Cheat Sheet
The Best In Brief
Palin Addresses Abortion Foes
Sarah Palin said Friday that if policymakers allow abortion rights, "perhaps the same mind-set applies to other persons," warning that the government might end health care for elderly patients or special-needs children. Palin's message came in Wisconsin where she was the star speaker at a pro-life fundraising event. Attendees were offered a chance to donate $1,000 in exchange for an autographed copy of the former vice presidential candidate's forthcoming memoir. Palin said, “It is so bogus that society is sending a message right now and has been for probably the last 40 years that a woman isn’t strong enough or smart enough to be able to pursue an education, a career and her rights and still let her baby live.”
Partner Sites: Expedia| Hotels| Hotwire| Urbanspoon| Vimeo
lets remember what the legal debate is about...this is a direct quote from Roe V Wade ....
"Only when the life of the pregnant mother herself is at stake, balanced against the life she carries within her, should the interest of the embryo or fetus not prevail."
read it at ....
http://www.tourolaw.edu/Patch/Roe/#rop
states have the right and obligation to protect prenatal life and minimize abortions. this can be done through education and offering help to women who wish to bring their pregancies to term.
That was very artfully taken out of context. Justice Blackmun was presenting the arguments of the defendants in the case in order to explicitly state that these views had been considered.
Here's the full quote:
"The third reason is the State's interest -- some phrase it in terms of duty -- in protecting prenatal life. Some of the argument for this justification rests on the theory that a new human life is present from the moment of conception. [Footnote 45] The State's interest and general obligation to protect life then extends, it is argued, to prenatal life. Only when the life of the pregnant mother herself is at stake, balanced against the life she carries within her, should the interest of the embryo or fetus not prevail. Logically, of course, a legitimate state interest in this area need not stand or fall on acceptance of the belief that life begins at conception or at some other point prior to live birth. In assessing the State's interest, recognition may be given to the less rigid claim that as long as at least potential life is involved, the State may assert interests beyond the protection of the pregnant woman alone.
Earlier in the opinion, Blackmun states the following, which is much more clearly problematic to your position:
"3. State criminal abortion laws, like those involved here, that except from criminality only a life-saving procedure on the mother's behalf without regard to the stage of her pregnancy and other interests involved violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which protects against state action the right to privacy, including a woman's qualified right to terminate her pregnancy. Though the State cannot override that right, it has legitimate interests in protecting both the pregnant woman's health and the potentiality of human life, each of which interests grows and reaches a "compelling" point at various stages of the woman's approach to term. Pp. 410 U. S. 147-164.
Very convenient of you to leave out the part that the person who originally sued for her right to have an abortion is now Pro-Life, stating that having an abortion was the biggest mistake she ever made. She also says she was manipulated and used by her own legal counsel to futher their own agenda.
Educate yourself. You state only the parts that further your cause and leave GAPING HOLES in the whole story.
Did you want me to post the entire opinion, Elizabeth?
With regard to my education, I'll pit mine against yours anytime you're ready.
Yes, Norma McCorvey has recanted. She also never had the abortion for which she fought so hard. She has at various points tried on lesbianism, evangelical christianity and now catholicism. She's been arrested multiple times. She supported Ron Paul for president. In short, she is completely unstable.
Who would have thought that being at the center of one of the most contentious debates in American history could be deleterious to a person's emotional health?
I believe the whole point of Pro Choice is that each woman who faces this dilemma has a CHOICE. If you find yourself unexpectedly pregnant and for whatever reason want the pregnancy to continue, then you most certainly should do so. Conversely if you don't want the pregnancy to continue, then you most certainly should be allowed a legal abortion. This is a privacy issue, a medical issue, a religious issue -- what it should not be is a political issue.
It is very disturbing to me that all the Pro Life people protest like crazy to the point of killing doctors that are legally providing abortions but once the child is born, they disappear into thin air. These are the very same people that try to vote down social programs to help children rise out of poverty, to help children born with drug addiction, to help children born who are created out of rape. What happens to their beliefs about how sacred life is? Then they are crying how government should stay out of their lives, not raise their taxes, no social programs. They speak out of both sides of their mouths and neither side is very attractive.
Never make abortion illegal again; that would be the worse thing. Palin's argument is created out of her desire to stay in the public eye; she doesn't give a damn about your children or mine. She doesn't even give a damn about her own children and she should stop telling me what to do when she can't keep her own house in order.
Pinko lefty, who the hell do you think you are to Judge Norma McCorvey, she is unstable, because you say so? people like you judge her because she doesn't agree with your philosophy. How does it feel to be judged?.
hfb1053: These are the same conservatives that vote against health care reform, even though 45,000 uninsured Americans die each year as they can't afford life-saving medical treatment.
Where are conservatives when these people need help?
And the Johns Hopkins Children's Center recently published a study showing that the lack of health care has led to 17,000 US child deaths over the last 20 years. So much for compassionate conservatism...
While I'm loath to go up against such a formidable adversary as you, diamondgirl, I'll give it my best shot.
