The Politics of the "Abortion" Word Games

[JoeB131]

Well, there will come a reckoning of this nonsense. And people like you who publicly advocate for the Normalization of Sexual Abnormality, while further advocating for the right to murder the innocent conceived as a result of the normalization of debauchery and hedonism... will be subjected to a special place in hell for your trouble.

There is no hell, guy. And kind of disturbing you think your magic sky fairy is about revenge.

 

[JoeB131]

Well Joe, sorry to disappoint you but I am not a Christian. I also haven't advocated for spooge to have human rights. For the Hat Trick, I am also not a Republican. Honestly, I don't keep up with what happens to bills that are pulled, I imagine there are reasons other than everyone having the epiphany that killing babies is perfectly okay.

Yeah, there was an epiphany. The fact that women will run these assholes out on a rail in 2016 if they didn't shut the **** up.

 

[Boss]

Well Joe, sorry to disappoint you but I am not a Christian. I also haven't advocated for spooge to have human rights. For the Hat Trick, I am also not a Republican. Honestly, I don't keep up with what happens to bills that are pulled, I imagine there are reasons other than everyone having the epiphany that killing babies is perfectly okay.

Yeah, there was an epiphany. The fact that women will run these assholes out on a rail in 2016 if they didn't shut the **** up.

So... again, you admit this issue is all about politics as opposed to what's right and wrong. It's really the only weapon in your arsenal when you think about it. Oh, I could launch into you really good on your silly notion that most republican-voting women disagree with the pro-life platform of their party... but I think the point is made that you view this issue as being all about politics and that is a poignant testament on your part.

I sometimes wonder about the delusional nature of the left, where they somehow get the impression that the vast majority of America believes as they do and their opposition is a small insignificant number of people who mean nothing. Are you guys telling yourselves this to try and build self confidence, or what? Because the facts are pretty clear, we're fairly evenly divided as a nation on the pro-choice/pro-life issue of abortion. That said, we do not all hold the same monolithic extremist view on either side, we are all individuals with individual opinions which vary.

You see... I am Pro-Life, all things being equal. I am not opposed to Pro-choice, I support women and their rights to chose and make informed choices as well. I'm not a fundamentalist who thinks it's my duty to impose God's will on society, I am pragmatic enough to realize civil society best functions when we all agree on common boundaries of decent behavior and acceptable practice. None of us would condone allowing open masturbation in public places because it's disgusting and we don't want to see that behavior in public, it doesn't mean we're religious nuts.

Human life begins at the point of conception. I don't know when (or if) God bestows a soul on human life, or when "personhood" begins. I believe these can only be based on opinions and no one really knows for certain. What we know is, it's human life from point of conception. All philosophy aside, this is what science confirms and we have to accept. From there, we can engage in an intelligent debate over when it is ethical to terminate human life, and I have no problem with that debate. However, if Life and Choice are equal, I favor Life over Choice.

So you say, well Boss, how would they not be equal? And I would say, if the choice was taken away by the act of rape, that would be an example where Choice and Life are not equal. The Life exists, but there was no Choice. In that case, I think the Choice deserves preservation over the Life. Okay, what if the Life prevails over Choice but threatens another Life in the process? Choice again should prevail. So as you can see, I am not a rigid Pro-lifer by any means.

Society will eventually work this out, I have no doubt in my mind about that. Roe v. Wade will go down in history just like Dred Scott and Plessy v Ferguson, and all other SCOTUS rulings which have denied human rights to human lives.

 

[JoeB131]

So... again, you admit this issue is all about politics as opposed to what's right and wrong. It's really the only weapon in your arsenal when you think about it. Oh, I could launch into you really good on your silly notion that most republican-voting women disagree with the pro-life platform of their party... but I think the point is made that you view this issue as being all about politics and that is a poignant testament on your part.

I don't have this whole "Right and Wrong" arrogance you have. To me, fetuses aren't people when most abortions are performed. The few cases where they are performed after viability, it's usually for a good reason.

