every other post from the Right criticizes the Left for passing laws and regulation that intrude into our lives. What can possibly be more intrusive than this?

Just what was ROE V/s Wade?? A poetic interlude with the Courts?? There is nothing more intrusive than your moronic belief that I should pay for you to kill your unborn child. NOT GONNA HAPPEN!

Indeed. All payment via tax money should be stopped immediately to planned parenthood, merchants of the death of innocents.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I say that a 4 week old embryo is not a human being.

Play God often do you?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Well we'll have to agree to disagree. I'll opt for life, you can opt for infanticide.

We'll both have to settle up for our positions at some point.

 

[gekaap]

OMG, HOW PATHETIC!!!! LMAO!! You stated it was your right being taken away.. So show me , don't tell me - show me. Put up or shut up.. After all, it's YOU who believe you have the right and are entitled to have your hand IN my pocket funding the slaughter of children.

I never stated anything about my rights being taken away. I'm a man, outlawing abortion cannot take away my rights. At least, not directly. It could have secondary implications, but that's hypothetical and indeterminate. And I never said anything about having a right to have my hand in your pocket. As you can see from your vantage point, my hand is not there, and it never has been. So I can't have possibly said anything about taking away my rights. So, like I said, you're playing with straw men.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

About every other post from the Right criticizes the Left for passing laws and regulation that intrude into our lives. What can possibly be more intrusive than this?

Just what was ROE V/s Wade?? A poetic interlude with the Courts?? There is nothing more intrusive than your moronic belief that I should pay for you to kill your unborn child. NOT GONNA HAPPEN!

Indeed. All payment via tax money should be stopped immediately to planned parenthood, merchants of the death of innocents.

This^^^^^^^^^^^ Absolutely!

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

OMG, HOW PATHETIC!!!! LMAO!! You stated it was your right being taken away.. So show me , don't tell me - show me. Put up or shut up.. After all, it's YOU who believe you have the right and are entitled to have your hand IN my pocket funding the slaughter of children.

I never stated anything about my rights being taken away. I'm a man, outlawing abortion cannot take away my rights. At least, not directly. It could have secondary implications, but that's hypothetical and indeterminate. And I never said anything about having a right to have my hand in your pocket. As you can see from your vantage point, my hand is not there, and it never has been. So I can't have possibly said anything about taking away my rights. So, like I said, you're playing with straw men.

Lie much??http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...lock-on-progress-for-women-7.html#post3292112

YOUR WORD, RIGHTS- Where do you get off telling me YOU have the right to MY MONEY in order to fund the MURDER of an unborn child?? Once more, YOUR WORD, "RIGHTS" -- NOW PUT THE HELL UP or shut up-- Where in the Constitution does it state you have the RIGHT to my money funding the slaughter of unborn children?? IT DOESN'T.. thus your continual moving of the goal posts F A I L~

 

[gekaap]

Play God often do you?

How does coming to a conclusion on biological functions amount to playing God? There is no evidence to suggest that a 4 week old embryo is a human being. It does not require God to understand the logic.

I'll opt for life, you can opt for infanticide.

In other words, you believe that the only position that has any merit is your own. But you can't even support your position. All you can do is level emotionally charged statements in hopes that it will make up for the lack of supporting evidence.

We'll both have to settle up for our positions at some point.

Subtly throwing out your religious persuasion? Unfortunately, I am very devout in my beliefs, which are remarkably different than your own. Don't suppose it would mean much to you if I suggested that you're going to burn in Hellfire for littering.

 

[gekaap]

Lie much??http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...lock-on-progress-for-women-7.html#post3292112

YOUR WORD, RIGHTS- Where do you get off telling me YOU have the right to MY MONEY in order to fund the MURDER of an unborn child?? Once more, YOUR WORD, "RIGHTS" -- NOW PUT THE HELL UP or shut up-- Where in the Constitution does it state you have the RIGHT to my money funding the slaughter of unborn children?? IT DOESN'T.. thus your continual moving of the goal posts F A I L~

That link does not show me saying anything about me having the right to use your money for anything. It shows me saying that public policy cannot be determined by your particular religious beliefs, because we all have the right to our own religious beliefs. I'm not moving the goal post. You just keep avoiding the endzone, because you have yet to say anything of logical value to support your claims and positions, and you keep trying to detract from that fact by demanding me to prove things that I did not say.

I think you should really just stop at this point. Your emotional tirade here is without any organization or direction, and invokes mental images of disheveled hair, sweating and bulging forehead veins.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

Lie much??http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...lock-on-progress-for-women-7.html#post3292112

YOUR WORD, RIGHTS- Where do you get off telling me YOU have the right to MY MONEY in order to fund the MURDER of an unborn child?? Once more, YOUR WORD, "RIGHTS" -- NOW PUT THE HELL UP or shut up-- Where in the Constitution does it state you have the RIGHT to my money funding the slaughter of unborn children?? IT DOESN'T.. thus your continual moving of the goal posts F A I L~

That link does not show me saying anything about me having the right to use your money for anything. It shows me saying that public policy cannot be determined by your particular religious beliefs, because we all have the right to our own religious beliefs. I'm not moving the goal post. You just keep avoiding the endzone, because you have yet to say anything of logical value to support your claims and positions, and you keep trying to detract from that fact by demanding me to prove things that I did not say.

I think you should really just stop at this point. Your emotional tirade here is without any organization or direction, and invokes mental images of disheveled hair, sweating and bulging forehead veins.

