Media
Leftist Logic: ‘Women Have Abortions Because They Care About Motherhood’
- Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:16pm by
Meredith Jessup
- Print »
- Email »
Abortion provider Dr. Elizabeth Newhall sat down to chat with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow about how she feels threatened by anti-abortion activists and offered these sanctimonious thoughts:
Maddow has appeared on multiple NBC News fronts plugging an MSNBC documentary which examines the murder of George Tiller, the former medical director of Women’s Health Care Services in Wichita, Kansas — one of only three clinics in the U.S. offering late-term abortions after the 21st week of pregnancy. Tiller was shot and killed by anti-abortion militant activist Scott Roeder in 2009.
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 703 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 542 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 360 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 357 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 356 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 356 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 360 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 276 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 149 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 356 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (408)
BurntHills
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:11pmsick sick sick. it’s come down to the democrats are no longer “AMERICANS” and they are no longer recognizable as humans.
Report Post »JACOBK
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:10pmAnd if you check there are woman who have had 2,3,4,5,6 abortions these are also people who love motherhood. ABC drowning puppies is wrong but late term abortions is legal. The child has no feeling. Hilter may his name be oblivated loved his animals more than people. Abortion is one step closer to euthansia, mental illness killing, useless people killing and old people killing. “obamacare” has given the right to the government to abort grandma, and grandpa. You my friend are SICK
Report Post »GnomeChomsky
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:35pm“obamacare” has given the right to the government to abort grandma, and grandpa.
Thats just outright false.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:30pmYour logic is atrocious, and so are your facts. Democrats bent over backwards to prevent public funding of abortions although the procedure is legal and should be allowed. Pacifists cannot hold back their tax dollars in support of our foreign wars, afterall. More importantly, you say Hitler–nice bringing his name into it for your theatrics–valued his animals more than people, as if that has anything to do with my saying that a fully developed puppy has self-consciousness and an ability to feel pain, while a fetus before the 28th week (roughly) does not. These are scientific facts. Your comment is not fit for my toilet. But good one on Hitler. That rhetorical flourish is always appropriate…not!
Report Post »NeoFan
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:03pmEveryone knows that a fetus or collection of cells will become a puppy, giraffe or stuffed animal if it is not aborted from a human female.
Report Post »AnotherAmericanVoice
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:01pmIf women that get abortions are doing it because they care about “Motherhood” then the can can be made that people that rob banks have deep concerns about the saving of money.
Report Post »Bauervision
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 5:31pmgood one
Report Post »SJJB
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:00pmI was going to comment on ABC logic but it would never get posted.
Report Post »kindling
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:43pmThere is something just wrong about putting ABC and logic in the same sentence.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:25pmKindling, there you go again.
Report Post »richierich
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:58pmDon’t have women have reproductive freedom? Can’t women just say NO.
Report Post »valarie
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:54pmOOOooooo….I just don’t think the butchered babies would describe what she does as “healthcare.” Just sayin’.
Report Post »AChristian
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:54pmThe question is this: If the act of abortion was not performed would the unborn be born thus becoming a living human being? If the answer is yes, then the action of abortion is MURDER!
Anyone who argues this point is admitting that they are in favor of murdering a human being. A human that is just like them, and deserves the same chance to live as they were granted. Go ahead murderers state your argument.
Report Post »GnomeChomsky
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:22pmNot necessarily. Any number of complications could arise resulting in the loss of the pregnancy. You dont know with any concrete certainty that any fetus will come to term and thus be born. So your arguement doesn’t hold up.
Report Post »kindling
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:48pmI read last week a child is not a human until they leave the hospital……what about those born outside hospitals….are they not human….that might explain ABC.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:23pmKindling, you cannot win an argument, so you dehumanize your opponent. Nice.
Report Post »Psychosis
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:44pm@ abc you can not win your argument…………so you dehumanize your victim……….
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 8:13pmPsychosis, nice try. But it is the science that clearly shows that a fetus is less than a full human being. I have dehumanized nothing. Although I have killed many of your fallatious arguments.
Report Post »Bauervision
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 5:27pmABC: A fetus isn’t a human being? Okay let’s say that I buy that and all the science that says it is.
It becomes a human though right? Isn’t that something very special? Nothing else on this planet can claim that. Doesn’t that deserve to be protected?
It’s not like a fly, as you have pointed out prior, that becomes one. Which to bounce off that for a second, you mention that there is a heartbeat in a fly, just like there is a heartbeat in a fetus. Where there is a human heartbeat there is human life. Human life that cannot defend itself. Just like your innocent Iraqis.
There have been 49,551,703 abortions since your precious case. During the Holocaust, there was an estimate of 5,860,000 Jewish people that were killed. But of course that doesn’t matter because they (the fetus’ who were aborted) “were not” human, but they would have “become” human and that is the point that many of us are trying to make. We have committed more of a genocide on the backs of liberals in America then Hitler ever did. You jump to defend the Iraqis, but you don’t want to jump to defend the beginning of human life. Either you believe in protecting human life or your don’t.
I’m 34, and while I might not be yet old, does that mean that I won’t deserve to be treated as an old man one day? I’m also not dead, does that mean that as of right now, I don’t deserve to have a burial when I do die?
I believe in abortion to save the life of the mother, in the case of rape and incest–each of those are truly up to the mother, but making it so that women can use it whenever they like, is ignoring something very special.
Do I think that if a women has an abortion she is going to hell? No, God is the judge of that. Should she be punished by our society? No. But she also shouldn’t be rewarded either–in any way shape or form. To opt for an abortion when there is no medical reason to do so is a lack of personal responsibility, I don’t care how you spin it.
It is up to the woman and the man, and the doctor, whether or not to have an abortion. And in the case of most people, it is between them and God.
Report Post »missAmerica
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:53pmhttp://www.priestsforlife.org/images/index.aspx
America Will Not Reject Abortion Until America
Sees Abortion
I double dog dare ya!
Report Post »teddrunk
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 6:57amAbsolutely Correct!
Report Post »Star Spangled
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:50pmAbortion is a way OUT of motherhood , stupid !
Report Post »I’d bet neither of those women have ever been a mother , so when they talk about motherhood they’re just ” talk’n out of their ass “.
GabyM
Posted on October 28, 2010 at 12:11pmAgreed. All those women who have abortions are taking the easy way out. If a woman gets pregnant, and is unable or unwilling to raise that baby, instead of killing it, give that child a chance at life by letting one of the thousands, if not millions, of couples who are unable to have children adopt that child. I find it sad that there are so many couples out there who have done everything they could in an attempt to be able to have kids, and yet a pregnant woman kills a child because she is unwilling to own up and take responsibility for her actions
Report Post »BoilitDown
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:49pmI am not inclined to be hateful or see and entire group of people as my enemy but, if I did, I would do everything I could to convince their women that abortions were the highest form of morality. Claiming that I really, really cared about their need to be good mothers would certainly be one of my promotions. I would also target the weakest minds among them.
Report Post »Agentuntomyself
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:31pmThank you, Boilitdown! Finally, someone who gets it.
Report Post »faktchekr
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:47pmwell gee whiz “doc,” I feel sooo much better about dragging a helpless human being from the womb of his mother, dismembering him and throwing him in the trash, now that I know his mother “cares about motherhood.” these people are obviously delusional…and they call us “nuts.”
Report Post »kindling
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:41pmgross, but very well said
Report Post »ondrock
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:44pmWhy is this concept difficult to grasp? A Fetus is NOT the mother’s
Report Post »body, nor secondary to her rights, but a separate entity with its OWN right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It’s not a choice, its a life.
BetterBob
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:37pmTiller wasn’t “killed” he was merely aborted, late term.
Report Post »AngryTexanFromAmarillo
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:44pmlol I have to agree bob
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:48pmAssassinated in a church, to be precise. And comparing Tiller to a fetus is just silly. You are being funny.
Report Post »faktchekr
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:03pmTiller in a church…now that’s a sick joke…Ah well, he’s getting his chance to explain himself to God now…wish I could hear it.
Report Post »claymoremacm
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:35pmoh oh oh can we abort Obama? he is just a cluster of cells
Report Post »claymoremacm
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:39pmoops i meant Impeach
Report Post »Raven249
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:35pmSick.. Just plain sick. The only way I would think that it be allowed is if the kid has no chance of survival, and if the mother attempts to give birth to them, then her life is also in danger.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:46pmBut you don’t have any standing to tell a mother what to do with her womb. You cannot play dictator nor ask the government to play dictator, just because you wrongly equate a fetus with a fully-developed child. They are not the same, and the law, unlike you, recognizes as much. So much for the freedom-from-gov’t propaganda that the Right usually spouts.
Report Post »HKS
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:53pmDouble sick
Report Post »Inuyasha
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:12pmFetuses are children, children that are unborn and have their constitutionally guaranteed right to life taken away from them by selfish would-be mothers who do it in the guise of being a good mother. They are not being good mothers, they are being selfish because they do not want the put up with the responsibility. No good mother would kill her child, and that is exactly what this is. If you think anything else you are blinded by your own delusion. Every single life is created for a reason. And as far as the argument about this going against the gov’t being involved in your life . . . . that is a crock of you know what! When a LIFE is involved it is not the same as eating, drinking, or even smoking something. Yeah, the gov’t has no right to tell you what to put in your body, but when that choice involves KILLING an INNOCENT life that is where the line is drawn. PERIOD
Report Post »Jeff f.
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:15pm@ABC
Report Post »Oh don’t even play that game. You are already playing dictator deciding which children can live and which can not. And don’t tell me I can not call them children as you have no concept of anything but the moment and can not see what they could become.
abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:20pmIt is science and those who practice that discipline, not me, that are telling you that you cannot call a fetus a child. It is also the Supreme Court that is telling you that you cannot demand human rights for fetuses. I am demanding nothing of you. But you are calling for everyone else to believe what you believe even though trained experts and experienced lawyers disagree with you. That is a salient difference, I would say, and good reason to avoid calling my comments a “game.”
