Liberals On Abortion

[JoeB131]

A distinction without a difference.

Simply a semantic argument for those with blood on their hands.

No, a pragmatic distinction. If you accept the logic that a fetus is a person, then you've essentially abolished human rights for pregnant women.

Not just in terms of abortion, but then we should treat every miscarriage as a murder investigation. Clearly, she did something to cause that miscarriage.

And don't think for a moment you can go have a sip of wine or smoke while preggers! That blob inside of you has more rights than you do!

And now, for truth and perspective:

1. Eugenics was the agenda of the Progressives, the Democrats.

Honey, it's too early in the morning for your number pointed crazy.

Here's Eugenics made simple. People understood that certain negative aspects were handed down genetically. There was a line of thought that maybe they should stop doing that. Of course, they really didn't know what was caused by nature or nurture at that point, it was still very much a case of scientific debate.

Today, we could probably screen all pregnancies in vitro.... I'm not sure we'd want to... kind of takes all the fun out of it, but we could. We might even see a future of genetically engineered people free of disease and defect in the future.

 

[gipper]

It doesn’t require a great deal of insight to recognize that, when one’s life hasn’t turned out as well as one might have wished, you produce the sorts of posts that you do.
So sad.

No one's life turns out the way they wished. That's why they call it life. I suspect my life would have been different if I hadn't joined the Army or if I didn't accept this job, or if I had made the relationship with the crazy girl work (who is now stalking me on facebook, 30 years later.)

Here's the thing. I used to be VERY right wing. I used to make far better anti-choice arguments than you do.

Then I realized that at the end of the day, the Conservative Movement is about keeping working people down by playing them off against each other. Abortion is a great example. Republicans have appointed 10 of the 14 vacancies that have popped up since Roe. Yet half of these guys have consistently voted to maintain Roe. Why do you think this is, if Roe was a flawed decision?

Because Roe is more useful as a rallying point to get dumb Christians angry.

I simply refuse to be played anymore.

If you want less abortions, there's a way to get there. But this is never been about the abortions.

That’s too funny. The leaders of the baby killer movement have promoted so many lies on abortion, yet you believed them all. You simply got played over and over. When will you learn?

 

[beautress]

When I took American History, both Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson (not to mention many others) were greatly against slavery.

Again, did you miss the part where Jefferson had a huge plantation with lost of slaves, was raping the shit out of poor Sally Hemmings?

However, in order to build a union they had to deal with plantation owners in the
South who depended on slaves to keep their businesses competitive. The anti-slavery defenders had to concede in order to achieve including southern growers who provided cotton for northern state factories.

This is where you are a little confused. Cotton wasn't a big crop in 1776, and there were very few factories in the North. That all came later with the industrial revolution. The big crop in the South at the time was Tobacco, with sugar cane being a close second..

They caved for unity with the hope that one day, slavery would be abolished. The alternative was to let go of southern states who could furnish goods with which to repel the world's most successful army, Great Britain. They knew what they had to have to get rid of the disintrested monarchy King Chas. of Britain tended to be.

Actually, the slave states were the instigators of the revolution, because they knew at some point, Britain would outlaw slavery in the colonies just like they already had in Britain itself. There was really nothing noble about the American Revolution. It was a pure power grab by some awful people.

I have this dream where Washington and Jefferson ended up at the end of ropes, and the Dominion of North America abolished slavery in 1830. None of this manifest destiny bullshit. We'd all have universal health care by now.

Even their best guy, Benjamin Franklin couldn't persuade him to take an interest in the colonies who'd fed Britain astonishing profits since the very early years of the seventeenth century.

Actually, Charles III (or more to the point, his Parliament) was more than willing to negotiate with the Colonials in good faith.

So you are calling Attorney General Barr corrupt? OK. List his crime,

Covering up for Bush and Reagan in Iran Contra, and Iraq gate in the 1990's, what he's trying to do for Trump now.

