The Political View of Abortion

[Moonglow]

1. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Thomas Jefferson.

a. And based on the above, every conservative is pro-choice.

2. Our nation was founded on the premise that each individual has the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But they don’t become rights by virtue of birth…we are endowed with these rights by our Creator, at the moment of creation.

a. This is a political argument: the form of the Creator invoked by the Founders is irrelevant to the debate. Morality is not a consideration here, so there is no mention of contraception as being right or wrong; one’s use of contraceptives does not infringe on anyone else’s rights.

b. The fact is that our nation, at its very founding, acknowledged that, by virtue of being created, of being conceived, the unborn child, has a right to live. It is not a right that is alienable….even by the child’s mother.





3. Conservatism embraces this brand of pro-choice sentiment: we fully acknowledge a woman’s ability to make choices about her own body, and to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
The choice that operates is this: contraceptives may fail…the decision to engage in sexual intercourse is to accept the possibility that pregnancy may occur. This means the decision to accept all of the responsibilities that may become necessary.

a. When deciding to buy a house, there is the implicit acceptance of future mortgage payments, upkeep, insurance, etc.

b. The choice to which an individual has the right of decision is to have sex or not, rather than to abort or not.

c. No unjust intrusion on the unborn child’s right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is allowed.






4. Based on this position, the obligation of government is to protect the lives of the unborn by restricting access to abortion only to those situations in which the mother’s life is in danger, or to cases of rape or incest.

5. The vast majority of abortions performed in the United States are carried out for reasons that can be broadly categorized as “matters of convenience.” In a study of 27 nations, reasons for abortion services were found to be the following:

a. “Worldwide, the most commonly reported reason women cite for having an abortion is to postpone or stop childbearing. The second most common reason—socioeconomic concerns—includes disruption of education or employment; lack of support from the father; desire to provide schooling for existing children; and poverty, unemployment or inability to afford additional children. In addition, relationship problems with a husband or partner and a woman's perception that she is too young constitute other important categories of reasons.”
Reasons Why Women Have Induced Abortions: Evidence from 27 Countries

b. A 2004 study of American women yielded similar results: “The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman’s education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%). Nearly four in 10 women said they had completed their childbearing, and almost one-third were not ready to have a child. Fewer than 1% said their parents’ or partners’ desire for them to have an abortion was the most important reason. Younger women often reported that they were unprepared for the transition to motherhood, while older women regularly cited their responsibility to dependents.”
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/psrh/full/3711005.pdf

c. We reject the view that inconvenience of a mother’s informed choice outweighs the unalienable right to life of the child she bears by virtue of that choice.






On-demand abortion is antithetical to the ideas and ideals upon which America was built.
Based on “Voices of the Damned,” found in “Reinventing the Right,” by Robert Wheeler, pp. 89-99.

And just be sure to add that conservatives never owned slaves, killed a native or took what belonged to someone else and made it theirs. Clearly the Founding Fathers were speaking of men and not women, who were not equals in their eyes.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Hmmmm.

Just caught this in the reply.

Our government is set to also protect us from the majority. If the majority is in favor of interning the Japanese as a whole it is probably still unconstitutional.

Now that same thing works agains making abortion illegal. Even if the majority of folks in Mississippi want to outlaw abortion it is probably against the Constitution. Or in Oregon if the majority of folks support the right of terminal cancer patients to give up and commit suicide in a reasonable manor, it is probably Constitutional for them to do so.

In my small government in our personal lives opinion anyway.

Practically I wonder how much the majority opinion affects the issue, probably a bit since one party is economically liberal and the other religously and warfarringly liberal. (I made a word)

U know, S&L bailouts, bank bailouts.....both parties are pretty darn economically liberal. Damn Reagan lol.

1. " If the majority is in favor of interning the Japanese..."
Democrat endeavor.

2. "Now that same thing works agains (sic) making abortion illegal."
I believe that Americans won't all hold the same view, but, unlike a Liberal, I don't agree that we should deny others their perspective.
Some states support abortion...others may vote to deny it.
I'm down with that.
Why aren't you?
This is a political query, not a theological one.


3. "The question was, why would want Roe overturned..."
Because the Constitution doesn't give venue to the federal government.
Read it, and you'll see that I am correct.



4. "Or in Oregon if the majority of folks support blah blah blah...."
So...you have some other subject in mind, or did my response cover it?

If you want states to decide abortion rights, why don't you want states to decide gun rights?

I often find myself saying 'he can't be this dumb...'


But you are.



Didn't you know that there is an amendment to the Constitution that deals with guns.