Report Post »lcassavaugh
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:33pmI used to have a bumper sticker on the back of my car that read something like this “the most dangerous place to live in America is in a woman’s womb”
Report Post »kindling
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:38pmI agree for more reasons than just abortion. I think about all those babies being given legal and illegal drugs and how they suffer because of the mother’s choices. Some say they would be better off aborted, I have 3 such children and I think they would say they are glad to be alive. I believe we need to make laws protecting unborn humans from stupidity, seeing as they are the future and should be given the best start possible. There are many families out there willing to raise these kids.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:16pmKindling, that is true and I admire your willingness to take those kids in. You are stronger for it than I am. But it is wrong, in my opinion, for you to tell others that they must make that sacrifice because you did. That is tyranny, not freedom. Moreover, it ignores that each person and each case is different. I have friends who watched their badly formed newborn die painfully over a three day period–a horrible outcome–that should have been avoided with a late-term abortion. But your philosophy and wish would disallow what would have been the most humane outcome. That is wrong. And you try to bolster your case by making up bogus science. That is also wrong. I have clearly stated that as the science reveals earlier points in a pregnancy in terms of human consciousness (my preferred test) or viability (the one in Roe v Wade), then we ought to move the vast majority of abortions to within that range–with the example of my friends, rape and incest being the exceptions. But this black-and-white, I-know-every-case-by-heart judgment of the right is just pointless and unproductive. The world is more complex than the right-wing ideology that I see on display here, and the contradictions and hypocrisy, omissions and outright errors written by many here provide full evidence of it. A rational discussion would be much better than O‘Reilly’s Tiller-the-baby-killer nonsensical jingoism or, worse, the bombings of clinics and assassinations of doctors. There are bright, well read and well meaning people on the other side, if you’d get past your ideological rigidity and scientific/legal ignorance to understand that.
Report Post »lcassavaugh
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:32pmAbortion is murder – not healthcare!
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:45pmAbortion is not murder. Roe v. Wade settled that. It is performed by doctors and covered by many private insurance companies that consider it health care. You are spinning…
Report Post »HKS
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:51pmRoe V Wade be wrong.
Report Post »Oh, God!
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:51pmAnd you are delusional.
Report Post »Jeff f.
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:57pm@ABC
Report Post »Legalized murder is still murder.
RAISINGCONSERVATIVES
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:08pm@ABC
Report Post »Funny you mention Roe v Wade…do some research…the woman that they exploited in this case is now an avid Pro-Life activist…
GnomeChomsky
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:11pmThen I expect you will be out protesting the next execution then Jeff.
Report Post »Jeff f.
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:24pmComparing an innocent that has had no chance at life yet to that of someone who has no respect for life is quite a stretch. Both abortion and abolishing capital punishment are ideologies in avoiding responsibility for ones actions. No wonder the left feel so entitled and elite.
Report Post »GnomeChomsky
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:52pmI’m not comparing the two, I’m comparing legal murder to legal murder. As ABC has pointed the mental gymnastics you guys go through to delineate between the manner in which the taking of lives are acceptable or unacceptable. Especially when comparing unborn fetuses to the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians, actual living breathing conscious beings, that have been killed since the invasion.
Report Post »Bauervision
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 5:06pmInvasion? Don’t you mean liberation?
Report Post »claymoremacm
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:31pmThe most evil campaigned ever waged against women,and they all suffer today if they fell for it ie it is just a cluster of cells….I weep
Report Post »HillBillySam1
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:31pmHow deranged these Progressives are. The doctor is the victim. Not the child who will be chemically burned or torn apart in it‘s mother’s womb. If the doctor feels so strongly about “women’s reproductive rights”, does that mean that she performs these abortions for free?? I didn’t think so. The Culture of Death is what the Progressive Movement is in this country. They have absolutely no shame.
Report Post »Scott Roeder was wrong in what he did to George Tiller. He is now going to pay the consequences for his actions. Unfortunately, those unborn children do not have any opportunity for due process.
abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:43pmAborted fetuses are not children. They do not yet have sensations of pain nor self-awareness. Stop using inaccurate terms to describe what a fetus is. How many funerals for spontaneously aborted fetus (and there are a lot of them, medically speaking) have you attended in your life? To compare the value of Dr. Tiller’s life to an unborn fetus is a travesty and a farse. And you have the audacity to call Progressive deranged…
Also, that a baker supplies an important life-giving item for a price doesn‘t mean that he isn’t supplying a valuable service that he believes in. Similarly, this doctor doesn’t have to do abortions for free just because she believes it is a valuable service to help women terminate unwanted pregnancies. This is silly logic, when you think about it. People have to eat, afterall.
Report Post »HKS
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:49pmThere you go again ABC, Your an idiot.
Report Post »Psychosis
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:54pm@ abc your so wrong in so many ways, but you are consistent, albeit wrong.
here is one for ya to try to explain http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/aug/08081209.html
and im sure this woman would disagree with you
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPF1FhCMPuQ
you are the scum that is destroying this country
Report Post »Oh, God!
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:57pm@ABC, and you know this because????? And did I have a funeral for the 8 that I lost? No I did not, but I know when their birthday’s were suppose to be and I pray on those days and cry over my loss. I suggest you go troll somewhere else, and maybe go back to school. The indoctrination and bra burning hippy thing is very yesterday.
Report Post »HillBillySam1
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:11pm@ABC
Report Post »Scientifically, a child feels pain at 20 weeks. This was the argument brought before the 9th circuit court in the early 90′s. Judge Brown ruled that despit the evidence that the child felt pain durin an abortion, it did not outweigh the mother’s right to chose.
abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:32pmHillbilly, scientists disagree on the exact timing, but 20 weeks, according to the most recent research, is too early: http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/the-human-condition/2010/06/25/does-the-fetus-feel-pain-uk-report-says-no.html
I learned 27-30 weeks when I studied biology in college, but the technology has advanced. I am happy to use the incidence of a pain mechanism as the outer bound, but that still allows for a lot of abortions. Further, I would think that some small set of cases would merit an abortion even outside this range. Afterall, we fight wars even though a lot of pain occurs.
I would note that Roe v Wade set the test around viability outside the womb, which is also becoming possible at earlier points in time, since the thinking was you have to equate the fetus with a human when it functions like a human (i.e., can survive outside the womb). Perhaps that ruling should be modified, but definitely not overturned.
Report Post »kindling
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:56pmmy daughter was born at 26 weeks and pain or not she is still living and very much human.
Report Post »kindling
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:57pmthat’s true ABC, they are no longer fetus’, they are dead children.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:09pmKindling, you can say it a billion times, but it will not change the science or the law. A fetus is not a child. Your daughter became a child when we proved viability outside the womb, but even your daughter has no idea whether she felt pain at 26 weeks, so let’s stop the theatrics, shall we?
Report Post »WhiteFang
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:44pmOoooh, ABC went to college! Wow, I’m so impressed.
Report Post »You must be a real idiot then because you obviously didn’t learn a single thing. And you wasted your tuition money because you are still stupid. So, Shut up you idiot, you make all of us sick with your so-called wisdom.
untameable-kate
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:52pmKindling, I am glad I read every post here before I replied because I was going to say the exact same thing. Dead children, ABC you must be a man and never carried a baby, The mothers who have abortions know what they have done, that is why so many of them need psychologists after.
Report Post »untameable-kate
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:55pmOH GOD, I am so sorry for the loss you suffered. My prayers are with you and them.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:58pmWhiteFang, settle down. Lots of people went to college. You really shouldn’t be so impressed or so bitter about it. You give yourself away.
Report Post »WhiteFang
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:59pmHey, I have an idea. Anytime we see a post from ABC, just ignore him/her and refuse to respond to anything he/she says. I perceive he/she is just trying to stir up comments to make him/her seem more important and relevant (a delusion). ABC is a dissident troublemaker and I will not respond to this jerk.
Report Post »GnomeChomsky
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 8:00pm@Whitefang
Way to make a well reasoned, coherent defense of your viewpoint. Your rebuttal is unbeatable and ABC will rue the day that he tangled with the mental powerhouse that is you.
Report Post »Blacktooth
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 8:32pmGnomeChomsky/ I don’t think whitefang considers himself to be a “mental powerhouse” He is just fed up with the rhetoric and the immorality that seems to consume so many people in this world. When you get fed up, you often times express yourself with crazy words. I agree though that ABC needs to be shunned.
Report Post »YellowFin
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 8:57pmAnyone that can, in their twisted mind, recommend aborting (killing) a baby is beyond logic. He is not a loving human being. And then you have to add the fact that they will eventually have to answer to our Creator for their murderous ways. ABC is not on firm ground on this issue. He does need to go back for a higher education.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 10:22pmFin,
You do realize that calling me names and making unsupported claims does little to rebut my comments. Further, I can assure you that all of us will have to answer to our Creator for our actions should he or she turn out to exist. Finally, I can almost guarantee you that I have a higher education than you do, so I really don’t think I need to return to school to learn of your superior knowledge.
Report Post »YellowFin
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 11:07pmABC, you said: “I really don’t think I need to return to school to learn”
Report Post »Since you obviously know all things and cannot learn anything more, why don’t you write a book on your magnificence and superior knowledge. You can write about how everybody is so ignorant and cannot possibly comprehend the college educated words that spew out of your freaky brain?
Blacktooth
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 11:17pmYes, you might even sell a copy of your book. HaHa
Report Post »Blacktooth
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 12:15amABC,
You said to Fin: “I can almost guarantee you that I have a higher education than you do”
What an arrogant statement! Who do you think you are? It must be wonderful to be you.
Report Post »JJ Coolay
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 1:03amOh, so now it’s a matter of whether the baby can feel pain or not?
Report Post »That’s real sick!
teddrunk
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:31pmWhat a creepy hippie. If she couldn‘t kill babies she’d be busy drowning puppies.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:39pmShe is providing a legal service, abortions, to thousands of women that demand it. Drowning puppies is illegal and not demanded by very many people at all. So I think your analogy is wrong.
Report Post »cheezwhiz
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:30pm‘Women Have Abortions Because They Care About Motherhood’
Report Post »—————————————
and Bill Ayers bombed the Pentagon because he cared about peace
abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:38pmActually, Ayers bombed the Pentagon at night when no human lives were at risk in order to protest a war in Vietnam that was killing thousands of innocent people.
Report Post »Seven
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:47pmYou fools war for the right is not murder, it is killing. They are not the same. But abortion is not a womans right it is Murder. God I love America!
Report Post »Psychosis
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:47pm@ abc…………….nice logic but he also bombed the police station in nyc in the middle of the day………so your explanation is moot
Report Post »HKS
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:48pmABC stay on the subject or take your left wing crap somewhere else.
Report Post »cheezwhiz
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:51pm@ abc
Let me guess.
Report Post »You think that Kenneth Gladney’s beating was justified.
