True conservatives are pro-choice

[asterism]

I believe a majority of anti-abortionists would prefer to see the Constitution amended to protect the unborn.

Perhaps.

Your choice for President seems to disagree, even to the point of supporting the "choice" beyond birth.

Eugenics or just plain stupidity?

 

[mdn2000]

The people of China must believe we are insane, I am in Brazil, Rio De Janeiro, I had a snack at a fast food joint ran by a married couple (married as in the definition without political correctness and special interest lobbies), I asked where is life better, here in Brazil (dumb question but it opens the conversation), or in China, the simple answer, the governor of their state decreed not only are they allowed one child but if the baby is a girl it must be aborted.

I just heard that Obama intends to make abortion just and fair by castrating males, the burden should not be on the woman. This may be pure rumor so do not think this is fact, I have to look it up.

 

[Charles_Main]

True conservatives believe that a government that governs least governs best.

And that would naturally mean an opposition to a government forcing newly pregnant women to carry to term.

Alleged conservatives perform a lot of mental gymnastics to try to rationalize away this simple fact. But they're still wrong and they're not true conservatives.

And that's just the way it is.

A bit simplistic bud. It depends on whether or not you think an unborn baby is a person, possessing the same rights as any other, or a blob of meat subject to termination at will.

It has nothing to do with Conservatism or Liberalism.

 

[shintao]

Mental gymnastics is what it takes to call the killing of babies anything other than murder. Obama's policy while Illinois state senator was if a baby lived after abortion that child must die. The woman's first choice to murder the baby must be upheld as her, "right to chose".

Newly pregnant women all made the same choice (outside of rape), to have sex, the point at which a woman has a right to do with her body as she choices is before her body becomes the life support system of another human being.

I truely call that "Mental gymnastics " in its finest hour!! LOL!

Mental gymnastics is performed when the pro-abortion-murder lobby and activist determine when the exact time a baby is not a human being and is to be called a fetus.

Imagine, we had to fight to end late term abortions.

Quick warning, any person who gets an abortion is potentially destroying their ability to have a health baby, ever.

If I am to accept your reasoning, I could expect to extract a fetus from the womb in the first month, and set it in the crib. And it should survive there by mothers milk and the air we breath. If it can do that, then I can accept your twisted "Mental gymnastics."

Really? So all those full-term babies that have been born and lived but needed some help in their first few days are not worthy?

Mental gymnastics indeed, or just channeling Margaret Sanger (but at least she was honest about it).

All are worthy, which has nothing to do with trying to make a case a fetus is a live person at conception or before it is born. To carry this logic further, a sperm & ova are persons as well, both are human flesh. The sperm can smell & find it's way up stream to the ova like a slamon going up river, therefore it smells. feels, and thinks. The ova feels and only allows one sperm to enter, therefore it thinks as well and is flesh. Are you ready to protect a sperms life?

 

[shintao]

I think that all lives being equal is preposterous. But that's another discussion. I didn't argue your view on that, I argued your logic. You said that it's contradictory to oppose abortion while supporting "war" and capital punishment. Nothing you said here contradicts their logic, it just says that it's your view that all lives are the same. It is perfectly logical to oppose killing an innocent fetus while supporting a war for defense against an aggressor or punishing a murderer with death.

I do think it's illogical to argue that government cannot make people's choices for them with their wallet, but they can with their bodies. That's why I go that route

We will just have to disagree on the point. I showed you the logic behind humanity, and our difference is you place a variable value on human life, involving all kinds of exceptions.


No doubt we would be far better off if government had no choice, yet they are the glue.

The glue huh?

WOW!

Yes, in the terms of holding us all together as America. No government and we are wandering tribesmen living in chaos without laws and guidance.

 

[asterism]

I truely call that "Mental gymnastics " in its finest hour!! LOL!



If I am to accept your reasoning, I could expect to extract a fetus from the womb in the first month, and set it in the crib. And it should survive there by mothers milk and the air we breath. If it can do that, then I can accept your twisted "Mental gymnastics."

