Other Disaffected Republicans?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
268

[quote]Professor X wrote:
reddog6376 wrote:
Also in cases where the woman’s LIFE (not health, as commonly worded) is in danger, as trading one life for another is not the right thing to do. If the woman agreed to have sex, then she already made her choice, the baby’s life trumps her right to an abortion. What stage of life the baby is at should be irrelevent.

Then we definitely disagree. How would a baby’s life at birth (assuming complications) trump the mother’s simply because she had sex? Why does a woman lose any rights in that situation in your mind?
[/quote]

You misunderstood me. The baby’s life doesn’t trump the mother life. I said, “trading one life for another is not the right thing to do. If the woman agreed to have sex, then she already made her choice, the baby’s life trumps her right to an abortion.”

269

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Not a “woman’s convenience”, but the needs of the woman overtake the needs of a fetus that there is much controversy as far as being viable. Have you even considered individual cases where this would difficult to judge correctly? Do you honestly believe all abortions are done by teenagers in place of a condom? If that actually was the case, I would be shouting for a change as well…but it isn’t.
[/quote]

“…but it isn’t.” You don’t really believe that, do you??

Are you so sure? The last time I looked up abortion statistics, only 3% of abortions were due to health, incest, or rape. They may not be “teenagers”, but they are still senseless.

Who Has Abortions
52% of U.S. women obtaining abortions are younger than 25: Women aged 20?24 obtain 33% of all abortions, and teenagers obtain 19%.
Black women are more than three times as likely as white women to have an abortion, and Hispanic women are two-and-a-half times as likely.
43% of women obtaining abortions identify themselves as Protestant, and 27% identify themselves as Catholic.
Two-thirds of all abortions are among never-married women.
More than 60% of abortions are among women who have had one or more children.
On average, women give at least three reasons for choosing abortion: three-fourths say that having a baby would interfere with work, school, or other responsibilities; about two-thirds say they cannot afford a child; and half say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner.
About 13,000 women have abortions each year following rape or incest.


Only 13,000 out of 1.3 million were for rape or incest reasons!! And, what about the "health" of the mother? That statistic isn't even included because, "On average, women give at least three reasons for choosing abortion: three-fourths say that having a baby would interfere with work, school, or other responsibilities; about two-thirds say they cannot afford a child; and half say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner." HEALTH reasons isn't even COMMON.

Don't you all see the problem in this. Whoever said, "Let God sort 'em out" is allowing an injustice in this society that is nauseating. Do you really think Pro-Lifers are trying to "Judge"? Bullshit. It is a humane response to protect the innocent. There is not f'n judging going on.
270

[quote]jackzepplin wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Not a “woman’s convenience”, but the needs of the woman overtake the needs of a fetus that there is much controversy as far as being viable. Have you even considered individual cases where this would difficult to judge correctly? Do you honestly believe all abortions are done by teenagers in place of a condom? If that actually was the case, I would be shouting for a change as well…but it isn’t.

“…but it isn’t.” You don’t really believe that, do you??

Are you so sure? The last time I looked up abortion statistics, only 3% of abortions were due to health, incest, or rape. They may not be “teenagers”, but they are still senseless.

Who Has Abortions
52% of U.S. women obtaining abortions are younger than 25: Women aged 20?24 obtain 33% of all abortions, and teenagers obtain 19%.
Black women are more than three times as likely as white women to have an abortion, and Hispanic women are two-and-a-half times as likely.
43% of women obtaining abortions identify themselves as Protestant, and 27% identify themselves as Catholic.
Two-thirds of all abortions are among never-married women.
More than 60% of abortions are among women who have had one or more children.
On average, women give at least three reasons for choosing abortion: three-fourths say that having a baby would interfere with work, school, or other responsibilities; about two-thirds say they cannot afford a child; and half say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner.
About 13,000 women have abortions each year following rape or incest.


Only 13,000 out of 1.3 million were for rape or incest reasons!! And, what about the "health" of the mother? That statistic isn't even included because, "On average, women give at least three reasons for choosing abortion: three-fourths say that having a baby would interfere with work, school, or other responsibilities; about two-thirds say they cannot afford a child; and half say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner." HEALTH reasons isn't even COMMON.