Clearly, this WAS about politics.

Human life begins at the point of conception. I don't know when (or if) God bestows a soul on human life, or when "personhood" begins. I believe these can only be based on opinions and no one really knows for certain. What we know is, it's human life from point of conception. All philosophy aside, this is what science confirms and we have to accept. From there, we can engage in an intelligent debate over when it is ethical to terminate human life, and I have no problem with that debate. However, if Life and Choice are equal, I favor Life over Choice.

And if people on your side weren't constantly trying to yank food out of the mouths of hungry children so the rich can buy more Dressage Horses, I might actually take you seriously.

So you say, well Boss, how would they not be equal? And I would say, if the choice was taken away by the act of rape, that would be an example where Choice and Life are not equal. The Life exists, but there was no Choice. In that case, I think the Choice deserves preservation over the Life. Okay, what if the Life prevails over Choice but threatens another Life in the process? Choice again should prevail. So as you can see, I am not a rigid Pro-lifer by any means.

But that's the hypocrisy on your part. Regardless of how a fetus was conceived, you can't say that the one conceived in a rape has less rights than one conceived because the girl wanted to force her boyfriend to marry her and he wouldn't. (Something that has actually happened with people I know.) YOu are the one playing politics, because you know the rape victim is sympathetic, but the gal who is using the fetus as a bargaining chip with a boyfriend isn't.

Society will eventually work this out, I have no doubt in my mind about that. Roe v. Wade will go down in history just like Dred Scott and Plessy v Ferguson, and all other SCOTUS rulings which have denied human rights to human lives.

Again, you see, the thing is, you work on the assumption that Roe really changed anything. Women were having abortions before Roe. The birth rate did NOT drop in 1974. Women were terminating their fetuses in 1972 at the same rate they would in 1974.

In fact, if you guys got your wish, and overturned Roe, you wouldn't end abortion, you'd just drive it underground. The Philippines has the kinds of restrictions on abortion you guys pray for. They also have 500,000 to 800,000 abortions performed every year. (Out of a population of some 90 million, this is a HIGHER rate than the US).

 

[JoeB131]

I sometimes wonder about the delusional nature of the left, where they somehow get the impression that the vast majority of America believes as they do and their opposition is a small insignificant number of people who mean nothing. Are you guys telling yourselves this to try and build self confidence, or what? Because the facts are pretty clear, we're fairly evenly divided as a nation on the pro-choice/pro-life issue of abortion. That said, we do not all hold the same monolithic extremist view on either side, we are all individuals with individual opinions which vary.

Yeah, but all your opinions are kind of stupid, that's the thing.

My problem with the Pro-Life people is that you are dupes. It's not that I really worry you'll ever end abortion, becuaase you never, ever will.

What worries me is that you put in people like George W. Stupid, who proceeds to start wars, wreck economies and do the bidding of the 1% on the hope, some day, Little Timmy, that they will try to impose your base superstitions and sexual prudeness on the rest of us.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

... To me, fetuses ...

Relativism... nasty stuff.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I sometimes wonder about the delusional nature of the left, where they somehow get the impression that the vast majority of America believes as they do and their opposition is a small insignificant number of people who mean nothing. Are you guys telling yourselves this to try and build self confidence, or what? Because the facts are pretty clear, we're fairly evenly divided as a nation on the pro-choice/pro-life issue of abortion. That said, we do not all hold the same monolithic extremist view on either side, we are all individuals with individual opinions which vary.

Yeah, but all your opinions are kind of stupid ...

ROFLMNAO!

CLASSIC!

I just adore the sweeter ironies.

 

[JoeB131]

... To me, fetuses ...

Relativism... nasty stuff.

All morals are relative.

It was considered moral in bible times to stone your daughter to death if her hymen wasn't intact on her wedding night.

It was considered moral to stone your neighbor to death for working on the sabbath.