Really? So all those full-term babies that have been born and lived but needed some help in their first few days are not worthy?

Mental gymnastics indeed, or just channeling Margaret Sanger (but at least she was honest about it).

All are worthy, which has nothing to do with trying to make a case a fetus is a live person at conception or before it is born. To carry this logic further, a sperm & ova are persons as well, both are human flesh. The sperm can smell & find it's way up stream to the ova like a slamon going up river, therefore it smells. feels, and thinks. The ova feels and only allows one sperm to enter, therefore it thinks as well and is flesh. Are you ready to protect a sperms life?

No, but that's something else for medical science.

 

[Ravi]

Yeah but here's the rub. If my name appears in the "father" section of any birth certificate the government forces me to support that child even if I "chose" to have it aborted and the mother chose to keep it.

Just like I can't have it both ways neither can those on the other side of this issue. If it's her legal "choice" and hers alone, it should also be solely her legal responsibility.

Why use government force to compel fathers to accept responsibility for a child they never wanted to have?

That's another discussion. Unless you're trying to tell us you oppose abortion because you can't have one.

There's been some effective framing and marketing to convince to me to have just that opinion has there not?

"Don't like abortion? Don't have one!"

If you can't answer just say so.

 

[Jackson]

Killing your own baby should not be confused with a simple definition of conservatism or liberalism. It talks about your soul. Either you can mutilate your baby or you can't. I personally cannot.

 

[Anguille]

Killing your own baby should not be confused with a simple definition of conservatism or liberalism. It talks about your soul. Either you can mutilate your baby or you can't. I personally cannot.

Clearly, you can mutilate logic, however.

 

[shintao]

Really? So all those full-term babies that have been born and lived but needed some help in their first few days are not worthy?

Mental gymnastics indeed, or just channeling Margaret Sanger (but at least she was honest about it).

All are worthy, which has nothing to do with trying to make a case a fetus is a live person at conception or before it is born. To carry this logic further, a sperm & ova are persons as well, both are human flesh. The sperm can smell & find it's way up stream to the ova like a slamon going up river, therefore it smells. feels, and thinks. The ova feels and only allows one sperm to enter, therefore it thinks as well and is flesh. Are you ready to protect a sperms life?

No, but that's something else for medical science.

It is already supported by science, as meeting the definition of life. And it is also supported by the Christian Bible, for those that need the religious support.

 

[kaz]

Why use government force to compel fathers to accept responsibility for a child they never wanted to have?

When did I say anything about fathers and government?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

True conservatives believe that a government that governs least governs best.

And that would naturally mean an opposition to a government forcing newly pregnant women to carry to term.

Alleged conservatives perform a lot of mental gymnastics to try to rationalize away this simple fact. But they're still wrong and they're not true conservatives.

And that's just the way it is.

True conservatives, or liberals for that matter, do not judge themselves by the answer to a single issue question. You should really get past your pro abortion stance and realize their are issues that are a lot more important than being able to kill children because they inconvenience you.

The Liberal Case Against Abortion - Pro-Life Liberals - Publications - The Writings of Vasu S. Murti: Human Rights - Social Justice - Animal Rights - Peace - Love - Compassion - Kindness - Gentleness - Religion - Soul - Spirit - Knowledge - Wisdom -

 

[NYcarbineer]

Killing your own baby should not be confused with a simple definition of conservatism or liberalism. It talks about your soul. Either you can mutilate your baby or you can't. I personally cannot.

Could you mutilate someone else's baby with a bomb?

 

[asterism]

All are worthy, which has nothing to do with trying to make a case a fetus is a live person at conception or before it is born. To carry this logic further, a sperm & ova are persons as well, both are human flesh. The sperm can smell & find it's way up stream to the ova like a slamon going up river, therefore it smells. feels, and thinks. The ova feels and only allows one sperm to enter, therefore it thinks as well and is flesh. Are you ready to protect a sperms life?

No, but that's something else for medical science.

