You seem very opinionated about a group you obviously know very little about. All your little assertions about what this groups believes and why they believe is really amusing. The funny thing is your self-righteous rants and your proclamations about other people’s motives remind me of the more unhinged Christians fanatics I know. They tell me that the pro-choicers don’t really care about choice or women’s health they just want to be able to kill unwanted babies. That if they could get away with they would let mother’s drown them at birth if they wanted to. You are pretty much the pro-choice version of that.
That was pretty much my reaction. It is so much easier to dump all opponents into one conveniently monolithically evil group that gives us moral superiority. Basically, the same thing he finds so disgusting about pro lifers. Operation Rescue from Tyrants, instead of from baby murderers.
I know you really don’t care how offense to some people what you have been saying might be since you have your righteousness to justify it but you really come off as a self important blow hard talking out his ass about subjects he doesn't really know much about. Stick to trying to describe what you believe and you might do better.
By the way the way a zygote is alive by any definition of the word that hasn't been politicized and it is a human so there for it is a human life. I know people have come with some contrived definitions of life that would rule out zygotes but those are political constructs and have nothing to do with science. I have yet to see anyone come with a valid definition of life that doesn’t include the entire life cycle of an organism. Zygote is a stage in life cycle of humans and a zygote is no less human than any other human in any other stage. Now you can argue that is a human life without value but saying which humans get to live and which should die based on their value is a very dangerous game. The list of the unworhty can grow.
Personally I am on the fence on the whole issue I just found your bad logic and your flawed proclamations about what other people felt annoying. The problem is there are valid arguments to made on both sides but the less opened minded and more radical on both sides are to blinded by the light of the surety to see they create strawmen to fight and feel reassured when they beat those stawmen.
By the way the way a zygote is alive by any definition of the word that hasn't been politicized and it is a human so there for it is a human life. I know people have come with some contrived definitions of life that would rule out zygotes but those are political constructs and have nothing to do with science. I have yet to see anyone come with a valid definition of life that doesn’t include the entire life cycle of an organism. Zygote is a stage in life cycle of humans and a zygote is no less human than any other human in any other stage. Now you can argue that is a human life without value but saying which humans get to live and which should die based on their value is a very dangerous game. The list of the unworhty can grow.
Personally I am on the fence on the whole issue I just found your bad logic and your flawed proclamations about what other people felt annoying. The problem is there are valid arguments to made on both sides but the less opened minded and more radical on both sides are to blinded by the light of the surety to see they create strawmen to fight and feel reassured when they beat those stawmen.
Now that I have given with one hand I do feel obliged to take with the other. There MUST be a difference between a human being and a finger nail clipping, and even the most ardent pro lifer does not oppose removing malignancies on the grounds it takes a human life, though the cells are human and alive. I cannot say where that difference lies, though legally it should probably be at the detection of brain waves (of course it is never that easy; brain waves have frequently been documented as early as 8 weeks, often before women know they are pregnant, but then we get to debate whether the standard should be "continuous" brain waves, a regular pattern, when THOSE begin, etc. etc.)
Since I cannot be sure, I prefer to err on the side of caution, so if I ever get pregnant I will have the baby. *nods* On the other hand, since I cannot be sure, I cannot prove someone elses answer wrong, and because of that and the fact they, not I, must face the dangers of pregnancy and childbirth, not to mention raise the child, I do not feel qualified to decide for them any more than they are for me. Where it gets dicey is when one partner is pro life and the other pro choice, particularly if the man is pro life, because legally there is not a darned thing he can do to stop the woman killing what he believes his child. Of course, if I do not have sex outside of a committed relationship with a woman willing, perhaps even eager, to bear my child, that is a non-issue. Funny how that works; almost like it was planned that way....