Right ?
abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:25pmPsychosis, wrong again (are you ever right) since you conveniently omit the advanced warning they gave to ensure that everyone got out before the blast. Their intent was never to take human life, just create massive publicity and pressure to end the war. I don’t agree with their actions, but they are not like the terrorists of the Middle East (including the Jews that bombed the King David hotel when they were fighting for a country of their own), nor the terrorist in Northern Ireland, nor the terrorists in this country like Timothy McVeigh. Of course, conservatives never own up to that, since it would weaken their attacks on Obama. Politics and propaganda over truth. Nice M.O.
Report Post »kindling
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:32pmand the police station where he killed people ABC?
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:58pmKindling, get your facts straight. That was the Park Place police station in SF, which was hit in February 1970 and which the Weather Undergound never claimed credit for, nor were they ever charged for it. The Black Liberation Army was also a suspect in that bombing, which did not have advanced warnings and fit the pattern of the BLA, which was responsible for multiple police officer deaths and used no advanced warning when they constructed their bombs. You should try to get your facts from real sources rather than relying on ideologues who just want to score guilt-by-association points against Obama. Read much?
Report Post »Bauervision
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 1:12pmSo ABC, what exactly would you kill for? Other then babies of course…..I’m sorry, I meant gill baring tad poles.
You site examples of murder as if any of us had the slightest decision regarding the, as you so often like to put it, the complexities, of war, (especially dealing with the collateral damage of war) as a way of trying to shine light on a subject that no one here disagrees with–killing innocents is wrong. You equate these examples as a way of trying to undermine people’s strongly held beliefs, however by doing so you only shine the light on one fact.
You are a progressive liberal. To you that is probably a compliment.
The real problem is not with your logic, although ill-conceived, it is with the simple assertion that you bow to science before anything else. Which as I have said before, is fine. But please don’t forget that the Bible has been proving scientific facts long before any man or woman went through the scientific process to discover it.
Your generalizations of Conservatives are at best, talking points rhetoric derived from the MSM. Have fun with it, we can tell that you oh so do delight in it, but I just want to point out that the main thing Conservatives stand for is the Republic and it’s founding principles. Progressive liberals like yourself seem to stand for Socialism and Democracy (an oxymoron I know, but there you have it)–which is in direct opposition to what our founding father’s worked so hard to achieve.
Need you look any further then Europe–where we fled from, to see why our principles are so worth fighting for?
Abortion might seem like a grand alternative to raising a kid, and granted there are many people who do not deserve kids, but it is not birth control and it needs to stop being used as such.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 1:39pmBauer,
To answer the question, I would kill for the things allowed under just war doctrine (i.e., self-defense, when no other option is available). And don’t call fetuses babies. It makes you look like a moron and scientific illiterate.
Speaking of which, you claim that the Bible continues to prove scientific conclusions right before the science does. It would look like that to someone who only believes the science that proves the Bible correct. Sadly for you, there is much science that has proven the Bible wrong, from how old the Earth is to how man came to be. Only a person totally ignorant of science would make such ridiculous claims as you have. And it is hard for you to critique the merits of my philosophy that emphasizes science, empirical knowledge and reasoning when you do not even understand it. I’ll wait to hear a critique from someone slightly more familiar with science. Having you do it would be like having you critique a Chinese poem that you cannot read. Useless opinion from an unqualified arbiter.
My criticism of conservatives’ positions are not derived from the MSM, as they often do a terrible job of thinking deeply about positions as well. They often misrepresent the science (although not as badly as conservatives do) and they lack a solid grounding in the great thinkers that have resisted conservative dogma for centuries. And I definitely do not talk in sound bites. When I start talking like Boehner, I’ll shoot myself…
Further, saying that conservatives stand for the republic is an empty statement. Republic is a form of government based upon representative democracy. Democracy refers to both direct and indirect forms of popular government. Democracy and republic do not refer to a particular philosophy–and both the Nazi’s and the US had such governments in the 1930s. Socialism, on the other hand, is a way of organizing the economy, but it is not what the liberals in this country stand for. Rather, they stand for a capitalist system with a safety net and healthy regulation to mitigate the ills of capitalism. You criticize my generalizations, but you cannot even use the right words to articulate a cogent explanation of the differences between conservatives and liberals. Given those deficiencies, how seriously should I take your comments?
Finally, I’m not sure why you and other conservatives like to malign Europe all the time. Our principals came from Europe. All of the ideas of our founding fathers came from earlier Enlightenment thinkers in England, France and elsewhere. I grow tired of people making France sound worse than Saudi Arabia or Venezuela or even Israel, when the truth could not be more in reverse. And just so you know, there are many more restrictions on abortion in the various European countries than there are in the US. So perhaps you ought to do your homework on European abortion laws before equating those countries with being overly permissive relative to the US–this would seem important given our respective positions on the abortion issue, don’t you think??
Report Post »BrightLightNCali
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 1:42pmWow. How compassionate and caring of Mr. Ayers. Maybe, for his valiant efforts to save human lives, he should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize!?! Please, ABC, we are all adults here. Your rhetoric, is flawed and quite ridiculous. Also, please stop baiting these nice people. Trolls, like yourself, are a dime a dozen. If I had my way, we would never, ever write rebuttals to you or any other trolls that frequent this site. Instead, I long for an honest open debate about abortion and other “hot button” issues. However, ABC, you are incapable of anything other than inflaming and goading people. Thanks for playing. Now take your toys and leave.
As a mother, a woman, and a person who knows from experience, abortion is murder. Quibbling over when a BABY is truly alive, is completely irrelevant. Of course the baby is alive. Isn’t it growing? Isn’t it eating and breathing? Whether some think of an unborn baby as a lump of tissues or not, is irrelevant. That “mass” grows into a human not a cow or chicken. It is a HUMAN!
A couple things are troublesome about abortion. First, who are we to play God? Who are we to decide which life ends and which is granted mercy? In the meantime, thousands of babies are being murdered by their own mothers. These women, have blood on their hands as sure as I’m sitting here. My proof? If a pregnant mother was killed, wouldn’t the murderer be charged with TWO homicides? Yes. Yes, they would. We can’t have it all ways my friends.
Second, killing these unborn babies is genocide, especially for minority populations. The Planned Parenthood hero, Margaret Sanger, was a monster. She was pure evil. But, the left holds her up like some kind of wonderful. I would like to know when exactly, Margaret Sanger became the hero and Phyllis Schlafly became the zero. I grew up in a culture that vilified stay at home moms and held up the working woman as the “gold standard.“ As a ”working-woman-turned-stay-at-home-mom,” it took me a few years to finally realize that my job is as valuable as any career woman’s. It’s mind boggling to say this now, but I felt “bad” about being home with my children all day, like I wasn’t productive. Now I understand my role is more important than I realized, as I am raising children. Children who will become the next wave of conservatives with Christian morals and values. Children who’s character is being perfected through the “hot house” of homeschooling. YAY ME!!! LOL!
Lastly, when men back away from the fray and say, “It‘s a woman’s choice,” I instantly think, “coward.” Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t a man partly responsible for the pregnancy? As “forward thinking” Americans, shouldn’t a man be allowed a voice? Many feel because the baby is alive and growing in a woman’s body, it is “hers.” I disagree. She did not conceive said baby alone. Men, if you don’t want to have deal with this problem, too bad. You have an important role to play. Step up and take responsibility. Speak up!!! Your voice counts.
To my fellow Christians who equivocate on abortion. Please watch the following videos. There will be no doubt left in your mind whether abortion is a choice or murder:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbkrf3-gDFo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfckJ5eiIJM&feature=related
As Christians it is time to draw the line between ourselves and the world. We can’t keep dabbling with the world! It is killing our validity and our children.
Thanks.
Report Post »Bauervision
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 3:15pmOkay ABC, my point, concerning you and us, is that while you say liberals want to ensure safeguards against capitalism, at least myself do see that as a honorable approach, but I can’t stand one more “law” concerning the free market.
Our founding father’s came from Europe sure, and while some of their ideas had a basis in European historical ideas, our Constitution is a unique document that mirrors the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. Furthermore, while your beloved France sits in economic ruin, it is a Conservative President who is having to make the tough decisions to remove the Socialism from the economic system. Weird how that works.
You points on the Bible, while I trust they were few due to convenience, are a far reach to my view, as a way to “disprove” the Bible. Science says that the earth is millions of years old, okay, time is a relative term, you really want to hang your proof on something so trivial?
Science says that man is old as dirt. Great. When the Bible says God created man, it is only an interpretation that one would come to a belief that within a second He snapped His fingers and poof there was an adult human….a rather naive one at that. I personally believe that we did “evolve” from lower life forms, to me it explains how God works. If I paint a picture that takes me years to finish, can the final result all of sudden not be attributed to me?
Again, time is relative.
If I drew an eye on a whiteboard, and in 100 years it became a face and blinked at you, would you not credit me for my design just because you don’t understand how I made it? That, in a nutshell is how I see science in regards to God’s design.
You say you are a man of empirical facts, how do you explain the vast amounts of healing miracles in this world–miracles that even doctors have no idea about. I personally have seen my mother-in-law completely recover from what the doctors assured us was a life ending physical situation. We laid hands on her, prayed for a healing, she received that healing and within a week was back at the house like nothing happened. I guess because you don’t understand something, means it isn’t true.
In regards to when life is conceived and what I choose to call a baby is my choice, calling me a name because of my beliefs doesn’t support yours. Science can say whatever it wants, but as a father who went through 2 miscarriages with my wife, I can tell you that we morned over those losses as much as we could. Life is fragile, if you are giving a chance at life, no one, not even the mother should be allowed to take that away.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 4:14pmBrightLight, you are the walking contradiction of arguments that I make fun of. But it would be too easy, so I will take my toys home and ignore your senseless posting.
Bauer,
The free market requires laws to function, and those laws must evolve over time, so I’m not sure how to respond when you say you will tolerate no more laws to regulate it.
Our Constitution is a unique document, but it does not mirror the doctrine of the Holy Trinity nor any other doctrine. It is a living document that can be amended, has been amended, and is constantly being reinterpreted. This is very different than the religious dogmatic interpretation that many people try to ascribe to it and the courts who rely upon it.
Funny that you say France is in economic ruin because of its Socialism but ignore Holland and Germany which have equally strong market regulations and strong unions, and their economies are much stronger than ours. Also, it is harder to do business in China because of government regulations than in the US, but they are growing at 11% per year. I think you should try to examine things more carefully rather than only looking for one thing and believing you’ve found it everywhere.
