News-Record.com

There's an old expression: Figures lie and liars figure.

Seems both the pot and kettle are black:

http://www.naral.org/news/press-releases/2006/pr07172006-cpc.html

Great website, cRock-o-feller. Now I know where to go to get all the facts I need to know about abortions...

"Interesting that this abortion group could not find someone local to respond to columnist Joe Guarino’s opinion. What does it tell us?" It tells me here is yet another MAN trying to control the reproductive rights of women. A man who thinks HE knows what is best for women and knows more about being pregnant than do women.

If Don had bothered to read Mr. Guarino's blog, he would already know some highly intelligent, qualified local women responded to his opinion piece. Don would also know Mr. Guarino dismissed them as lacking intelligence enough to know what they were talking about. In fact, he was downright insulting to Sue.

And anyone following this whole debate knows Don took liberties with the truth in his letter today.

It's not abortions Neo, it's "womens reproductive healthcare". Let's get the PC lingo straight now.

Yvonne, why is it forbidden in your book for a MAN to have an opinion about abortion? If the writer had been "Dawn" Mulligan would you spout off similarly? Can only females legislate abor....er.....womens reproductive healthcare? Or only pro-abortion females and males?

Using this logic, can only blacks could legislate affirmative action? After all we whities just don't understand.

The NARAL link applauded Rep. Henry Waxman (a MAN) for his investigative report about Pregnancy Resource Centers. Shouldn't he butt out since he is a MAN?

Argue all you want for abortion, but your argument of a MAN having an opinion and proposing legislation because he is a MAN and doesn't understand pregnancy is weak.

I believe Joe Guarino understands the concept of pregnancy very well, as his title is Dr. Joe Guarino. I have known Dr. Guarino for many years, he is an intelligent, accomplished physician.

Here's the dif' between you and me, Neo:

When some one states "XYZ is saying/doing ...", you accept it or reject it based on your fixed stale prejudices. I try to find out what XYZ really said or did.

That's why I'm relatively objective while you are full of crap.

Counter-insults will be ignored.

JDR, I agree, investigating to become informed is a wonderful thing!

Shalom

Dan and Neo,
two part question:

if your significant other was pregnant and the ultrasound showed that the fetus had substantial anomalies such as downs or anacephalia, would you allow her to have an abortion? Yes or No.

if you choose No, will you use any governmental agencies to assist you in the care or that child?
Yes or No.

Don: First question - no.

My wife has a mentally retarded sister, my brother and his wife have a daughter with autism. Not every human being is born perfect, but I believe they have a God given right to exist just like anyone else. What kind of society are we if we start exterminating humans because they have defects? Where does this lead? How about Chinese who regularly abort girls?

Second question - no. I have resources to "care for" my children ie. food, clothing, shelter and love. That being said, I plan to send my kids to public schools, so I am using a govt. agency for their education, for which I pay taxes. Likewise if govt. agencies provide special needs education I would take advantage of it as well. So, basic care no, education yes since I pay taxes.

Question for you please. If your significant other (mine is called my wife) were pregnant and decided to abort a child because it's not the right time in her career, she already has two kids and doens't want more, or another similar reason would you allow her to have an abortion?

By the way, this terminology of a man "allowing a woman to have an abortion" is going to make Yvonne's veins pop out of her head. Just a friendly warning.

I can't prove this, but I believe more women have abortions for other reasons than potential birth defects on an ultrasound.

Dan:

I would answer those questions the same way - and having two attractive teen daughters makes these thoughts poignant ...

I hope most answer as you do. The big issue I see is very few - none I've ever talked with anyway - WANT to abort, even in extreme circumstances as raised by Don.

BUT - hard core Right to Lifers insist on removing ALL possibility of options, even under more heinous situations than raised here.

Dan,

thanks for the honest response. i think you are the exception since the cost would be in the millions. precluding the option IHO would be a mistake.

as for me, after much discussion, i would let her because i am not the master of her body. we have to make decisions that we must live with and i would have to live with that.