Most everyone agrees we are talking about a baby after the sixth or seventh month; at that point survival outside the womb is usually possible with regular feeding and changing, so it is a bit ridiculous (and dangerous) to deny that is a person simply because still in the uterus. Funny thing about Roe: It only legalized abortion within the first trimester; the concurrent Doe v. Bolton ruling legalized late term abortion when the mothers health is in jeopardy. Unfortunately, its inclusion of undefined "psychological health" opens the door to pert neer everything; post partum depression, worrying about your career, the kids college fund, whether your hubby still finds you attractive: ANYTHING is grounds for abortion. That is a long time complaint of mine, but I never saw it referenced by either side in the infamous late term ("partial birth" as pro lifers style it) federal abortion ban.
The first time I ever saw anyone else mention Doe legalizing abortion on demand at all times before delivery was today—in the plaintiffs 2000 affidavit declaring Doe v. Bolton a fraud, perpetrated without her knowledge and under significant duress. The "plaintiff" in Doe v. Bolton fled halfway across the country to escape her mother and lawyers attempt to force an abortion she never wanted. Pretty horrifying, really; so much for "a womans right to choose." The affidavit is linked below, and this time I made a point of finding sources I am reasonably sure are not some dishonest pro lifer making a specious claim; according to this CNN article: http://articles.cnn.com/2006-10-10/justice/scotus.abortion_1_jane-roe-abortion-case-norma-mccorvey?_s=PM:LAW
"Cano [AKA Mary Doe] stated in her appeal that she had never wanted an abortion in the first place, had been living in an abusive relationship, and had been forced by her attorney to fight the abortion option in court."
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
This message last edited by Joel on 10/02/2012 at 09:34:44 PM
Susan G. Komen cuts funds to Planned Parenthood. (with updated edit)
02/02/2012 04:32:27 PM
- 2209 Views
The most annoying part is in the sixth paragraph- abortions are only a small part of their thing
02/02/2012 05:08:07 PM
- 1099 Views
I agree.
02/02/2012 05:20:17 PM
- 1003 Views
Actually, there are longer-acting forms of birth control than the pill.
03/02/2012 12:37:42 AM
- 989 Views
I do think that preventing abortions is their primary goal.
03/02/2012 01:08:05 AM
- 955 Views
If they don't see that link, it's because they haven't looked.
03/02/2012 02:42:42 AM
- 1039 Views
That is a little unfair.
03/02/2012 12:48:46 PM
- 1250 Views
Won't someone please think of the children?!
04/02/2012 05:03:27 AM
- 1034 Views
I think you're leaving out some important points.
04/02/2012 03:40:48 PM
- 979 Views
Ah, the good ol' silent majority.
04/02/2012 07:32:29 PM
- 955 Views
So which moron is feeding you this crap?
04/02/2012 10:27:15 PM
- 973 Views
It worries me when we think alike....
05/02/2012 01:22:35 PM
- 1013 Views
Brain waves at 8 weeks are a myth.
05/02/2012 08:46:06 PM
- 1115 Views
"brain function... appears to be reliably present in the fetus at about eight weeks' gestation."
05/02/2012 10:42:35 PM
- 1028 Views
Oh please.
05/02/2012 11:13:50 PM
- 997 Views
Re: Oh please yourself.
06/02/2012 09:15:26 PM
- 869 Views
Quite a telling reply.
07/02/2012 04:38:20 AM
- 936 Views
Re: I quite agree.
08/02/2012 06:03:23 PM
- 1141 Views
You're taking an issue of objective facts and treating it like a day of playground gossip.
09/02/2012 03:47:06 AM
- 976 Views
No, your source, in which there is very little that is objective, did that for me.
11/02/2012 02:59:45 AM
- 998 Views
I see you have continued to provide no factual arguments.
14/02/2012 04:53:28 AM
- 1240 Views
I presented factual rebuttals.
19/02/2012 01:56:45 AM
- 1031 Views
You continue to miss the point.
23/02/2012 10:22:24 PM
- 1120 Views
No, I got the point: You expect me to accept a heavily biased, partisan and combative "source."
07/03/2012 01:47:37 AM
- 1039 Views
The claim of brain waves at 8 weeks is still unsupported by evidence, i.e. a myth.
15/03/2012 09:16:14 PM
- 1078 Views
Well, yes.
