Barack Obama: I Don’t Want My Daughters “Punished” With A Baby (http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/barack_obama_i_dont_want_my_daughters_punished_wit h_a_baby/)

The “punished with a baby” part is noxious enough, but get a load of him putting pregnancy on par with an STD:
“Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old,” he said. “I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby. I don’t want them punished with an STD at age 16, so it doesn’t make sense to not give them information.”
A child isn’t a punishment. In the case of an unwanted pregnancy it may be a consequence, but the term “punish” implies some third party sending the baby along in response to bad behavior. But that’s now how it actually works. An unwanted pregnancy can’t be a punishment because a child is the result of the actions of the parents.
Though I can see where a liberal like Obama would want to make it seem like those challenged with unwanted pregnancy are victims as that’s pretty much the liberal way. Nobody is ever responsible for their own actions. People don’t act, they are acted upon.
That’s the liberal way.

Barack Obama: I Don’t Want My Daughters “Punished” With A Baby (http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/barack_obama_i_dont_want_my_daughters_punished_wit h_a_baby/)

The “punished with a baby” part is noxious enough, but get a load of him putting pregnancy on par with an STD:
“Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old,” he said. “I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby. I don’t want them punished with an STD at age 16, so it doesn’t make sense to not give them information.”
A child isn’t a punishment. In the case of an unwanted pregnancy it may be a consequence, but the term “punish” implies some third party sending the baby along in response to bad behavior. But that’s now how it actually works. An unwanted pregnancy can’t be a punishment because a child is the result of the actions of the parents.
Though I can see where a liberal like Obama would want to make it seem like those challenged with unwanted pregnancy are victims as that’s pretty much the liberal way. Nobody is ever responsible for their own actions. People don’t act, they are acted upon.
That’s the liberal way.

16 year olds aren't responsible for their actions.

16 year olds aren't responsible for their actions.

Yeah they are. However, saddling some 16 yr old with a baby when there are ways of preventing or terminating that pregnancy is punishment.

I don't think Barry has anything to worry about.
This country will always allow his daughters to abort his grandchildren.

Yeah they are. However, saddling some 16 yr old with a baby when there are ways of preventing or terminating that pregnancy is punishment.
It's punishment for the unwanted child who will most likely not have the best life...

The blog LF is quoting provides no source for that quote.

If Senator Obama actually did say it then I am sure the context will shed more light on it.

The blog LF is quoting provides no source for that quote.


It doesn't really matter.

The claim that Obama was ""putting pregnancy on par with an STD"" is a lie anyway. He did not make that comparison nor even hint at any such thing.

It doesn't really matter.

The claim that Obama was ""putting pregnancy on par with an STD"" is a lie anyway. He did not make that comparison nor even hint at any such thing.
“Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old,” he said. “I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby. I don’t want them punished with a STD at age 16,

try reading the whole post next time, instead of just the headline:thumbs:

so it doesn’t make sense to not give them information.”

still, there's no law (yet) preventing him from raising his children himself.

It doesn't really matter.

The claim that Obama was ""putting pregnancy on par with an STD"" is a lie anyway. He did not make that comparison nor even hint at any such thing.

True.
And besides, it's a ridiculous comparison.

Most STDs cost a few hundred bucks to get rid of.
Kids on the other hand, will cost you a couple hundred thousand dollars before it's all said and done.
(Half a million easy, if it turns out they want to go to college.)

:(

I'd say if you aren't taught to not have sex safely, or are not taught at all about sex and learn of it through media and peer pressure... having a kid, most of the time, IS a "punishment" because you just want the feeling and don't want the results, but yet you are ignorant to the concept of an unwrapped member inside your opposing partner. You suddenly can't have a social life, and you can't go to school full time. You probably aren't psychologically and physically ready to take on that amount of stress. While a child is a blessed gift... I say if you aren't ready, give to someone who is infertile or wanting to adopt.

Originally Posted by Freethinker
It doesn't really matter.

The claim that Obama was ""putting pregnancy on par with an STD"" is a lie anyway. He did not make that comparison nor even hint at any such thing.


Quote:
“Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old,” he said. “I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby. I don’t want them punished with a STD at age 16,

try reading the whole post next time, instead of just the headline :thumbs:

I did read the entire post.

The claim that Obama was ""putting pregnancy on par with an STD"" is a lie.

Obama did not make that comparison nor did he hint at any such thing.

Why don't you try a course in reading comprehension.

The claim that Obama was ""putting pregnancy on par with an STD"" is a lie.

Obama did not make that comparison nor did he hint at any such thing.
he call them both a punishment is the same paragraph, oh great Pharaoh!:slap:

what's it like being king of denial?

he call them both a punishment is the same paragraph, oh great Pharaoh!:slap:

what's it like being king of denial?

Both being punishments doesn't mean the punishments are equal.

Both being punishments doesn't mean the punishments are equal.
if he didn't want them to be taken as equal, he shouldn't have given them the same weight.

It bears repeating that the source cited is a blog with no attribution itself. "I got two daughters..." doesn't sound like Obama. I'll believe it when I see the video.

he call them both a punishment is the same paragraph, oh great Pharaoh!So if I say jaywalking and murder are both crimes that means I'm putting them on a par with each other?