Yvonne is not the only one with a vein popping out Dan. Thank God we live in a society today, where I don't need nor require my man's permission to do anything I want to when it comes to my body. Just as soon as they invent a way for a man to carry a fetus to term and then birth it will I consider it.

Iv'e got news for you, most of them time, people who are anit-abortion have a button. A button that when pressed will find them excusing away why it is ok for this abortion right here right now.

Before anyone starts, I am pro abortion (I dont need the fancy lables) and I am Pro Death Penalty too. FYI

So anyway, most people who are dead set against abortion will usually start back peddling right about the time someone mentions 12 year old rape victims or women being forced to carry a severly malformed fetus to term. I know a man who was strongly anit abortion. Right up until the day that his Trophy wife informed him she was pregnant with a black mans child. I believe he drove her to the clinic.

I do find myself a little angry when men come out against abortion. I know that there are a lot of men who feel strongly against it but they really are removed from it in a technical sense because it is something that they will never have to experience.

I wonder where these same men stand on things like Forced Castration after commiting a sexual offense?

Don, No & No.

Even if I were to have suggested such a heinous act to my wife, I would have been sleeping on the couch for at least a year. Yes, Yvonne, my wife is a WOMAN and very anti-murder (pro-life)

fyi, I have a first cousin who was born with downs. She is one of 3 sisters and is very much a part of that family. No government help there. Sorry.

I think that Ms. Reed's message is being a little bit misinterpreted. She is not saying that "abortions are the answer to all the world's problems." Yes she is pro choice and is not happy about the number of women having to choose abortion when contraception and education can and should be made more available. If this were the case, abortion would not be the issue that it is today. I think that today's families and mothers in particular have tremendous pressures as do all of us. Having to go through with an unwanted pregnancy can have serious negative consequences not only for her and the unwanted child but for the rest of the family as well. I think more in terms or trying to add to the quality of life and living rather than just adding another unwanted burden(and I say that with feeling and respect). It's a woman's choice. And man also need to be part of the equation as well--just like what we are doing now.

I think that Ms. Reed's message is being a little bit misinterpreted. She is not saying that "abortions are the answer to all the world's problems." Yes she is pro choice and is not happy about the number of women having to choose abortion when contraception and education can and should be made more available. If this were the case, abortion would not be the issue that it is today. I think that today's families and mothers in particular have tremendous pressures as do all of us. Having to go through with an unwanted pregnancy can have serious negative consequences not only for her and the unwanted child but for the rest of the family as well. I think more in terms or trying to add to the quality of life and living rather than just adding another unwanted burden(and I say that with feeling and respect). It's a woman's choice. And man also need to be part of the equation as well--just like what we are doing now.

James,

would you really allow your wife to carry to full term the anacephalic fetus just to see it die after the delivery???

Nature aborts abnormal and normal fetuses every day. we have the science of ultrasounds that were not available just 20 years ago so we can see problems before nature sees them. so we should just let nature take its natural course and do nothing? there is nothing in modern medicine that can save them.

i guess that means if an ultrasound spots an aneurysm near your heart, doctors should do nothing and allow nature to takes it course. i do not think so.

i am not being cold hearted, because i want to see children grow up healthy and loved but we are being naive if we think that is reality.

Budda, thanks for being clear on your "pro-abortion" terminology and avoiding PC lingo that softens the taking of a human life.

Are you saying if my wife gets pregnant and wants to have an abortion then I have no input in the decision since it's her body? Yes it's her body, but it's OUR baby. That is something you and Yvonne seem to ignore.

Again I always hear the argument of rape, incest, birth defects from the pro-abortion crowd as if these are the only reasons abortions are performed.

What about those who abort because it interferes with career or school, already have kids and don't want another one, just got careless and forgot to slip on the condom, or don't want the "unwanted burden" (joejoe's lingo)? Again I can't prove it, but I believe more abortions result from these reasons than rape, incest, or birth defects.

Don, if a fetus has no chance of survival and will die at or shortly after birth, I can understand the need for an abortion. You mentioned Downs however, which isn't at all comparable.

" ... where [do] these same men stand on things like Forced Castration after commiting a sexual offense?"

They don't have the balls to answer, littlebuddababy.