Can you cite one dealing with abortion?


If not....you probably sit on the TV and watch the couch.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I believe in federalism.


Don't you?

I think you're more of an anti-federalist.

The question was, why would want Roe overturned if the citizenry supports it 2 to 1,

right after you've said that you would like the citizenry to have the say?

(Your contradictions are getting closer and closer together. I think you're about to give birth to a whopper)

This is as slowly as I can say this:

1.I believe in the Constitution and federalism

2. Not judges nor Justices....the people have the final say.

3. Imaginary 'rights' are just that.

4.I endorse political outcomes, not theological.


and...

5. Principles have no shelf life. Fads do.

Number 5 is ironic coming from the person who changed her opinion on privacy rights in the space of a year or so.

 

[NYcarbineer]

1. " If the majority is in favor of interning the Japanese..."
Democrat endeavor.

2. "Now that same thing works agains (sic) making abortion illegal."
I believe that Americans won't all hold the same view, but, unlike a Liberal, I don't agree that we should deny others their perspective.
Some states support abortion...others may vote to deny it.
I'm down with that.
Why aren't you?
This is a political query, not a theological one.


3. "The question was, why would want Roe overturned..."
Because the Constitution doesn't give venue to the federal government.
Read it, and you'll see that I am correct.



4. "Or in Oregon if the majority of folks support blah blah blah...."
So...you have some other subject in mind, or did my response cover it?

If you want states to decide abortion rights, why don't you want states to decide gun rights?

I often find myself saying 'he can't be this dumb...'


But you are.



Didn't you know that there is an amendment to the Constitution that deals with guns.

Can you cite one dealing with abortion?


If not....you probably sit on the TV and watch the couch.

So the only reason you can come up with for why you, PERSONALLY, think that states should not have the right to decide gun issues themselves is because the Constitution says so?

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Thomas Jefferson.

a. And based on the above, every conservative is pro-choice.

2. Our nation was founded on the premise that each individual has the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But they don’t become rights by virtue of birth…we are endowed with these rights by our Creator, at the moment of creation.

a. This is a political argument: the form of the Creator invoked by the Founders is irrelevant to the debate. Morality is not a consideration here, so there is no mention of contraception as being right or wrong; one’s use of contraceptives does not infringe on anyone else’s rights.

b. The fact is that our nation, at its very founding, acknowledged that, by virtue of being created, of being conceived, the unborn child, has a right to live. It is not a right that is alienable….even by the child’s mother.





3. Conservatism embraces this brand of pro-choice sentiment: we fully acknowledge a woman’s ability to make choices about her own body, and to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
The choice that operates is this: contraceptives may fail…the decision to engage in sexual intercourse is to accept the possibility that pregnancy may occur. This means the decision to accept all of the responsibilities that may become necessary.

a. When deciding to buy a house, there is the implicit acceptance of future mortgage payments, upkeep, insurance, etc.

b. The choice to which an individual has the right of decision is to have sex or not, rather than to abort or not.

c. No unjust intrusion on the unborn child’s right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is allowed.






4. Based on this position, the obligation of government is to protect the lives of the unborn by restricting access to abortion only to those situations in which the mother’s life is in danger, or to cases of rape or incest.

5. The vast majority of abortions performed in the United States are carried out for reasons that can be broadly categorized as “matters of convenience.” In a study of 27 nations, reasons for abortion services were found to be the following:

a. “Worldwide, the most commonly reported reason women cite for having an abortion is to postpone or stop childbearing. The second most common reason—socioeconomic concerns—includes disruption of education or employment; lack of support from the father; desire to provide schooling for existing children; and poverty, unemployment or inability to afford additional children. In addition, relationship problems with a husband or partner and a woman's perception that she is too young constitute other important categories of reasons.”
Reasons Why Women Have Induced Abortions: Evidence from 27 Countries

b. A 2004 study of American women yielded similar results: “The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman’s education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%). Nearly four in 10 women said they had completed their childbearing, and almost one-third were not ready to have a child. Fewer than 1% said their parents’ or partners’ desire for them to have an abortion was the most important reason. Younger women often reported that they were unprepared for the transition to motherhood, while older women regularly cited their responsibility to dependents.”
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/psrh/full/3711005.pdf

c. We reject the view that inconvenience of a mother’s informed choice outweighs the unalienable right to life of the child she bears by virtue of that choice.






On-demand abortion is antithetical to the ideas and ideals upon which America was built.
Based on “Voices of the Damned,” found in “Reinventing the Right,” by Robert Wheeler, pp. 89-99.