"Pinko lefty, who the hell do you think you are to Judge Norma McCorvey, she is unstable, because you say so?"
No, diamondgirl, she's not unstable because I say so. She's unstable because she's a walking, talking banana pie. She's changed her mind about the most constructive thing she ever did. She's changed her mind about her sexual orientation twice. She's changed her mind about which religion she believes in at least twice. These are not the things that a stable person does. Perhaps your definition of stability can encompass this behavior. Mine can't.
"people like you judge her because she doesn't agree with your philosophy."
Try to stay with me now, this is called logic. I would agree with you that there are some people who are like me in some ways who judge her because she doesn't agree with my philosophy. However, in my particular case I judge everyone regardless of their agreement with me. It's what rational people do. We judge the information that comes our way. To simplify it for you even further, there are some Democrats and other people on the left that I can't stand. The fact that I haven't seen fit to call them out here should not be construed as blanket approval for all things considered liberal.
"How does it feel to be judged?."
You tell me. I'm doing it to you right now. By the way, do any of the following judgments sound familiar?
"Anyone who is pro abortion has no respect for human life..."
"No way will I keep my mouth shut so you liberal creatures who have no respect for life can continue to kill babies..."
While there is a considerable wind coming from your gaping maw, it won't stop me from getting my liberal bag limit of babies.
"You're the ones that are lazy and think you're entitled to have an abortion rather than be responsible. Sick people"
"To kill a baby because you opened your legs is irresponsible..."
Opened your legs? What are you, Carrie's mom? Is touching the dirty pillows allowed?
"Rusty, dont tell me when a baby is a baby, get your facts straight. There would be nothing to abort if there was no baby in the first place."
Really? I just had a walnut. Does that mean that I just ate a tree?
"oak, you are a narrow minded person, who thinks people should think like you, otherwise they are backed in a corner. I think what I want, & how I want, and it doesnt matter to me one little bit how you feel about it... Sorry you have limited mental capacity, so you cant expand your views, like those with a brain can."
Apparently you don't care how people feel about your punctuation either. Tell you what, how about you me and oaklynne get together. I'll give you both the same copy of an old GRE exam and you can have all the time you want to finish it and oaklynne has to stop when you do. I'd bet my entire life savings that oaklynne at least doubles your score. I wouldn't trade one oaklynne for ten of you even if I had ten gagballs on hand for which I had no other use.
@ElizabethInDallas: Norma McCorvey (Jane Roe) is only a "hero" to the anti-choice movement when she's willing to keep her lesbianism out of sight.
NMcC is permanently peeved that the pro-choice world hasn't handed her a living for being Jane Roe. Keep in mind that the attorneys did all the work. I'd say all she did was get pregnant and then lend her name to the case -- but in fact, she DIDN'T lend her name to the case, choosing to file anonymously as "Jane Roe." She also DIDN'T have an abortion; instead, she bore a daughter, her third child, at the age of 21. Get your facts straight. So far as I know, McCorvey has never had an abortion.
The anti-choice movement is happy to pay her bills, but not so happy about her orientation, which they keep expecting her to hide, even pushing her to proclaim she'd given up being lesbian in the mid-1990s (ha! at that point, she'd been with the same partner for over 20 years.). The pro-choice movement never has asked or expected her to deny herself and her partner the basic dignity of being who they are.
If you care about Norma McCorvey, here she is in her own words:
http://www.nytimes.com/1994/07/28/garden/at-home-with-norma-mccorvey-of- roe-dreams-and-choices.html
Why don't those of you on the anti-abortion side try to conduct a little thought experiment?
Specifically, what would "winning" look like for you?
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that you're not going to stop anyone who really wants an abortion. Technology has passed you by. RU-486 is available in many countries worldwide. How long do you think it would take for an extensive black market to develop here in the U.S.?
My guess is that within a year you will have a situation where illegal RU-486 is available to almost anyone who wants it. Nearly every young woman will know someone who knows someone who can get them what they want.
The logistics of supply are trivial. Set up a storefront operation, say in a place like Liberia where the public officials are for sale, and order a ton of pills. When the supply arrives the pills get repackaged and loaded into a ship bound for Jacksonville or Miami where they could then be distributed via pre-existing organized criminal networks. Better yet, you could increase profits by simply murdering doctors and pharmacists to take their on-hand supply.
An abortion performed in the U.S. in 2001 cost an average of about $280. An RU-486 abortion in France cost $235 when combined with two doctor visits. Eliminate the doctor visits and the cost of the drug alone would drop dramatically. Factoring in pharmaceutical pricing differences in the third world and it might be possible to get a dose of RU-486 into the U.S. for less than $100.
You won't have solved anything. You will have, once again, legislated a whole new class of criminals into existence. Not only will existing outlaw elements participate, but an entirely new breed of crusader drug dealers might arise. The remaining stigma of approaching medical professionals regarding the decision to abort would no longer be an issue. You will, in the end, have created a situation where abortion is actually easier and, most probably, even cheaper and more common than it is today. It will certainly be more dangerous. Let's not forget that your precious tax dollars would finally be involved in providing abortions due to the cost of incarcerating any convicted participants.