Don:

I probably answered too quickly - you asked " ... would you allow her to have an abortion .."

I answered, as Dan did, "No" - but that was not really what I meant.
Would I PREVENT her? No.
Would I REQUIRE her? No.
Would we discuss it? Yes.

You gave a pretty broad range of anomalies - from downs (which can be minor) to anencephalia (which is rarely minor).

Would I support her decision - either way? Yes.

My error.

This has been interesting, but pretty much anecdotal. Here's the results of a study done in 2004 of the reasons why a woman had an abortion. Ref: Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives By Lawrence B. Finer, Lori F. Frohwirth, Lindsay A. Dauphinee, Susheela Singh and Ann M. Moore.

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.

CONCLUSIONS: The decision to have an abortion is typically motivated by multiple, diverse and interrelated reasons. The themes of responsibility to others and resource limitations, such as financial constraints and lack of partner support, recurred throughout the study.

The study shows that most women have an abortion by lifestyle choice, not as a result of health problems of the woman or fetus, or because of rape. So, if you accept the results of this survey, then one has to decide to what extent a woman's right to choose trumps that of an unborn fetus. Some of you will say that it does. It pretty much shows that women have abortions because they can, and it is largely driven by convenience, not necessity.

TABLE 3. Percentage distribution of women having an abortion, by their most important
reason for having the abortion, 2004

Reason 2004
(N=957)
Not ready for a(nother) child†/timing is wrong 25
Can’t afford a baby now 23
Have completed my childbearing/have other people depending on me/
children are grown 19
Don’t want to be a single mother/am having relationship problems 8
Don’t feel mature enough to raise a(nother) child/feel too young 7
Would interfere with education or career plans 4
Physical problem with my health 4
Possible problems affecting the health of the fetus 3
Was a victim of rape <0.5
Husband or partner wants me to have an abortion <0.5
Parents want me to have an abortion <0.5
Don’t want people to know I had sex or got pregnant <0.5
Other 6
Total 100

Good data, ORR - thanks

Does it list anywhere WHEN this occurred?

Does that make a difference, e.g. the Plan "B" vs. third trimester arguement?

I think this has been one of the better discussions regarding abortion.

I'll only address Don's remark regarding science and technology.

My child spent Monday playing with a 4 year old girl that is completely normal by medical standards.. She was given a 0 % chance of survival by her mother's physicians. Even if she did survive (I'm not sure why they added this given the 0% chance of survival), doctors said, she would be severely malformed. Her mother did not believe in abortion in any case and had the child.

Early in her life, the child spent time on a respirator and had feeding tubes. She is still resolving some issues with her speech but the doctor's confirmed that she is perfectly healthy and out of any danger.

My only point in saying this is that even with all the technology that was used in this case, sometimes doctor's get it wrong.

If the mother had listened to the 'professionals' she would not have her daughter today and my son would not have his first sweetheart.

ORR,

If your data is correct, my personal in almost all cases of abortions, the REAL reason for the abortion is the failure to prevent the pregnancy.

Thanks for confirming my belief ORR, most abortions are lifestyle choices, however the pro-abortion crowd always references the rape, incest, birth defect argument.

My bottom line is when I die I do not want to answer to God as to why I participated in the termination of an innocent child.

Abortion rights arose in the context of eugenics and the practice still serves that function. People too poor to afford children and too irresponsible to prevent them with contraception are likely to be irresponsible parents raising irresponsible children. Steven Leavitt presents strong--although not unproblematic--data linking the rise of abortion and the decline in crime among the cohort of post-1973 children. NARAL doesn't have much to say on this topic.

Hate to point it out Dan, but you were the one who flauted the terminology, "allow her too". You did it full well knowing you were going to push someones buttons so congratulations.

JDR: Balls.....funny!

Another thing just occured to me. While the Pro Abortion people are always running around making excuses, you made my point relevant Dan. As you said, you agree with it under certain circumstances. Most people have a button.

When it comes to abortion, I think the babies father can have a say. Ultimatly thought it has to be a womans decision, because it is not as if the fetus can be magically transfered to the man for him to carry.