Regarding the alleged relationship between Jefferson and Hemmings: Were you peeping through the shutters, Joe, or are you making up the "raped the shit out of..." I know how you lefties love projecting your own sins against innocent people. It gives you the impression that you are more important than others to know dirt. Who wrote of this? In what diary does this information appear? Or are you producing from your own imagination and experience, Joe? Fess up, now. Do you think black women are incapable of luring a man into bed with them, even if they are very young? If you do think so, you are very, very naive, or do you just have a purpose to damage the Founders' reputations in order to establish communism disguised as 'socialism' in this free country. Oh, what a tangled web you weave when first you practice to deceive. This paragraph is to let you know you will not fool some of us who are chary after years of reading pure dee genuine smarm created to produce a false narrative that will convince very young, inexperienced people to take up the dark side and destroy the United States Constitution.

We abolished slavery, and I abhor it. We had to create a new party in order to get rid of slavery, and it was called the Republican Party. The Republican Party fought slavery, unequal education, injustices to women, unequal justice for minorities, the works. I lived through the Eisenhower years, and it was Eisenhower, who beat back the Nazis in WWII who beat back injustice in educational, job, and housing opportunites for black and worked on black suppression during his administration. Elitist Jack Kennedy didn't do that initially. It was a Texan, Vice President Johnson, who convinced him that if he wanted to continue to be President, he would have to have a percentage of the black vote. Finally, Kennedy caved and began walking with blacks in marches in order to get minority votes. Even so, he had to ante up to the Unions who hated this. It took the Unions a generation to get on board with equality. All of a sudden, the Democrats had to produce false narratives of pretense against Republicans, and they infiltrated the Fourth Estate in order to procure a narrative that at first, got votes but did nothing to raise blacks in the manner of Dwight David Eisenhower, who actually set up protections for the first black child to enter a white established school in 1954. The reason he did this is because he grew to respect black men and women by their selfless service in the armed forces in WWII. He weighed giving up a bad life and giving up a good life of men and decided both were the same--blacks were already equal and not unequal. Kennedy would have continued his arrogant elitism had it not been for his cranky Vice President who had seen racism at its lowest and knew precisely what it was. He was also a man of numbers, having come up through the educational complex, which caused him to be a man of mercy and experience. No, he wasn't a dazzling man, but he was a true man, and he knew how to bring in the votes. He used himself in order to light the fire of justice and equality in the Democrat elitists who were hard of hearing, and he used himself to cross difficult party lines, which was also his forte while convincing the debonair Kennedy clan to go for the gusto. They used the enchantment of Camelot to change America. That was a good thing.

What wasn't a good thing is the clingers in the Democrat party fought tooth and nail to keep things as they were for blacks. Their spiel to continue in their fight against integration of blacks into mainstream America was not met with much pleasure by the Republicans, either, nor was the using racism to achieve wealth met with acceptance. They maintained the status quo that all men are created equal, and that pissed off both factions in the Democrat Party and earned us angst of watching blacks being lured into the Democrat Party using the samo-samo false narrative called selective amnesia to pardon their reluctance for one hundred years to accept black people into the American Dream. It's too bad I had to hear Democrats cursing black people while I was growing up. It caused me to be certain I'd never join their ranks for life 55 years ago, and as I watch Democrats bending over backward to create false narratives to this day, that has reinforced my disgust with lies, including the lies the FBI used in order to fluff Democrat projectionists who took what Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama did and pretentiously accused falsely Hillary's adversary, Donald Trump.

And in my humble opinion, I do not think you had to go to all that trouble of fluffing up lies to be the truth that never were and never will measure up to the truth: Democrats and their fluffers are in it for the power, and not for the good of all Americans. And you never will be so long as you cling to lying as your ally.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Exactly what I said here:

...haters of America attack the Founders as a proxy, and continue to lie no matter how many times they are corrected.

Well, when you give me ACTUAL EVIDENCE, then you can correct. What you've given me is an alternative theory. Not really any proof of anything.

Readers already understand what you are, and why you do what you do.


Live with it.

 

[Crepitus]

Conservatives On Crack

This is the level of 'clever' the Liberals aspire to.....

....I really need more educated opposition.

Have your handlers assign you to a different site.

From which ones have you been expelled?

None, but I'm not your big worry. I usually just ignore your idiocy.