Many aspects of the Bible have been disproven by science, including the Earth’s age and where man came from. While you get around the former problem by making up stupid definitions of days, you choose to ignore the mountain of evidence concerning the latter because it doesn’t fit your mythology book. This is just proving that you don’t understand science and are ignoring how it has devastated the accuracy of your religious stories. Arguing it further is a waste of time, but calling the assault trivial is just dumb. The Church didn’t imprison guys like Galileo over trivia. It was and remains a huge rebuttal to religious thinking. Your view that God works through evolution is quaint, but when you stop insisting that the Bible is literally correct–as most conservatives do–then you are conceding that we don’t need God to explain it. Putting God on top of a working scientific theory is unnecessary, redundant and explains absolutely nothing. It might be worse than continuing to insist that Eve really did come from a male rib.
Go read Feynmann‘s ’74 commencement speech at CalTech and you will understand how prevalent phony science and bogus claims are. Yes, there is much science hasn’t figured out, but if the mystery minerals can cure terminal illness, then there will be a lot of drug companies ready to fund repeatable experiments to earn billions on the patents. To believe that they are just dumb makes you look dumber. Feynmann explains this in much more colorful and entertaining language than I can. He, like I, admit that we know little, but we know that the scientific method is the only way of establishing what is true–not phony stories made up by muddled minds in religion or in pseudoscience.
You are entitled to your opinion and can call a fetus a baby as a private citizen, but you are not entitled to insist upon it as a matter of science or law.
Report Post »Bauervision
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 4:21pmABC: I’m glad that you are on here because we need open conversations about these topics. All we tend to get about liberal views is what is spewed on the MSM and the rantings of crazed misinformed lunatics that want a free ride.
You are a man of science, I am a man of God.
While you raise science to such a level, how quickly I remember the many times that science has claimed something as fact, only to reject it later.
I don’t recall many times that has happened concerning God.
Please keep posting because it is nice to actually hear from the opposing side instead of…..well….what we usually get.
Report Post »Bauervision
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 5:02pmABC, I say that I cannot tolerate another law because that is ALL our government seems to be concerned with. Yes we are a country ruled by law, but at some point, it becomes less about freedom and more about law–and that isn’t what they wanted.
Regulate this, regulate that.
They wanted small government, not what we have today.
Can it be amended? Sure, Should it be? Sure.
It does mirror the Holy Trinity: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Decision maker, Law maker and Judge.
As far as other countries and their regulations, all I can say is that Germany is doing better then we are now because they didn’t buy into the stimulus BS and drown their government further into debt.
If we need anything concerning regulations, it is more regulations on the government–not us.
Report Post »Bauervision
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 8:30pmJust wanted to chime in on my point on the Republic versus a Democratic government comment ABC.
What I was trying to, albeit, simplisticly, was to point out that the result of a Democracy (Direct or Representative) is that of the oppression of the minority, and unlimited power held by the majority which leads to Tyranny-by-Majority. This is what I personally see in DC and we all should be apalled. It is what Jefferson called “elective despotism was not the government we fought for”. –granted this goes outside of the abortion discussion and even supports your side; but then again, I never said a woman shouldn’t be allowed to have one.
In any Democracy–either a Direct or a Representative type–as a form of government, there can be no legal system which protects The Individual or The Minority (any or all minorities) against unlimited tyranny by The Majority. I never, and will never support something that limits a persons freedom in this country, but on the abortion topic, it is not just the freedom of the mother that I am concerned about…..but I digress.
The definition of a Republic is: a constitutionally limited government of the representative type created by a written Constitution–adopted by the people and changeable (from its original meaning) by them only by its amendment–with its powers divided between three separate Branches: Executive, Legislative and Judicial……note the major difference there. A LIMITED government. That is all the Conservatives want. And all it seems the Left wants to remove.
Yes our Constituion can and should be amended to change with the times, but I personally feel that in respect to our Constitution, ANY amendments to said document should be proposed by the Legislature and then voted on by the electorate.
Report Post »takingonissues.com
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:29pmWow. Never, ever forget that no matter how the left “packages” it, abortion will always be murder, period!
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:37pmWar must be murder as well then.
Report Post »HKS
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:42pmAgree, Murder is Murder regardless of how you package it.
Report Post »HKS
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:45pmABC don’t get it, war is defense. da
Report Post »GnomeChomsky
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:53pmYes dont you remeber how we valiantly defended ourselves against Grenada, Panama, Vietnam, Iraq, Nicaragua, Korea etc etc.
Report Post »Jeff f.
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:53pm@ABC
Report Post »Wouldn’t it have been nice if some of those aborted children would have had the opportunity to risk their lives to defend this country?
abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:04pmFunny how your conservatives call 10 year old Iraq children killed in battle collateral damage, but call the termination of a six-week fetus murder. Only someone blinded by dogma could make such arguments. The point is that killing is complex. It might be justified or not, but in the case of a fetus, the law says that it is not murder and the fetus is not a child. So stop calling it what it is not. If you want to make a nuanced case for certain types of abortions being wrong, then fine. But these simpleton arguments are so easy to poke holes into, that smart conservatives should be blushing right now.
Report Post »what4
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:13pmits murder in the name of lazy slobs, who just want to have sex with no reprecussions!
Report Post »kindling
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:30pmAh….lets see, war is war, flys are not people just because they have a heart, abortion is the killing of a baby that in late term is a baby that can live if given a chance rather than sucking its brain out and you ABC….the jury is still out on.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:50pmKindling, what is wrong with you? I never equated a fly with a human. There ARE very big differences in types of war–unless the US and Germany were morally equivalent during WWII. And a fetus is not a fully viable human child, biologically or legally.
Report Post »We Are Not Alone
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:58pmWARNING:
http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?v=hdSUprDkVr
Report Post »WhiteFang
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:31pmABC, Shut up you idiot. Your words are an embarrassment to you
Report Post »untameable-kate
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:41pmABC to say conservatives don’t care about Iraqui children is just nasty, you have never heard a conservative say anything like that, you are full of crap. I do notice however that you really glommed onto the abortion issue so I think you are just here to make false accusations, upset good God fearing people and pick fights. God help you.
Report Post »GnomeChomsky
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:55pmABC has not said that conservatives “dont care” about the deaths of Iraqi children, he/she has said that you would rationalize it and while unfortunate deem it to be acceptable collateral damage. Who is making false accusations again?
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:56pmI said no such thing. I said that they are accepted as collateral damage. Implicitly, in supporting wars, conservatives have made a choice to accept the invariable collateral damage that occurs. You allow for killing of innocents when it comes to war, but not when it comes to women being accorded the freedom to choose. There are many good reasons to accept it in the case of abortion since the fetus doesn’t feel pain–unlike in the war case–so there is a huge contradiction in conservatives’ acceptance of even optional wars versus their insistence that all abortions are wrong.
Report Post »ratposion
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 11:52pmgood thing for wars it gives you your freedom of speech
Report Post »TEXAS
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:29pmuaaaaa WHAT?
Report Post »Seven
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:44pmABC what an ASS you are. Your comments are the same pratel we have heard for decades. You embarass yourself. You wear your ignorance well. God I love America!
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:57pmSeven, calling me names doesn’t rebut my arguments. Try using facts and logic rather than ad hominem arguments if you want to be taken seriously by intelligent people.
Report Post »untameable-kate
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:33pmTell me then ABC if it is not human what is it? It certainly is not any other type of flora or fauna, It is human, it can be nothing else. This woman says she feels threatened, she not only threatens but kills unborn HUMANS everyday. I get so sick of them justifying murder by calling it womens health and reproductive freedom, can’t these women figure out how to use condoms or take one stinking pill a day?
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:53pmIt is a fetus, not a human being. That you‘re sick of women who don’t know how to use condoms is understandable. But that is not the entire population of women who seek abortions.
Report Post »CatB
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:55pmWOW .. now I have heard the “mother” (pardon the pun) of all spin! Next you are going to try to convince us Madcow is a woman.
Report Post »Seven
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 8:06pmIs this ABC person some kind of plant to aggravate people with nonsense. They offers silly facts that have no foundation in truth. Who wants to argue with a flat earth fool. We will mark you . God I love America.
Report Post »RAISINGCONSERVATIVES
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:22pmAbortion has nothing to do with motherhood. It is the most selfish thing that you could ever do. Abortion is murder. I remember having an ultrasound at 6.5 weeks and there was a heartbeat. Why is it that you go to jail for crushing an eagle egg, but to kill your own baby is ok?
Everyone should read the book “The Marketing of Evil”…
Report Post »Tripper
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:28pmwarped logic.
calling on all OBGYNs to perform a “service”?
Report Post »GnomeChomsky
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:32pmWouldn’t bringing a child into the world that you do not have the means to care for be equally as selfish?
abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:36pmThe late-term abortions supplied by Dr. Tiller, as well as all other abortions, are legal. The status of the fetus is not human, so it is not murder. And biologically, we know that the fetus is not fully human yet. Calling it a baby is a little strange in this context. By the way, the flies that you swat and kill thoughtless also have beating hearts, so the fact that you see one beating at 6.5 weeks, when your fetus still has gills and a tail, would seem irrelevant to most people. And while abortions and motherhood are clearly different, the best-placed person to determine the right choice on an abortion is the mother. Not the state. Funny how conservatives want the government out of people‘s lives except on the issues that they want to ram down other people’s throats. What you guys really want is the government out of your lives and neck-deep in everyone else’s. Love the hypocrisy.
Seven
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:40pmThis woman sounds so intelligent yet her words are so arcane. She looks stuck in the 60s with her dream catchers hanging from her ears. What about the threat to our most innocent. We do not live in the dark ages as does this woman and the man interviewing her. The child is not her body The child has chromosomes from the mother and father in equal amounts and one entirely of its own. Therefore the child is its own person. Shame on the men and women of this nation for not stopping this charade. We will no longer keep our eyes closed. Oh by the way , God will forgive anything if we ask and we can start anew. God I love America!
RAISINGCONSERVATIVES
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:40pmThat is what adoption is for. Since when is human life so disposable? It is very simple…don’t get pregnant! And if you do, then don’t make the baby suffer the consequences for your actions. Take responsibility, if you don’t want to keep the baby, then there are many, many families out there that would give him/her a good home. There is ALWAYS an alternative to murder.
Report Post »AngryTexanFromAmarillo
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:42pmAnother question is this…As morbid as it is….If an unborn baby isn’t a baby and not a LIFE.
Report Post »Then why is it if someone kills a pregnant woman, they are charged with 2 murders?
Why is a baby a life in this case and not a life in the case of abortions?
Oh, God!
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:45pmABC, there is a huge difference between a fly and an unborn child. Murder is murder. I suggest you go back to your vegan world and suck on a plant. Oh wait, those are living things also, heaven forbid if we kill a plant, but babies are OK…
Report Post »Psychosis
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:45pm@ gnome.if you cant afford a child , keep your freakin legs closed, or adoption is a viable option.
