The Baby Killers Are Back

[Rebel Yell]

Abortion will never be illegal, not in any developed nation I doubt, but we should seek to put restrictions on it, especially the ones that allow late term abortions for no good reason.

I think a fair compromise would be give the woman one chance. Call it "Everyone makes a mistake." Let her have her abortion, it's on her soul and that of the performing doctor. If she comes back for a second abortion, since we now know she knows where babies come from, she only gets the abortion if she also let's them tie her tubes while they are in their. This plan works great for welfare recepiants as well.

[linda22003]

I think a fair compromise would be give the woman one chance. Call it "Everyone makes a mistake." Let her have her abortion, it's on her soul and that of the performing doctor. If she comes back for a second abortion, since we now know she knows where babies come from, she only gets the abortion if she also let's them tie her tubes while they are in their. This plan works great for welfare recepiants as well.

What about the illiterate? Should they be breeding? :p

[Cold Warrior]

What about the illiterate? Should they be breeding? :p

What!! You don't think that's a good platform??? I think it's greyt. I think the Repubs should adopt it and most of all publicize it far and wide. They could call it the "Tie the bitch's tubes stand."

BTW, perhaps eliminating the illiterate ain't such a bad idear.

[linda22003]

What!! You don't think that's a good platform??? I think it's greyt. I think the Repubs should adopt it and most of all publicize it far and wide. They could call it the "Tie the bitch's tubes stand."

So you can be pro-life, but everyone gets a freebie. Okay.

[Rebel Yell]

What about the illiterate? Should they be breeding? :p

Spell check may be a good friend, but as long as I get the point across, I think i've done what I set out to do. I look at this as conversation, not an essay, but feel free to grade it anyway. I always know you're gonna point out any grammatical errors I make, I look forward to it.:D

[linda22003]

You'll always keep me busy. :) I suppose your plan is better than that of those who think the time will come when the woman herself might be prosecuted for abortion.

[Rebel Yell]

You'll always keep me busy. :) I suppose your plan is better than that of those who think the time will come when the woman herself might be prosecuted for abortion.

I blog the way I talk, sorry. Believe it for not, I actually come up with the marketing letters for this agency (I do use spell check for it). Anyway, I know this plan is not feasible, but it sure sounds good in theory, huh?

[Voice of Reason]

Anyone who knows me know I am very pro-life, so threads like this just piss me off :mad:

Not me, despite the fact that I'm also very pro-life. The DUmmie is attempting to inject logic and reason into what tends to be a very emotionally-charged debate on both sides, and that's to be commended.

Besides, I've got a soft spot for anyone who actually understands the original meaning of the phrase "to beg the question."

BullGooseLoony (1000+ posts) Sat Jul-12-08 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #2
15. The great thing about a proper pro-choice argument is that it takes personhood into account.
Whether the fetus is a person or not, it doesn't have the right to use someone else's body to sustain itself against that person's will.

This argument is roughly analogous to the following. Suppose there is a person in your house, and you don't want him there. Perhaps he's an intruder, or perhaps he's an invited guest who's worn out his welcome. Outside is a howling blizzard, and it's certain that if you eject him from your house he will die. Do you have the right to eject him regardless?

The answer is that yes, you do. It may be immoral for you to do so, and you may be a horrible person if you do so, but it's your property and it's your right to decide who occupies it. The fact that the other person needs to make use of your property to survive does not impose any duty on you.

But the analogy fails in the case of abortion, because while you may have the right to eject most people from your house, this right does not apply when the other person is your child. You do have an affirmative duty to shelter, feed, and otherwise care for your children, and this duty is voluntarily assumed when you choose to become a parent. This can be extended to claiming that the duty is assumed when you voluntarily choose to engage in behavior for which pregnancy is a foreseeable consequence, i.e. sex. The law already recognizes this in the case of men, who are obligated to support children they father, even if they use birth control, even if they've been falsely assured that their partner is sterile.

Abortion is legal and its [sic] going to stay that way. Deal with it Ms. Ambulance Driver.

Can you tell me where you got your crystal ball? Mine is broken, and the shop is out of stock.

I just dont see why you guys care about this.

For the same reason that many Northerners cared about slavery. We see an entire class of people classified as subhuman under the law, without rights, and we believe that this is unjust and we want it to stop.

Junebug68 Please do not let Eyelids get to you. Sounds like he/she is just trying to bait you. You know you are correct on your position. Keep your head high!

Seems to be very good at baiting, that one. You might even call him a master baiter.

Abortion will never be illegal, not in any developed nation

Another person with a crystal ball! Was there a sale?

I wonder if people said the same thing about slavery. I know people said the same thing about segregation... and to this day people say the same thing about affirmative action.

but we should seek to put restrictions on it, especially the ones that allow late term abortions for no good reason.

What's a good reason? And since when do free people need to have "good reasons" to exercise their rights?

I think a fair compromise would be give the woman one chance. Call it "Everyone makes a mistake." Let her have her abortion, it's on her soul and that of the performing doctor. If she comes back for a second abortion, since we now know she knows where babies come from, she only gets the abortion if she also let's them tie her tubes while they are in their. This plan works great for welfare recepiants as well.

This makes no logical sense.

Either the fetus is a person or it isn't. If it is, then abortion is the moral equivalent of homicide. If it isn't, then abortion is the moral equivalent of a haircut. In neither case does restricting it to one per person make any sense at all. We don't give people one legal murder, nor do we limit people to one legal haircut.

[Rebel Yell]

This makes no logical sense.

Either the fetus is a person or it isn't. If it is, then abortion is the moral equivalent of homicide. If it isn't, then abortion is the moral equivalent of a haircut. In neither case does restricting it to one per person make any sense at all. We don't give people one legal murder, nor do we limit people to one legal haircut.

That is more along the lines of my thoughts on welfare, as well as a high school diploma or GED. As far as abortion,in an almost perfect world (perfect would be NO abortion) this would be the next best thing. I know you understood that, though.

[Goldwater]

Another person with a crystal ball! Was there a sale?

So is your face.

I've read through the vitriol on this thread and the only post that makes sense is Goldwater's. That means, of course, that's the post with which I agree.

I wuv you Linda numbers.