And just be sure to add that conservatives never owned slaves, killed a native or took what belonged to someone else and made it theirs. Clearly the Founding Fathers were speaking of men and not women, who were not equals in their eyes.

I understand, you hate America in general, and the Founders, specifically....


...but as far as the OP....

You didn't understand it, or you couldn't find any errors in it....

Which was it?

 

[NYcarbineer]

This is as slowly as I can say this:

1.I believe in the Constitution and federalism

Then you believe in judicial review.

Try to avoid discussion until you understand the concepts involved, e.g., judicial review.

I know exactly what judicial review is. It is constitutional right of the SCOTUS to determine the constitutionality of laws that are challenged and come before it,

therefore, the right to some abortions is a constitutional right. Whether you like it or not.

 

[NYcarbineer]

1. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Thomas Jefferson.

a. And based on the above, every conservative is pro-choice.

2. Our nation was founded on the premise that each individual has the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But they don’t become rights by virtue of birth…we are endowed with these rights by our Creator, at the moment of creation.

a. This is a political argument: the form of the Creator invoked by the Founders is irrelevant to the debate. Morality is not a consideration here, so there is no mention of contraception as being right or wrong; one’s use of contraceptives does not infringe on anyone else’s rights.

b. The fact is that our nation, at its very founding, acknowledged that, by virtue of being created, of being conceived, the unborn child, has a right to live. It is not a right that is alienable….even by the child’s mother.





3. Conservatism embraces this brand of pro-choice sentiment: we fully acknowledge a woman’s ability to make choices about her own body, and to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
The choice that operates is this: contraceptives may fail…the decision to engage in sexual intercourse is to accept the possibility that pregnancy may occur. This means the decision to accept all of the responsibilities that may become necessary.

a. When deciding to buy a house, there is the implicit acceptance of future mortgage payments, upkeep, insurance, etc.

b. The choice to which an individual has the right of decision is to have sex or not, rather than to abort or not.

c. No unjust intrusion on the unborn child’s right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is allowed.






4. Based on this position, the obligation of government is to protect the lives of the unborn by restricting access to abortion only to those situations in which the mother’s life is in danger, or to cases of rape or incest.

5. The vast majority of abortions performed in the United States are carried out for reasons that can be broadly categorized as “matters of convenience.” In a study of 27 nations, reasons for abortion services were found to be the following:

a. “Worldwide, the most commonly reported reason women cite for having an abortion is to postpone or stop childbearing. The second most common reason—socioeconomic concerns—includes disruption of education or employment; lack of support from the father; desire to provide schooling for existing children; and poverty, unemployment or inability to afford additional children. In addition, relationship problems with a husband or partner and a woman's perception that she is too young constitute other important categories of reasons.”
Reasons Why Women Have Induced Abortions: Evidence from 27 Countries

b. A 2004 study of American women yielded similar results: “The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman’s education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%). Nearly four in 10 women said they had completed their childbearing, and almost one-third were not ready to have a child. Fewer than 1% said their parents’ or partners’ desire for them to have an abortion was the most important reason. Younger women often reported that they were unprepared for the transition to motherhood, while older women regularly cited their responsibility to dependents.”
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/psrh/full/3711005.pdf

c. We reject the view that inconvenience of a mother’s informed choice outweighs the unalienable right to life of the child she bears by virtue of that choice.






On-demand abortion is antithetical to the ideas and ideals upon which America was built.
Based on “Voices of the Damned,” found in “Reinventing the Right,” by Robert Wheeler, pp. 89-99.

And just be sure to add that conservatives never owned slaves, killed a native or took what belonged to someone else and made it theirs. Clearly the Founding Fathers were speaking of men and not women, who were not equals in their eyes.

I understand, you hate America in general, and the Founders, specifically....


...but as far as the OP....

You didn't understand it, or you couldn't find any errors in it....

Which was it?

The first error is that the endowment of rights by the Creator referenced in the Declaration of Indepence does not even imply that such an endowment occurs at the moment of conception.

The second error is that there is not even an implied reference to the unborn in the Constitution.

 

[NYcarbineer]

1. " If the majority is in favor of interning the Japanese..."
Democrat endeavor.

2. "Now that same thing works agains (sic) making abortion illegal."
I believe that Americans won't all hold the same view, but, unlike a Liberal, I don't agree that we should deny others their perspective.
Some states support abortion...others may vote to deny it.
I'm down with that.
Why aren't you?
This is a political query, not a theological one.