Report Post »@ ABC nice strawman…………but still wont work. if you dont want to get pregnant, stop participating in actions that risk pregnancy,,…….you have the right as a woman to your reproductive organs to chose to use them or not………….if you chose to use those organs, you also chose the consequence
A1955Rosie
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:46pmThe majority of women who have abortions are IRRESPONSIBLE. There are many many ways to prevent pregnancy in the first place PLUS THE DAY AFTER PILL. It‘s unplanned irresponsibility and then laying blame that we don’t want to fund your so called later term killings. THE ROAD TO HELL IS PAVED W/GOOD INTENTIONS.
Report Post »Jeff f.
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:50pm@ABC
Report Post »You shoot a dog you go to jail. You kill a fetus, you are a hero to women’s rights. Love the hypocrisy. If you can’t see the worth of the potential life you are snuffing out, I don’t know how you value any life.
Oh, God!
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:50pm@ ANGRYTEXANFROMAMARILLO, I have often asked that myself. Either way it is bad, but if the woman has a so-called choice, shouldn’t the father also? After all, he did help in the process.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:52pmPsychosis continues to only envision the scenarios that make his case, rather than the many that do not. Rape. Incest. Extreme disability. Exteme underage of the mother. As a function of IVF. There are many cases in which aborting a non-feeling, unaware fetus is the lesser of two evils. Further, we live in a free country where the one who should make the call is the one who must bear the costs. You conservatives love your freedom, including your freedom to deny others theirs. This would be fine if you could prove that a fetus is a child, but it is not, so you should stop equating the two. You should also recognize that many abortions happen for good reasons that you choose to ignore since they are inconvenient to your rigid ideology.
abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:53pmJeff, a dog has self-awareness and feelings. A fetus does not. A dog is worth more than a fetus. The laws make sense. You do not.
RAISINGCONSERVATIVES
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:54pm@ABC: You may hold yourself on the same level as a fly, but I do not.
Human life is precious. It starts at conception. You liberals all want to try and quote the Declaration of Independance “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness” but you don’t give a damn about life other than your own. What we want is for the govenment to protect LIFE. Until we get back to the true American experiment which is a ‘revolutionary idea that the common man is free, and can be the master of his govenment, so only if he himself is ruled by God’ then our country will continue down this sprial of immorality and failure. When God is restored to His rightful place in our nation so too shall our nation be restored!
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:55pmEarth to Rosie: the morning after pill causes an abortion.
HillBillySam1
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 5:57pm@gnomechomsky
Report Post »This is the same tired old line that liberals and Progressives bring up in the abortion debate:” Isn’t it better for the child to have been aborted other than bring it into a hard, cruel life?”. This is the difference between liberals/Progressives and Conservatives. Conservatives believe in personal resposibility/progressives believe in “keep your laws off of my body”. If you don’t want to get pregnant, don’t have sexual intercourse. It’s very simple. You don’t get pregnant if someone sneezes on you. You don’t get pregnant from drinking after somebody. You don’t get pregnant by sitting on a dirty toilet seat. It takes a very specific act. If a pregnancy occurs, be responsible and either raise the child yourself our opt for adoption. This “problem solved” attitude of abortion is cruel and irresponsible. Do you realize what happens to the baby during an abortion? How is that a better solution? Do you realize what happens to the woman after an abortion? For all except a very few, the pain and remorse will last a lifetime. Teenage girls are 10 times more likely to attempt suicide after an abortion. Abortion is not about “women’s rights”. It is about an Progressive agenda that touts population control and social engineering. Abortion affects minority populations far more than caucasion. Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, was a devout follower of eugenics.
The resposibility rests equally on the man in this equation. The sad fact is that men are for abortion rights more than women are because they certainly don’t want responsibility whenever and whoever they “hook up” with.
Progreesives need a new argument.
abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:01pmYou conservatives are so silly, which is why this is so much fun. I never equated a fly with a human, but noted that there is no significance to seeing a heartbeat on an ultrasound at 6.5 weeks because even a fly has a heartbeat. But you guys don’t follow logic very well. So funny.
You also blindly assert that life begins at conception, but then you cannot explain why we don’t hold funerals for fetuses that are spontaneously aborted as a great many are–many more than abortions, actually. You ignore these facts and logic, because it goes against a narrative that you take on faith and do not use your brains to question. I don’t know whether that is due to fear, brainwashing or laziness. Someone will have to explain it to me…or produce evidence of a lot of fetus funerals that I don’t know about.
Jeff f.
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:01pmIn my world the one who makes the choice faces the consequences of his/her actions. That choice was already made. The choice at this point is the choice to live and that choice is being taken away from the unborn child before he/she can make it.
Report Post »RAISINGCONSERVATIVES
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:04pm@ABC…you tell me if they are or are not formed babies or just a clump of cells…
Warning…graphic
http://www.priestsforlife.org/resources/photosbyage/index.htm
Report Post »HillBillySam1
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:05pm@ABC
Report Post »You, sir are a typical Progressive blowhard trying to hide behind psuedoscience to make your vulgar argument. Scientifically, the fetus is distinctly human at the moment of fertilization. It is not a tadpole. It is not a seahorse. It is not a unicorn. Genetically, everything about the child is determined in that selfsame moment.
Maybe you should read something other than “Rules For Radicals”.
Jeff f.
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:05pm@ABC
Report Post »That is where we differ. I put much more value on human life, even immature human life that that of a dog or any other animal for that matter. You are quibbling over stages of development. No matter the stage a fetus is in, it is still life and it is still human.
kindling
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:05pmWhat ever happened to the hypocratic oath of DO NO HARM? I would thing killing someone would be considered harm.
Report Post »Psychosis
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:05pm@ abc .you have no idea what i “envision”………..and your argument is what all of you turn to when your losing the argument……………over 90% of abortions are elective. these are the ones i have issue with. rape, incest, and endangerment to mother or child is a whole different scenario, and if you want a debate on that, it is worthy of it. ELECTIVE ABORTION IS NOT
Report Post »kindling
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:07pmGnomeChomsky, That is what birth control is, not getting pregnant in the first place. If a woman is raped I understand how painful that can be…..because it happened to me. Yes, I lived in fear, but I never blamed my child for it and I could have given him up for adoption. I have adopted 3 unwanted kids and believe me, they are all loved.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:08pmJeff, not a child but a fetus. And the mother and (sometimes) the father do feel guilt and anguish over the decision in the vast majority of cases–as much research and interviews have clearly shown. Look, you guys cheer on soldiers who kill without anguish although they invariably kill people who are “collateral damage” in war, even though many soldiers are conflicted about war. Heck, more than 1/2 of our soldiers reported having trouble firing their weapon in WWI because they felt conflicted about killing. So it’s not surprising that you would also make false generalizations about what the women going in for abortions feel. The rhetoric is far from the reality. Typical.
Report Post »Jeff f.
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:10pm@ABC
Report Post »There you go again comparing a heart beat of a fly with that of a human. A fly is a fly a fetus is a human in a early stage. They are not equal. The heart beat of a fully developed is a pittance to that of any stage of human development.
abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:11pmRaising, the fetus can look very human but lacks a functioning brain. We turn off the life support on brain dead patients that look even more human than those fetuses you linked us to. And those patients have much stronger connections to loved ones than those fetuses too. This is the unthinking sensationalism that drives a movement, but doesn’t help address the nuanced complexity of this issue. I could show similar pictures of little kids killed in war, but you’d just call me a peacenik and laugh at me. But you are using the same simpleton logic to defend the abolition of all abortions. Nonsense.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:16pmHillbilly, I have cited no pseudoscience. I am aware of the genetic makeup of a fetus versus other organisms. But the existence of a human chromosome is not a barrier to termination of that organism. We murder in war. We turn off life support of brain dead humans. We destroy human blastocysts for IVF all the time. Funny how it is only the poor scared woman going into an abortion clinic that receives that wrath of conservatives. When the use of fully human stem cells–the genetic equivalent of an embryo–produce life saving drugs, you people will be first in line to demand those medicines. The hypocrisy of what you protest and the contradictory facts you stress to justify it must make your ears ring with cognitive dissonance.
kindling
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:18pmABC, I don’t know what you are talking about, my oldest daughter was born 3 months early and she is fine……and fully human. You are the one fooling yourself. At conseption the cells are fully human. They can become nothing except a human. Humans don’t give birth to anything but humans. Love the hypocrisy of saying Not fully human yet, it looks to me like if that is true you are an example that even birth does not satisfy that in some people.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:21pmJeff, do I really have to explain it again? I didn’t equate a fly to a human or even a fetus. I pointed out the existence of a heartbeat is inconsquential since something as worthless as a fly has one. Study logic ever?
Psychosis, you only covered some of the cases where an abortion is justified, and, anyway, it’s not your call. Fetus doesn’t equal human, so you don’t get to decide. Next…
Kindling, an abortion is not killing someone. It is killing something. Just like killing cancer cells is killing something. Do no harm applies to humans. Not things that are not yet human or never will be.
Report Post »kindling
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:25pmearth to ABC, the morning after pill stops conseption just in case there is an egg there…..not the same thing!
Report Post »jcons114
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:28pm@ Kindling: God Bless you for your choice of life. Your story is an inspiring example to me.
Report Post »Jeff f.
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:29pmNow you are making up terms. It is called the human life cycle because it describes the development of a human from zygote to adult hood. They whole existence of which, it is human. You can‘t just dictate where it can be called human to further your belief that no one should face any consequences they don’t want to face.
Report Post »Danglinbags
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:31pmWow, ABC! You know so much about the exact moment when human embryos/fetuses/infants are actually “alive,“ have ”feelings,“ and are ”self aware.” The medical community could benefit greatly if you would share your irrefutable science with them so we could get this all sorted out. Until then, I vote for erring on the side of caution.
Report Post »IOnceWasLiberalButNowISee
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:34pm@GnomeChomsky
What about adoption? My neice and nephew had to wait years to adopt, because there were not enough children to fulfill the list . . . and he got bumped UP on the list because he had been adopted. My wife was adopted, I praise God daily that her birth mother didn’t fall for the “It’s only a blob of tissue,” argument.
The article ended with: “Tiller was shot and killed by anti-abortion militant activist Scott Roeder in 2009.” That should read, “Tiller was shot and killed by a pro-choice militant activist Scott Roeder in 2009.”