If I had a bon bon for every post by a Liberal posting in a thread he claimed to ignore.....I'd have to enroll in some sort of weight loss program....

Again?

 

[Theowl32]

Yeah, um, that's not the same as "there's no tissue, only baby". Dumbass. Once again, pro-lifers understand that "tissue" and "baby" are not mutually exclusive terms used to denote total opposites . . . something they covered in primary school, and which you CLEARLY need to go find an 8th grader to explain to you.

Every baby is tissue, not every tissue is baby. That is what pro-choicers understand but 'zygotes are persons too' types do not.

Simple enough for you?

You fucking moron. If the Mars rover landed on Mars and somehow showed proof of life because it found mycoplasma, you fucking hypocrites would be hooting and hollering about LIFE ON MARS. That, btw is the smallest most simple form of life on THIS PLANET.

However, here you are talking about how zygotes are not really life. How about the fact that you fucking losers CELEBRATE (yeah, CELEBRATE) the killing of babies in the 3rd trimester, and NOW OUT OF THE FUCKING WOMB!!!!

Same fucking losers that would fucking throw a party if mycoplasma was found on some moon orbiting Jupiter and yell about PROOF OF LIFE are the same fucking losers that claim a HUMAN IN THE 3rd TRIMESTER with kicking arms, legs, and feels pain, is NOT LIFE.

FUCK YOU

 

[JoeB131]

Regarding the alleged relationship between Jefferson and Hemmings: Were you peeping through the shutters, Joe, or are you making up the "raped the shit out of..." xx

First, it's against the rules to accuse a fellow board member of criminal conduct.

Second, of course what he did to her was rape, because there's simply no way you can "consent", when you are property.

Who wrote of this? In what diary does this information appear?

It was written about at the time by critics of Jefferson.

The controversy dates from the 1790s. Jefferson's sexual relationship with Hemings was first reported in 1802 by one of Jefferson's enemies, a political journalist named James T. Callender, after he noticed several light-skinned slaves at Monticello.[49] Jefferson himself never publicly denied this allegation.[49]

Or are you producing from your own imagination and experience, Joe? Fess up, now. Do you think black women are incapable of luring a man into bed with them, even if they are very young?

Again, total violation of the rules, you have been reported.

But that said, let's look at the power dynamic.

Sally was between 14-16 when Jefferson started his relationship with her. He was 44. He was a wealthy and powerful plantation owner, she was a slave. Who do you think held all the power in that relationship?

We abolished slavery, and I abhor it. We had to create a new party in order to get rid of slavery, and it was called the Republican Party. The Republican Party fought slavery, unequal education, injustices to women, unequal justice for minorities, the works. I lived through the Eisenhower years, and it was Eisenhower, who beat back the Nazis in WWII who beat back injustice in educational, job, and housing opportunites for black and worked on black suppression during his administration. Elitist Jack Kennedy didn't do that initially.

Eisenhower was a professional soldier, JFK wasn't. One of his brothers DIED in World War II. JFK himself was seriously injured in combat.

Yes, the GOP deserves credit for abolishing slavery, but frankly, it's more recent conduct, where it continues to appeal to racism to get stupid white people to vote against their own economic interests... as we used to say in the Army, One "Oh, Shit" erases a hundred "Attaboys".

I watch Democrats bending over backward to create false narratives to this day, that has reinforced my disgust with lies, including the lies the FBI used in order to fluff Democrat projectionists who took what Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama did and pretentiously accused falsely Hillary's adversary, Donald Trump.

Honey, both parties create false narratives. You should be old enough and mature enough to realize that. I mean, I kind of excuse the Mail Order Bride From Hell for her child-like view of the world... but you should know better.

I don't worry about what people did 60 years ago. What are they doing now.

Right now, the GOP is supporting a corrupt and mentally unstable president because he "owns the libs". Just ignore the kids he's putting in concentration camps. Or his attacks on a free press. Or how his business is profiting from his presidency.

The party of family values now argues that it was perfectly okay that Trump paid off a porn star.... kind of like you are now trying to ignore a mountain of historical evidence that Thomas Jefferson raped his slave.