It was considered moral to hold another human being as property, to sell your daughter into slavery, and a lot of other things we'd consider illegal and insane today.

So what happened? Morals changed.

 

[Boss]

I don't have this whole "Right and Wrong" arrogance you have. To me, fetuses aren't people when most abortions are performed. The few cases where they are performed after viability, it's usually for a good reason.

And many once thought slaves were not people and the few free slaves had good reason to be killed. Hitler thought most Jews were not people and the few free Jews had good reason to be killed.

I still don't get this "viability" aspect.. It's never going to be 100% viable outside of it's natural environment. By placing this impossible criteria on the fetus you are making an irrational argument that I simply don't understand. How "viable" are you if I sew you up inside a womb of amniotic fluid? Does that make you less of a human being?

In NO case is an abortion performed on anything other than a living human organism. A human life, a human being. To what degree that human has this ambiguous "personhood" you wish to apply, I don't know. Just as I don't know when or if it gets a soul. I can only go by science and biology on this but I do believe at some point the fetus deserves protection as a human being with constitutional rights, including the right to live.

 

[Boss]

But that's the hypocrisy on your part. Regardless of how a fetus was conceived, you can't say that the one conceived in a rape has less rights than one conceived because the girl wanted to force her boyfriend to marry her and he wouldn't.

Sure I can, I just explained it to you. I think the fetus in a rape case has less rights the first trimester than the rape victim. The rape victim should have the right of choice in that case and I believe it trumps the first-trimester fetus' right to live. In the other example, I am for the woman's choice to have her baby regardless of her reason. Seems to me the guy already exercised his options.

 

[Boss]

All morals are relative.

This explains everything about you!

This should be your sig!

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Relativism... nasty stuff.

All morals are relative.

YES~ BE AMAZED!

I say it here and it comes out THERE!

.

.

.

ROFLMNAO! Relativists...

 

[TimothysAlaska]

The real question is what does it mean to be 'human'?

And, it seems that the answer depends on where you reside on the political spectrum
For Liberals/Progressives/Democrats, a major selling point of their worldview is in allowing moral relativity, self-determined morality, and 'if it feels good, do it."

The corollary of same is that one must never, never be judgmental.
And with abortion, the right to kill "it" depends on how you define....or rationalize....what "it" is.

1. The abortion argument revolves around whether or not life begins at conception. For those who wish to see abortion as the mothers’ right, or decision, then there must be a separate understanding of the terms ‘life’ and ‘person:’ such a distinction is widely accepted today on the secular Left.

a. If life begins at one time, and ‘personhood’ comes into being some time later, then, clearly, they are two different things. The validation of this thinking can be found in Roe v. Wade, which found that a fetus is human from the beginning, but not a person until some time later, at 24 weeks, “the earliest point at which it can be proven that the fetus has the capacity to have a meaningful life as a person.”
Civil Rights of a Fetus - Law Philosophy and Religion

b. Dating back to antiquity, most cultures have assumed that a human being comprises both physical and spiritual elements: body and soul. Contemporary thought, it seems, has split these apart. In accordance with liberal or Postmodernist thinking, there is the autonomous self, the person versus the Modernist concept of a biochemical machine, the body.

1. 1. If one accepts this divided concept of human nature, i.e., person, and body, this aligns one with the liberal political view, which rejects moral limits on desire as a violation of its liberty.
   2. An interesting comment is that of Joseph Fletcher, founder of the theory of situational ethics: “What is critical is personal status, not merely human status.” In his view, fetuses and newborns are “sub-personal,” and therefore fail to qualify for the right to life. Joseph Fletcher, “Humanhood: Essays in Biomedical Ethics,” p. ll. "It struck me how similar this idea is to the Nazi concept of “untermenschen” for Jews, gypsies, slavs, any non-aryans." Pearcey, "Saving Leonardo," chapter three

1. As for the response ‘If you’re against abortion, don’t have one,” it’s not quite that easy…this rebuttal sidesteps the fact that once one accepts this view, it entails acceptance of the worldview that justifies same. It is less a private matter than one that dictates how people can behave toward each other...e.g., "if you don’t agree with robbing banks, then don’t rob any.”