@ABC
Report Post »I used to agree with you, as my handle might indicate. I have a picture on my wall of a 5 year old girl dressed as Minnie Mouse for halloween. She is now 19 and studying to become a psychologist. When her mother, a friend of mine, came to me to say that she was pregnant and her louse of a boyfriend no longer wanted anything to do with her, I said, “You should just have an abortion, you don’t need that in your life.” Then 7 months later I held that baby in my arms I realized that I had advocated her MURDER. You say that abortion is not murder because Roe v Wade settled the question. Guess we should have kept Dred Scott on the books, too.
abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:35pmKindling, the morning after pill prevents the attachment of a fertilized egg to the uterine wall, so that little zygote that is genetically fully human–what conservatives call a baby–will die in a artifically-induced spontaneous abortion. You are citing the example of someone taking the morning after pill when it wasn‘t needed since the egg wasn’t fertilized the night before. Wow. Know much?
Report Post »MJ1025
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:37pmABC, you must not have children. If you ever fall in love, get married, and your wife gets pregnant, you will get to see your baby’s heartbeat within 3 weeks. Is that not your child? You get to see his or her growth at each visit. Is that not your human child? You may have picked out a name for your baby by then. Imagine your wife having contractions at six months, the baby is born too early and dies. You will get to see a perfectly formed little baby girl or boy that was yours. Will you not cry because you just lost your son or daughter?
Or will you say that is not a real baby and just a mass of cells?
ABC, you are just immature and/or ignorant. I pray that you never have to experience the lost of a child.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:38pmJeff, you’re so funny. Because it’s called the “human” life cycle, then we should give human rights to a four-celled blastocyst as though it is the same thing as putting a bullet in Dr. Tiller’s head in front of his wife and kids. Yeah. That makes sense. And we should also indict every US soldier in every war for committing murder too, since those adult men and women–not to mention innocent children–that were killed by our soldiers are part of that “human” life cycle as well. Good logic. I’ll have to remember that one.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:41pmDangling, this is the problem with people who don‘t know science and don’t know the law. They make dumb statements like yours. I am not deciding when life is accorded human rights, although I have stated my personal opinion. I am telling people what the law says, what Roe v Wade says,and what alternatives are out there. They all are problematic and complex, which is why this issue deserves more thoughtful discussion that is coming from the bloggers here–with their black and white nonsense that doesn’t explain much of anything and reveals a ton of hypocrisy and contradiction. I would serve no use to the doctors, but they would serve much use to the people here who are ignorant of the science. And the legal scholars who have developed the case law and rationale behind it would also help out those that are woefully ignorant about the law and why it is written as it is. They spend so much time protesting what they don’t understand. So funny.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:47pmIoncewas, it’s so funny. I told two of my college friends not to hook up because I didn’t think they were right for each other, but they ignored me and did. Now they are happily married with a baby they conceived out of wedlock. I was advocating the non-existence of their child…
Just because you have a personal experience that would seem to preclude abortions, it doesn’t mean that all cases are the same as that one. Nor does it mean that a fetus is suddenly the same thing as the baby you held in your arms–unless you build your tree houses on acorns. And it certainly doesn’t mean that Roe v Wade is on the level with Dred Scott. Fully sentient black people denied human rights is not even in the same zip code as fetuses not recognized as equivalent to a viable human baby. And only a person blinded by ideology or (worse) a racist could equate the two. I doubt you are a racist, so I’ll go with the blinded option…
Report Post »RAISINGCONSERVATIVES
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 6:49pm@ABC
Report Post »Studies indicate that the majority of abortions are done between the 11th and 12th week of pregnancy. During those weeks of development there are synapses that start to form in the brain and the baby can make deliberate motions with its hands, arms and legs. The baby has the ability to move and react to its surrounding and does have the capability to feel pain. In fact by the end of the 6th week reflex movement is seen and the 5 brain vesicles are complete.
Just because you don’t want to believe it is a baby, just so you can sleep better at night, doesn’t make it so.
abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:04pmRaising, are you really that arrogant that you are going to contest the work of trained scientists with decades of experience just to hold onto a point that is untenable? Do you also consult plumbers rather than heart surgeons when you need bypass surgery? Honestly.
Here’s one for you… When I was in high school, we applied electrical impulses to the severed legs of dead frogs and made them respond to that stimuli. Severed legs of dead frogs. Your explanation of what a fetus can do at 11 weeks is similar to what a dead frog leg can do. Congratulations. Shall we all become vegans now?
The complex brain waves that define us uniquely as humans do not start to appear until at least the 28th week, so your highlighting the formation of a reptilian nervous system at the 11th week–which, by the way, is the acting out of evolution within human development and another proof that Darwin is right and conservatives are wrong–is really just beside the point in so many ways. Nice try though. And good luck with the plumber should your heart need repair. Those that do not recognize expertise authority do not deserve those experts when they need them.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:06pmMJ, I actually do have children, and while I have never experienced the loss of a child, I have lost my son in a crowded place and felt the crushing feeling for nearly an hour that he might be gone forever. I love my children very much, but it doesn’t change my belief, rooted in science, that a human fetus is not the same thing as a human child.
Report Post »Diane999
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:19pmIt will forever boggle my mind how women can kill their own offspring without a second thought, and forever boggle my mind how such an artificial distinction as an arbitrary point in time can make the legal and ethical distinction between getting rid of an inconvenience and murder. My heart truly breaks for the monumental evil that is being done in this country and for the terrible soul scars left on women and womanhood. Will we ever be able to look back at this treacherous time in history without shuddering at the inhumanity of it?
Report Post »MJ1025
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:26pmABC, you make no sense at all. You have children but you think your children were not worth worrying about until they were born. You actually think the child that was growing in your wife’s uterus had less value. You must make the progressive thinkers proud. I hope you do not get really old and can not take care of yourself. Your kids may see you as a strain when you can not contribute to society anymore. You may be considered of less value to them.
Report Post »Agentuntomyself
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:29pm@ABC
Report Post »Okay, we get it already. You want us all to understand how smart and logical you are – it‘s like you’re wearing a neon sign, and it’s annoying. Here’s the deal: You’re wrong. Science will never be able to provide a definitive answer about when life begins. What defines life? Heartbeat? Brain activity? Breathing? Voluntary movement? When a woman is pregnant with a baby, there is life in her womb. Do you know why you don’t want to acknowledge that? Because if you did, you would have to examine the fact that your value system is flawed, irrational, and disengenuous. The feminist/pro-choice movement is a lie that has enslaved and destroyed a whole generation of women. The lie is this: by convincing women to abort unwanted babies, we will prevent more suffering to women and children alike. Look around. Is that what you see? Have things improved? If you say yes, then you are a liar. The rise in the degredation of and violence to women is staggering. Pornography, rape, domestic violence…the list goes on and on. The same for the treatment of children. We haven’t done anything for women by encouraging them to be promiscuous and then further encouraging them to have abortions when that promiscuity results in pregnancy. And don’t start talking about rape, incest and the safety of the mother, because it’s ridiculous. Long before Roe v. Wade, women could go to their doctor and have what was called a “therauputic abortion” and it was legal. But doctors were restricted to performing those abortions only under certain circumstances, such as health of the mother, rape, etc. But you don‘t hear about that in your Women’s Studies courses at Wellsley, do you? Roe v. Wade was about one thing only: abortion on demand, for any reason. One last thing. Don’t make stupid generalizations about conservatives thinking it is okay to kill Iraqui children and other such nonsense. It just makes you sound stupid and childish.
longhorn mama
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:38pm@ ABC So how do you know God did not put a unique soul in that fertilized egg? How do you dare risk it? Eugenics does not work because we are not animals and you cannot breed a soul. It is a gift from God. We have turned our backs on God and on our humanity with this legalized genocide. Just today I had a young mother tell me she could never give up her baby for adoption so I asked her if she could kill her baby instead of allowing someone else to love him?
Report Post »I know it is the mother‘s body but it is her child’s body, too, even if it is only one cell, and who can speak for him or her? I know we must concentrate on defeating the Marxist/Statist/Socialist/Liberal/Communist/Progressives but will God help us after we have turned our back on Him? Do you pray with an open heart and an open mind for guidance? If God Himself told me that there was not a human life there, I could buy your arguments, but otherwise this is obviously the most savage carnage and atrocity.
RAISINGCONSERVATIVES
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:44pmThe difference between the frog leg and the baby at 11-12 weeks are that the motions that the baby can make are deliberate.
By the time that the baby is within its 8th week of gestation the neuro-anatomic structures are present. What is needed is a sensory nerve to feel the pain and send a message to the thalamus, a part of the base of the brain, and motor nerves that send a message to that area. These are present at 8 weeks. The pain impulse goes to the thalamus. It sends a signal down the motor nerves to pull away from the hurt. Pain can be detected when nociceptors (pain receptors) discharge electrical impulses to the spinal cord and brain. These fire impulses outward, telling the muscles and body to react. These can be measured. Lip tactile response may be evoked by the end of the 7th week. At 11 weeks, the face and all parts of the upper and lower extremities are sensitive to touch. By 13 1/2 to 14 weeks, the entire body surface, except for the back and the top of the head, are sensitive to pain.
The responses that the baby makes to pain have been documented by ultra sound. Reflexively avoiding what caused the pain and the acceleration of the heartbeat can clearly be seen. Your pro-abortion science is bunk. You don’t want to believe that there is any type of survival instinct on the part of the baby or that it does feel pain so you can justify the murder of human life disguised as a “civil right”.
Report Post »Oh…and your argument about disconnecting a “brain dead” person is faulty as well. The baby is developing and will gain more and more brain activity as it grows. The “brain dead” person will not. Nice try. Bunk again.
abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:45pmMJ, let’s get it straight, shall we? I said a fetus is not worth the same as a developed human child. I never said that I would not care for my wife’s unborn fetus. Proof: I would hold a funeral for my child if he or she were to die before I do. I would not hold a funeral for the unborn fetus that my wife spontaneously aborts.