 

[JoeB131]

You fucking moron. If the Mars rover landed on Mars and somehow showed proof of life because it found mycoplasma, you fucking hypocrites would be hooting and hollering about LIFE ON MARS. That, btw is the smallest most simple form of life on THIS PLANET.

However, here you are talking about how zygotes are not really life. How about the fact that you fucking losers CELEBRATE (yeah, CELEBRATE) the killing of babies in the 3rd trimester, and NOW OUT OF THE FUCKING WOMB!!!!

Same fucking losers that would fucking throw a party of mycoplasma was found on some moon orbiting Jupiter and yell about PROOF OF LIFE are the same fucking losers that claim a HUMAN IN THE 3rd TRIMESTER with kicking arms, legs, and feels pain, is NOT LIFE.

FUCK YOU

Wow, I wasn't aware we were giving fungus from mars more rights than actual people, unlike what you guys want to do about zygotes on this planet.

If anyone is aborting a fetus old enough to feel pain, then it's because something has gone wrong in the pregnancy... It's just that simple.

 

[JoeB131]

That’s too funny. The leaders of the baby killer movement have promoted so many lies on abortion, yet you believed them all. You simply got played over and over. When will you learn?

Which lies are those?

One more time, I don't really care if a fetus is a person or not. I just realize as a practical matter, if a woman doesn't want to be pregnant, she will find a way to not be pregnant.

 

[SAYIT]

It doesn’t require a great deal of insight to recognize that, when one’s life hasn’t turned out as well as one might have wished, you produce the sorts of posts that you do. So sad.

…Here's the thing. I used to be VERY right wing. I used to make far better anti-choice arguments than you do. Then I realized that at the end of the day, the Conservative Movement is about keeping working people down by playing them off against each other...

What a coincidence!!!
As luck would have it, that was the very moment you lost your mind, painting all who believe in such quaint ideas as personal responsibility and less big, greasy, gov't control of our lives as "keeping working people down."
Even if we ignore the elephant that was then and is still in the room - the Dem Plantation - only an idiot would accept that "the Conservative Movement" is comprised of a single mind or agenda.

BTW, post some of your pro-life arguments and I'll be the judge of how good they are but if your anti-life arguments are an indication, they weren't as brilliant as you recall.

 

[Taz]

Explain lighting up the new world trade center, celebrating the passing of infanticide.

Explain wtf you're talking about first.

W hen new York passed abortion up to birth. They celebrated by lighting up the new world trade center in pink. You really don't know what your party represents, do you?

Celebrating mass murder, yet Americans think themselves better than the Nazis.

You mean like the invasion of Iraq?

You mean taking out a dictator that would put people in a meat grinder feet first for entertainment?

The US army killed way more Iraqis than Saddam ever did. Not even close.

 

[beautress]

Okay, again, you're making a lot of ASSumptions based on your worldview, such as "There will be as many 'unwanted' children as there are abortions now", "All of those children will be abandoned or otherwise uncared for", and "Big government is the only possible means of providing for these floods of unwanted, abandoned children I have ASSumed will exist." So no, I feel no compulsion to accept your worldview as fact, or defend and justify my positions against your ultimatum of "Either give us socialism RIGHT NOW, or we have to kill babies!"

Well, you have a point. There won't be as many unwanted kids as there are abortion. The abortions will just move underground, just like they were before 1973. Affluent women in red states will just travel to Blue states to end their pregnancies.

But we will have a LOT of unwanted kids.

Again, I point the Philippines, where they have exactly the kind of laws you guys want. They have 500,000 - 800,000 illegal abortions, along with 4000 women a year who are killed or injured having them. They also have 1.8 million abandoned children living feral lives in the slums and often being exploited in various ways.

The problem, of course, is your lack of compassion. You want to force these children in the world on people who've already admitted they can't care for them, but you don't want to pay the costs to take care of them. Nope. Let's buy weapons that we'll never use or tax cuts for rich people, but man, some little bastard wanting food stamps? That's Socialism!

