True conservatives are pro-choice

[mdn2000]

To say that a human egg upon fertilization is a person is like saying that the blueprint for a building is a building.

Thats right, because one day the building will walk and talk and have kids of its own.

What do they teach in school these days?

 

[BenNatuf]

only social "conservaties" want to control such things. they are nothign short of fascists, wanting to bend the world under their views or else

yes, because wanting to honor the idea of not taking a life without due process of law is so fascist.

 

[The T]

Conservative meaning of Pro-Choice is LIBERTY and the choice of the Individual at their whim as their needs dictate.

That's actually why true liberals are also pro-choice.

But thanks for your 'contributions.'

'LIFE', Liberty, Persuit Of Happiness (Property)

What is Liberty if LIFE is not preserved, protected?

 

[Ravi]

To say that a human egg upon fertilization is a person is like saying that the blueprint for a building is a building.

Or an acorn is a tree.

And for all the ones that want their state or city to decide...too bad. A woman's body either is hers to govern or it isn't. A state can't make rules that take away constitutionally given rights.

 

[The T]

To say that a human egg upon fertilization is a person is like saying that the blueprint for a building is a building.

Or an acorn is a tree.

And for all the ones that want their state or city to decide...too bad. A woman's body either is hers to govern or it isn't. A state can't make rules that take away constitutionally given rights.

Hmmmm...See also Obamacare Death Panels and Government PAYING FOR ABORTIONS

Idiot.

 

[Ravi]

To say that a human egg upon fertilization is a person is like saying that the blueprint for a building is a building.

Or an acorn is a tree.

And for all the ones that want their state or city to decide...too bad. A woman's body either is hers to govern or it isn't. A state can't make rules that take away constitutionally given rights.

Hmmmm...See also Obamacare Death Panels and Government PAYING FOR ABORTIONS

Idiot.

Asshole, there are no death panels and the government doesn't pay for abortions. But insurance should since it is a valid medical procedure.

 

[The T]

Or an acorn is a tree.

And for all the ones that want their state or city to decide...too bad. A woman's body either is hers to govern or it isn't. A state can't make rules that take away constitutionally given rights.

Hmmmm...See also Obamacare Death Panels and Government PAYING FOR ABORTIONS

Idiot.

Asshole, there are no death panels and the government doesn't pay for abortions. But insurance should since it is a valid medical procedure.

Idiot...and Taxpayers shouldn't be supporting DEATH for convenience...

 

[Ravi]

Hmmmm...See also Obamacare Death Panels and Government PAYING FOR ABORTIONS

Idiot.

Asshole, there are no death panels and the government doesn't pay for abortions. But insurance should since it is a valid medical procedure.

Idiot...and Taxpayers shouldn't be supporting DEATH for convenience...

Again, they don't, fucktard.

 

[The T]

Asshole, there are no death panels and the government doesn't pay for abortions. But insurance should since it is a valid medical procedure.

Idiot...and Taxpayers shouldn't be supporting DEATH for convenience...

Again, they don't, fucktard.

“Only an accounting procedure”

Boxer admits Senate’s ‘abortion compromise’ nothing more than legislative sleight of hand....

READ IT...Stupid shit.

 

[Ravi]

 

[shintao]

To say that a human egg upon fertilization is a person is like saying that the blueprint for a building is a building.

For your edification, here's a tidbit of reality you evidently never learned:

Analogies are supposed to be predicated on analogs.

And you disagree with his example, because.....................................?

 

[The T]

Translation: "i chose NOT to read it because it would prove me wrong because it came from my own side...I therefore prove T to be correct..."

 

[shintao]

I have YET to see a compelling argument that defends on a logical, scientific and factual level the contention that a pre-born baby (zygote, embryo, whatever), after conception, is "not" a human life.

This needs a thread. I would give you the opportunity to define what "human Life" is determined by physically and mentally.

It may benefit from a thread. I'm not at all convinced that I can give THE definition. And I have not made that claim. Ever.

I have a view point on the topic and if it hasn't become obvious over time, I don't mind acknowledging something up front. My conclusions are entirely mine. I have never claimed that -- on the abortion topic -- I am in possession of "sole" truth or ANY truth. I am quite unsure of how to determine the truth value of some of the most basic premises.

My philosophy stems from the observation that WE, as a whole, simply don't know and, for the most part, we cannot know. However, that fact comes with consequences. Where, as here, we don't know, we probably have an obligation to default on the side of life.

Why wouldn't that be the proper default conclusion?

A conclusion built on a false premise would be illogical to follow. Our empirical science can detect when human life meets the definition of existence.

We can change the definition of what human life is, and for some they have done this with "conception." Problem is, the door is now opened to say the sperm & ova are human life, by following their logical path of conception. And of course for the Christian, they cannot ignore this by what is commanded by their gods in the Bible, protecting the sperm from being spilled on the ground. Are we ready to say every human life is precious by this new pre-conception definition of male & female?

 

[shintao]

Or an acorn is a tree.

And for all the ones that want their state or city to decide...too bad. A woman's body either is hers to govern or it isn't. A state can't make rules that take away constitutionally given rights.

Hmmmm...See also Obamacare Death Panels and Government PAYING FOR ABORTIONS

Idiot.

Asshole, there are no death panels and the government doesn't pay for abortions. But insurance should since it is a valid medical procedure.

Fed? Right on. However we must be careful here to add, except in Arizona the governor is the death panel to transpalnt victims she refuses to help.