04/02/2012 11:14:47 PM
- 1041 Views
A silent majority may as well not exist, if it has no tangible effects.
05/02/2012 12:54:34 AM
- 982 Views
You ignoring it is not the same thing as it having no tangible effect.
05/02/2012 02:11:36 AM
- 1077 Views
Since few people oppose ADULT contraception access, that might be wise in this case.
04/02/2012 08:25:49 PM
- 1071 Views
Re: Since few people oppose ADULT contraception access, that might be wise in this case.
05/02/2012 02:11:28 AM
- 973 Views
If you are arguing most sex ed opponents are naïve/ignorant, I agree.
05/02/2012 08:42:17 AM
- 815 Views
Re: If you are arguing most sex ed opponents are naïve/ignorant, I agree.
05/02/2012 10:04:59 PM
- 982 Views
Re: If you are arguing most sex ed opponents are naïve/ignorant, I agree.
06/02/2012 08:57:38 PM
- 955 Views
I'm done discussing my use of the term "oppression." The Tim Ryan stuff is interesting, though.
07/02/2012 05:37:05 AM
- 1056 Views
Yet, regrettably, not done misusing it.
08/02/2012 06:01:32 PM
- 1152 Views
Re: Yet, regrettably, not done misusing it.
09/02/2012 05:30:58 AM
- 1017 Views
Re: Yet, regrettably, not done misusing it.
11/02/2012 02:58:00 AM
- 1045 Views
Re: Yet, regrettably, not done misusing it.
14/02/2012 04:29:08 AM
- 1109 Views
Re: Yet, regrettably, not done misusing it.
19/02/2012 01:54:30 AM
- 1028 Views
Re: Yet, regrettably, not done misusing it.
23/02/2012 10:59:32 PM
- 1325 Views
There are problems with the implants
03/02/2012 01:42:55 AM
- 1002 Views
Any form of birth control doesn't work for everyone, though.
03/02/2012 02:37:00 AM
- 1028 Views
Oh yes, I totally agree! My point is just that there are some barriers to handing out implants *NM*
03/02/2012 03:38:05 AM
- 472 Views
What on earth does that have to do with anything?
03/02/2012 01:47:42 AM
- 936 Views
I was actually kinda with you until you closed with that anathema I condemned in my response to rt.
03/02/2012 01:39:06 PM
- 964 Views
I agree that they have made Beast Cancer a cult but splitting with PP is just smart
02/02/2012 05:39:49 PM
- 1137 Views
I agree.
02/02/2012 06:00:17 PM
- 921 Views
yes she is going to have to piss off one group or the other
02/02/2012 06:12:31 PM
- 988 Views
Right
02/02/2012 06:24:14 PM
- 1037 Views
it is a judgment call and I hope her decision is based on more than my guesses
02/02/2012 06:53:50 PM
- 910 Views
Do you see a way Komen could have avoided pissing off one side?
02/02/2012 06:55:36 PM
- 985 Views
No, I don't. I don't believe I said that?
02/02/2012 07:53:50 PM
- 895 Views
You didn't; I inferred it from the way you phrased that ("if she HAS to..."). Sorry.
02/02/2012 08:06:11 PM
- 975 Views
I know I'm not always clear.
02/02/2012 08:32:47 PM
- 979 Views
Just curious...
02/02/2012 10:07:49 PM
- 959 Views
Not at all.
02/02/2012 10:24:19 PM
- 1028 Views
Not at all?
02/02/2012 10:32:31 PM
- 919 Views
No.
02/02/2012 10:47:04 PM
- 873 Views
My argument is based on my belief that the pro-choice women are more dedicated to women's causes
02/02/2012 11:17:24 PM
- 972 Views
Re: My argument is based on my belief that the pro-choice women are more dedicated to women's causes
03/02/2012 12:08:01 AM
- 970 Views
wow that may be the worst advice I had in weeks
03/02/2012 12:13:18 AM
- 937 Views
Ooor, the best.