3. "The question was, why would want Roe overturned..."
Because the Constitution doesn't give venue to the federal government.
Read it, and you'll see that I am correct.



4. "Or in Oregon if the majority of folks support blah blah blah...."
So...you have some other subject in mind, or did my response cover it?

If you want states to decide abortion rights, why don't you want states to decide gun rights?

I often find myself saying 'he can't be this dumb...'


But you are.



Didn't you know that there is an amendment to the Constitution that deals with guns.

Can you cite one dealing with abortion?


If not....you probably sit on the TV and watch the couch.

Can you cite one dealing with the unborn?

 

[Dragonlady]

3. And, to be consistent, stop applying the nick-name that your acquaintances have for you, to me.

Learn how to correctly address your betters.

This is your problem. You think you're better than other people, and you think you're smarter too. You're not better than me and you are most definitely not smarter than me.

No one is better than me. And I am better than NO ONE. And neither are you. Deal with it, Bitch.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Then you believe in judicial review.

Try to avoid discussion until you understand the concepts involved, e.g., judicial review.

I know exactly what judicial review is. It is constitutional right of the SCOTUS to determine the constitutionality of laws that are challenged and come before it,

therefore, the right to some abortions is a constitutional right. Whether you like it or not.

No....you don't understand judicial review.

It is to search the Constitution, and either link the question under review to the Constitution, or state so.

It is not to imagine what they believe should be in the Constitution.

 

[PoliticalChic]

3. And, to be consistent, stop applying the nick-name that your acquaintances have for you, to me.

Learn how to correctly address your betters.

This is your problem. You think you're better than other people, and you think you're smarter too. You're not better than me and you are most definitely not smarter than me.

No one is better than me. And I am better than NO ONE. And neither are you. Deal with it, Bitch.

Now...be serious.

How could I not be better, or smarter, than a vulgar child killer?

 

[Dragonlady]

It is not to imagine what they believe should be in the Constitution.

DING, DING, DING!!! We have a winner folks. PC finally made an comment which is factually correct, proving the old adage that even a clock which has stopped, is right twice a day. That she made entirely by accident in an attempt it rebutt a comment to a liberal is neither here nor there, she is correct.

One should not image what they believe should be in the Constitution, like for example, rights for the unborn, and deal with actually is in the constitution, which says nothing about abortion.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It is not to imagine what they believe should be in the Constitution.

DING, DING, DING!!! We have a winner folks. PC finally made an comment which is factually correct, proving the old adage that even a clock which has stopped, is right twice a day. That she made entirely by accident in an attempt it rebutt a comment to a liberal is neither here nor there, she is correct.

One should not image what they believe should be in the Constitution, like for example, rights for the unborn, and deal with actually is in the constitution, which says nothing about abortion.

Hey.....don't you want to respond to this, from my earlier post?


"2. Now, let's prove what a moron you are in terms of biological knowledge.

The baby is not your body, ....what parts of 'your body' have different DNA? Different blood type? Fingerprints? And different sex half the time?

No, the baby is an entirely different entity, one you claim the right to put to death at a whim, a caprice.

That makes you a beast."


I love it!
If brains were water, you wouldn't have enough to baptize a flea!


Looks like I pulled the teeth out of the dragon, huh?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Try to avoid discussion until you understand the concepts involved, e.g., judicial review.

I know exactly what judicial review is. It is constitutional right of the SCOTUS to determine the constitutionality of laws that are challenged and come before it,

therefore, the right to some abortions is a constitutional right. Whether you like it or not.

No....you don't understand judicial review.

It is to search the Constitution, and either link the question under review to the Constitution, or state so.

It is not to imagine what they believe should be in the Constitution.

So if Obamacare mandated that everyone's medical records be public information, no one would have constitutional grounds to challenge that,

because the Court would have to 'imagine' that privacy rights are constitutionally protected?

(another question you can dodge)

 

[NYcarbineer]

It is not to imagine what they believe should be in the Constitution.

DING, DING, DING!!! We have a winner folks. PC finally made an comment which is factually correct, proving the old adage that even a clock which has stopped, is right twice a day. That she made entirely by accident in an attempt it rebutt a comment to a liberal is neither here nor there, she is correct.

One should not image what they believe should be in the Constitution, like for example, rights for the unborn, and deal with actually is in the constitution, which says nothing about abortion.

What PC meant to say was, the Court should not imagine what they believe should be in the Constitution,

unless PC likes the idea of that being in the Constitution.