When you draw comparisons between different cultures, particularly between the Philippine Islands' problems and America's problems. The Philippine Islands did not originate as a Christian entity with Western Values. America did. We have clear laws against murder (the Books of Exodus and Deuteronomy) and a Bible that claims throughout its words that spilling one's seed is bad (the book of Genesis) and that life begins before a woman knows that she is pregnant. (the book of Psalms).

If there are unwanted children, that is because there has been a disruption of nature by a corrupt education system in which human beings are encouraged to turn over responsibility for their children to complete strangers who are educated in objectives, not one of which has to do with caring for family members on a lifetime basis. That interruption came when the education of children was changed from the hands of the church and placed in the hands of the undisciplined in matters of human understanding, which is what religion is.

Now on the horizon is a socialist/communist scenario that will further distance human beings one from the other, and it is why we have graduates of the military showing off their ability to kill many people in silent competition between serial killers and serial rapist/killers. And since the age of computers is largely based on freedom of expression and not the truth, it is easy to brainwash teenagers into the avenues of asocial behaviors including taking out adversaries with guns, the adversaries being anyone a person doesn't care for. Throw in a little paranoia, and you have a recipe for social disorder among those who've never been directed to care for their fellow man. Those so uninstructed fall into a form of animalism to kill for the food that bathes the asocial personality. People become asocial when they fall away from the righteousness of faith in God, including heresies that solicit asocial behavior rather than righteousness with Godly teachings that connect man to God and man to his fellow man.

 

[alang1216]

Yeah, um, that's not the same as "there's no tissue, only baby". Dumbass. Once again, pro-lifers understand that "tissue" and "baby" are not mutually exclusive terms used to denote total opposites . . . something they covered in primary school, and which you CLEARLY need to go find an 8th grader to explain to you.

Every baby is tissue, not every tissue is baby. That is what pro-choicers understand but 'zygotes are persons too' types do not.

Simple enough for you?

You fucking moron. If the Mars rover landed on Mars and somehow showed proof of life because it found mycoplasma, you fucking hypocrites would be hooting and hollering about LIFE ON MARS. That, btw is the smallest most simple form of life on THIS PLANET.

However, here you are talking about how zygotes are not really life. How about the fact that you fucking losers CELEBRATE (yeah, CELEBRATE) the killing of babies in the 3rd trimester, and NOW OUT OF THE FUCKING WOMB!!!!

Same fucking losers that would fucking throw a party if mycoplasma was found on some moon orbiting Jupiter and yell about PROOF OF LIFE are the same fucking losers that claim a HUMAN IN THE 3rd TRIMESTER with kicking arms, legs, and feels pain, is NOT LIFE.

FUCK YOU

Every human being is a life, not every life is a human being.

Simple enough for you?

Got any examples of anyone celebrating a 3rd TRIMESTER abortion? I know I never have nor have I ever met anyone who celebrated ANY abortion.

 

[RealDave]

I mean real Liberals, those with integrity and a reputable view of the world, not the mind numbed variety that adhere to the Democrats no matter how insane their current agenda is.




1.Perhaps you’ve noticed that today the strongest Liberals/Democrats are those with the least ability to analyze what they are supporting. As a result, just as Orwell predicted in 1984, they can’t keep straight whether they are at war with Eastasia, or Eurasia. They need not keep track, they simply agree that the enemy at the moment is whoever the leadership says it is.
And today it is the unborn.

Hence, the Liberals were against gay marriage before they were for it. They opposed socialism before they were for it. And they opposed nuclear weapons for Iran before they were in favor of it.
So, no big deal to want to exterminate the defenseless.....

They are clueless to 180° turns by the party. Morons simply march lock-step via the party’s orders.





I came across an interesting real-Liberal essay opposing abortion, and it is instructive to peruse.


2.“Abortion: The Left has betrayed the sanctity of life From The Progressive magazine. Abortion: The Left has betrayed the sanctity of life
Consistency demands concern for the unborn

The abortion issue, more than most, illustrates the occasional tendency of the Left to become so enthusiastic over what is called a "reform" that it forgets to think the issue through. It is ironic that so many on the Left have done on abortion what the conservatives and Cold War liberals did on Vietnam: They marched off in the wrong direction, to fight the wrong war, against the wrong people.