You victory will be reduced to a moral one at best, and your morality is based in a set of beliefs that are firmly held by a rapidly decreasing number of your fellow Americans. It's incredible to me how Republicans and other right wingers pay lip service to privacy and freedom, but still consider the relationships of other people and the goings on inside the uteri of women they don't even know to be inherently their business.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
You lack Sarah's penetrating insight that anyone who permits abortion is a Nazi who will parade people in front of Death Panels and murder the weak.
Does that mean the Government will be stopping women's right to choose? See Progressive 2's comment below. Then tell us what you want us to support, cause we're starting the parade soon, and you'll be at the front.
Dems voted for the greatest abortion restrictions in 40 years last night and that had nothing to do with Sarah Palin...or did it? They wanted their government take over of health care so bad that they were willing to agree to almost anything. Pro-life people yesterday won a very big victory. Pro-choice public option folks better start knitting those booties.
The vote was 176 Republicans and 64 Democrats to pass the amendment. Hardly the Dems doing.
Anyone who is pro abortion has no respect for human life, no matter what stage it be in...There is little to no excuse for anyone today to get an abortion, there are plenty of inexpensive ways to prevent pregnancy available to women. Number one keep your legs closed, is the most important thing, No.2 men don't expect, guilt, insist on any women to have sex with you if either one of you has no protection. This will cut down on the amount of unwanted pregnancies not to mention AIDS, and diseases
Keep your legs closed.
Simple, precise, so easy to do. That's why it has never been accomplished in any society in the history of the world.
Hey, I know... let's just kill all those who want abortion rights! After all, why respect their lives if they don't respect a fetus's? And while we're at it, let's just do away with all those who don't think like the jeweled one here... sound good?
Zirconium Girl: The biggest problem it that is that it ensures more morons like you.
While you're keeping your legs and mind shut, would you please do the same with your mouth?
speagle& jay, No way will I keep my mouth shut so you liberal creatures who have no respect for life can continue to kill babies...
I guess you're diamondgirl cause you waited for the diamond, right? Your mind is closed along with your legs. Birth control fails, I know. Been there, done that. Twice. Once with an IUD, once on the pill. I was fortunate to be able to deal with having children, being married and having support. Many women are not in as a flexible situation as I was.
Saying people shouldn't have sex shows your lack of knowledge and acknowledgement about the human being a sexual animal and having sex is a normal part of life. Only in America is the Victorian age still prevalent.
As far as birth control, why aren't you out there fighting for birth control to be available, affordable and taught? Most of those who are anti choice are also anti knowledge. They want to block funds for Planned Parenthood and other organizations who want to help sexually active teens and adults to plan for pregnancy or to prevent them. Instead we have abstinence only education advocates screaming if teens are taught how to avoid pregnancy. What a bunch of hypocrites you are. You don't want to force insurance companies to provide coverage for birth control while they have no problem covering Viagra. You want to tell everyone how they should live their lives at the same time you scream for less government and more rights while you seek to take away the rights of every child bearing age female. You should be forced to wear a large H for hypocrite.
Do you really believe that you can intimidate anyone with your assertion that people are pro abortion, diamond girl, if so, you are sadly mistaken, and your immature attitude is not suited to lecture anyone.
jeweled one...
I don't want you to shut up... not at all. I believe any and everyone is entitled to their opinions, however sad and inane. Speak it LOUD, sister!
Oh... and I'm not a "liberal." Well... more liberal than you, but most humans are.
"Anyone who is pro abortion has no respect for human life" - including the mother's life??? How about someone who was raped? How about the Abortion doctor that was murdered - where was the respect that human life? Zirc, your blather is equal parts offensive and ignorant.
Just so you folks know, I have had plenty of experience with this situation, I used to work in a hospital before abortions were legal, I was in charge of making sure these women got their abortions by presenting them to the board of Doctors the documents that proved the mother's life was in danger. It was at a clinic, MIC unit, Free for those who had little money, more women than not would get an abortion like you change your underwear. It made me sick, and the head of the program started to monitor these repeat women, and recommend sterilization, because they had no way to pay or desire to have these babies. Abortions should not to be taken lightly, I have full knowledge of what it's like to have children, I filled them all in about sex, been there done that. Put them on the pill people, how hard is that, they give them out at clinics, colleges, family physicians.. Our schools taught birth control, I think that's great so the rich and poor got the same education and have no problems getting the pill all they have to do is ask the school nurse, for any form of birth control, they gave out condoms in high school, and instructed the kids as to where to go to be helped.