One name, Andrea Yates. This woman *and her husband* were told after each pregnancy and after each breakdown to stop having children. Not only did this "challenged" woman hear this *so did her husband*. Her husband openly admitted that he took part in continuing to have babies and never did anything to prevent it. Yet, when this woman broke down and killed her children, he walked away........he walked away. In my mind he was every bit to blame as she was. Yet, because he can not actually give birth, and therefor can not actually get PPD or PPP he can not be held accountable for what happens under continue strain. Men, don't have to physically pay for giving birth. They dont have to carry the child, push the child out, breastfeed the child with their bodies( though i know this is not really "required) they don't have to deal with the mental and physical changes that happen to a body durring and after childbirth.

This next part is a joke, but it holds some small amount of truth. "The only part of childbirth men have to participate in, is the fun part"

So yes, I think individual women reserve the right to the final decision on abortion.

LBB, I do remember the "fun part". Now I get the challenging part, to raise two children to become responsible educated adults. It's still a lot of fun, well at least 98% of the time :)

Thanks for your honesty LBB. Off to SC on a business trip, chat with you guys tonight.

A joke that's about three days too late:

When's Labor Day?

40 weeks after Father's day.

When was the last time you read about NARAL supporters shooting a doctor or bombing a clinic?

Answer: Never
*********************
Now that was the cue for all the "pro birth" folks to say that babies are being butchered etc.etc.
Problem with that argument, is that other than those terminated close to pregnancy are just a mass of cells that cannot live outside the womb.

Pro birth people just want the babies born, then they don't give a rat's ass about it. What amazes me is the commonality that bunch has with the crowd that is always yelling about spending on welfare or telling the poor and minorities to just "pull themselves up by the bootstraps"---hypocrites.

Dear "Moralist Mulligan",
The reason local people do not respond (anymore) to these type letters, is because once they do, they start receiving letters, phone calls and personal visits from either "The God Squad" or the "Wacko Clinic Protestors" here in town. Believe me! I know of what I speak. There is a husband and wife team here in town that is so over the edge "anti abortion" that they try to intimidate ANYONE who is pro choice. Look for a car or van with the license plate PRO LIFE1 and you will see either the husband or wife. These are domestic terrorists in my opinion as they block clinic access and protest in neighborhoods where physicians live.

The Pro Life movement is pure and simple, pro birth.

Dan - you're doing the republican steal the word game.

There is no such thing as "Pro-Abortion" ... it's "Pro Keep-Your-Stinking-Hands-Out-Of-MY-Business, I will answer to God."

... which pretty much sums all these blog debates:

If one wants Government Intervention in, for example the murder of the unborn aka the diberate bypass of a fertilized egg using an IUD aka Plan "B" aka You Rape 'em, We scrape em" ... then LET THE GOVERNMENT CONTROL WHAT WE DO.

If one does not want Government Intervention in, for example the fair distribution of the nation's natural resources aka the lousy stinking IRS aka progressive tax structures aka tax-and-spend Democrats ... GET GOVERNMENT THE HELL OFF OUR BACKS.

It's all Topical Perspective - has little to do with principles.

"Pro birth people just want the babies born"

That's not accurate. Pro-life folks want the unwanted baby to never be conceived in the first place just like Pro-choice people do.

After conception, yes, pro-life folks want the child to be born.

After birth, I'd say that pro-life and pro-choice folks are pretty much the same in giving a "rat's ass" about it. Some do, some don't.

DD: "When was the last time you read about NARAL supporters shooting a doctor or bombing a clinic?

Answer: Never
*********************
Now that was the cue for all the "pro birth" folks to say that babies are being butchered etc.etc."

Problem with your argument is you paint all pro-life people into one camp and you know that is not true. When was the last time you heard about Dan, Joe Guarino, Don Mulligan and other pro-life people shooting doctors or bombing clinics?

Answer: Never
*************

I would never condone such violence.

Yes there is a nut fringe out there, but it is very small compared to the majority of the rest of us. Yet another weak argument like the rape, incest, birth defect argument as these represent a minority of abortions.