Don't you all see the problem in this. Whoever said, "Let God sort 'em out" is allowing an injustice in this society that is nauseating. Do you really think Pro-Lifers are trying to "Judge"? Bullshit. It is a humane response to protect the innocent. There is not f'n judging going on.[/quote]

Problem with comprehension much?  I said ALL.  I wrote the word A   L   L and you still plowed right over that and decided to look up statistics which do nothing but show that I'm right...all abortions are NOT because of teenagers so no law thrown out dictating how all women can deal with their own bodies should be accepted.
271

[quote]reddog6376 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Damici wrote:
Reddog, EVERYTHING you just said illustrates my whole freaking point. YOU feel that way about the issue. YOU feel that it’s the same as killing people in mental hospitals. YOU think it’s terminating a life. YOU think that life begins at conception. I – yes me – might even agree with you. But AT LEAST FIFTY-ONE PERCENT OF THE FREAKING POPULATION DOESN’T!! Therefore: NO LAW OUTLAWING IT!!

If 90-something percent, or maybe even 80 percent, of the population agreed with you, that would be one thing. But they don’t. As a matter of fact, more people in this country DISagree with you than agree with you. Therefore, it is not your right, or anyone else’s, to force YOUR view of things down everyone else’s throats. (And I essentially agree with your thinking on the heart of the issue)!

The massive PROBLEM that this staunch “let’s-outlaw-abortion” stance creates, as I mentioned, is that it prevents the BEST, MOST CAPABLE people, who could very ably deal with the REALLY IMPORTANT issues facing the nation (national security, war, terrorism, economy, dependence on oil, etc.) from being allowed to govern. And I’m SO fucking sick of it!!!

LET – GOD – SORT – THEM – OUT. IT’S – NOT – YOUR – LIFE/ISSUE/PROBLEM.

I agree completely. This world isn’t fopr us to force everyone to be Christians and act like one. Most Christians don’t even act like one.

It is always the right time to do the right thing. If you saw somebody killing an innocent person, isn’t it your responsibility to stop it? Popular opinion be damned?
[/quote]

A.) It’s YOUR opinion that it’s the “right” thing.
B.) It’s YOUR opinion that it’s a life (i.e. that life begins at conception).
C.) Someone could be acting PERFECTLY responsibly, i.e. a married woman and her husband could be having sex, using the pill AND condoms, and the 1/1000 of a percentage chance of a pregnancy in that case becomes a reality. No one was acting “irresponsibly” there. But they’re not able to/willing to/capable of raising a child at that point in their lives, for whatever reason. (AND they don’t believe that an early stage pregnancy is a life, as you do). These aren’t mindless 16-year-old sluts.

GET – OFF – EVERYONE --ELSE’S --BACKS. YOU – ARE – ARRESTING – THE DEVELOPMENT – OF – ALMOST – EVERY --OTHER – ASPECT – OF – NATIONAL – POLICY – WITH – THIS – DO-GOODER – “I KNOW BETTER THAN YOU” – FETISH.

LET – GOD – SORT – THEM – OUT.

It really has become a fetish for some people, this anti-abortion zealotry. People (already-BORN people) are being slaughtered by the thousands in Darfur, yet I don’t hear you CLAMORING to make that issue (i.e. wanting to immediately go over there and put a stop to it) THE litmus test for any politician wanting to assume public office. Why did you choose THIS issue, then, if you’re SOOOOOO concerned about human life? That example alone makes me question the idea of those on your side of this debate being any more “morally upstanding” than anyone else. You’re not. You just believe you’re on some mission from God, and it’s actually RUINING much of this country, as we now have Bozo the Clown nominated by our party, now running things and ruining the world, instead of someone intellectually active and capable of governing, like a Giuliani or a McCain.

Gee, thanks for that.

272

Well, this coming from the same guy that says the dems aren’t putting enough out on the table in terms of ideas.

I wonder why.

I really wish you’d stop playing both sides of the issue depending on the argument.

Most of us are here to discuss things and so on, you are here to win a fucking argument. Grow up.

273

[quote]jackzepplin wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Not a “woman’s convenience”, but the needs of the woman overtake the needs of a fetus that there is much controversy as far as being viable. Have you even considered individual cases where this would difficult to judge correctly? Do you honestly believe all abortions are done by teenagers in place of a condom? If that actually was the case, I would be shouting for a change as well…but it isn’t.

“…but it isn’t.” You don’t really believe that, do you??

Are you so sure? The last time I looked up abortion statistics, only 3% of abortions were due to health, incest, or rape. They may not be “teenagers”, but they are still senseless.

