BSBD Tiller the Baby Killer

[billvon 3,059]

And your one warning as well.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

And your one warning as well.

I suppose I should thank you for just a warning.

Marc

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[yjumpinoz 0]

Pro life yes. If aborting a baby because it is no use to society and too much of a burden, why not exterminate old folks as well. Many of them are of no value.

[wmw999 2,515]

What is your answer to the people who would like to have their life ended because it has no meaning.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[yjumpinoz 0]

My parents took care of over 100 foster kids, including adopting my brother, an unwanted/neglected kid. He is very pro-life because he very easily could have been aborted. He changed my views on abortion.

[billvon 3,059]

> why not exterminate old folks as well.

If they want to die, and they are going to die soon anyway, and it will save them a few months of excruciating pain - I say let them make the decision.

[yjumpinoz 0]

The babies don't get that decision.

[billvon 3,059]

>The babies don't get that decision.

Correct, because they are not yet people.

[DJL 235]

Quote

The babies don't get that decision.

This is a good example of how when people are discussing this issue in a forum it never goes anywhere just because you can use one circumstance to discredit another. If you're going to talk about this and make any sense of it then you need to talk only about the specific situations. If you're making a point that pertains to the mother's health then you'll have someone put it in perspective of a rich white girl who doesn't want to look fat in her prom dress.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[yjumpinoz 0]

Oh yes...only a fetus right. And back to the decision being the womans alone, I had an ex that chose to abort a child that I wanted to keep. We were seperated at the time. I am pretty sure she would not have had a "fetus" in her without my input. The "fetus" and the father had no choice in the matter.

[flyfast1966 0]

I will say , Women should have the right to chose .
It's there body , PERIOD.
If you don't like abortion don't have one.
I feel that both sides could make a difference in the abortion rate. but with all the anger and finger pointing , not likely.
The murder of Tiller was a shame.
Abortions are a shame too.
But they are legal and should be up to the woman and her doctor

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Pro life yes. If aborting a baby because it is no use to society and too much of a burden, why not exterminate old folks as well. Many of them are of no value.

"Pro-life" is not just about abortion. For example, I found it really amusing when someone who claims to be so-called "pro-life" supports death penalty or military conflicts like recent wars where a lot of people suffer. Similar thing when a so-called "pro-life" person is not a foster parent - which means to me they do not want to put their money where their mouth is. That's why I'm saying that if you're just against abortion - you're anti-choice, and not pro-life in any way.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[billvon 3,059]

>And back to the decision being the womans alone, I had an ex that chose
>to abort a child that I wanted to keep. We were seperated at the time. I am
>pretty sure she would not have had a "fetus" in her without my input. The
>"fetus" and the father had no choice in the matter.

Correct. You don't have the right to tell someone else what they can do with their own body. Best, then, to not have unprotected sex with a woman until you talk about what you are going to do if she gets pregnant, and ascertain that she's stable/agreeable enough that she will do what you want (and what she says she will do.)

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

>The babies don't get that decision.

Correct, because they are not yet people.

Simply declaring something to be true does not make it so. Your statement is a good encapsulation of the terms of the debate, but that hardly concludes the debate itself.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Oh yes...only a fetus right. And back to the decision being the womans alone, I had an ex that chose to abort a child that I wanted to keep. We were seperated at the time. I am pretty sure she would not have had a "fetus" in her without my input. The "fetus" and the father had no choice in the matter.

Isnt this something

and if a mother and unborn child are murdered it is a double murder.

They want both sides, most certinly if the murder was commited with a gun

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>And back to the decision being the womans alone, I had an ex that chose
>to abort a child that I wanted to keep. We were seperated at the time. I am
>pretty sure she would not have had a "fetus" in her without my input. The
>"fetus" and the father had no choice in the matter.

Correct. You don't have the right to tell someone else what they can do with their own body. Best, then, to not have unprotected sex with a woman until you talk about what you are going to do if she gets pregnant, and ascertain that she's stable/agreeable enough that she will do what you want (and what she says she will do.)

Hmm, you almost danced with the being responcible for your own actions here. There is hope!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

The babies don't get that decision.

I don't think that we have any way to let them make that decision, one way or the other.

But in the hypothetical scenario where they _could_ have a decision, where do we draw the line? Should my eggs have a decision about whether they get a chance at being fertilized or not? Or is it some point beyond fertilization that they get a decision about whether to become a person? And if so, what is that point?

But of course I'm only stating the obvious, and what the abortion debate is all about. And I doubt there will ever be a consensus on the answer, so the best that we can hope for is a decent compromise.

[billvon 3,059]

>Simply declaring something to be true does not make it so.

Right. You have law, court decisions etc - and the result is that fetuses are not people in a legal sense. That hasn't stopped many pro-life types from trying to get it in the "back door" of course, but in terms of the law, they do not have rights.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>Simply declaring something to be true does not make it so.

Right. You have law, court decisions etc - and the result is that fetuses are not people in a legal sense. That hasn't stopped many pro-life types from trying to get it in the "back door" of course, but in terms of the law, they do not have rights.

Except when the mother and unborn baby person are murdered. How do you square that one?

No one here has yet to answer to this!!!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

>Simply declaring something to be true does not make it so.

Right. You have law, court decisions etc - and the result is that fetuses are not people in a legal sense. That hasn't stopped many pro-life types from trying to get it in the "back door" of course, but in terms of the law, they do not have rights.

Would that it were as neat and clean as that, but it's not. For example, here's one quick thumbnail:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_rights#cite_note-lacislaw-0

[wmw999 2,515]

Quote

Except when the mother and unborn baby person are murdered.

Considering that pro-life forces fought for that a whole lot harder than pro-choice forces (remember that "slippery slope" thing?), I'd say that at it's not a matter of abortion rights people wanting it both ways.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Butters 0]

Quote

>The babies don't get that decision.

Correct, because they are not yet people.

Correct, because the Supreme Court decided they are not yet legal people just like blacks and women weren't legal people at one point in time.

PS: Why is a viable fetus not a legal person but a comatose person on life support is?

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[Butters 0]

Quote

"Pro-life" is not just about abortion. For example, I found it really amusing when someone who claims to be so-called "pro-life" supports death penalty or military conflicts like recent wars where a lot of people suffer. Similar thing when a so-called "pro-life" person is not a foster parent - which means to me they do not want to put their money where their mouth is. That's why I'm saying that if you're just against abortion - you're anti-choice, and not pro-life in any way.

So pro-choice people are always pro-choice? What choices does the man have? None in regards to abortion. None in regards to child support. What choices does the viable fetus have, or the tax payers, or ... you're argument is falling apart.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

>Simply declaring something to be true does not make it so.

Right. You have law, court decisions etc - and the result is that fetuses are not people in a legal sense.

You also have court decisions and medical procedures going the other way. The easiest two examples are the one Rush gave (additional charges for injuring or killing a fetus) and the fact that virtually every emergency room in the nation considers a pregnant woman to be two patients.

Just stating your opinion (which is pretty congruent to my own, incidentally) doesn't make it so.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

you're anti-choice

I'm pro choice on everything. Taxes, wars, children--I think that people ought to choose for themselves, and not be forced to do things by others, no matter how many, and how well organized into governments.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com