Now if you're a grown up there are county clinics and they will give out birth control like they did for the H1N1 flu shot and it's all free. How stupid are you people that I have to tell you what's available out there. You all act like none of this is available to people, who are you kidding, where do you live, Bumbleland? So you think it's easier to kill a baby rather than take the time to get protection. You're the ones that are lazy and think you're entitled to have an abortion rather than be responsible. Sick people
zirc, quit hurling your insults. Do you think you're the only person who knows about birth control? Or worked in a hospital, or cared for a pregnant woman? We don't need you lecturing us about our personal rights and responsibilities. Some of your right wing conservative anti-choice friends don't believe in birth control; some consider morning after pills a form of "baby killing" and sometimes condoms break. How does that square with your tidy little personal value system? Life throws things at us, and if a woman (or girl) feels she cannot handle becoming a mother, or it endangers her life, or she has no support system, then it's HER choice - and no one -- not you or anyone - can prevent her. It's the law. You want to overturn Roe v Wade? Good luck, I'll fight you tooth and nail as will millions of other Americans who believe in a woman's right to choose.
diamondgirl,
When every Pro-Lifer adopts 10 unwanted babies each -- of ALL colors, we'll be able to do away with abortions. Furthermore, no one is pro-abortion. Get adopting, or shut your mouth.
Oak, I have no problem with the morning after pill, I have no problem if the life of the mother is at risk, or rape,insest. And I do believe in the right to choose, what I have a problem with is that you all are not considering the Babies at all, otherwise there wouldn't be so many abortions, and way too many people use it as a form of birth control. Give the babies up for adoption, there is a shortage, so many people would love to have these babies and give the great lives....
zirc, trying to shift the argument now that you're backed into a corner won't work. YOU'RE the one who said that anyone who supports abortion rights "has no respect for human life" - yet here you are now declaring that abortion is OK for women who have been raped, or are victims of incest, or whose life is at risk. As for your assertion that women are using abortion as a form of birth control, there's no proof to support it. NONE. As for adoption, I don't see you conservatives rushing out to adopt unwanted babies. All that smug moralistic posturing is hypocritical, zirc.
Palin...you gotta step out of the dark ages and into reality.
You are just sooooo pathetic. You can not believe that a woman in her right mind would listen to your bullsh*t.
Hey Concerned,This isn't really about Palin, she is just continuing a very old conversation on Abortion and what it means. To most Americans it means killing a baby not matter what stage it's in. You may not agree with it but that not going to change the facts. Many years ago, if people wanted to get an abortion they paid for it themselves. Why should I have to pay for someone who was not responsible for their behavior? There are plenty of free clinics to get anything necessary to prevent pregnancies, go get some if you are planning on having sex. To kill a baby because you opened your legs is irresponsible and should not be used as a form of birth control.
You base your theory on the point that only the females too silly and uneducated are thoughtless enough to get in a jam and require a quick way out. This may be true in some cases. Yet the women I know who have had an abortion where not. One was going under chemo, one had the birh control fail while taking a drug that caused a birth defect that would have left the newborn to quickly die as soon as the cord was cut, and the other had a set of Siamese twins that shared a heart, one lung and no airway. In all cases the married parents wanted to have children and the woman with chemo already had 4. This is not a black and white issue. The grey of what is right for one woman is not the answer for another.
diamondgirl, please get you terms straight. It's not a 'baby' until it's BORN. Blastocyst > fetus > BORN > baby. Got it?
diamondgirl - you're correct, this isn't really about Palin. She's just the newest, loudest, getting the most attention person who spreads the message of the pro-lifers.
I know your views but I'm not going to wish you dead or threaten you or actually kill you as some of the pro-lifers have done. It is so two-faced of the pro-lifers to say that life begins at conception and is sacred and then to actually kill legal abortion providers and to wish death on the people that support choice.
If you want 20 dozen children and you can afford them, more power to you. Are you out there speaking about providing safe birth control, safe places for children of incest and rape, homes for unwanted children, etc., or are you just beating your gums about the sanctity of life while doing nothing else. If you're truly proactive in your beliefs, I applaud you but I still demand my rights also be respected should I choose to terminate a pregnancy. You just can't ram your right-wing beliefs down the throats of others and expect them to be OK with it.
Rusty, dont tell me when a baby is a baby, get your facts straight. There would be nothing to abort if there was no baby in the first place.
Actually it is about Palin, if you bothered to read the DB article. Your last sentence is offensive and stupid.
...or yours, for that matter.
zirconium Girl;
"Many years ago, if people wanted to get an abortion they paid for it themselves. "
You very ignorant hick; many years ago (1973) abortions were ILLEGAL. People who sought/provided abortions were put in prisons.
wait wait aren't republicans for LESS government control on people ? Where's the personal responsibility thing?
Oh right Hypocrites, guess it only applies to corporations.
Are there any "real conservatives" out there?
Obviously people like zirconiagirl can't see the irony of advocating for government control over women's reproductive lives while slavishly following ranting lunatics like Palin and Bachmann who claim they want no government interference with their lives.
Want to know the real agenda of the far right? Look at what they accuse progressives of wanting to do. How many people die daily for lack of health care, yet who vigorously opposes health care? Who would gut every social program, leaving untold numbers of vulnerable fellow citizens to fend for themselves, in order to save a few of their precious tax dollars? Their smoke screen? The Constitution. No, ladies and gentlemen, the real party of death is the GOP which is increasingly under the control of right wingers.