Who Has Abortions
52% of U.S. women obtaining abortions are younger than 25: Women aged 20?24 obtain 33% of all abortions, and teenagers obtain 19%.
Black women are more than three times as likely as white women to have an abortion, and Hispanic women are two-and-a-half times as likely.
43% of women obtaining abortions identify themselves as Protestant, and 27% identify themselves as Catholic.
Two-thirds of all abortions are among never-married women.
More than 60% of abortions are among women who have had one or more children.
On average, women give at least three reasons for choosing abortion: three-fourths say that having a baby would interfere with work, school, or other responsibilities; about two-thirds say they cannot afford a child; and half say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner.
About 13,000 women have abortions each year following rape or incest.


Only 13,000 out of 1.3 million were for rape or incest reasons!! And, what about the "health" of the mother? That statistic isn't even included because, "On average, women give at least three reasons for choosing abortion: three-fourths say that having a baby would interfere with work, school, or other responsibilities; about two-thirds say they cannot afford a child; and half say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner." HEALTH reasons isn't even COMMON.

Don't you all see the problem in this. Whoever said, "Let God sort 'em out" is allowing an injustice in this society that is nauseating. Do you really think Pro-Lifers are trying to "Judge"? Bullshit. It is a humane response to protect the innocent. There is not f'n judging going on.[/quote]

Jackzeppelin,

YOU have deemed it an "injustice."  YOU have deemed it "nauseating."  YOU have deemed unborn children in the early stages of pregnancy to be "lives."  MANY OUT THERE OBVIOUSLY DO NOT AGREE WITH YOU.  MORE THAN HALF, ACTUALLY.  Hence: NO CHANGING OF THE LAW!

Are you afraid that God is NOT capable of sorting them out??
274

[quote]BIGRAGOO wrote:

But it is a good way of population control. Besides, if the mother doesn’t want it, fuck it , it’s probably doomed anyway. IMO. Personally I don’t see the need for so much debate on this.[/quote]

You’re a cold hearted bastard. A dog’s life gets more consideration that that.

275

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Problem with comprehension much? I said ALL. I wrote the word A L L and you still plowed right over that and decided to look up statistics which do nothing but show that I’m right…all abortions are NOT because of teenagers so no law thrown out dictating how all women can deal with their own bodies should be accepted.[/quote]

No, not all. Just 97%! Sounds like you’re splitting hairs Prof.

276

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Problem with comprehension much? I said ALL. I wrote the word A L L and you still plowed right over that and decided to look up statistics which do nothing but show that I’m right…all abortions are NOT because of teenagers so no law thrown out dictating how all women can deal with their own bodies should be accepted.[/quote]

You’re right. I didn’t pay much attention to what you were implying. I just used part of the message as a platform to respond to some of the other rhetoric on this thread.

277

[quote]Damici wrote:
YOU have deemed it an “injustice.” YOU have deemed it “nauseating.” YOU have deemed unborn children in the early stages of pregnancy to be “lives.” MANY OUT THERe OBVIOUSLY DO NOT AGREE WITH YOU. MORE THAN HALF, ACTUALLY. Hence: NO CHANGING OF THE LAW!

Are you afraid that God is NOT capable of sorting them out??[/quote]

After they’re dead, it’s a little late for them, dontcha think?

278

[quote]reddog6376 wrote:
BIGRAGOO wrote:

But it is a good way of population control. Besides, if the mother doesn’t want it, fuck it , it’s probably doomed anyway. IMO. Personally I don’t see the need for so much debate on this.

You’re a cold hearted bastard. A dog’s life gets more consideration that that.[/quote]

Yes, I admit I can be a cold hearted fuck, but I don’t care about other’s problems or how they solve them. Again, I say if it’s unwanted, let it go. Why should I be made to bring about what I want to do away with?

279

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Damici wrote:

If 90-something percent, or maybe even 80 percent, of the population agreed with you, that would be one thing. But they don’t. As a matter of fact, more people in this country DISagree with you than agree with you. Therefore, it is not your right, or anyone else’s, to force YOUR view of things down everyone else’s throats. (And I essentially agree with your thinking on the heart of the issue)!

The massive PROBLEM that this staunch “let’s-outlaw-abortion” stance creates, as I mentioned, is that it prevents the BEST, MOST CAPABLE people, who could very ably deal with the REALLY IMPORTANT issues facing the nation (national security, war, terrorism, economy, dependence on oil, etc.) from being allowed to govern. And I’m SO fucking sick of it!!!

LET – GOD – SORT – THEM – OUT. IT’S – NOT – YOUR – LIFE/ISSUE/PROBLEM.

You are making an excellent case for the overturning of Roe. You do know that in Roe, the court completely ripped the right to a democratic determination of the legality abortion away from the various states?