3. Some of us … are now active in the right-to-life movement. We do not enjoy opposing our old friends on the abortion issue, but we feel that we have no choice. We are moved by what pro-life feminists call the "consistency thing" -- the belief that respect for human life demands opposition to abortion, capital punishment, euthanasia, and war. We don't think we have either the luxury or the right to choose some types of killing and say that they are all right, while others are not. A human life is a human life; and if equality means anything, it means that society may not value some human lives over others.




4. Until the last decade, people on the Left and Right generally agreed on one rule: We all protected the young. This was not merely agreement on an ethical question: It was also an expression of instinct, so deep and ancient that it scarcely required explanation. Protection of the young included protection of the unborn, for abortion was forbidden by state laws throughout the United States. Those laws reflected an ethical consensus, not based solely on religious tradition but also on scientific evidence that human life begins at conception. The prohibition of abortion in the ancient Hippocratic Oath is well known.

5. …it is important to ask why the Left in the United States generally accepted legalized abortion. One factor was the popular civil libertarian rationale for freedom of choice in abortion. Many feminists presented it as a right of women to control their own bodies. When the objection was raised that abortion ruins another person's body, they respond that a) it is not a body, just a "blob of protoplasm" (thereby displaying ignorance of biology); or b) it is not really a "person" until it is born.

When it was suggested that this is a wholly arbitrary decision, unsupported by any biology evidence, they said, "Well, that's your point of view. This is a matter of individual conscience, and in a pluralistic society people must be free to follow their consciences."




Thinking Liberals, largely an oxymoron today, continue embracing rectitude over party loyalty.

Thank you for your view from the Republican/Trump marching band.

You are so far off base with this pro-choice as being a party directive.

There is no scientifically proven time when a fetus become human life. Why should everyone be forced to adhere to your definition?

Furthermore this " OMG OMG OMG human life!! Human life!!" is shown to be bullshit when you support stealing children at the border, support cutting benefits to poor people, cutting education, feeding kids unhealthy school lunches, and any of the other anti -children stances your party takes.

So really, shove your pretend giving a shit about human life. Let me know when you start giving a shit about children after they are born.

 

[SAYIT]

Exactly what I said here: ...haters of America attack the Founders as a proxy, and continue to lie no matter how many times they are corrected.

Well, when you give me ACTUAL EVIDENCE, then you can correct. What you've given me is an alternative theory. Not really any proof of anything.

Readers already understand what you are, and why you do what you do. Live with it.

I sometimes wonder if "progressives" (pronounced: regressives) who eagerly come out of their closet to openly celebrate their agenda actually believe no one can see them or have convinced themselves and each other that to deny the obvious is all the defense they need? They remind me of the 1 yr old in a high chair who believes covering her eyes makes her invisible - and therefore not required to eat the squished peas - because she can't see us. The good news is their denials will fall on deaf ears by Nov 2020.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I mean real Liberals, those with integrity and a reputable view of the world, not the mind numbed variety that adhere to the Democrats no matter how insane their current agenda is.




1.Perhaps you’ve noticed that today the strongest Liberals/Democrats are those with the least ability to analyze what they are supporting. As a result, just as Orwell predicted in 1984, they can’t keep straight whether they are at war with Eastasia, or Eurasia. They need not keep track, they simply agree that the enemy at the moment is whoever the leadership says it is.
And today it is the unborn.

Hence, the Liberals were against gay marriage before they were for it. They opposed socialism before they were for it. And they opposed nuclear weapons for Iran before they were in favor of it.
So, no big deal to want to exterminate the defenseless.....

They are clueless to 180° turns by the party. Morons simply march lock-step via the party’s orders.





I came across an interesting real-Liberal essay opposing abortion, and it is instructive to peruse.


2.“Abortion: The Left has betrayed the sanctity of life From The Progressive magazine. Abortion: The Left has betrayed the sanctity of life
Consistency demands concern for the unborn

The abortion issue, more than most, illustrates the occasional tendency of the Left to become so enthusiastic over what is called a "reform" that it forgets to think the issue through. It is ironic that so many on the Left have done on abortion what the conservatives and Cold War liberals did on Vietnam: They marched off in the wrong direction, to fight the wrong war, against the wrong people.