 

[The T]

Hmmmm...See also Obamacare Death Panels and Government PAYING FOR ABORTIONS

Idiot.

Asshole, there are no death panels and the government doesn't pay for abortions. But insurance should since it is a valid medical procedure.

Fed? Right on. However we must be careful here to add, except in Arizona the governor is the death panel to transpalnt victims she refuses to help.

And WHY should she since that is a PESONAL RESPONSIBILITY?

 

[The T]

This needs a thread. I would give you the opportunity to define what "human Life" is determined by physically and mentally.

It may benefit from a thread. I'm not at all convinced that I can give THE definition. And I have not made that claim. Ever.

I have a view point on the topic and if it hasn't become obvious over time, I don't mind acknowledging something up front. My conclusions are entirely mine. I have never claimed that -- on the abortion topic -- I am in possession of "sole" truth or ANY truth. I am quite unsure of how to determine the truth value of some of the most basic premises.

My philosophy stems from the observation that WE, as a whole, simply don't know and, for the most part, we cannot know. However, that fact comes with consequences. Where, as here, we don't know, we probably have an obligation to default on the side of life.

Why wouldn't that be the proper default conclusion?

A conclusion built on a false premise would be illogical to follow. Our empirical science can detect when human life meets the definition of existence.

We can change the definition of what human life is, and for some they have done this with "conception." Problem is, the door is now opened to say the sperm & ova are human life, by following their logical path of conception. And of course for the Christian, they cannot ignore this by what is commanded by their gods in the Bible, protecting the sperm from being spilled on the ground. Are we ready to say every human life is precious by this new pre-conception definition of male & female?

The only thing here ILLOGICAL...is YOU.

 

[mdn2000]

What a bunch of sick people. You support a procedure, you call abortion a medical procedure, what kind of medical procedure is it that the worst thing that happens is a baby is born alive then the doctors and nurses neglect the new born until it dies.

I think some people should be haunted by the babies cries as they die.

We should pay people to have children, your sick people. Serious, kids are great, especially babies, funny as hell some of them are, my youngest is big comedian, kill em you say, even if they live.

Kill em even if you have no understanding if the kid is even thinking, I imagine abortion is a pretty bad day for a kid in the womb.

You compare them to trees, acorns and buildings. You people are pretty scary. As you call as the extreme right, I have to jump through hoops to figure out how you can live with the results of what you support. Your literally as guilty as the doctor.

http://www.bornalivetruth.org/index.php

In 1999 a gruesome discovery was made that an IL hospital was shelving babies to die in a soiled utility room who had survived their abortions.
The federal Born Alive Infants Protection Act was introduced in 2000 to provide legal protection to all born babies, wanted or not, including the right to medical care.
In 2002, Born Alive passed unanimously in the U.S. Senate and by overwhelming voice vote in the House. On August 5, President George W. Bush signed the bill into law.
Despite that, numerous accounts from various parts of the country document abortion survivors are still being medically neglected until the die or outright killed – infanticide

Our first project in Autumn 2008 was to spotlight then-presidential candidate Barack Obama's opposition as an IL state senator to the identical Born Alive bill that passed so overwhelmingly on the federal level.

 

[whitehall]

What is this? Saul Alinsky speak? It's not a matter of big or small or powerful federal government. It's a matter of the dignity or human life. Americans didn't vote for unrestricted abortion. Leftie liberal judicial activists found a "right to privacy" clause in the Constitution that didn't exist and decreed that women could hire a technician to kill their unborn babies at any stage of pregnancy.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Or an acorn is a tree.

And for all the ones that want their state or city to decide...too bad. A woman's body either is hers to govern or it isn't. A state can't make rules that take away constitutionally given rights.

Hmmmm...See also Obamacare Death Panels and Government PAYING FOR ABORTIONS

Idiot.

Asshole, there are no death panels and the government doesn't pay for abortions. But insurance should since it is a valid medical procedure.

1) Maryland Becomes Second State to Offer Federally Funded Abortions under Obamacare | CNSnews.com



December 25, 2010
Obama Returns to End-of-Life Plan That Caused Stir
By ROBERT PEAR
WASHINGTON — When a proposal to encourage end-of-life planning touched off a political storm over “death panels,” Democrats dropped it from legislation to overhaul the health care system. But the Obama administration will achieve the same goal by regulation, starting Jan. 1.

Under the new policy, outlined in a Medicare regulation, the government will pay doctors who advise patients on options for end-of-life care, which may include advance directives to forgo aggressive life-sustaining treatment.

2) http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/us/politics/26death.html

 

[Ravi]

Hmmmm...See also Obamacare Death Panels and Government PAYING FOR ABORTIONS

Idiot.

Asshole, there are no death panels and the government doesn't pay for abortions. But insurance should since it is a valid medical procedure.

1) Maryland Becomes Second State to Offer Federally Funded Abortions under Obamacare | CNSnews.com



December 25, 2010
Obama Returns to End-of-Life Plan That Caused Stir
By ROBERT PEAR
WASHINGTON — When a proposal to encourage end-of-life planning touched off a political storm over “death panels,” Democrats dropped it from legislation to overhaul the health care system. But the Obama administration will achieve the same goal by regulation, starting Jan. 1.

Under the new policy, outlined in a Medicare regulation, the government will pay doctors who advise patients on options for end-of-life care, which may include advance directives to forgo aggressive life-sustaining treatment.

2) http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/us/politics/26death.html

Advising people of what their end of live care might be isn't a death panel, moron.