03/02/2012 12:25:56 AM
- 912 Views
ok now you are just being mean *NM*
03/02/2012 12:46:12 AM
- 592 Views
The thread was going too well - I thought we needed the meanness. *NM*
03/02/2012 11:30:39 AM
- 541 Views
Never having heard of any of those except PP, my opinion may not be the most relevant...
02/02/2012 08:32:48 PM
- 1041 Views
You don't know stuff.
02/02/2012 08:43:38 PM
- 1006 Views
I know the stuff that matters.
02/02/2012 09:55:08 PM
- 912 Views
they may also be a afraid that PP will go the way of ACORN
02/02/2012 11:04:16 PM
- 1053 Views
"Accused" of = unfounded slander.
03/02/2012 12:13:30 AM
- 1067 Views
did you notice I called tactic disgusting? That doesn't mean it isn't effective
03/02/2012 12:45:10 AM
- 996 Views
The investigation by Congress is well-known to be specious. It's the House GOP abusing their power. *NM*
03/02/2012 12:41:58 AM
- 649 Views
This is so foreign a debate for me
02/02/2012 10:16:15 PM
- 1024 Views
Re: stuff
03/02/2012 09:18:53 AM
- 922 Views
I'm sorry, but what're we talking about when we're talking about "cancer"
03/02/2012 12:49:34 PM
- 955 Views
Obviously not adenocarcinoma, no.
04/02/2012 07:36:06 AM
- 969 Views
I"m not that fussed. I'm just generally leary of research that has results like that
04/02/2012 08:35:04 PM
- 915 Views
Once I looked up Nancy Brinker at Wikipedia it all made sense.
02/02/2012 10:54:34 PM
- 1003 Views
Re: Once I looked up Nancy Brinker at Wikipedia it all made sense.
02/02/2012 11:03:32 PM
- 932 Views
After a little more digging I have to say you are probably right.
03/02/2012 02:23:14 AM
- 867 Views
They restored funding incidentally
03/02/2012 05:43:47 PM
- 908 Views
Unless I've missed it
03/02/2012 05:56:15 PM
- 991 Views
You must have missed it then
03/02/2012 07:07:13 PM
- 907 Views
If you're referring to Cannoli
03/02/2012 07:19:25 PM
- 1061 Views
Multiple was not an accidental choice of words
03/02/2012 11:46:30 PM
- 938 Views
Then I agree that maybe this is not the thread for you.
04/02/2012 12:41:42 AM
- 974 Views
Re: Then I agree that maybe this is not the thread for you.
04/02/2012 01:53:25 AM
- 1162 Views
well at least there will not be any doubt about this being a political decision
03/02/2012 06:24:14 PM
- 1101 Views
Re: well at least there will not be any doubt about this being a political decision
03/02/2012 06:29:34 PM
- 883 Views
I do wonder a bit which lawmakers Fox thinks "pressured" Komen.
03/02/2012 08:29:50 PM
- 906 Views
Beyond the 26 senators, I'd imagine rumor of the more reliable sort
03/02/2012 08:46:31 PM
- 971 Views
Well, if they wrote AS senators rather than friends of Nancy Brinker, that probably qualifies.
03/02/2012 10:24:11 PM
- 1025 Views
Judge for yourself
04/02/2012 12:01:06 AM
- 1036 Views
Well, a public letter makes whether they signed it "Sen. so-and-so" irrelevant: It is political.
04/02/2012 04:07:20 PM
- 957 Views
are you trying to disprove the study you posted?
03/02/2012 09:20:12 PM
- 1034 Views
To me, it depends on the nature of the contact, which I have not dug enough to discover.
03/02/2012 10:43:45 PM
- 935 Views
you admit you have no incite into what happened
04/02/2012 04:27:17 AM
- 957 Views
Actually, it looks like Komens new VP (and former GOP GA gubernatorial candidate) had the incite.
04/02/2012 04:24:14 PM
- 1008 Views
educated guess don't work when you are tinfoil hat wearing kool-aid drinker
04/02/2012 09:33:49 PM
- 907 Views