3. Some of us … are now active in the right-to-life movement. We do not enjoy opposing our old friends on the abortion issue, but we feel that we have no choice. We are moved by what pro-life feminists call the "consistency thing" -- the belief that respect for human life demands opposition to abortion, capital punishment, euthanasia, and war. We don't think we have either the luxury or the right to choose some types of killing and say that they are all right, while others are not. A human life is a human life; and if equality means anything, it means that society may not value some human lives over others.




4. Until the last decade, people on the Left and Right generally agreed on one rule: We all protected the young. This was not merely agreement on an ethical question: It was also an expression of instinct, so deep and ancient that it scarcely required explanation. Protection of the young included protection of the unborn, for abortion was forbidden by state laws throughout the United States. Those laws reflected an ethical consensus, not based solely on religious tradition but also on scientific evidence that human life begins at conception. The prohibition of abortion in the ancient Hippocratic Oath is well known.

5. …it is important to ask why the Left in the United States generally accepted legalized abortion. One factor was the popular civil libertarian rationale for freedom of choice in abortion. Many feminists presented it as a right of women to control their own bodies. When the objection was raised that abortion ruins another person's body, they respond that a) it is not a body, just a "blob of protoplasm" (thereby displaying ignorance of biology); or b) it is not really a "person" until it is born.

When it was suggested that this is a wholly arbitrary decision, unsupported by any biology evidence, they said, "Well, that's your point of view. This is a matter of individual conscience, and in a pluralistic society people must be free to follow their consciences."




Thinking Liberals, largely an oxymoron today, continue embracing rectitude over party loyalty.

Thank you for your view from the Republican/Trump marching band.

You are so far off base with this pro-choice as being a party directive.

There is no scientifically proven time when a fetus become human life. Why should everyone be forced to adhere to your definition?

Furthermore this " OMG OMG OMG human life!! Human life!!" is shown to be bullshit when you support stealing children at the border, support cutting benefits to poor people, cutting education, feeding kids unhealthy school lunches, and any of the other anti -children stances your party takes.

So really, shove your pretend giving a shit about human life. Let me know when you start giving a shit about children after they are born.

Eschew the vulgarity and I'll consider giving you the thrashing your post deserves.

Why do you post such drivel?

Oh....because you're RealDumb.

 

[beautress]

Regarding the alleged relationship between Jefferson and Hemmings: Were you peeping through the shutters, Joe, or are you making up the "raped the shit out of..." xx

First, it's against the rules to accuse a fellow board member of criminal conduct.

Second, of course what he did to her was rape, because there's simply no way you can "consent", when you are property.

Who wrote of this? In what diary does this information appear?

It was written about at the time by critics of Jefferson.

The controversy dates from the 1790s. Jefferson's sexual relationship with Hemings was first reported in 1802 by one of Jefferson's enemies, a political journalist named James T. Callender, after he noticed several light-skinned slaves at Monticello.[49] Jefferson himself never publicly denied this allegation.[49]

Or are you producing from your own imagination and experience, Joe? Fess up, now. Do you think black women are incapable of luring a man into bed with them, even if they are very young?

Again, total violation of the rules, you have been reported.

But that said, let's look at the power dynamic.

Sally was between 14-16 when Jefferson started his relationship with her. He was 44. He was a wealthy and powerful plantation owner, she was a slave. Who do you think held all the power in that relationship?

We abolished slavery, and I abhor it. We had to create a new party in order to get rid of slavery, and it was called the Republican Party. The Republican Party fought slavery, unequal education, injustices to women, unequal justice for minorities, the works. I lived through the Eisenhower years, and it was Eisenhower, who beat back the Nazis in WWII who beat back injustice in educational, job, and housing opportunites for black and worked on black suppression during his administration. Elitist Jack Kennedy didn't do that initially.