It is already supported by science, as meeting the definition of life. And it is also supported by the Christian Bible, for those that need the religious support.

What exactly is that again? Cite some references for both please.

 

[asterism]

Why use government force to compel fathers to accept responsibility for a child they never wanted to have?

When did I say anything about fathers and government?

You didn't. The current law does.

 

[Wingsofwind]

The problem with pro-choice is that we are dealing with TWO lives here not just the woman's. Abortion, unless it is due to medical reasons (mother's life is in danger), is murder no matter what way you slice it.

There has been babies born before 6 months that has survived. This shows that the baby is 'alive' well before 6 months in the womb. Here are two cases where a baby was born before 6 months and survived. If they survived there is no telling how many more could also.

Miracle child

“Non-viable” Baby Girl Survives Birth at 21 Weeks, Weighing Under 10oz | LifeSiteNews.com

For this reason and my beliefs is why I am against abortion for any reason other than the survival of the mother.

I have only one reason why abortion would be an option for a rape victim. The stress of pregnancy on top of the mental health of the woman because of the rape could case problems with the pregnancy and could cause a miscarage. However, a woman should not look to an abortion as an option due to pregnancy from rape. If a doctor determans she and/or the baby is at risk because of her mental health or even physical heath from the rape then she may consider an abortion. But again, it is for the survival of the woman.

However, most abortions are not due to the survival of the woman but rather most are due to the woman just not wanting the child or she feels the child is an inconvenience.

1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).

Abortion Statistics

 

[RadiomanATL]

I disagree.

It all comes down to when you believe life begins. If you believe it begins at conception, or very shortly after, then another human doesn't have a right to decide if another lives or dies. In this case, the state absolutely should protect someone from being killed by another human (abortion). This is consistent with the conservative philosophy.

If you believe that life does not begin at conception or shortly after, and instead begins at another predetermined point or at the actual birth itself, then it is the individual right of the mother to do what she wants with her body. Without state interference. This is also consistent with the conservative philosophy.

I very, very, very rarely enter into the abortion debate. There is no answer because it really does boil down to when you believe life begins. And we as humans don't really have a definitive answer. Myself, I subscribe to the first option above. But I can recognize how, if viewed differently, an opposite view can be consistent with a conservative philosophy.

 

[manifold]

True conservatives believe that a government that governs least governs best.

And that would naturally mean an opposition to a government forcing newly pregnant women to carry to term.

Alleged conservatives perform a lot of mental gymnastics to try to rationalize away this simple fact. But they're still wrong and they're not true conservatives.

And that's just the way it is.

A bit simplistic bud. It depends on whether or not you think an unborn baby is a person, possessing the same rights as any other, or a blob of meat subject to termination at will.

It has nothing to do with Conservatism or Liberalism.

^more mental gymnastics from an authoritarian faux conservative.

 

[mdn2000]

Life, killing, murder, abortion, at Six Months abortion is murder, no matter the reason.

Gianna Jessen Abortion Survivor, she would of died if the Abortion Doctor was at the clinic, she lived and had the Abortionist been present he would of murdered a baby, but she lived.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPF1FhCMPuQ"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPF1FhCMPuQ[/ame]

 

[manifold]

True conservatives believe that a government that governs least governs best.

And that would naturally mean an opposition to a government forcing newly pregnant women to carry to term.

Alleged conservatives perform a lot of mental gymnastics to try to rationalize away this simple fact. But they're still wrong and they're not true conservatives.

And that's just the way it is.

True conservatives, or liberals for that matter, do not judge themselves by the answer to a single issue question. You should really get past your pro abortion stance and realize their are issues that are a lot more important than being able to kill children because they inconvenience you.

Fail.

Most people here know by now that I'm adamantly ANTI-ABORTION. I believe it's wrong on every level and if there is a God these people will be dealt with. But as an adamant believer in individual liberty in this life, I don't believe it's my place, or the governments, to force my moral standard on others when what they are doing doesn't affect me either way.