Your argument about us wanting people born and then not caring for them is as worn out as my 170K mile truck. I didn't know only pro-abortion folks served as foster parents, pregnancy counselors, adoptive parents, teachers etc. etc. Thanks for informing me DD.

Of course we don't encourage people to have 10 kids when they make $20K a year and then live off the goverment in perpetuity, what's wrong with that? I realize that a more self sufficent populace is a threat to Democrats, as they lose a chunk of their voting block that depends on govt. handouts.

If you look at it this way DD, you should be against abortion. Why? Because banning abortion will lead to more births, many of which will be from poor people who need govt. handouts. That would increase the voting block for Democrats!!

JDR, call it whatever you want, it's pro-abortion. I like the term womens reproductive healthcare, although it's not to healthy for the future woman or man in the womb.

... the point was Dan, we all shift the framing of G-man intervention from Good to Bad to Good to Bad - depending on the topic de jour.

Therefore and by definition: the classic Liberal Left and Conservative Right rhetoric is ... bogus [dude].

JDR, call it whatever you want, it's pro-abortion.

Kudos to LBB for being the only pro-abortion person I've ever met who actually admitted the term instead of concealing it with PC lingo.

A demain.....zzzzzzzzzzzzz

Dan,

I don't know what crystal ball you are using to read people's minds, but you sure got duped if you paid for it. You need to take it back and demand your money be returned cause it is not working.

First, I thought DON's wording was perfect for a man who expresses the thoughts you do. I can certainly imagine you thinking it is your right to "let" or "not let" your wife do something.

Secondly, I have never had a problem saying exactly what I mean. If I were pro-abortion, I would have absolutely no qualms saying I was. But I have never said I was pro-abortion because I am not (contrary to what your crystal ball tells you). As nitpicker expressed so nicely, I wish women who do not want a child, for whatever reason, would not get pregnant at all. If he can understand that concept, why are you having so much difficulty with it? Is it because, although he is against abortion, he understands it is not his right to try to control another living human being?

I say I am PRO-CHOICE because I am PRO-CHOICE. It is not right, legally or morally, for me to be making reproductive decisions for other women. That is and should be a personal decision. I believe it is NOT my responsibility nor my obligation to "save" women from themselves. Therefore, I try to mind my own business and let others take personal responsibility.

Thirdly, if I thought a man has no right to an OPINION about abortion, I would say that. What I have said and will continue to say is no man has the right to legislate, dictate or otherwise interfere with a woman's decision regarding abortion. When a man can carry a child to term and give birth, he will have earned the right to try to repeal Roe vs Wade. Until then, he can offer any opinion to anyone he wishes. He just needs to keep his efforts to control women out of their uteruses.

Oh, and BTW, does Dr. Guarino's understanding of pregnancy include personal knowledge? As in, has he ever been pregnant? I KNOW about shaving but I don't get up every day to shave. I KNOW about brain tumors but I've never had one. I KNOW about paralysis but I've never experienced it. Get my point?

Dan,
Too bad you can't realize that the term "Pro Choice" means just that. Unlike you, I do not believe it is my role to dominate women and their reproductive rights, therefore I am for giving them the choice to make.
You make it sound as if you drag your wife around the house by the hair, making decisions for her that she is incapable of making. It's all about control--some just have to have control over everyone. The real irony is they are many times the same people who advocate choice for social security, schools, etc, but when it doesn't suit them, they want to tell women what to do. You know, the old saying is that if men could bear children, abortion would be written into the constitution!

AS to the LTE writer, does he not acknowledge the deceit with which his beloved pro lifers stoop with regards to advertising family planning? They used to put ads for the "birth only" clinics under Abortion Providers in the phone book, but the phone companies wised up and required only those who perform pregnancy terminations to be able to list there.

MISLEADING? MISLEADING? When a pregnant woman wants to hear all of her options and some God Squad shill cries over her and her pregnancy---is that not misleading?

No crystal ball Yvonne, just a keyboard and a screen.

Don's wording was "would you allow her to have an abortion". "Allow" means to grant permission, i.e. I would grant my significant other permission to do something. I thought you would take exception to a man allowing a woman to do something or not.