If one has that that view so common in Liberals/Progressives/Democrats, .....this means that anything....anything, no matter how heartless or diabolical....one chooses to do with/to the pre-person stage.....it's all good.

That's why Liberals/Progressives/Democrats were fine with electing a President who had no problem with infanticide.

Hmm interesting.....view......but have you seen the people having abortions? Not really the type of people that have a philosophical debate about life why are we here. Yes yes yes....I know you think we all should but we don't, people live in the moment to be honest and we created the society the way it is now. People want what they want. Is it right? They do not care...to be blunt about it. Pandora's box has been open, you can't close it. Won't happen. So on one hand you have a nazi mentality, as you put it. On the other you have a stalinistic approach where the government decides what choices you make. Hmm and Stalin killed more people then hitler....and yes it seems the progressives and liberals jumped on the abortion debate.... But wasn't started by women's lib? I guess we could go back to when everything was good, but women could not vote, If allowed to work they made way less then men that makes the complaint today seem like a drop in the bucket. And most were expected to be a stay at home mother and if you were a mother out of wedlock, you were shunned by your community....I mean come on live your life to your values and people will be inspired by you force people to live to what rules you want implemented and you become a pariah....

I like the way things have progressed in today's society....you do to....take the good with the bad and make the best you can!

 

[Bfgrn]

Well Joe, sorry to disappoint you but I am not a Christian. I also haven't advocated for spooge to have human rights. For the Hat Trick, I am also not a Republican. Honestly, I don't keep up with what happens to bills that are pulled, I imagine there are reasons other than everyone having the epiphany that killing babies is perfectly okay.

Yeah, there was an epiphany. The fact that women will run these assholes out on a rail in 2016 if they didn't shut the **** up.

So... again, you admit this issue is all about politics as opposed to what's right and wrong. It's really the only weapon in your arsenal when you think about it. Oh, I could launch into you really good on your silly notion that most republican-voting women disagree with the pro-life platform of their party... but I think the point is made that you view this issue as being all about politics and that is a poignant testament on your part.

I sometimes wonder about the delusional nature of the left, where they somehow get the impression that the vast majority of America believes as they do and their opposition is a small insignificant number of people who mean nothing. Are you guys telling yourselves this to try and build self confidence, or what? Because the facts are pretty clear, we're fairly evenly divided as a nation on the pro-choice/pro-life issue of abortion. That said, we do not all hold the same monolithic extremist view on either side, we are all individuals with individual opinions which vary.

You see... I am Pro-Life, all things being equal. I am not opposed to Pro-choice, I support women and their rights to chose and make informed choices as well. I'm not a fundamentalist who thinks it's my duty to impose God's will on society, I am pragmatic enough to realize civil society best functions when we all agree on common boundaries of decent behavior and acceptable practice. None of us would condone allowing open masturbation in public places because it's disgusting and we don't want to see that behavior in public, it doesn't mean we're religious nuts.

Human life begins at the point of conception. I don't know when (or if) God bestows a soul on human life, or when "personhood" begins. I believe these can only be based on opinions and no one really knows for certain. What we know is, it's human life from point of conception. All philosophy aside, this is what science confirms and we have to accept. From there, we can engage in an intelligent debate over when it is ethical to terminate human life, and I have no problem with that debate. However, if Life and Choice are equal, I favor Life over Choice.

So you say, well Boss, how would they not be equal? And I would say, if the choice was taken away by the act of rape, that would be an example where Choice and Life are not equal. The Life exists, but there was no Choice. In that case, I think the Choice deserves preservation over the Life. Okay, what if the Life prevails over Choice but threatens another Life in the process? Choice again should prevail. So as you can see, I am not a rigid Pro-lifer by any means.