If women don't have a total right to abortion,the only people that will suffer are the poor ones-as usual.
daniel76
daniel,The rich and the poor need to keep their legs closed if they are not ready to have a baby,and men need to respect and understand that if neither one has any protection available.
too bad your parents didn't heed your fine advice, zirc.
oak, I can only wish the same of yours!
oak, you are a narrow minded person, who thinks people should think like you, otherwise they are backed in a corner. I think what I want, & how I want, and it doesnt matter to me one little bit how you feel about it... Sorry you have limited mental capacity, so you cant expand your views, like those with a brain can.
zirc, yes it's obvious that you don't care how anyone feels about what you write, or you would stopped writing your idiotic blather a long time ago. My feelings aren't hurt - your comments just prove that you are a thin-skinned conservative hypocrite
Because they're too poor to buy a freakin' condom? Puh-leez. Their poor because no one wants to hire someone with such an irresponsible attitude.
People that are responsible in the first place don't have unprotected sex, and wouldn't necessitate the need for nearly as many "omigod, I'm pregnant" incidents. Then, when they DID get pregnant they would have the child and give it up for adoption, rather than worrying that it might give them stretch marks or mess up their pathetic social life for a while.
Having an abortion is the ULTIMATE selfish act. It is the hallmark of a pathologically self-centered baby that hasn't grown up themselves.
oops..typo -- they're. lol...
You know nothing of what you speak. You have no clue. You wear blinders and elevate yourself above others. You put yourself above others and it shows in what you post. Be careful. You have a long way to fall.
I respectfully disagree. I think abortion should obviously be a last resort option. But I don't think it means if a person has one they are committing the ULTIMATE act of selfishness. My younger sister has had to have an abortion because of not taking her birth control properly. We were raised in a family where sex was not something you did until after you were married so nobody ever took the time to train either of us about safe sex. She is not in a postition where she can financially afford bringing a child into this world. The man she was dating when this happened was not a man who would stick through and help her with the child (though he certainly could stick her with the child). So presented with the options of carrying this baby to term and not being able to give the child what it needs as well as facing the public shame that goes with having a child out of wedlock in our Mississippi community, she had an early term abortion. She made the grown up decision. To have the child and give it up for adoption while it is a valid option was not the option she thought best for her or the child she could have brought into this world and I don't think her decision was selfish or immoral.
Elizabeth - You sound as tho you talk directly to your god and she's told you to insult everyone who doesn't agree with you and then everything will work out the way you want. Have another drink, smoke another joint, bang your head on another wall, but don't suppose that people have abortions to avoid stretch marks. When you say such stupid things, it only shows others how stupid you are, not how stupid you think they are.
Are you a doctor; how do you know abortion is the hallmark of a pathologically self-centered baby.....? I think you may need to see a doctor yourself; your brain seems pretty scrambled to me to make such a universally scathing remark regarding every woman that's ever had an abortion. Scary.
Yes Sarah, that's exactly the message that you are proving. That some women are not strong enough to get an education, a career and still let their babies live. Since you haven't drowned any of your 4 children yet, I guess you are either uneducated or unemployed!
What an idiot. Pro-choice means exactly that. Giving OTHER women the same CHOICE you had in either getting an abortion if you are unable to be a good parent or going ahead and carrying your pregnancy to term. What part of freedom of choice do you not understand? I thought you were the party of freedoms and taking government out of family decisions? What a hypocrite.
This is the party who believes in the "freedom" to buy guns to shoot other human-beings and animals as well as the "freedom" to kill prisoners.
Additionally, I can't believe this this the same person that shoots down innocent LIVE animals from a plane. A coward AND a hypocrite.
crybaby-this topic is about abortion, killing babies. Your pro choice description is not the only freedom of choice a women can make, the most important thing here is everyone has the freedom of choice to get protection, and if not you also have the freedom of choice to not have sex unprotected... Result less dead babies
What??? You're contradicting yourself. Abortion is 100% selfish and hateful. She said her statement with sarcasm.. DUH.... Pro-choice means pro-selfish, pro-pathologically-self-centered and pro-idiot. Freedom to do what you want does NOT mean freedom from consequences. Abortion is an attempt to not pay for the consequences of your actions. Promiscuous unprotected sex is also incredibly self-centered.
The epidemic of abortions would be nonexistent if people weren't so selfish that all that mattered to them was getting their freak on without springing $.50 for a condom. Oh that's right, they don't feel as good. You can just get an abortion later if you get knocked up. FOR CRYIN' OUT LOUD!!! That's disgusting!!!
Very well said.
So bogus, dude.
palin, it is not about "a woman isn't strong enough or smart enough...", it is about careful development of the most precious asset humankind has, children. but, instead, the boomer gens went for the mammon; they bought the line of mass production--economy of scale--as the way to raise children. time, not argument, will tell the better way.
Honey, you need to look at current US demographics. You think you're affecting the "careful development"?? Our own country is soon to be overrun by immigrant groups that have many more children than we do. Your right to have an abortion will soon be voted down (within 2 generations max) by the other groups coming into the US, because they will soon outnumber you in sheer numbers. They don't believe in abortion either.