...keep in mind, she started this thread imagining that the Declaration of Independence established that the Founders' consensus was that life began at conception,

and that is how she got to fetal personhood and the attendant constitutional rights.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I wonder if PC is aware that even the dissent in Roe v Wade did not argue for fetal rights.

 

[Dragonlady]

Now...be serious.

How could I not be better, or smarter, than a vulgar child killer?

Let's start with better. You're no better than a crack whore living on welfare. It says so in the Constitution that you love to quote. All are equal under the Constitution. Your country was founded on the "self-evident" principle of equality for all. You give lip service to the Constitution but you believe all of the animals are equal but some are more equal than others - you being one of them.

One of the problems with conservatives is that so many of them think they are better and smarter than other people. That's why they think that they're entitled to tell lesser beings how to live their lives. Like you telling women that they shouldn't have an abortion because YOU know it's wrong.

Anyone who brags that they're better and smarter, rarely is either. If you have to tell people this, if they can't immediately see if for themselves, you're merely deluding yourself.

I was having dinner with a friend when a client of my law firm stopped by our table to exchange greetings. This man was a truly extraordinary man. Born into poverty, he had become a multi-millionaire by the time he was 30. He had homes in Paris, Monte Carlo, Toronto, and Beirut. He was a member of Parliament in his home country. We exchanged greetings, and both introduced our dinner companions. We then chatted briefly about his Canadian business interests before he and his cousin left. The moment this gentleman was out of earshot, my friend said "Who was that amazing man????". All my friend had been told on introduction was the man's name and that I knew him through my work. I told her he was the Vice-President of Lebanon and she replied "I knew he was someone special as soon as he started to talk".

You're constantly reminding us how smart you think you are because we would never come to that conclusion by reading your posts which contain numerous factual errors in which you contradict your earlier "facts" whenever it suits you.

This whole "We are the defenders of the Constitution" simply won't fly because Republicans are all too willing to trample the Constitution underfoot when it suits their purposes (The Patriot Act, Gitmo, extraordinary rendition, the list is endless).

OTOH, as long as conservatives keep focused on the Constitution, abortion and women's sexuality, instead of looking at the epic fail of Friedman's unfettered free-market capitalism, or building a platform to appeal to voters outside of their older white male demographic, it's all good. Because as long as you keep focussed on this crap, no one, other than white males and their wives, will vote Republican.

And especially abortion. Republican leaders are now acknowledging that this plank of their platform is an epic fail and that lack of respect for women and their reproductive rights and freedoms may have cost them the election. They will never get women's votes back unless they start showing respect for women.

This is such a no-brainer that it's shocking it took them this long to acknowledge it, but we are talking about a group of people who feel entitled to rule the country and will gerrymander to make it happen. They learn nothing until someone whacks them with a two by four right between their eyes to get their attention. Losing the 2012 elections on every level (yes I know they retained the HOUSE, but only because there were so few seats being contested - Democrats received a 1 million more votes in House elections than Republicans) was the whack between the eyes.

Last but not least, I'm no child killer. If you had ever bothered reading my posts on abortion you would know that I personally oppose abortion and would never have had one. I live in a country where abortion is a matter between a woman and her doctor so abortion was always a legal option when I was of child-bearing age. I chose to carry my babies to term. That's what "pro-choice" means. My body, my choice.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Try to avoid discussion until you understand the concepts involved, e.g., judicial review.

I know exactly what judicial review is. It is constitutional right of the SCOTUS to determine the constitutionality of laws that are challenged and come before it,

therefore, the right to some abortions is a constitutional right. Whether you like it or not.

No....you don't understand judicial review.

It is to search the Constitution, and either link the question under review to the Constitution, or state so.

It is not to imagine what they believe should be in the Constitution.

And where would one imagine that the precise rules (that you've decided exist) for judicial review appear in the Constitution?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I know exactly what judicial review is. It is constitutional right of the SCOTUS to determine the constitutionality of laws that are challenged and come before it,

therefore, the right to some abortions is a constitutional right. Whether you like it or not.

No....you don't understand judicial review.

It is to search the Constitution, and either link the question under review to the Constitution, or state so.

It is not to imagine what they believe should be in the Constitution.

And where would one imagine that the precise rules (that you've decided exist) for judicial review appear in the Constitution?

Article V.

 

[NYcarbineer]

No....you don't understand judicial review.

It is to search the Constitution, and either link the question under review to the Constitution, or state so.

It is not to imagine what they believe should be in the Constitution.

And where would one imagine that the precise rules (that you've decided exist) for judicial review appear in the Constitution?

Article V.

You'll have to cite precisely the text that supports your claim.