Society will eventually work this out, I have no doubt in my mind about that. Roe v. Wade will go down in history just like Dred Scott and Plessy v Ferguson, and all other SCOTUS rulings which have denied human rights to human lives.

The left didn't make the abortion issue all about politics, the right did. When the ruling on Roe v. Wade came down, the group with the highest percentage of support were Republicans.

The position of the right on abortion was driven BY politics, not morality, ethics or the concern for the unborn. Conservatives show no concern for the crawling or the walking, why would anyone believe they care about an egg or embryo.

In a 7-2 decision by a conservative leaning Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade really was about abortion, nothing more or less. To read the actual opinion, as almost no one ever does, is to understand that the seven middle-aged to elderly men in the majority certainly didn’t think they were making a statement about women’s rights: women and their voices are nearly absent from the opinion.

It’s a case about the rights of doctors – fellow professionals, after all – who faced criminal prosecution in states across the country for acting in what they considered to be the best interests of their patients. In “Before Roe v. Wade: Voices That Shaped the Abortion Debate Before the Supreme Court’s Ruling,” a book collecting pre-Roe documents that Reva B. Siegel and I published, we reprint an account by Dr. Jane E. Hodgson, a Mayo Clinic-trained obstetrician/gynecologist, of her arrest in St. Paul in 1970 for performing a first-trimester abortion for a patient who had contracted German measles in the fourth week of pregnancy. (In those days before immunization eradicated the threat posed to pregnant women by German measles, the disease commonly caused serious birth defects.) Justice Harry A. Blackmun, formerly the Mayo Clinic’s lawyer, knew Dr. Hodgson’s story; I had found her account, published in the clinic’s alumni magazine, in the justice’s files at the Library of Congress.

In decriminalizing abortion, the justices were reflecting a rapid sea change in public opinion that moved over the course of a decade from the elites of the public health and legal professions to ordinary people who viewed the issue as one of policy rather than, as many later would, personal identity. A Gallup poll in the summer of 1972 found 64 percent of Americans agreeing with the statement that “The decision to have an abortion should be made solely by a woman and her physician.” A majority of all identified groups, including Catholics, agreed with that statement. There was almost no difference between men and women. The group expressing the strongest agreement – 68 percent – was made up of Republicans. George Gallup’s syndicated column discussing the poll results, “Abortion Seen Up to Woman, Doctor,” which we reprint in the book, was also in Justice Blackmun’s files.

more



All of PC's ridicule of Liberals and progressives applies to Republicans before the Evangelical right politicized abortion when the IRS sought to revoke the tax-exempt status of Bob Jones University in 1975 because the school's regulations forbade interracial dating; African Americans, in fact, had been denied admission altogether until 1971, and it took another four years before unmarried African Americans were allowed to enroll.

Paul M. Weyrich, a longtime conservative activist, saw the evangelical discontent over the Bob Jones case as the opening he was looking for to start a new conservative movement using evangelicals as foot soldiers.

During the meeting in Washington, D.C., Weyrich went on to characterize the leaders of the Religious Right as reluctant to take up the abortion cause even close to a decade after the Roe ruling. "I had discussions with all the leading lights of the movement in the late 1970s and early 1980s, post–Roe v. Wade," he said, "and they were all arguing that that decision was one more reason why Christians had to isolate themselves from the rest of the world."

"What caused the movement to surface," Weyrich reiterated,"was the federal government's moves against Christian schools." The IRS threat against segregated schools, he said, "enraged the Christian community." That, not abortion, according to Weyrich, was what galvanized politically conservative evangelicals into the Religious Right and goaded them into action. "It was not the other things," he said.

more

 

[JoeB131]

And many once thought slaves were not people and the few free slaves had good reason to be killed. Hitler thought most Jews were not people and the few free Jews had good reason to be killed.

Slaves and Jews weren't inside other people when these things happened. How about getting on the point. DO you think a fetus has more rights than the person it is inside?