...And people believe in evolution?? Democrats are proof positive in reverse-evolution. MYOPIC to a pathological degree. There is a universal law of right and wrong. Most people know this in their hearts. Your conscience is so seared that you have drowned out the inner voice that was designed to guide you.
Sarah, use your tiny little intellect to get your hands around this: Will you or any of your party members support any social programs for all the thousands of children who are born into poverty?? Support school??? Housing???etc. NO! you won't will you? Well, then get the stay out of my business!
OMG... they might not have Wii's or have silver spoons in their hands!! Poverty is a separate issue that can be solved ethically. Do you think poor people don't have a right to live? A poor mother that loves others enough to go ahead and have her child can give it up for adoption. You are so selfish and hateful.. and judgemental. Your argument states that having money is more important than anything. Pull your head out of your a$$.
Your the one with her head in her ass and your ass is what we are seeing on these posts.
this always shocks me. i think if a woman has a abortion see should be sterilized. if you are so irresponsible that you cant have protected sex and need a abortion you need not ever have to worry about it again, Killing for a good time is unbelievable and needs to be a crime
I think people like Demsdisorder are the ones who should be sterilized. We have fought long and hard for equal rights in this country for women, to not be under the thumbs of men AND the government and the last thing we need is more people like it trying to take a personal decision away from women. It is none of your business if a woman makes a choice she must make and it isn't the governments' business either. The fact that you want to interfere is despicable. It isn't your place. You don't have to avail yourself of the services if you don't want to but you have no right to stand in the way of others, no matter how you feel about it.
crymeariver, from my first post....you do not have a legal right to abortion on demand for any reason, let me quote directly from Roe V Wade...
"Only when the life of the pregnant mother herself is at stake, balanced against the life she carries within her, should the interest of the embryo or fetus not prevail."
read it at ....
http://www.tourolaw.edu/Patch/Roe/#rop
Excuse me, but this citation is from the argument detailing the three principal reasons posited to justify the criminalization of abortion in the 19th century. Try reading Mr. Justice Rehnquist's dissenting opinion, in which he states, "The Court's opinion decides that a State may impose virtually no restriction on the performance of abortions during the first trimester of pregnancy." In other words, even Mr. Rehnquist, who opposed the decision, acknowledged that Roe v. Wade supports the right to abortion upon demand.
It get tiresome listening to her. She always talks about family, children, etc. She knows everything! However, she is all over the country. Maybe she needs to be home with her baby more and stop telling others how to run their lives!
She might actually have to face what she has created that way! She can talk the talk but she won't walk the walk. Staying home would mean she might actually have to be a parent and not leave it to her kids to parent themselves.She is a first class idiot, and yeah, I do know her. Never liked her, even as a "sportscaster". Most irritating voice ever on the nightly news. She is an idiot.
Palin can not and will not be the voice of sanity. She would lose her power base if she did.
Used to be, "boys and girls" had to think about sex and the possibility of having a baby. Seems now, folks want to have their cake and eat it (I know, what's a cake for anyway). If total abortion rights mean that one can have sex with whomever one wants and just get rid of any excess baggage created, then I guess I'm glad my mother was from another generation since attitudes sometimes cross over from specific situations into the character of the person. I understand it's both an issue for the man and woman involved, and that some contraceptive methods are problematic. No problem with abortion for certain circumstances (e.g. rape, medical, child abuse, etc.), though the tragedy for the fetus is non the less. As far as Palin goes, I can't figure out politicians in general. Then again, with overpopulation, maybe we should all abort :-)
C'mon OldJoe, total abortion rights , to me, means that I have no say on if the woman down the street or next dor to me can have an abortion. Do I have to agree with them? No. But then nobody protested my colonoscopy , so I will leave it at that
Can't argue with that, nor would I be interested in meddling in other's affairs. All I'm saying is that people used to have to "look before they leap" and I'm not sure if not having to look first is the best strategy from many angles unless one's purely narcissistic regarding the pursuit of pleasure, which is, again, a personal choice. And again, having to "look before you leap" is a personal choice also, so perhaps my total ambivalence on most anything is showing. To go beyond the fringe, I wonder how all these aborted beings would be transmigrating, if such be how "things work" beyond the mundane.
Your colon does not have a soul. Your colon is not a seperate entity. I would not protest your colonoscopy because you're not killing something... you're preserving something. Use an intelligent argument.
ElizabethInDallas: Nothing in you is a separate entity until it's, well, separate; i.e., born.
Rusty, if that was true, why would you need an abortion if there wasn't a living,beating heart inside the women?
diamondgirl asks "why would you need an abortion if there wasn't a living,beating heart inside the women?", ostensibly a gotcha question.
The answer is, you don't. Unless, of course, carrying the fetus to term poses unreasonable risks to the woman. Additionally, many, many, pregnancies are spontaneously aborted, at different stages, in all mammals - no intervention required - sometimes without the female ever knowing she was pregnant.