Eisenhower was a professional soldier, JFK wasn't. One of his brothers DIED in World War II. JFK himself was seriously injured in combat.

Yes, the GOP deserves credit for abolishing slavery, but frankly, it's more recent conduct, where it continues to appeal to racism to get stupid white people to vote against their own economic interests... as we used to say in the Army, One "Oh, Shit" erases a hundred "Attaboys".

I watch Democrats bending over backward to create false narratives to this day, that has reinforced my disgust with lies, including the lies the FBI used in order to fluff Democrat projectionists who took what Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama did and pretentiously accused falsely Hillary's adversary, Donald Trump.

Honey, both parties create false narratives. You should be old enough and mature enough to realize that. I mean, I kind of excuse the Mail Order Bride From Hell for her child-like view of the world... but you should know better.

I don't worry about what people did 60 years ago. What are they doing now.

Right now, the GOP is supporting a corrupt and mentally unstable president because he "owns the libs". Just ignore the kids he's putting in concentration camps. Or his attacks on a free press. Or how his business is profiting from his presidency.

The party of family values now argues that it was perfectly okay that Trump paid off a porn star.... kind of like you are now trying to ignore a mountain of historical evidence that Thomas Jefferson raped his slave.

I accused any one of criminal conduct? I was unaware of that. Were you there? The answer is, no you were not there. Did you see the conduct of Jefferson and his woman? No, you did not see the conduct of Mr. Jefferson. Did you see the conduct of the woman? No, you did not see the conduct of the woman. Do I believe you? I certainly do not believe you were an expert witness. Yes, I have heard stories about the alleged DNA. Were those samples of DNA authentic? Was I there? No, i did not see the samples, and no, I do not necessarily believe the stories that they allegedly tell, because I do not know whether the researchers are prejudiced or not. If they knew what the samples were, it was not a blind study. There are a lot of things that make a scientific study valid, and some do not. I greatly suspect that 200 year-old samples are not reliable. That is all. I do not believe that samples that are 200 years old of DNA that has rotted in a humid to freezing temperatures grave are reliable. I just don't believe it at all. Yet that is the only comparison the lab folks had, and if they knew who and what it was intended for, there was bias, and I suspect there was bias. Bias + degraded samples = my disbelief in the reliability of 200 year old DNA "samples."

 

[PoliticalChic]

Exactly what I said here: ...haters of America attack the Founders as a proxy, and continue to lie no matter how many times they are corrected.

Well, when you give me ACTUAL EVIDENCE, then you can correct. What you've given me is an alternative theory. Not really any proof of anything.

Readers already understand what you are, and why you do what you do. Live with it.

I sometimes wonder if "progressives" (pronounced: regressives) who eagerly come out of their closet to openly celebrate their agenda actually believe no one can see them or have convinced themselves and each other that to deny the obvious is all the defense they need? They remind me of the 1 yr old in a high chair who believes covering her eyes makes her invisible - and therefore not required to eat the squished peas - because she can't see us. The good news is their denials will fall on deaf ears by Nov 2020.

View attachment 265276

How to explain the number of them that have abandoned logic, experience, knowledge, and morality????

 

[SAYIT]

From The Progressive magazine. Abortion: The Left has betrayed the sanctity of life

Thank you for your view from the Republican/Trump marching band. You are so far off base with this pro-choice as being a party directive...

Wait … did you really just claim that the anti-life position so many lefties embrace isn't for many (or most) an ideological imperative? That y'all looked carefully at what abortion is and decided individually that it's a fine idea?


Babies-in-the-womb form organs and nervous system by week #8. How about we at least stop slaughtering and flushing them once they can feel it?

The fact is, despite your pompous posturing here you've proven incapable of individual thought but JFTR, these are actual free-thinking lefties:

Anti-abortion feminism - Wikipedia

 

[SAYIT]

You mean taking out a dictator that would put people in a meat grinder feet first for entertainment?

The US army killed way more Iraqis than Saddam ever did. Not even close.

Those who died as a result of war died as a result of war.

Those who were murdered for Saddam's sadistic pleasure were murdered.

Apples and oranges, not that anyone should expect any anti-US leftard to see it.