I still don't get this "viability" aspect.. It's never going to be 100% viable outside of it's natural environment. By placing this impossible criteria on the fetus you are making an irrational argument that I simply don't understand. How "viable" are you if I sew you up inside a womb of amniotic fluid? Does that make you less of a human being?

Dude, no one wants to hear about your weird fetishes.

In NO case is an abortion performed on anything other than a living human organism. A human life, a human being. To what degree that human has this ambiguous "personhood" you wish to apply, I don't know. Just as I don't know when or if it gets a soul. I can only go by science and biology on this but I do believe at some point the fetus deserves protection as a human being with constitutional rights, including the right to live.

LIke I said. My standard. Abortion pisses off religious assholes, therefore it's a good. **** religion and **** science, the practical matter is, the kind of society that forces women to have babies they dont' want isn't one any of us would want to live in. It would be the most invasive of police states.

Sure I can, I just explained it to you. I think the fetus in a rape case has less rights the first trimester than the rape victim. The rape victim should have the right of choice in that case and I believe it trumps the first-trimester fetus' right to live. In the other example, I am for the woman's choice to have her baby regardless of her reason. Seems to me the guy already exercised his options.

Again- either it's a person or it isn't. Otherwise, would a woman should be able to smother her newborn the day it's born when she see's it's clearly her rapists baby instead of her husbands.

You can't have it both ways. Either Fetuses are people with more rights than they are in, or they are disposable clumps of cells.

 

[JoeB131]

All morals are relative.

This explains everything about you!

This should be your sig!

So do you think it was okay in bible times to stone a girl to death because her cherry was popped?

 

[Boss]

And many once thought slaves were not people and the few free slaves had good reason to be killed. Hitler thought most Jews were not people and the few free Jews had good reason to be killed.

Slaves and Jews weren't inside other people when these things happened. How about getting on the point. DO you think a fetus has more rights than the person it is inside?

So now... what you are and whether you have any rights is a matter of where you're at?

LIke I said. My standard. Abortion pisses off religious assholes, therefore it's a good. **** religion and **** science....

Says everything we need to know about you.

You can't have it both ways. Either Fetuses are people with more rights than they are in, or they are disposable clumps of cells.

No it doesn't have to be either. Fetuses are not clumps of cells, period. There is no science that supports that, it is sheer ignorance. Fetuses are human beings in the fetal stage of development. There is no question about this, it is supported by science. The question of rights and choices and when they begin or end is a matter of opinion, so is the value of personhood or spirit.

You've not presented any argument other than your arrogant and opinionated disrespect for human life and moral decency. You've already admitted this is all about politics for you and flipping the middle finger to religion. You don't give one solitary shit about human rights. Human being are garbage to you. They serve as a means to your personal gratification and that is all. And what is so sad for society is, you are not alone.

 

[JoeB131]

So now... what you are and whether you have any rights is a matter of where you're at?

There are no "rights", guy. There's only privilages that society agrees you should have. Any fool who thinks he has rights needs to look up 'Japanese-Americans, 1942".

No it doesn't have to be either. Fetuses are not clumps of cells, period. There is no science that supports that, it is sheer ignorance. Fetuses are human beings in the fetal stage of development. There is no question about this, it is supported by science. The question of rights and choices and when they begin or end is a matter of opinion, so is the value of personhood or spirit.

I think you are getting it entirely wrong. At the end of the day, the person who decides whether it's a baby or medical waste is the woman it's inside. It's her choice. It's none of your business, and it's not the business of a church or a politician.

I don't get hung up about it because that's the way it will be no matter what the laws are.

I do worry what kind of hell the wealthy will inflict becuase they can get stupid people like you to vote against your own (and my) economic interests, but I'm not worried that you will ever stop a single abortion.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Well Joe, sorry to disappoint you but I am not a Christian. I also haven't advocated for spooge to have human rights. For the Hat Trick, I am also not a Republican. Honestly, I don't keep up with what happens to bills that are pulled, I imagine there are reasons other than everyone having the epiphany that killing babies is perfectly okay.