Your real position is ultimately not a pragmatic but a religious one which asserts that a human soul enters the egg right when the sperm does, and that people have no authority to undo what God hath wrought. You have, of course, no non-scriptural evidence for this empirical claim, which is why women can still choose their course of action with regard to childbirth in this country.
Rusty, Let me ask you a quesiton,have you ever been pregnant? Well let me tell you from my experience, when you find out you are pregnant, it's not religion that steps in and make you feel what comes next in most cases, and it wasnt mine. One minute you have no life inside you and the next you do. Simple as that, each person will then take from that what it means to them. Happiness or Not Happy.
The life is there or you wouldnt have the emotion...See if you can grasp that for now..
People forget that Roe v. Wade appears to be about abortions but is actually a case about privacy rights. Do you want Government intrusion into your medical procedures, and if so how much? If you don't believe me, read the whole transcript, not just two or three lines of the case. Also read the case that precedes it (in privacy issues), Griswold v. Connecticut.
Bogus, eh? How long have Bill and Ted been your most excellent speech writers?
For God's sake Sarah, you were a communications major--learn to communicate effectively! "Cuz, that would be so rad, dude!
i have read the whole tanscript magoo and am aware of Griswols v Connecticut
the establishment of privacy rights does not eliminate the obligation of a state to consider prenatal life. privacy is another item on the scales of justice that must be considered.
and.. roe v wade is about abortion. saying it is about privacy is like saying the civil war was about states rights...
The Civil War was about state's rights. State's rights to import slaves.
roe v wade leaves out a very important thing, the killing of a baby, in which the baby has no free choice. The freedom of choice should not exclude anyone from using that free choice to prevent unwanted pregnancies by using protection. Abortion should not be used as a form of Birth Control. You are killing babies here, not swatting flies!
No, zirconuim: We don't want to kill all babies. Just yours.
Finally, diamondgirl, we have someone with a conscience. Bravo!
How is it that men are disproportionately pro-choice? Oh... I get it.. because so many of them are afraid of having to pay child support for getting their irresponsible freaks on.
I nearly cried when I heard a girl in an ER state she was getting an abortion because she didn't want stretch marks. I wanted to throw up.
The funny thing is diamondgirl that minors don't get actual rights until they reach the age of majority. In some states parents can send their children off to work and then claim their child's paycheck legally even though the parent did no actual work. Feeding, clothing and putting a roof over the head of a child is no right to take away the check of a hard working kid, is it?
diamondgirl: babies are, by definition, born.
blastocyst -> emryo -> fetus -> /BIRTH/ -> baby.
There are no unborn babies, it's an oxymoron. No one is killing babies, and you only work yourself into a froth by insisting that it is so.
Why does anyone listen to this woman? She should write for the SciFi channel. If she next said that abortion rights will lead to the government killing people when the crystal on their hands turns black at age 21, I wouldn't be surprised.
She's painting the abortion attitude toward the value of life (or lack thereof) to other population groups. She was illustrating how that same grandiosity could soon threaten other groups. It's valid -- over time.
People in the US watched as Germany slowly stripped rights from the Jews.. and refused to allow themselves to believe what was happening. It took Pearl Harbor for us to finally get off our self-centered asses to get involved. THEN we acted all horrified and amazed at what Nazi Germany was doing to its own citizens. That is an extreme case, but it is happening here on our own turf. Undetected, unchallenged, it has the potential to run out of control -- as did things in Nazi Germany.
Godwin
You lose!
Further, please do not advertise that you live in my beloved hometown,
it's bad enough that W is here and buying an apologist institute at SMU.
ElizabethInDallas:
For f**k's sake, now you've really jumped the shark. Any parallel between abortion and Nazis is unserious, untenable, and, frankly, unhinged. You really should drop that line of argument as it's grossly offputting to people with real moral compasses.
Seriously.
I see your point and agree. a good thing that will come from this health care is the ability and availability of medical personnel to preform abortions will be VERY slim.
when all is said and dun the government wont pay therefor the docs will not be allowed to do it for cash as it would brake there contracts. so people will need to go to doctors that do not participate in government HC and you will pay BIG for a abortion if you can find a Doc to do it. so by default abortions will drop dramatically.. remember careful what you wish for you might get it.
I love her absurdity! She makes it sooo easy to laugh at her total inability to grasp anything!!
Heard she's rather "rough" with & borders on verbal abuse of her own product of a good romp! Tisk tisk woman! You're not even a good mommy!!!
This is one chick who belongs planted in the kitchen & should leave the "politicin;" to those who know something.....those who know anything!
So you're saying that unsubstantiated gossip about her is more valid than a child's life?? You don't yell? Ever? You don't even lie well.
Flood gate of insanity.. flood gate of hate... flood gate of ignorance. You should write for the National Enquirer.
Open the flood gates of Hell, for the liberals, I say. HAHAHA
Swing them open so we can escape this conservative driven Hell !
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
SimonSaize, you sound like a second grader having a temper tantrum. Are you capable of expressing your hate-filled self without name-calling and profanity?
