Pro-Life Bill......

[jon_forward]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=2&u=/ap/20040226/ap_on_go_co/unborn_victims

seem they have decided when life begins....

 

[Avatar4321]

I was actually happy to see it. But unfortunately we cant ban abortion all together but since the judges are rather stubborn into reading a right that doesnt exist in the constitution only an ammendment will change that and while i think a majority support the pro life movement, there arent enough for an ammendment. You would think that in a society as advanced as ours we would have overcome something as barbaric as infanticide by now. I mean its one of the few things worse then slavery thats existed in the United States.

 

[jon_forward]

I am against abortion except in cases of violence or mothers health...If I understand right...this means life at conception...the holy grail definition needed for clearity of when life starts...

 

[Avatar4321]

The question is will the courts uphold the deffinition set forth by the people?

 

[jon_forward]

at the risk of pissing off some ladys on this board I do hope so....but its not likely...

 

[Moi]

This is a gigantic step towards prosecuting those who would harm the unborn. I do not believe that it will be the death knell for abortion as that's voluntary rather than involuntary.

And, yes, I meant the pun.

 

[eric]

It's about time !!!!!

 

[Bullypulpit]

...Human life does not "begin" at conception. From a purely practical standpoint, it doesn't really begin until the fetus is viable outside the womb.

Until the blastocyst (an undifferentiated mass of cells) implants itself in the uterine wall, it isn't even considered a fetus. And until well into the first trimester, it doesn't even resemble anything human.

The so called "right-to-life" movement confuses the potential with the actual. The life that already exists (the mother) trumps the potential life (the blastocyst or the fetus).

And, face it, the "right-to-life" movement isn't about life, it's about power...political power...the power to dictate how a woman will lead her life. Is she an entity with free-will? Or merely chattel, to do as she's told. That view coincides nicely with the Taliban and Wahabi view of the world...doncha think? Just goes to show ya...religious extremists are all dangerous loonies, doesn't matter what religious flavor they like.

 

[Avatar4321]

Life exists if cells divide.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
...Human life does not "begin" at conception. From a purely practical standpoint, it doesn't really begin until the fetus is viable outside the womb.

Until the blastocyst (an undifferentiated mass of cells) implants itself in the uterine wall, it isn't even considered a fetus. And until well into the first trimester, it doesn't even resemble anything human.

The so called "right-to-life" movement confuses the potential with the actual. The life that already exists (the mother) trumps the potential life (the blastocyst or the fetus).

And, face it, the "right-to-life" movement isn't about life, it's about power...political power...the power to dictate how a woman will lead her life. Is she an entity with free-will? Or merely chattel, to do as she's told. That view coincides nicely with the Taliban and Wahabi view of the world...doncha think? Just goes to show ya...religious extremists are all dangerous loonies, doesn't matter what religious flavor they like.

Sorry to burst YOUR bubble, but read the new legislation. Must suck to always be on the losing end.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
...Human life does not "begin" at conception. From a purely practical standpoint, it doesn't really begin until the fetus is viable outside the womb.

Until the blastocyst (an undifferentiated mass of cells) implants itself in the uterine wall, it isn't even considered a fetus. And until well into the first trimester, it doesn't even resemble anything human.

The so called "right-to-life" movement confuses the potential with the actual. The life that already exists (the mother) trumps the potential life (the blastocyst or the fetus).

And, face it, the "right-to-life" movement isn't about life, it's about power...political power...the power to dictate how a woman will lead her life. Is she an entity with free-will? Or merely chattel, to do as she's told. That view coincides nicely with the Taliban and Wahabi view of the world...doncha think? Just goes to show ya...religious extremists are all dangerous loonies, doesn't matter what religious flavor they like.

No, I don't think. Cells are alive. They may not be a cognitive human, but they are alive.

The fact is that abortion is the taking of life. Plain and simple. Perhaps the euphamism of "choice" causes some people to ignore that fact but yet it's there. You have never carried a baby so I doubt you will ever know the truth. However, it would have killed me if when I was pregnant someone had harmed me and thus caused me to lose my baby. Just because he wasn't born didn't mean I didn't love him and want him and deserve him. Just because he could not have lived without me at first didn't make me any less responsible for his welfare.

I'm not advocating for a repeal of abortion when I say that making it a crime to harm a fetus- whether by the man who just doesn't want to be responsible for the child support or the woman so high on crack she doesn't give fuck or the unwitting moron who pushes a pregnant woman down the stairs in impatient attempt to get by- and giving the law the teeth to prosecute those who do harm to them is a great thing for society.

Abortion isn't about power. It's about protecting life. In the overwhelming majority of cases, abortion is not about protecting the life of the mother or preventing birth as a result of rape/incest. It's plain and simple someone wanting to be excused from the consequences of their actions. Now, is the taking of one life acceptable for the convenience of another? Sometimes the answer to that is yes. I believe in the death penalty.

However, I completely refute the assertion that all those who believe that abortion is wrong only want to return to the days of women as chattel. I do not think that the vast majority of the people who want to end abortion are so narrow minded and cruel as you choose to think they are. You're as hypocritical as those whom you decry.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by jimnyc
Sorry to burst YOUR bubble, but read the new legislation. Must suck to always be on the losing end.

Sorry, the new legislation is wrong, medically and scientifically.

Must suck to be so stupid.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Sorry, the new legislation is wrong, medically and scientifically.

Must suck to be so stupid.

Tsk, tsk. Ask your wife about stupidity.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by jimnyc
Tsk, tsk. Ask your wife about stupidity.

She thinks you're stupid too...

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
She thinks you're stupid too...

Thanks for solidifying my point.

Once clueless, always clueless.

 

[Bullypulpit]

You really should speak of yourself in such negative terms. How long have you had this self-image problem?

 

[Moi]

Once again, Bully, you've redefined the absurd.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
You really should speak of yourself in such negative terms. How long have you had this self-image problem?

I'm not the one whining day in and day out!

I'm quite happy! No gay marriages, Bush is our president and will be for the next 4 years!

You clean bedpans and live a miserable complaining existence.

Can someone say a pity prayer for Bullshit?

 

[Bullypulpit]

Hmm...musta touched a nerve...

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by Moi
Once again, Bully, you've redefined the absurd.

Yes old son, one need only read your posts to do so.