Yeah, there was an epiphany. The fact that women will run these assholes out on a rail in 2016 if they didn't shut the **** up.

So... again, you admit this issue is all about politics as opposed to what's right and wrong. It's really the only weapon in your arsenal when you think about it. Oh, I could launch into you really good on your silly notion that most republican-voting women disagree with the pro-life platform of their party... but I think the point is made that you view this issue as being all about politics and that is a poignant testament on your part.

I sometimes wonder about the delusional nature of the left, where they somehow get the impression that the vast majority of America believes as they do and their opposition is a small insignificant number of people who mean nothing. Are you guys telling yourselves this to try and build self confidence, or what? Because the facts are pretty clear, we're fairly evenly divided as a nation on the pro-choice/pro-life issue of abortion. That said, we do not all hold the same monolithic extremist view on either side, we are all individuals with individual opinions which vary.

You see... I am Pro-Life, all things being equal. I am not opposed to Pro-choice, I support women and their rights to chose and make informed choices as well. I'm not a fundamentalist who thinks it's my duty to impose God's will on society, I am pragmatic enough to realize civil society best functions when we all agree on common boundaries of decent behavior and acceptable practice. None of us would condone allowing open masturbation in public places because it's disgusting and we don't want to see that behavior in public, it doesn't mean we're religious nuts.

Human life begins at the point of conception. I don't know when (or if) God bestows a soul on human life, or when "personhood" begins. I believe these can only be based on opinions and no one really knows for certain. What we know is, it's human life from point of conception. All philosophy aside, this is what science confirms and we have to accept. From there, we can engage in an intelligent debate over when it is ethical to terminate human life, and I have no problem with that debate. However, if Life and Choice are equal, I favor Life over Choice.

So you say, well Boss, how would they not be equal? And I would say, if the choice was taken away by the act of rape, that would be an example where Choice and Life are not equal. The Life exists, but there was no Choice. In that case, I think the Choice deserves preservation over the Life. Okay, what if the Life prevails over Choice but threatens another Life in the process? Choice again should prevail. So as you can see, I am not a rigid Pro-lifer by any means.

Society will eventually work this out, I have no doubt in my mind about that. Roe v. Wade will go down in history just like Dred Scott and Plessy v Ferguson, and all other SCOTUS rulings which have denied human rights to human lives.

The left didn't make the abortion issue all about politics, the right did. When the ruling on Roe v. Wade came down, the group with the highest percentage of support were Republicans.

The position of the right on abortion was driven BY politics, not morality, ethics or the concern for the unborn. Conservatives show no concern for the crawling or the walking, why would anyone believe they care about an egg or embryo.

In a 7-2 decision by a conservative leaning Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade really was about abortion, nothing more or less. To read the actual opinion, as almost no one ever does, is to understand that the seven middle-aged to elderly men in the majority certainly didn’t think they were making a statement about women’s rights: women and their voices are nearly absent from the opinion.

It’s a case about the rights of doctors – fellow professionals, after all – who faced criminal prosecution in states across the country for acting in what they considered to be the best interests of their patients. In “Before Roe v. Wade: Voices That Shaped the Abortion Debate Before the Supreme Court’s Ruling,” a book collecting pre-Roe documents that Reva B. Siegel and I published, we reprint an account by Dr. Jane E. Hodgson, a Mayo Clinic-trained obstetrician/gynecologist, of her arrest in St. Paul in 1970 for performing a first-trimester abortion for a patient who had contracted German measles in the fourth week of pregnancy. (In those days before immunization eradicated the threat posed to pregnant women by German measles, the disease commonly caused serious birth defects.) Justice Harry A. Blackmun, formerly the Mayo Clinic’s lawyer, knew Dr. Hodgson’s story; I had found her account, published in the clinic’s alumni magazine, in the justice’s files at the Library of Congress.