I think we all agree that avoiding unwanted pregnancies is the best course. I have practiced that over many years. The two pregnancies that resulted in my children were mutually intentional.

"Is it because, although he is against abortion, he understands it is not his right to try to control another living human being?"

My thoughts exactly. Why does a pregnant woman have the right to control another living human being and exterminate him/her?

"What I have said and will continue to say is no man has the right to legislate, dictate or otherwise interfere with a woman's decision regarding abortion."

Using this logic, only blacks can legislate affirmative action, only poor can legislate welfare reform, only the disabled can legislate the ADA, only parents can legislate FMLA, get my point?

Just love all the

"GET THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF OUR LIVES"

people wanting to bring UNCLE SAM in to make the

most personal of personal decisions for people.

It is the ultimate hypocrisy. Then they point

to people having babies out of wedlock and

having "10 babies" as if that makes their

point. What a joke!

Religious Consevatives: the ultimate hypocrites.

No hypocrisy DD. I would say most of us support a law making it illegal to murder someone. I just believe an unborn child is a human being and terminating that child is murder.

You may believe it's not a child rather a glob of cells but I don't.

Look at these pics (nothing gory, G rated)

http://www.wprc.org/trimester1.phtml

Week 3

At this point, the blastocyst, or developing embryo, is looking for a spot to implant in the uterus. Early formation of the central nervous system, backbone, and spinal column has begun. The gastrointestinal system has also begun to develop with the kidneys, liver, and intestines forming. The heart has begun to form.

This is only at 3 weeks, when many women may not even know they are pregnant!!

Dan,
Glad to know you are now a "paraprofessional Gynecologist/Obstetrician".
What a joke! Do you want to tell the folks exactly how small that thing you give human qualities to? Reminds me of people giving human qualities to their deity. Why? Because it is the only way they can make their emotional fears reconcile with their hardened opinions/beliefs.

Is this "Cut my taxes" Dan who is now "Put Government in the personal lives of every woman" Dan?
Frankly, people who think like that are downright scary. Given a little power, they'd have the whole world goose stepping their way, and calling it "conservative" or "family values" or "pro family".....or they would condemn dissenters as "Godless" or "Anti family".

Whew! Just when you thought the Puritans were gone...they're back! Sanctimonious and self righteous as ever. If ever there was divine retribution, this is it:
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/144/story_14444_1.html

And I got that link from one of the fringe internet sites supporting Randall Terry. What makes it so funny is that Terry claims he's a peaceful protestor.....ha! ha!.

I don't think that women make impulsive, selfish, or decisions of "convenience" as was suggested by an interpretation of an earlier research article. Any woman I know who has had an abortion did so with great anguish. There were multiple reasons for the unwanted pregnancy. Any or all of the reasons for why a woman got an abortion in the above research study were, I am reasonally confident, for the individual very necessary, needed and vital. If a woman says I cannot support the children I already have, I don't say that's a selfish and convenient rationalization. I'm not in her shoes. We need to acknowledge that we are all sexual beings; some people don't know about or have access to birth control and sometimes stuff happens and a pregnancy is on the horizon. Contraception is imperative and abortion is a painful choice when the former is not available, not accessable and not always reliable. No decision is frivilous. I don't have to live with the consequences and I have heard as was stated in an earlier message that people have a way to come down on needy, poor households who need welfare for support when a timely abortion may have made the difference.

Joejoe,

I agree with the gyst of what you are saying but I'm thinking that in many cases the man and woman should have had their "great anquish" before having sex instead of having the abortion.

DD, one question for you, are you glad your mother didn't abort you?

Dan,
If she had, I wouldn't have ever known about it. That is another straw man that the "pro birth" group puts out there.

If that is a serious question, then "What were you thinking in the womb at around 8 or 9 weeks?". Get real.
************
Knowing a little about you from your posts, answer me this:

What if a your wife is raped at gunpoint by one of the illegal Mexican immigrants you detest, and she becomes traumatized beyond your wildest imagination. As the weeks pass, she realizes she is carrying this dispicable person's child.