What you are suggesting is that majoritarian legislative responses to the question of abortion is the way to go - that is exactly what conservatives are suggesting is the right response.

The other thing is that your 51% is not even distributed, as there is ability to pass a ‘national’ law outlawing or permitting abortion. Any legislative response will be handled at the state level, so your 51% will be distributed differently among different thinking states - think of what CA would legislate versus MS.

[/quote]

Thunderbolt,

Correct, but it doesn’t change my point. The anti-abortion crowd wants to change it from being a national right allowing abortion to eliminating that “national right” and letting each state decide – i.e. overturning Roe. I know that. There’s a constitutional law debate going on about whether or not it should be a national thing or a state’s rights thing. I’m no constitutional scholar and don’t profess to be one.

If you ask me to look at it from a PRACTICAL, PRAGMATIC perspective, i.e. would I want Roe overturned so that the states could decide individually, I would say “Hell no!” because then – yes – slightly more than half the country (spread out and irregularly distributed though they might be) would be up in arms in a nationwide shitstorm of fury. Don’t believe me? Think about the response from the other (more than)half of the country if Roe were overturned, and what it would do to national unity, stability, AND, most importantly of all, the ability of this nation to focus on the TRULY important and life-threatening issues facing it (war, terrorism, dependency on oil, economy, etc.).

I truly wish the far right would just fucking STOP IT with this fetish of overturning Roe! What good do you really think you’re doing, trying to legislate YOUR idea of morality to the ENTIRE nation, over half of which doesn’t agree with you? You’re at 49%, at best! You wanna’ pull something like THAT?? You should have at least 80% (hopefully over 90%) popular agreement before even THINKING of doing so.

THIS IS INTERFERING WITH THE MORE PRESSING MATTERS INVOLVED IN RUNNING THIS COUNTRY, AND THAT IS A DAMN SHAME!

Again – God can and will do the sorting. I’m confident of it.

280

[quote]Damici wrote:
Jackzeppelin,

YOU have deemed it an “injustice.” YOU have deemed it “nauseating.” YOU have deemed unborn children in the early stages of pregnancy to be “lives.” MANY OUT THERe OBVIOUSLY DO NOT AGREE WITH YOU. MORE THAN HALF, ACTUALLY. Hence: NO CHANGING OF THE LAW!

Are you afraid that God is NOT capable of sorting them out??[/quote]

God enabled us to protect the innocent. He is quite capable of judging those that have abortions AND those who stand idle and let it happen.

As for your 51%; where do you get this number? The last I heard, Pro-Choice numbers were down from 56% to 48% in 2001 and declining. 51% of what?

281

[quote]Damici wrote:

A.) It’s YOUR opinion that it’s the “right” thing.
B.) It’s YOUR opinion that it’s a life (i.e. that life begins at conception).
C.) Someone could be acting PERFECTLY responsibly, i.e. a married woman and her husband could be having sex, using the pill AND condoms, and the 1/1000 of a percentage chance of a pregnancy in that case becomes a reality. No one was acting “irresponsibly” there. But they’re not able to/willing to/capable of raising a child at that point in their lives, for whatever reason. (AND they don’t believe that an early stage pregnancy is a life, as you do). These aren’t mindless 16-year-old sluts.

GET – OFF – EVERYONE --ELSE’S --BACKS. YOU – ARE – ARRESTING – THE DEVELOPMENT – OF – ALMOST – EVERY --OTHER – ASPECT – OF – NATIONAL – POLICY – WITH – THIS – DO-GOODER – “I KNOW BETTER THAN YOU” – FETISH.

LET – GOD – SORT – THEM – OUT.

It really has become a fetish for some people, this anti-abortion zealotry. People (already-BORN people) are being slaughtered by the thousands in Darfur, yet I don’t hear you CLAMORING to make that issue (i.e. wanting to immediately go over there and put a stop to it) THE litmus test for any politician wanting to assume public office. Why did you choose THIS issue, then, if you’re SOOOOOO concerned about human life? That example alone makes me question the idea of those on your side of this debate being any more “morally upstanding” than anyone else. You’re not. You just believe you’re on some mission from God, and it’s actually RUINING much of this country, as we now have Bozo the Clown nominated by our party, now running things and ruining the world, instead of someone intellectually active and capable of governing, like a Giuliani or a McCain.

Gee, thanks for that.[/quote]

So, popular opinion dictates what’s wrong & what’s right? So much for standing up for what you believe huh? Let me check the Gallup poll first. Nope, 51% of America belive murders ok, then it’s ok with me. Moral equivalence at it worst.