In decriminalizing abortion, the justices were reflecting a rapid sea change in public opinion that moved over the course of a decade from the elites of the public health and legal professions to ordinary people who viewed the issue as one of policy rather than, as many later would, personal identity. A Gallup poll in the summer of 1972 found 64 percent of Americans agreeing with the statement that “The decision to have an abortion should be made solely by a woman and her physician.” A majority of all identified groups, including Catholics, agreed with that statement. There was almost no difference between men and women. The group expressing the strongest agreement – 68 percent – was made up of Republicans. George Gallup’s syndicated column discussing the poll results, “Abortion Seen Up to Woman, Doctor,” which we reprint in the book, was also in Justice Blackmun’s files.

more



All of PC's ridicule of Liberals and progressives applies to Republicans before the Evangelical right politicized abortion when the IRS sought to revoke the tax-exempt status of Bob Jones University in 1975 because the school's regulations forbade interracial dating; African Americans, in fact, had been denied admission altogether until 1971, and it took another four years before unmarried African Americans were allowed to enroll.

Paul M. Weyrich, a longtime conservative activist, saw the evangelical discontent over the Bob Jones case as the opening he was looking for to start a new conservative movement using evangelicals as foot soldiers.

During the meeting in Washington, D.C., Weyrich went on to characterize the leaders of the Religious Right as reluctant to take up the abortion cause even close to a decade after the Roe ruling. "I had discussions with all the leading lights of the movement in the late 1970s and early 1980s, post–Roe v. Wade," he said, "and they were all arguing that that decision was one more reason why Christians had to isolate themselves from the rest of the world."

"What caused the movement to surface," Weyrich reiterated,"was the federal government's moves against Christian schools." The IRS threat against segregated schools, he said, "enraged the Christian community." That, not abortion, according to Weyrich, was what galvanized politically conservative evangelicals into the Religious Right and goaded them into action. "It was not the other things," he said.

more

WOW~

A nine paragraph non sequitur.

THAT is amazing.

 

[Dana7360]

Not everyone. The human life you discarded as medical waste is not better off.

My sex life has nothing to do with this debate, other than to further illustrate how devoid of a point you have become. In your mind, hurling some remark like that is supposed to degrade and mock me, make fun of me in front of your peers. It only serves to show how utterly immature you are and how selfish your attitude is toward others.

Naw, guy, when you say shit like 'don't have sex", everyone knows that you use your personality as birth control.

Yeah, Abstinence works. Just ask Bristol Palin.

Real world, people are ******* and having abortions when they get a little surprise on the EPT.

Bristol Palin didn't. She was mature enough to accept responsibility for the consequences of her actions. We're getting to the real heart of the matter with you, it's all about being able to shuck responsibility and do as you damn well please regardless of human life. But that's why you are getting such blowback on this and it's not going to stop. Ever.

Blowback, a.k.a. "nuggets"


Anti-Choice Violence and Intimidation

A campaign of violence, vandalism, and intimidation is endangering providers and patients and curtailing the availability of abortion services. Since 1993, eight clinic workers – including four doctors, two clinic employees, a clinic escort, and a security guard – have been murdered in the United States. Seventeen attempted murders have also occurred since 1991. In fact, opponents of choice have directed more than 6,400 reported acts of violence against abortion providers since 1977, including bombings, arsons, death threats, kidnappings, and assaults, as well as more than 175,000 reported acts of disruption, including bomb threats and harassing calls.

There's no downside to disrupting pre-born infanticide.

So you support murder, bombings and intimidation of law abiding citizens.

Exactly they're all murderers. They support murderers and terrorists. So those who support the murders and terrorists are exactly what they support.

Anti freedom people use murder and terrorism to force women to give up their freedom and rights. Then the murderers walk away. When the child needs any help at all, the woman becomes a slut or whore and the child becomes a thug.

They show their true colors and intensions all over this board.