Witness Exhibit A for the case of human de-evolution.
The government already HAS excluded seniors. Medicare and Medicaid patients are already being denied life-saving tests "because they've already had one that year". God forbid someone do the test wrong the first time --- or read it incorrectly, as happened with a family member. They would not even allow her to pay for a second test out of her own pocket!!! How can that be legal?? How can that be ethical?? Their refusal to allow her to have the second test quite nearly cost her life, because it WAS read incorrectly the first time. We had to fight for MONTHS, even though she was showing all the classic symptoms.
Like you, I would like to think that our government can improve our lives, but the evidence is everywhere that it CANNOT. They award to the LOWEST (cheapest quality) bidder, is full of unmotivated, illiterate employees that can't get a job anywhere else, and work there so they can have a job where they can't get fired. You want THOSE people managing your health care?? If you do, you'll soon get what you deserve.
There is no one who can refuse you the right to retake a test if it is out of your pocket. Your dotor may refuse to order it, but then you need to find another doctor, because that is where the failure lies, not with Medicare. They cannot and will not stop it. If it is a test the doctor has to order than you should be seeking a second opinion, not blaming the system for a doctors failure. And btw, many hospitals are doing tests without doctors orders. A person can walk in and ask for them and self pay. You post under a different name over on WashingtonIndepentdent don't you?
aranxa people listen to her because they lover her or hate her, she is perfect for politics, watch there will be 100 posts by noon
This woman is an idiot. Plain and simple.
... and you're a shining example of human perfection???
You aren't.
Starsetsky.. your a joke
The worst disaster that could befall the Republican party would be the repeal of Roe v Wade. But Dick, his wife, Lon, and Lynn Cheney might benefit. Dick would move to corner the market on clothes hangers.
Actually, the abortion debate is not about abortion or about women's rights.
The abortion debate is not even a debate; it is a challenge to who controls the power and authority in the Nation, the people or the self-appointed religious leadership.
The abortion debate is about who makes the laws in this Country, the people via their elected representatives or the people who believe that they are chosen to interpret the Bible.
The abortion debate, at its core, is an argument about the First Amendment specifically the separation of church and state. This argument has been going on since the Nation was founded.
Any sophomore biology student knows that a fetus is not a baby. Anyone who has taken the time to learn anything about fetal development knows that a human fetus doesn't develop brain function until the beginning of the 3rd trimester. This means that a fetus is not even legally alive until then which coincidently is about the point of viability.
Anyone who has really looked at the issue knows that less than 1% of all abortions occur after the end of the 2nd trimester and then, late term abortions are done only in the direst of circumstances to the mother. Virtually all of the material put forth by anti-choice anti-abortion activists is either false or misleading.
The notion that abortion is some huge abomination on the Nation is plain and simple bullshit fabricated by a bunch of old white guys who think that they, and only they, know what God is and what God's intentions are for the rest of us.
At its core, the abortion debate is about whether this Nation is to be governed by intelligence and reason for the good of the People or is the Nation going to be governed by theology for the glorification of someone's interpretation of God which historically translates into for the good of the priests.
Hear, hear PRoche, that is exactly the issue.
You are right about the religious part of it. The argument against abortion is a religious one and therefore should have no place in what the law says. No one is forced to have an abortion. They should be a legal medical procedure for those who choose to available themselves of one. Sex education and birth control being more readily available would help to further reduce the number of abortions performed, and they fight that too.
Wow, who'd of thunk it. What I'm about to post puts some of the TDB posters whom I find most offensive in a camp close to mine.
I agree with PRoche for probably the first time ever, because religion has become part of the issue simply because some people's entire belief system stems from their religion. It's why most believe it's wrong to lie, cheat and steal, to kill, to commit adultery, etc. And much of America's laws are founded upon the Ten Commandments. But here's where we split off.
We can respect both the pro-choice and the anti-abortionists. Just like the left is always using the argument about this country being made up of people with varying beliefs because of multi-culturalism, we also have a range of beliefs from the athiests to agnostics to sorta religious to extremely religious.
In my opinion, pro-choice is acceptable as long as that choice isn't dependent upon the funding from anti-abortionists (like by using tax money to pay for an abortion) and with tight restrictions. Abortion should have very strict controls that could progress to the point of murder should a baby be aborted when it is capable of surviving outside of the womb, unless the abortion must be done to save the life of the mother. Incest and rape are also valid reasons for abortion. Simply doing it as an afterthought, in the third tri-mester, could be tantamount to murder or manslaughter. Premature babies are saved on a regular basis and can be put up for adoption.
The fact that there is so much tolerance of irresponsibility, and immorality, is what has caused us to even have this issue to address. We need to, as a society, return to instilling responsibility and morality in our young people. Avoiding and reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies should be the goal.
Whenever laws are implemented, there are always those who try to circumvent the intent of the law. Legalizing abortion was never intended to be used as a means of birth control. We watched as the radical right (particularly Catholics) fought against the use of birth control to avoid pregnancy. I think most of those beliefs have changed to accept that avoiding pregnancy is a personal issue.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.