Would you:

A. Encourage her to take the baby to term and offer it up for adoption.

B. Encourage her to take the baby to term and rear it as your own.

C. Put all options on the table for the health of the victim--your wife, offering your support of whatever she chose.

Note: The only REAL choice is "C" because it is 100% choice of the woman. A or B are in keeping with YOUR rhetoric, but opens up caveats as to sharing custody of the criminal's child etc.
*****************
BOTTOM LINE: You have no business making those type decisions for your wife, much less other women. Get over yourself and your power trip. You can call it murder all day long---until it hits YOU. If you sincerely say that you & your wife would NOT abort the fetus and that you would adopt this child of rape, then I have no problem with your decision---but don't go making that tough decision for other women.

Thanks Yvonne.
I will watch my own words more carefully, as I have entered the gutteral areas heretofore held firmly by the right wing.
Posted by: DemonDeacon at June 26, 2006 01:31 PM

BTW, it's not illegal Mexican immigrant, rather undocumented worker. How terribly un-PC of you.

I would choose "D"... Abort the Mexican with a .45 slug in the temple before he raped my wife...

neoCON,
You are such a waste of human flesh.

"Using this logic, only blacks can legislate affirmative action, only poor can legislate welfare reform, only the disabled can legislate the ADA, only parents can legislate FMLA, get my point?"

Apples to oranges, Dan, and you know it. Affirmative Action covers men and women, the poor includes men and women, the disabled includes men and women and parents are men and women. In your examples, it is not a matter of one sex trying to dominate another. In my example, it is. It is the act of men trying to control, dominate, dictate, command, rule and interfere in a women's choice that makes it inappropriate and unacceptable. You are not superior to any woman and you do not own one. Women are not slaves or children that you can make decisions for. If you want to add your 2 cents worth when addressing an issue, it is within your rights to do so. But it is not your right to try to make a woman carry a fetus to term. Like it or not, the law agrees.

As much as you would like make a 3 week old BLASTOCYTE OR DEVELOPING EMBRYO into a living, breathing human being, you can't do that. I'm afaid science is not on your side on this one either.

If you and your wife are in agreement regarding her reproductive rights, fine. Live in harmony and enjoy the freedoms you have. But you cannot live others lives or make choices for them. For they have the same freedoms as you.

Yvonne,
Under "KING DAN" women would be relegated to the second class status of a Vernon Robinson "Leave it to Beaver" commercial.

Dan,
What would you do under the scenario I painted?

A little too realistic for you?

Or do you think all unwanted pregnancies are sweet little healthy white babies you've seen on an Arthur DeMoss ad?

If you are for abortion in cases of rape or

incest, then you are NOT pro-life,

but rather a huge hypocrite who wants to

put "YOUR" morality on everyone.

I'm pro-college football, so I've got to go!

DD, your scenario is not realistic at all, my wife has never been raped by an illegal Mexican immigrant...er..undocumented worker, much less a legal one. I would choose "D" as well.

In case you haven't read the thread DD, the rape incest argument has already been addressed. It's a red herring for you guys that is always brought up. The majority of abortions have nothing to do with rape or incest.

Yvonne, only women can legistlate something that effects women? I guess we cull out all the male members of Congress, the Supreme court, and the executive branch. This train of thought is ridiculous.

BTW, govt. legislates what we do with our bodies. I can't legally snort cocaine or even use my wife's legal prescription. I can't drive a car with 0.080 blood alcohol content.

As for a blastocyte being a living, breathing human being, I never said breathing. But it is a human being in development and will be breathing if carried to term rather than sucked into a sink. Science is definitely on my side.

Frankly Yvonne, I don't care what people do with their bodies, as you said it is the law. Eventually they will have to answer to a greater power than man (or woman) made laws. BTW all the Supreme Court justices who decided that case were male, you don't seem to mind men making such decisions as long as it's in your favor.

I'm not out there picketing abortion clinics, much less blowing them up or shooting doctors as DD implies. I just think abortion is murder and it's wrong, plain and simple. Just my opinion.

My wife and I are in agreement, as I would have never married someone who thought differently on such a core value.