282

[quote]jackzepplin wrote:
Damici wrote:
Jackzeppelin,

YOU have deemed it an “injustice.” YOU have deemed it “nauseating.” YOU have deemed unborn children in the early stages of pregnancy to be “lives.” MANY OUT THERe OBVIOUSLY DO NOT AGREE WITH YOU. MORE THAN HALF, ACTUALLY. Hence: NO CHANGING OF THE LAW!

Are you afraid that God is NOT capable of sorting them out??

God enabled us to protect the innocent. He is quite capable of judging those that have abortions AND those who stand idle and let it happen.

As for your 51%; where do you get this number? The last I heard, Pro-Choice numbers were down from 56% to 48% in 2001 and declining. 51% of what?[/quote]

I’ll gladly check on the number and get back to you. Either way, it’s nowhere NEAR the 90-ish percent that you should have before trying to change THAT law without starting a national civil war of sorts.

God did not mention a darned thing about abortions in the Bible or anywhere else that I’m aware. He did mention a whole lot of things specifically, like murder and theft and adultery and the like, but not once am I aware of an instance in which He stated that an unborn child is a life, and that aborting it is murder.

I REALIZE that YOU feel that way. Many others don’t. And it really, REALLY sucks that this issue is allowing the entire nation to essentially fall off a cliff, i.e. all the REALLY PRESSING and IMPORTANT issues are being co-opted, because SOME people have an unusual do-gooder fetish with THIS issue.

Great.

283

You know what… for people that aren’t religious life is life. There is a lot of life on the planet and there is a lot of death on the planet.

I know, we all value human life above the rest of the life on the planet, and we are special, whether or not you have religious beliefs, this is easy to see.

However, lacking moral imperatives on the issue due to religion, it really comes down to concepts such as pain and suffering.

Strangely, over the centuries, life has been held pretty cheaply on this planet. People are slaughtered by the thousands, other thousands starve, other’s die of all kinds of diseases – and all of us will die at some point. Millions upon millions have died before us.

At what point does the fetus have the nerves and brain cells to undergo something akin to suffering?

Then, after people stop stepping on ants, hunting for sport, drowning cats in bags and kicking stray dogs, claiming survival of the fittest, then they can start to try to raise the bar a bit higher.

Until then, this whole issue is filled with a huge burden of hypocracy.

Life is not truly held in high regard on this planet – this whole issue is simply a political one. And, it is only a big issue if you believe the religious implications.

If you truly believe in God, then why not let him cast judgment? If you truly believe, then you know he will…

However, I fear this is really fodder for a different thread.

284

[quote]BIGRAGOO wrote:
Yes, I admit I can be a cold hearted fuck, but I don’t care about other’s problems or how they solve them. Again, I say if it’s unwanted, let it go. Why should I be made to bring about what I want to do away with?[/quote]

I don’t know maybe personal responsibility? Maybe because it’s the moral thing to do?

285

[quote]vroom wrote:
However, I fear this is really fodder for a different thread.[/quote]

Not really. Most Republicans are Pro-Life, and this is decisive issue that people have to identify with to term themselves Republican or Democrat. The thread is about disaffected Republicans. You have to look at the hot issues that might strengthen or weaken your loyalty to a party, and Abortion is a very decisive issue. During the Democratic primaries, I was looking at the options, and I could’ve been all for Wes Clarke, had his views on abortion been different.

286

To compare stepping on ants to killing human fetus’ is a poor comparison.

I would wager that 90% of the people that post on this forum that think abortion is OK think that the rough treatment the terrorists at Gitmo is morally reprehensible.

I think too many people are brainwashed into believing the things their political party tells them too.

287

[quote]Damici wrote:
God did not mention a darned thing about abortions in the Bible or anywhere else that I’m aware. He did mention a whole lot of things specifically, like murder and theft and adultery and the like, but not once am I aware of an instance in which He stated that an unborn child is a life, and that aborting it is murder.[/quote]

When the bible was written, do you think anyone was capable of debating “life” in the womb? Forget about religion and think about what is humane. Why do you have to keep brining God into this debate? The liberals ask us to check our religion at the door when dealing with politics, and I’m doing that. Forget about God’s responsibilities as the ultimate Judge and think about what is humane. Is sucking the brains out of a child humane? Is cutting off the arms and legs of a human (at any stage of life) humane? Can’t you see that the laws need to change? Or are you one of those that feel like you should have the right to do any damn thing you please because you should have the “choice”? Did you know that it’s illegal to kill yourself?