Who's a Christian, Catholic, etc.. pro- choice supporter

[26 X World Champs]

Here's another.

The Yankees home opener looked like a continuation of the World Series, didn't it? The Red Sox creamed 'em 8 to 1. You must be in agony.

Agony? 26 world series to 1, real agony. Baseball is a pleasure, even when your team loses. There are so many joys in baseball. Winning is a bonus. The game itself is what I love.

Maybe instead of wasting bandwidth (your words) you'll actually produce some facts that I've requested in defense of all the generalizations that you make that have absolutely no basis in fact?

Remember? 12 ounce preemies? Amerasian taunts? Stats on how mixed race or religion in marriages causes families to crumble, more so than in your "traditional" marriages? All of these are just from the last 48 hours. You continue to post yet you have not provided one fact when challenged. How come? C'mon, let's see some facts to back up the bellows?

:hitsfan:

 

[26 X World Champs]

Here's another.

The Yankees home opener looked like a continuation of the World Series, didn't it? The Red Sox creamed 'em 8 to 1. You must be in agony.

It was the Sox' home opener. The Yanks beat the Sox 9-2 in the season opener @ the stadium...Just thought I'd correct your "facts" yet again...

 

[Sandy]

I am personally opposed to abortion but I do not feel I should have any sayso for anyone else. This makes me Pro-Choice on just about everything. Prohibition does nothing but build prisons in America.

How much government do you want?

 

[Mixed View]

just a little news- Austrailia is or is really thinking about illegalizing abortion because having an abortion is like the "in" thing there. Several teen girls are getting pregnant just to have an abortion. That is sick and wrong. How is this a woman's choice to decide wheather her baby lives or dies. Wow that sounds even more sick when I say it to myself. For crying out loud people. If you're raped put it up for adoption. If you just got pregnant deal with it, it was your choice to have sex, but it shoundn't be your choice to decide if you with let a baby live or murder it.

The War in Iraq
Abortion
What has America come to?

 

[Sandy]

So you would rather have the Federal Government make a law that abortions are prohibited? Do you have any idea what kind of enforcement this would demand? Our Government would close down due to the expansive growth this prohibition would demand.

Read up on Alcohol prohibition and see if this is what you really want. It took the FBI to try and close down the sellers of alcohol and it started a criminal cartel that is still in existence except now they are selling drugs. Our War on Drugs is a farce as the CIA is doing the dealing.

You have your choices and I have mine. America has never been able to legislate morality and there is no reason why they have to start now.

Australia is a Socialistic country where the residents look to the government for all their actions. America is a free nation where even bad choices are allowed. Move to Australia if you want your lives laid out for you.

Abortions are not mandated which means we have to think in advance whether we want to take a chance. We also have the same debate in America of how we choose to die.

It is becoming more difficult for people to recognize their responsibilities during their short time on earth. I think it is time we started taking these responsibilities. Calling on Big Daddy should not be an option, unless a person is really, really stupid and can't get from one to two without help.

 

[AHSPolitician]

I am personally opposed to abortion but I do not feel I should have any sayso for anyone else

Me too.

This is something I feel the Democratic Party rhetoric has failed to convince people about. I'm sure very few Democrats think that abortion is a "good idea", but yet it always comes off that way. Most of them probably believe just like you do Sandy, that abortion is a last resort, but the government shouldn't be have the power to regulated people's personal lives to this degree.

Right-wing moralists feel alienated by the Democrats because the Democrats come off (or at least are portrayed) as baby killers. What the Democrats need is a candidate to propose abortion prevention through abstinence and sexual education rather than simply advocating for protection of people's rights.

It is ironic that liberal, large-government-advocating Democrats are opposed to government regulation, but conservative, individual-responsibility-advocating Republicans want to take away personal choice on this issue. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

When did the Republicans become more concerned with "moral issues" than they did with advocating for less government control? It doesn't make sense to me. Seems to me their abandoning their old conservative ship for a brand new God-powered one.

 

[shuamort]

Me too.

This is something I feel the Democratic Party rhetoric has failed to convince people about. I'm sure very few Democrats think that abortion is a "good idea", but yet it always comes off that way.

You've really honed in on the big part of the debate that's problematic. What we really have in the abortion debate are two arguments being presented as one.

It's pro-personal-choice vs. anti-personal-choice and pro-life vs anti-life (or life as being defined on different levels).