Agent, what makes one sound stupid and childish is making outlandish comments with no basis in fact and expecting to get away with it. And you make a lot of those types of comments. First, you conflate life with human beings, and science can clearly tell us the former but not the latter; however, the real issue here is that people are ok with the grey areas that separate murder from acceptable killing in other realms (e.g., death penalty, war, end of life issues, etc.), but they they want to pretend as though a human being is magically defined as a human being at an arbitrary point with a moral bright line. I have never defined it thusly, but have explained what Roe v Wade says, what my personal but noncontrolling opinion is; and I have critiqued the opinion of others that creates all sorts of contradictions (killing an unconscious fetus is worse than innocent children in Iraq). This is not childish but very serious stuff, and I have seen professional ethicists at places like Stanford Medical School and Yale Law School do the same. That they are smarter than you might be annoying to you, but you are totally out of line calling such discussions childish. Second, to call the feminist movement responsible for the “enslavement” of people is such a gross exaggeration that is devoid of any supporting facts. It is also an insult to those that lived or even now still live in slavery. You might not agree with certain aspects of the movement–get in line, many people don’t–but you are beyond ignorant to claim that the feminist movement is reponsible for abortions, pornography, rape and domestic violence. All of those things existed long before the earliest inception of the feminist movement. Heck, a visit to Vesuvius will show you Roman pornography that would make Jenna Jameson blush. And rape and domestic violence is older than Rome. Third, there are plenty of documented cases of women who were denied abortions even in cases of rape, incest and the like, so it is FANTASY–albeit ideologically convenient–for you to claim otherwise. The fact that women would risk infection and death to have abortions should signal the extreme cases that were denied at hospitals. This is not Wellesley propaganda, but historical fact. Finally, I never claimed that conservatives are happy about children dying in Iraq–God, how the logical skills of conservatives are stunted–but how conservatives are willing to put them in a cost-benefit analysis in a way that they will not allow for women having abortions. They pretend to know the mind of the woman seeking the abortion, pass judgment on her intentions in the most negative light, and then claim that all abortions are wrong. If you conservatives applied the same kind of reasoning to war, then we’d never have intervened in WWII, much less invaded Iraq. How unbelievably simplistic can your reasoning be that you miss these obvious contradictions?? It really does make YOU sound stupid and childish.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:48pmLonghorn, abortion is not eugenics. Souls are not relevant from a medical or legal standpoint until they are found on a doctor’s ultrasound or MRI. We take the risk of damnation every time we execute a murderer although Jesus said to forgive, so start with that issue instead. And finally, socialism has nothing to do with it since many countries with freer capitalism than America (e.g., HK, Holland, Finland) allow freer abortions than we do.
Report Post »GnomeChomsky
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:49pm@Agent
Report Post »“The rise in the degredation of and violence to women is staggering.”
I’d have to strongly argue the contention that violence and oppression of women has increased post-legalized abortion. Making the case that reports of such incidents may have increased is valid but not the actual occurance. And to suggest that abortion is the reason behind such a trend is patently ridiculous. Here is a good rule of thumb “Correlation does not imply causation”. Of course this a common mistake made by people, regardless of political/social views, who do not have a well researched position on or even a basic understanding of a particular subject.
abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 7:51pmRaising, the motions a fly makes are also deliberate. So what? A human fetus has a working reptilian nervous system by the 11th week. Big deal. That hardly shows viability or human consciousness or anything else to justify putting it on par with a human baby.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 8:10pmAgent, I posted a response that somehow didn’t make it out. I’ll try this again…
What makes someone look childish or stupid is making comments that are totally outside the support of facts and expecting no one to notice. And you have made several such comments. First, science already has shown where human life begins, but it cannot dictate where we start being a full human being because that is an arbitrary decision we make as a society, and which is complex and nuanced. I am not making a definitive statement on that anyway, but have clearly stated where that arbitrary line was drawn in Roe v Wade, where others (like myself) have personally drawn it; and I have also shown the contradictions that call into question the bright line of conception made by conservatives that is problematic for many reasons (e.g., saying that terminating an unfeeling fetus is unacceptable but allowing children to die in Iraq is acceptable). I also have clearly stated with scientific facts that a fetus is not a baby, and this is both easy and clear to establish. Second, it is beyond stupid to argue that the feminist movement is responsible for slavery. You might have problems with the movement in its various forms–and many do, so get in line–but only an ignorant person could equate the status of women in America today with slavery. Third, you claim that the feminist movement is responsible for rape, domestic violence and pornography, among other societal ills, but you ignore the fact that all of these predate the feminist movement by at least a couple of millennia. Indeed, a visit to Vesuvius would reveal Roman pornography so graphic that they would make a dirty old man blush. And rape and domestic violence are older than Rome. Fourth, you claim without support that women who really needed abortions could get them at hospitals before Roe v Wade, but the documented deaths of women from botched abortions should show that some women who desperately needed them were turned away. And there are plenty of documented cases of even rape and incest victims being turned away at hospitals. This is not Wellesley propaganda but historical fact. You ignore those cases because they are ideologically inconvenient to your narrative. Finally, I have seen discussions on the nuances of medical ethics as it relates to abortion held at esteemed schools like Stanford Medical School and Yale Law School. To call such discussions childish is really infantile.
Report Post »RAISINGCONSERVATIVES
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 8:22pm@ ABC
Report Post »There you go again, comparing human life to a fly again. A fly will never be anything more than just that…a fly. The developing baby in the mother’s womb is not an insignifigant, non-feeling, piece of garbage. Once it is aborted, that is what it becomes. Nothing but biowaste. Our children deserve better. They deserve a chance. They deserve life. People like you want to play God. You feel like you should be able to choose who gets to live and who gets to die. Just because they haven’t been born yet, doesn’t mean that they are not a person.
The lady that was aborted but lived…should they have killed her? She was just a fetus right? What difference would it have made? What makes the baby a person? How much the mother wants the baby? What about when a woman who wants her baby but miscarries? Is it less than a baby then? Or is it a baby because she wanted it? You never hear anyone saying “I miscarried my fetus”. Why is that, do you think? I will tell you…it is easier to think of the living baby in your womb as a fetus if you intend to kill it. It helps you justify the termination of your child if you make it just a “thing” and not a life.
Abortion is wrong. Abortion is murder. No matter what you say to justify it.
Okpulot Taha
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 8:32pmABC comments about science, “When I was in high school, we applied electrical impulses to the severed legs of dead frogs and made them respond to that stimuli.”
You only need to shake a little salt on frog legs to have those back legs jump out of a frying pan. I learned this when a little girl helping grandma fry up a batch of frog legs during a Saturday picnic.
ABC, you make many valid points about science and religious hypocrisy. This annoys me so many are resorting to name calling and insult as counterpoint. While I have some issues with abortion your well articulated thoughts are appreciated.
Your basic political leanings, are you conservative or liberal? I am a conservative.
Okpulot Taha
Report Post »Choctaw Nation
Nobamazone
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 9:09pm@ABC
Report Post »A human baby is human from the start and never has gill slits or a tail
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/03/14/fishy-gill-slits
Taquoshi
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 9:19pmTo ABC -
Your comment was – “but then you cannot explain why we don’t hold funerals for fetuses that are spontaneously aborted as a great many are–many more than abortions, actually.”
The day we personally lost our second, and very much desired child through miscarriage was a day we still remember. She’d be 14 now. No memorial service was held for her – at our request, but she does have a baby book with all the cards and emails (a very new thing back then) as people all around the world prayed for us.
And I personally have attended funeral/memorial services for three sets of parents who have lost a child either in utero or shortly after birth. It was the practice years ago to pretend the pregnancy never happened. However, I have two first cousins who died in utero during the 60′s and believe it or not , they actually do have burial sites, as do two of the three infants whose services I attended.
So, yes, those memorial services have taken place in the past and do take place. Anyone who works in a neo-natal unit can attest to it because the overall philosophy of ignoring the situation has passed. However, it was, and continues to be a very private grief for those involved.
Report Post »Right to Lifer
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 10:17pmDr. Elizabeth Newhall made the disturbing comment, “Women have abortions because they care about motherhood”, on MSNBC – where else?
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 10:19pmRaising, do you willfully misstate what I wrote or are you really that thick. Go read it again.
Nobama, you would fail a high school biology class. Human embryos do indeed develop gills and a tail during one phase of growth, which is proof of evolution, which is why you deny it with bogus evidence.
Taq, then I stand corrected on the existence of such services. And I am sorry for your loss. I would venture as a guess that those services are most likely happening for fetuses close to full term rather than those that are terminated at 11 to 12 weeks, when the vast majority of abortions occur. Neo-natal clinics deal with babies that are premature and viable outside of the womb, which are the exact set of cases that Roe v Wade said should not be aborted except in extreme cases. So while your comment is very, very sad and tragic, it doesn’t really apply to the law as set down by Roe vs Wade.
Report Post »Right to Lifer
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 10:28pm@ABC …. It amuzes me and probably other commenters on here to see you continually trying to defend yourself and justify your opinion. Are you sure you believe what you say you do??
Report Post »RAISINGCONSERVATIVES
Posted on October 26, 2010 at 11:36pm@ABC:
YOU are the one who continually uses the fetus/fly analogy. Obviously you don’t regard a developing human life any more than you do a fly.
I do. And I will continue to.
Oh…and I noticed that you didn’t respond to any of my other statements. Like the “brain dead” argument that you made which was bunk…and what about the woman that survived her mother trying to abort her? Should she have been killed? How does 2 minutes make the difference between being just a fetus and being a baby? Your arguments don’t hold water. It’s a matter of principle and morals…both of which you don’t seem to have.
Report Post »toothfairy
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 12:30am@ABC-haven’t had a chance to read all the posts, but please don’t make the generalization that all conservatives are anti abortion. I have long held the belief that some people are a bit hypocritical on this issue, in that they want government out of their lives on everything except abortion and capital punishment. I believe it is a womans choice, although it would NEVER be my choice to have an abortion. I also think that it shouldn’t be federally funded, unless there was rape, incest, etc…We ALL walk a fine line on these issues, as there are moral implications any way you look at it. Thankyou for putting in your Are cents!
Report Post »JJ Coolay
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 12:47amGnomechomsky wrote: Wouldn’t bringing a child into the world that you do not have the means to care for be equally as selfish?
________
ARE YOU FREAKIN SERIOUS???
Report Post »First of all, no, bringing a child into the world without the means to care for it and actually KILLING the child are not selfish equals
Secondly, there are thousands if not millions of couples waiting to adopt children. Ever heard of adoption? Have you?????
JJ Coolay
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 12:51amABC: Funny how conservatives want the government out of people‘s lives except on the issues that they want to ram down other people’s throats.
__________
Ummm… I want the government in on this issue like I want the government writing laws against human beings killing other human beings—- oh wait, that’s the same thing.
Report Post »Duh!!
Get a clue!!
The government is necessary to write laws that keep a social culture from being uncivilized. i.e., it’s necessary to say “its against the law to kill someone”. Well, that baby, which you refuse to call a baby, is a “someone”.
teddrunk
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 6:59amA fetus does not have gills. Those will make up the 3 bones of the inner ear. The gills bit is more misinformation by supposed biology books heavily pushing evolution.