What a load of absolute BULLCRAP.. That link shows your EXACT wording of "taking away someone's rights." Now you stoop to personal attacks because I kicked your ass without even working up a sweat. LOL All too easy.. The ANSWER IS: The Constitution contains ZERO rights affording any woman taxpayer funding in the systemic slaughter of an unborn child. Don't thank me..

 

[code1211]

Regardless, I don't care. If a woman wants to kill a child no matter the circumstance let her do it with her own money. Two wrongs don't make a right. While I wish rape didn't exist, the innocent child who was created with the breath of God did nothing wrong. How about women actually put their kids first? Imagine that?!

Your religious beliefs are not justification for public policy. Other people have different beliefs, and in a decent society their rights cannot be determined by your religion. Imagine that?!

The purpose of any society is to band together so that the strength of numbers and the the strong can protect the weak.

There is no weaker entity in society than the new born or the unborn. Protecting the weak is not any more a religious directive than it is a societal one.

Why must every pro choicer condemn religion to protect abortion?

 

[gekaap]

What a load of absolute BULLCRAP.. That link shows your EXACT wording of "taking away someone's rights." Now you stoop to personal attacks because I kicked your ass without even working up a sweat. LOL All too easy.. The ANSWER IS: The Constitution contains ZERO rights affording any woman taxpayer funding in the systemic slaughter of an unborn child. Don't thank me..

This is what your link shows me saying:

Your religious beliefs are not justification for public policy. Other people have different beliefs, and in a decent society their rights cannot be determined by your religion. Imagine that?!

Are you just trolling?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

How does coming to a conclusion on biological functions amount to playing God? There is no evidence to suggest that a 4 week old embryo is a human being. It does not require God to understand the logic.

But you said this earlier:

If there was significant medical knowledge available to guide us in shaping these opinions the question would be much easier. But at this point in time there is no consensus in the medical community about when that magical moment occurs when a collection of cells becomes a distinct human being.

Sounds like you have no clue...

 

[code1211]

About every other post from the Right criticizes the Left for passing laws and regulation that intrude into our lives. What can possibly be more intrusive than this?

Maybe all those laws about not beating your wife or children. God! What gives these guys the right to stop me from exercising the freedom to choose to beat my wife?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

What a load of absolute BULLCRAP.. That link shows your EXACT wording of "taking away someone's rights." Now you stoop to personal attacks because I kicked your ass without even working up a sweat. LOL All too easy.. The ANSWER IS: The Constitution contains ZERO rights affording any woman taxpayer funding in the systemic slaughter of an unborn child. Don't thank me..

This is what your link shows me saying:

Your religious beliefs are not justification for public policy. Other people have different beliefs, and in a decent society their rights cannot be determined by your religion. Imagine that?!

You seem all to happy to deny the unborn the most basic right, that of life.

Who's trolling?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I guess gaskap ran out of convoluted logic.. time for gaskap to fire up another bowl!

 

[gekaap]

The purpose of any society is to band together so that the strength of numbers and the the strong can protect the weak.

There is no weaker entity in society than the new born or the unborn. Protecting the weak is not any more a religious directive than it is a societal one.

Citing a 4 week old embryo as a human being is largely unfounded. The medical community does not support that theory. If you do, then fine. If you have looked to your faith to offer you guidance to come to your conclusion, that's fine. But to insist that yours is the only acceptable opinion on the matter is extremely flawed. Considering the lack of evidence in support of it, there's nothing wrong with someone else coming to another opinion on the matter. Thus, for you to frame the issue in terms of protecting the "unborn" is entirely illogical and unfounded.

The subsequent consequences then raise questions about "how" unborn does some hypothetical and potential person have to be before they gain or lose the right to be "protected"? Should people be required to copulate, in order to protect the unborn children that will never be born if people don't start copulating? That, for course, becomes absurd. But logically, it is a necessary consequence that those hypothetical people protected to under the umbrella of the "unborn." There's then the question of the many pregnancies that women have, and lose, without ever knowing they were momentarily pregnant. In an effort to protect the unborn, should we start requiring women to undergo pregnancy screening twice a week, in order to identify pregnancies and help nurture them to full fruition?

Your argument is not a matter of protecting the "unborn." It is a matter of one group of people dictating their opinion that a 4 week old embryo is an unborn human being, and that people disagreeing should be forced to accept that opinion for use in their own lives.

Why must every pro choicer condemn religion to protect abortion?

I don't condemn religion for anything. I condemn any effort to enact public policy that will force people to live under the rule of a religious belief that they do not accept. And before someone says something about murder laws, inasmuch as a public policy has an objective purpose and interest, completely separate from any religious concern, that is still sufficient to justify the policy, then it's not a religious matter. But when it comes to abortion in cases of rape, incest, or when the mother's life is in danger, saying something like "this baby was created by the breath of God" shows that the speaker's intent and position is based on religion alone. Thus, it is appropriate to criticize the position on that merit.

 

[gekaap]

But you said this earlier:

If there was significant medical knowledge available to guide us in shaping these opinions the question would be much easier. But at this point in time there is no consensus in the medical community about when that magical moment occurs when a collection of cells becomes a distinct human being.

Sounds like you have no clue...

Wow. So you are saying that inasmuch as I affirm the lack of scientific knowledge and evidence to provide a definitive answer, and inasmuch as I do not accept the dictations of your religion on the matter, then I must not have a clue and my opinion must be flawed and irrelevant. That is incredibly egocentric, and entirely illogical.