Pro-personal-choice does not equal anti-life any more than pro-life equals anti-personal choice. It's just easier to divide an argument up in those quadrants without taking into consideration the complexities of the debate.

 

[Sandy]

Abortions will stop when the parents show their kids how to dress without the built-in seduction that they find with these pop stars.

They will also stop when the government stops financing them. The most active abortion clinic (private) is walking distance to the Capital.

Not all Republicans are pro-lifers, I belong to a group called Republicans for Choice and they are 3 million members at this time and growing.

 

[Fantasea]

I am personally opposed to abortion but I do not feel I should have any sayso for anyone else.

Prior to the Civil War, there were those who said, "While I would never own slaves, I don't care if you wish to own slaves."

How do you reconcile your position on abortion with that?

 

[26 X World Champs]

just a little news- Austrailia is or is really thinking about illegalizing abortion because having an abortion is like the "in" thing there. Several teen girls are getting pregnant just to have an abortion. That is sick and wrong.

Would you please back up this ridiculous statement with facts? Real ones, not conjecture?

 

[26 X World Champs]

Abortions will stop when the parents show their kids how to dress without the built-in seduction that they find with these pop stars.

Do you really believe that is the answer? I believe a reality check is mandated. What you just wrote is just so unreal....

They will also stop when the government stops financing them. The most active abortion clinic (private) is walking distance to the Capital.

Abortion will not stop as you suggest. Sorry....it's unrealistic to believe that...

 

[26 X World Champs]

Prior to the Civil War, there were those who said, "While I would never own slaves, I don't care if you wish to own slaves."

How do you reconcile your position on abortion with that?

Your analogy is pointless, again....You've written this before and it's just as absurd this time as it was last time.

Here's one for you? Prior to the 19th Amendment being ratified in 1920 women did not have the choice to vote. Prior to 1973 women did not have the choice to make a personal decision about their body....Now women can choose to vote and choose to have an abortion. Using your convoluted logic how do you reconcile this with your few on abortion? :doh

 

[Sandy]

Fantasea, your analogy is so absurd that I will not answer it.

 

[Fantasea]

You've really honed in on the big part of the debate that's problematic. What we really have in the abortion debate are two arguments being presented as one.

It's pro-personal-choice vs. anti-personal-choice and pro-life vs anti-life (or life as being defined on different levels).

Pro-personal-choice does not equal anti-life any more than pro-life equals anti-personal choice. It's just easier to divide an argument up in those quadrants without taking into consideration the complexities of the debate.

The debate is far simpler than that. Just one question. It is this.

Has the question of "speculation" as written by US Supreme Court Associate Justice Harry Blackmun in the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 been answered by the advances in science, obstetrics and genetics in the intervening thirty two years?

 

[shuamort]

The debate is far simpler than that. Just one question. It is this.

Has the question of "speculation" as written by US Supreme Court Associate Justice Harry Blackmun in the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 been answered by the advances in science, obstetrics and genetics in the intervening thirty two years?

No, the debate is not far simpler than that. Your question doesn't even address the other things like religion, emotion, personal privacy, foetal status, and constitutionality.

 

[Fantasea]

Originally Posted by Fantasea
The debate is far simpler than that. Just one question. It is this.

Has the question of "speculation" as written by US Supreme Court Associate Justice Harry Blackmun in the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 been answered by the advances in science, obstetrics and genetics in the intervening thirty two years?

No, the debate is not far simpler than that. Your question doesn't even address the other things like religion, emotion, personal privacy, foetal status, and constitutionality.

The only question not settled by Roe v. Wade was whether a human being is killed during an abortion procedure.

Since individuals are not permitted to kill human beings, none of these "other things" is germane.

Justice Blackmun said that abortion would be permitted because it wasn't known what, specifically, was going on in the womb and that the answer to the question would be left to a future court to decide at a time when speculation was no longer necessary.

The time has come. Speculation is no longer necessary. Genetic research has provided the answer. It is, indeed a new, unique, human being that is created when the 23 genes from the male sperm unite with the 23 genes from the female egg.

Left undisturbed, this human being will pass through many, many phases as it matures to an adult in old age. At no time along the continuum of life is it anything but a living human being.

We now know this through genetic research findings available today, that were not, as Justice Blackmun acknowledged, available in 1973.

Shall I, once more, fill your screen with the statements of a dozen, or so, renowned professionals attesting to the fact that "life begins at conception"?