Report Post »joyfulmom
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 9:05amSo, ABC, when do you think you’re life began? You were conceived in the womb…which is truly a miracle. Life is a miracle! By God’s grace, your mother did not abort you and tear you out of her womb. You were conceived and given the gift of life. The babies that are stuffed in garbage pails with hands and feet and blood dripping from their bodies are murdered and not given the chance of life, like you were given. If you can’t see this….then, your root problem is that you do not believe in God! The God that has given you breath and life, you do not honor. ABC, do you think you are a good person? Do you think if you died today that you would go to heaven? Take this test and find out:
Report Post »http://www.areyouagoodperson.org/
May God have mercy on your soul.
Stuck_in_CA
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 9:28am“Under threat”?!!!?? What about all those little girl babies you‘ve torn to pieces inside their mommy’s? A woman’s right to choose? OMG!
Report Post »news12kim
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 10:07amI will get that book… thanks!
Report Post »2Heartz
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 10:27amI will check into the book you suggested. Check out Assumptions that affect our lives by Christian Overman
Report Post »I am reading this to my teenage children and now they are understanding why they hear one thing at school and another from me. This book compares Greek Philosophy and Hebrew Wisdom. Abortion has been around for a long time, unfortunately, but the people who are engulfed in Greek Philosophy deem it perfectly ok. Why? Because it’s a godless society, they think it’s their responsibility to create the perfect society. Most people only scratch the surface of where Darwin was going with his theories. I actually heard a scientist in a debate against creationism say that we began as a speck that landed on earth from an alien’s back. A speck off of an alien’s back or Fearfully and Wondefully made? A godless society or a God Fearing society? Really there’s only two choices….
OBAMAWORSHIOER
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 11:44amWe don’t want to have goody, goody American children born. Large populations make it harder to control. We want depopulation of the earth. Look how we’ve infiltrated the cdureent Obama admin and get our talking heads supporting us. Resistence is futile.
Report Post »Bauervision
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 11:51amABC, you said that people who believe a fetus is human and worthy of saving as suffering from “unthinking sensationalism that drives a movement”, hmm….., isn’t that what got Obama elected?
Isn’t that also the impetus behind your stance? Oh yeah, that’s right, for you it is “thinking sensationalism” that drives your movement because “science says so”. Do you know how many things science can’t prove?
You bleed on about how Conservatives push their ideology on others, well what have you and your liberal buddies been doing to America for almost 100 years now?
You pushed (via a very controversial law) the idea that women should be allowed to have abortions whenever they want because it is their bodies at risk, or in jeopardy of being inconvenienced. Isn’t that sensationalism that drives a movement?
What ever happened to personal responsibility? Seems to be a common theme amongst liberals that there is no need for it…..over and over again.
Screw someone, get pregnant, abort the fetus. Screw someone, get pregnant, abort the fetus. Screw someone, get pregnant, abort the fetus. Screw someone, get pregnant, abort the fetus.
Great logic from someone very espoused on making others logic seem irrelevant.
You are free to kill as many fetus’ as you see fit, we are not the ones who will have to answer for it.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 1:00pmTedDrunk, those gill slits are non functioning and do become ear bones and glands. However, they also are proof that genetic material is conserved and reused for a new purpose. This is proof of evolution. If a creator made chickens then you would not be able to coax genes to grow teeth on their beaks. But evolution predicts that the conservation of prior teeth into a beak should allow you to grow teeth on a chicken, which scientists have done. The problem with arguing evolution with non-science people is that they don’t understand the science enough to see why they are wrong logically and, because they are emotionally vested in holding onto wrong ideas, no amount of scientific proof will convince them otherwise. It is not the fault of science, but of the weakminded thinking of the religious folks who oppose evolution. The only unscientific and illogical agenda is the one pushed by those who oppose evolution. The scientists just do honest work and where the inquiry takes them they follow.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 1:02pmJoyfulMom, I do not need God to explain my existence, why I should act morally or why I should value a fetus and a baby at the varying levels that I (and most mainstream Americans) do. Please keep your religion to yourself. You are entitled to your beliefs but you cannot impose that mythology on me. Only empirically proven facts can be and should be used in a public policy discussion.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 1:07pm2Heartz, you are wrong about the Greeks and the Romans. They were not godless, but their most ethical thinkers didn’t rely on religion to develop theories of how to act ethically, nor did they need to. And what gifts they provided civilization as a result. All science, art and philosophy in the Western World can be traced to Greco-Roman culture. And the law that we enjoy today is also derived more from Greco-Roman heritage than the Jewish one. Plato has had a greater influence on Christianity, it can be argued, than pre-Christian Judaism–and the Hellinization of the Jewish religion is clear proof of this. A friend of mine once said that everything that you need to live a good and ethical life can be found in Greco-Roman writings–you have no need for Judeo-Christianity. And I believe he is correct. One need only read Socrates, Plato and Aurelius to clearly see this. There are no Biblical profits of greater ethical standards than these three giants in human history. It is sad that the modern world doesn’t hold them in higher esteem.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 1:09pmObama, your logic is backward. The reality is that over time you would expect the number of anti-abortion people to rise since the pro-abortion people are having abortions and having fewer kids. Given that most people inherit their political beliefs from their parents, this would predict an eventual majority of anti-abortion folks. Sadly.
Report Post »abc
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 1:20pmBauer,
I do not deny unthinking sensationalism on the left, which helped propel Obama. But that is not the impetus behind my stance, which is driven by scientific knowledge–which also informed the Supreme Court in the Roe case. And while there are many things science cannot prove, there are a great many things that it can prove, including the stages of human development and the differences between a fetus and a fully functioning baby–differences that the Right conveniently ignores. I could go on about how the Right is selective in its use of science, welcoming its discoveries for drugs while denying the evolutionary biology that helped create them, but that is a digression…
The story of the last 500 years is a story of increasing personal liberty and increasing rationality. I am on that side of progress, which is why I listen to scientists rather than preachers and why I root for more personal freedom rather than the tyranny of know-nothing ideologues. Now, I didn’t push any controversial laws, since I was not on the Supreme Court in the early 70′s, but I do think it was the right decision reflecting several prior cases that had inferred privacy rights from the Constitution. You can disagree and hope for a reversal one day, but for now it is the law. You ought to respect your highest court. Also, the termination of a pregnancy, if done early enough (e.g., 11 weeks), is not the murder of a baby that conservatives complain it is–given the scientific differences between a fetus at that stage and a baby–so weighing that against the personal freedom of the mother–even the irresponsible mother–is not for you to question. Afterall, you do not question every single death of innocent bystanders in war even though we both know there are a lot of them. If you accept collateral damage in war, then you ought to accept the termination of far lesser things (fetuses) in defense of a woman’s control of her body. Otherwise, why fight the wars abroad to have others take away your freedom at home? Now, if you can show that a fetus is viable outside the womb or has human thought, then maybe that balancing act changes–just as it should if we find out that the Iraq War found no WMDs and killed 300,000 innocent Iraqis–whose deaths we as Americans will have to answer for, according to your logic. I’ll be ready to change my mind on abortion when you are ready to reverse your opinion on war. Until then, please do not belittle my arguments. They are not any less intelligent or less well-meaning than yours. Other people can arrive at different opinions and not be evil. I know it’s hard for conservatives to understand this. But trust me. It is true.
Report Post »Bauervision
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 3:26pmABC, I agree that a woman should have a say concerning her body, my point is that while it is her body, why can’t she have responsibility with her body when it comes to intercourse?
As long as women, or people for that matter, have a back door to escape from their problems, decisions will remain inconsequential.
Reverse my stance on war? Umm, why? I’ve already said that killing innocent people is a tragedy.
Do I think that 300,000 innocent Iraqis deserved to die in that war? No of course not. But I also don’t think that we should have stayed on the sidelines and continued to allow Saddam to kill his own people. I would like to think that we learned something from WW2.
I hear people like you all the time saying that we shouldn’t be over there helping anyone, that we have enough problems here. I agree we have problems here, but not one single American can claim that our government raped and murdered Americans because they wanted to.
Those people deserved to be free.
Next we need to go in Darfur and clean house there too. But wait, we won’t because it is mainly Christians who are being targeted for genocide….and they don’t matter as much.
Guess you could say that we are the fetus’ of humanity.
Report Post »independentvoteril
Posted on October 27, 2010 at 10:36pmThing is there have always been abortions.. on back in earlier times they were done in back alley rooms by unclean and possibly non doctors.. women DIED.. by LARGE numbers..I don’t remember EVER reading of a woman having an abortion late in her pregnancy however. usually it was at the first sign of being pregnant .Usually it was from NOT being married and the stigma it brought on her and the child.. It also was NOT for being used as birth control as it is now.. Thing is on this the LEFT is WRONG and so is the RIGHT.. there has to be a better answer than abortion..
Report Post »kkfedup
Posted on October 28, 2010 at 7:26amAbortion services must be provided in the dark and undercover of general health services. What a horrible disservice to all women. They must hide – any light shed on this industry shows the death and pain inflicted on the women and babies.
Report Post »I regret my abortion.
Call 800-784-2433 if you are suffering from an abortion decision. There is true hope and healing for you and your family.
moonpeace
Posted on October 28, 2010 at 10:06amDear GnomeChomsky: certianly, bringing a child you cannot care for into the world would be irresponsible, but nobody is promoting that here. Given a choice, I would rather come into this world poor and have a shot at bringing myself out of it than being murdered and not having a shot at all. A woman always has other choices, with a rape being about the only exception. Many people would love to adopt a baby. Believe me, the number of abortions performed after a rape is miniscule compared to the abortions from women who use no protection. They probably shouldn’t be having sex to begin with. If a woman gets pregnant because of her own carelessness or irresponsibility then she should have the guts to go through with the full pregnancy as long as her health is not in danger…and that means real danger, not the threat of having stretchmarks. Do they have no control over their own lusts? Like most leftists, Doctor Newhall is full of it. She says she is more frightened about a world without a woman’s reproductive rights than living in fear of someone who might harm her for her promotion of killing babies. That is easy to say, of course. But I wonder what she would say when she was staring down the wrong end of a 44. Would she stick to her murderous beliefs then? Like the coward that most liberals are, my guess is that when she got done wetting herself she would hurriedly change her beliefs.
Report Post »mrlogan3
Posted on October 28, 2010 at 1:16pm@Gnomechomsky The answer there is adoption. I have a friend whose sister cannot have a child. How much do you think she’d appreciate knowing that the opportunity for her wish to come true was terminated?
Report Post »