That is interesting for both sides. The people against the death penalty are all in for abortion. Both sides want to control everyone else through the government.
Yep, for most there is no cohesion. War, abortion, the death penalty... many just pick and choose as it suits them.
Scary it's even possible to decide who is or isn't worthy of death.
The government is supposed to protect the people. What you consider to be nothing; others consider to be a living person. People shouldn't have the choice to kill other people. You haven't figured out the beliefs of pro-life people yet? Neither side is going to change the mind of the other.
That's what one side says. I've heard it countless times. The other side says that the baby has it's own body and that it's not just a lifeless hunk of tissue. There will never be agreement.
Wrong. The constitution says the government was created "to preserve the blessing of liberty".
People give lip service to freedom until somebody does something actually free. Then they start saying "Uh oh, we gotta put a stop to that."
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Key word "...born. .."
Pro-life people believe the fetus is a human being that should be protected by the law. That seems reasonable enough to me.
My issue is with the people who are against contraception. Paying for another's contraceptives is much cheaper than pay for their unwanted children. Of course, many of those same people don't seem too concerned about the child after birth. Screw them if their family can't afford health insurance.
The problem is, that's not the first case that something like that has happens, and I used such examples before to show to pro-life people why abortion should be legal - all I got in response was "that's not the norm. That's a special case."
Apparently many think the norm to people who make abortion are evil, spoiled and careless people that have sex with no protection and since they're so inconvenient with the pregnancy, they just want to get rid of it with no regret whatsoever. If that's the case and if we follow that logic, then the norm in Christians are Bible-fanatics, the norm in Republican are racist, sexist, gun-lovers rednecks; the norm in Muslims are terrorist; the norm in feminists are women who hate men.... apparently the worst case scenario, the extremists, are the now the "norm".
Wouldn't "no government involvement" also mean, no government/taxpayer funds being used for abortions?
I don't remember seeing any poll...... was it here?
Isn't it though? That hadn't escaped me either.
I had noticed that.
I'm just going to leave this here, because the amount of dumb and hypocrisy on this guy is way too funny to not be shared.
The video is here: http://www.thelostogle.com/2012...how-treatment/
Well Vic, if anyone ever decides to abort you, I hope the government intrudes.
I hope they don't
What is more important your take or mine
I guess that depends who's in a position to advocate for our own interests. Unborn children aren't in a position to complain when you kill them, who's their advocate? Their mothers? If someone wants you dead, are they in a position to be a suitable advocate for your interests?
Who's advocating for all the sperm you squirt out?
Really? We're talking about the murder of children, sometimes only weeks from birth, and you want to compare it to jerking off? Pretty sad man.
Every sperm is sacred. Don't touch that, it will grow.
Unborn children recoil from medical instruments. After the first trimester, being aborted is roughly the same as being drawn and quartered. If that's the same as sperm to you, you're a lunatic.
If you're going to draw a line, where are you going to drawing it? Trimester, 2 weeks, 1 hour, pre-coitus?
I don't have a problem with the morning after pill, and I can see an argument for allowing abortion early in a pregnancy, but second and third trimester abortions should definitely be banned.
I am not in a position to make that choice. People want to draw a line. Who gets to? A legislator? A judge? A doctor? The potential parents?
To me that's the problem. When you start regulating, where do you stop? In some people's minds it is literally 'no birth control' in other people's minds it is 'until you cut the umbilical cord.'
I honestly don't know. I don't think I would ever want a pregnancy I produced to be aborted - I've never been in that position and hopefully never will be.
I know I don't want to make, or even be involved in that decision for someone else's pregnancy.
It makes sense to me to let those involved choose.
Who is more involved than the baby?
And, who is given no input at all? The baby.
It's not a 'baby' yet.
You are incorrect.
Yes I am. But that doesn't make a fetus a baby.
Every human fetus carried to term since the beginning of time has been a human baby. Giving it another clinical sounding name doesn't alter the fact that it is a human life.
It's sad how you twist and contort to justify killing unborn children.
Every acorn that grew into a tree has become a tree.
An acorn is not a tree
That's true. An acorn is an Oak in early development. And a fetus is not a mature adult!
But, an acorn is still an Oak and a fetus is still a human being.
No an acorn is a oak seed and a fetus is a human fetus.
I have a human hand it is not a human. I have human lungs they are not human beings.
You REALLY need to study some biology before you profess to know something about it.
Acorns are NOT seeds. The seeds were fertilized in the early spring of the year. Once fertilized, it develops into an acorn - with all the DNA it will have as a fully developed Oak tree.
Comparing an acorn to a fetus I suppose is fair - they're both in the early stages of development of their species.
Your attempt to compare an acorn to human limb is simply further crying out for you to learn some biology.
OK. Thanks for the correction.
I didn't mean to imply an arm. Left to it's own devices could become a human. I am lead to believe that given the right environment the human cells in an arm could (through the cloning process) become a human.
A fetus left to it's own devices could not become a human. It is, like an arm, comprised of human cells, and given the right environment (a functional womb) could become a human.
An acorn is not a tree.
Vic - Please read my responses - or I will ignore you.
I have no idea about cloning people using their arms. I think you made that up.
A fetus doesn't become human - it IS human.
A fetus is a human in the early stages of development.
An Acorn is an Oak in the early stages of development.
And a caterpillar is a butterfly. Got it.
so do you agree with the government intrusion that banned slavery? or jew genocide? if you say yes to those but no to abortion your a freaking HYPOCRITE! the biggest intrusion on someone elses body is MURDER, and abortion is MURDER
So you support all government intrusion if you say yes then so do I. If you say no then so do I. If you say sometimes then you are like everyone else m