 

[shuamort]

The only question not settled by Roe v. Wade was whether a human being is killed during an abortion procedure.

How about you actually quote from the decision laid out:
All this, together with our observation, supra, that throughout the major portion of the 19th century prevailing legal abortion practices were far freer than they are today, persuades us that the word "person," as used in the Fourteenth Amendment, does not include the unborn.

Shall I, once more, fill your screen with the statements of a dozen, or so, renowned professionals attesting to the fact that "life begins at conception"?

Oooooooh. "Professionals" you say? You regale us with your argumentum ad verecundiam and I can do the same in return. :roll:

 

[Fantasea]

Originally Posted by Fantasea
The only question not settled by Roe v. Wade was whether a human being is killed during an abortion procedure.

How about you actually quote from the decision laid out:
All this, together with our observation, supra, that throughout the major portion of the 19th century prevailing legal abortion practices were far freer than they are today, persuades us that the word "person," as used in the Fourteenth Amendment, does not include the unborn.

It is gratifying to know that I have been instrumental in getting you to study the Roe v. Wade decision. The more you know about it, the sooner you will come to understand what I have been trying to teach you.

By the way, wasn't one of the other problems, around the time the fourteenth amendment was being debated, that thorny constitutional question about blacks being considered only 3/5ths of a person?

Of course, Roe v. Wade had to be padded out with sufficient verbiage to look substantial. However, you know full well that the heart of that decision lay in Section IX, B, paragraph 2. That's where the issue was ducked and the buck was passed.

Originally Posted by Fantasea
Shall I, once more, fill your screen with the statements of a dozen, or so, renowned professionals attesting to the fact that "life begins at conception"?

Oooooooh. "Professionals" you say? You regale us with your argumentum ad verecundiam and I can do the same in return.

Potissimum quis vos narro planto parum voluntas. Nonnullus of quis vos narro planto haud voluntas.

However, if you are able to cite a few quotes, from professionals in the fields or obstetrics of genetics, that human life does not begin at conception, you will be the first to have done so.

But you can't, can you?

 

[Mixed View]

Sorry I can't give you direct facts. My English teacher just told me about it one day. Do you need to see everything for you to believe it?

 

[26 X World Champs]

Sorry I can't give you direct facts. My English teacher just told me about it one day. Do you need to see everything for you to believe it?

Yes, when you toss out unsubstantiated claims that appear to be inaccurate then I find it necessary to request that you back up your claim(s) otherwise your creditability is greatly diminished.

In a debate the side that has facts to back up their beliefs is usually the side that is correct...

 

[Fantasea]

Your analogy is pointless, again....You've written this before and it's just as absurd this time as it was last time.

Here's one for you? Prior to the 19th Amendment being ratified in 1920 women did not have the choice to vote. Prior to 1973 women did not have the choice to make a personal decision about their body....Now women can choose to vote and choose to have an abortion. Using your convoluted logic how do you reconcile this with your few on abortion? :doh

And later on, women were given equality with men with respect to sports programs at educational institutions that received government aid.

However, none of this corrects the Supreme Court's passing the buck in the Roe v. Wade decision which has produced an unanticipated result; a pile of infantile corpses nearly fifty million high.

Not satisfied with that number? It grows at the rate of about a million and a half annually. That's real progress, isn't it?

You're a Yankee fan, aren't you? I wonder how many kids who could have equalled or surpassed Babe Ruth, Joe DiMaggio, Mickey Mantle, Phil Rizzuto, Billie Martin, Yogi Berra, Derek Jeter, or A-Rod ended up in the slop bucket at the local abortion mill.

What do you think?

 

[Fantasea]

Originally Posted by Fantasea
Prior to the Civil War, there were those who said, "While I would never own slaves, I don't care if you wish to own slaves."

How do you reconcile your position on abortion with that?

Fantasea, your analogy is so absurd that I will not answer it.

You said you were leaving us. However, I'm, glad you changed your mind.

When someone says that something is "so absurd that I will not answer it.", I immediately understand that to mean, "I wish to avoid an answer because a truthful answer would reflect badly on the position I have adopted on the question and I don't wish to have to admit that the position I have adopted on the question is not as sustainable as I once thought it to be so, therefore, I will keep my mouth shut because I do not wish to be untruthful.

You as much as said, I wouldn't abort a child, but I don't care if others do. That seems like a pretty good analogy to me. If there's an inconsistency, kindly point it out.

 

[26 X World Champs]

Not satisfied with that number? It grows at the rate of about a million and a half annually. That's real progress, isn't it?

You're a Yankee fan, aren't you? I wonder how many kids who could have equalled or surpassed Babe Ruth, Joe DiMaggio, Mickey Mantle, Phil Rizzuto, Billie Martin, Yogi Berra, Derek Jeter, or A-Rod ended up in the slop bucket at the local abortion mill.

What do you think?

This is a going nowhere argument because neither of us is going to change their opinion. As you already know, I do not consider abortion murder, and I do not consider that 50 million or whatever amount it is, were killed.

I got a girl pregnant when she and I were 22 back in 1978 and to this day I have no regrets that she had an abortion. Neither of us were ready for kids, we were not married, we had been using drugs during this period of time (the follies of youth in the 70s!)

Morally, neither of us had any issues whatsoever, period. BTW - We did use birth control, but apparently it failed.

What a different life I would have now had she not had an abortion! Who knows? I think we made the right choice. You obviously think otherwise. That's fine, no problem with that at all...unless you try to impose your dogma into a decision that is none of your business....

 

[Fantasea]

Originally Posted by Fantasea
Not satisfied with that number? It grows at the rate of about a million and a half annually. That's real progress, isn't it?

You're a Yankee fan, aren't you? I wonder how many kids who could have equalled or surpassed Babe Ruth, Joe DiMaggio, Mickey Mantle, Phil Rizzuto, Billie Martin, Yogi Berra, Derek Jeter, or A-Rod ended up in the slop bucket at the local abortion mill.

What do you think?

This is a going nowhere argument because neither of us is going to change their opinion. As you already know, I do not consider abortion murder, and I do not consider that 50 million or whatever amount it is, were killed.

I got a girl pregnant when she and I were 22 back in 1978 and to this day I have no regrets that she had an abortion. Neither of us were ready for kids, we were not married, we had been using drugs during this period of time (the follies of youth in the 70s!)

Morally, neither of us had any issues whatsoever, period. BTW - We did use birth control, but apparently it failed.

What a different life I would have now had she not had an abortion! Who knows? I think we made the right choice. You obviously think otherwise. That's fine, no problem with that at all...unless you try to impose your dogma into a decision that is none of your business....

What makes you think I want to hear you confessing to me that you were an irresponible young druggie punk who wasn't man enough to stand up to his responsibility to the woman who was bearing his child and took the coward's way out?

The next time you go to Yankee Stadium, think about this. Your own son, with a handfull of World Series rings, could well be the starting pitcher, if you hadn't sentenced him to capital punishment just for showing up at the wrong time.

 

[26 X World Champs]

What makes you think I want to hear you confessing to me that you were an irresponible young druggie punk who wasn't man enough to stand up to his responsibility to the woman who was bearing his child and took the coward's way out?

The next time you go to Yankee Stadium, think about this. Your own son, with a handfull of World Series rings, could well be the starting pitcher, if you hadn't sentenced him to capital punishment just for showing up at the wrong time.

What makes you think that I give a rat's ass what you think? Your opinion is just that, your opinion. In the America that I live in I'm allowed to speak my mind, allowed to abort a pregnancy, allowed to feel that it was a proper choice. You're allowed to feel whatever you want, so please do.

BTW - Do you actually believe that even if I wanted to keep the pregnancy going that the woman involved wanted to? NEWSFLASH! She wanted to abort it, it was 100% HER choice, as it should be.

That aborted fetus was not my son, or daughter, it was not meant to be, whether you accept it or not, I do not care.

You're the epitome of bluster, you make irrational generalization after generalization, you make the same lame arguments over and over again. You never respond when challenged UNLESS you can prove your point right. IF you can't you stick your head into the sand, praying that we'll all forget what you wrote.

As far as being a "druggie" goes, I realize that you're simply trying to lash out at me because I was involved in an abortion. C'est la vie, right?

The word druggie is so lame, but then again why would I expect anything but lame from you? I'm not justifying my decision making, but I'm also not assinine enough to believe that 22 year olds during the 1970s using drugs was unusual. Bad decision in retrospect? Yes, as Mr. Mackey in South Park, Colorado likes to say: "Drugs are bad."

So, how about answering some of the repeated questions that I challenged you on this week, you know which ones they are? Remember, it made me post a picture of you?