That doesn't make sense.

It bears repeating that the source cited is a blog with no attribution itself. "I got two daughters..." doesn't sound like Obama. I'll believe it when I see the video.

Thank you.
I agree.

It bears repeating that the source cited is a blog with no attribution itself. "I got two daughters..." doesn't sound like Obama. I'll believe it when I see the video.I traced it back to a Politico article:




March 29, 2008
Categories: Barack Obama

"Stop these abortions.”

Out in western Pennsylvania, the issue of abortion can strike a nerve. Democrats there often describe themselves economic liberals and social conservatives who favor gun rights and oppose abortion rights.

So, it was not unusual to see a woman stand near the end of Barack Obama’s town hall meeting in Johnstown, Penn., and offer a hurried, passionate plea for him to "stop these abortions."

The ability of politicians like Obama to thread the needle between their own support of abortion rights and their constituents' opposition can be deteminative in Pennsylvania. And Obama, who supports abortion rights, handled the questioner deftly.

"This is a very difficult issue, and I understand sort of the passions on both sides of the issue," he said. "I have two precious daughters — they are miracles."

But politicians must trust women to make the right decisions for themselves, he said.

"This is an example where good people can disagree," the Illinois senator said. "The question then is, are there areas that we can agree to that everybody can get behind? We can all agree that we want to reduce teen pregnancies. We can all agree that we want to make sure that adoption is a viable option."

The exchange appeared to be prompted by Obama's earlier comments that he does not favor abstinence-only education, but rather comprehensive sexual education that includes information on abstinence and birth control.

"Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old," he said. "I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby. I don't want them punished with an STD at age 16, so it doesn't make sense to not give them information."


By Carrie Budoff Brown 03:20 PM

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Stop_these_abortions_.html

Sounds reasonable to me.

I don't want them punished with a baby. ?

Sounds reasonable to me.[/QUOTE]

You're a Nut.
Anyone who considers a Baby a punishment,is out of their Mind.
Literally.
That statement ALONE makes it abundantly clear this Bama Guy
isn't fit to be a member of Society,{like his Pastor} let alone a
Politician.

You're a Nut.
Anyone who considers a Baby a punishment,is out of their Mind.
Literally.
That statement ALONE makes it abundantly clear this Bama Guy
isn't fit to be a member of Society,{like his Pastor} let alone a
Politician.


Lordy - he's just saying teen pregnancy is bad. A) It's a good message. B) Most people agree with him.

Lordy - he's just saying teen pregnancy is bad. A) It's a good message. B) Most people agree with him.

I don't wanna hear it.
Human Life { ALL human life } IS Precious.
I'm really gettin sick of the knuckleheads that Post here.
Most you nutbags haven't a clue to what th'ell yer talkin about.
A True saint ... Mother Teresa spend much of her time,begging
females,to NOT fall prey to this Kitschy,new wave idea'r of Abortion.
Lest we furgit,that our Grandparents { those who lived around
the Turn-of-the-century } Got married and had children in their teens.

he call them both a punishment is the same paragraph

To me, that does not suggest that he believes that pregnancy and STDs are equal to one another.

It's punishment for the unwanted child who will most likely not have the best life...

So, the kid's life might or might not be perfect. Your solution is to kill it. How sad and sick your solution is. As far as I know not one single child who has survived a botched abortion has said he/she wishes the abortion had been successful and that he or she had been killed.

Abortion is never about what's good for the unborn child. It is always about what is good for the selfish, pregnant person.



I became pregnant. I don't want to be pregnant. What should I do. Oh, I know, I'll just kill my unborn child. There is no way to sugarcoat this. Abortion is murder.

Why make the unwanted child go through a painfull death just for the simple crime of being conceived?

There is a such thing as adoption.



It's punishment for the unwanted child who will most likely not have the best life...

There is a such thing as adoption.

There are a half million kids stuck in the violent, abusive and neglectful foster care system in America because they couldn't get adopted.

gmsisko1, How many kids have you adopted?

Interesting how the government and men are always trying to tell women what they can and can't do to their own body's.

OK, Sperm has potential baby's in it. Therefore it is murder for men to spew it at any time or place where it is not being used to have a baby. Put your wangers away boys. The government is regulating your sexualality. It's not a punishment. We're just protecting you from OUR definition of murder.

So your answer is to kill the innocent life.

I have a bumpersticker that reads "abort the liberal not the child"
(It's not on my car though)


There are a half million kids stuck in the violent, abusive and neglectful foster care system in America because they couldn't get adopted.

gmsisko1, How many kids have you adopted?

Some women are pro life too.

Spewing sperm and killing innocent life are worlds apart.


Interesting how the government and men are always trying to tell women what they can and can't do to their own body's.

OK, Sperm has potential baby's in it. Therefore it is murder for men to spew it at any time or place where it is not being used to have a baby. Put your wangers away boys. The government is regulating your sexualality. It's not a punishment. We're just protecting you from OUR definition of murder.

So your answer is to kill the innocent life.

So your answer is to abandon innocent children.

Nice.

Spewing sperm and killing innocent life are worlds apart.

Not according to the Bible.

But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother's wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. And what he did was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also. Gen. 38:9-10

Spewing sperm and killing innocent life are worlds apart.

Actually, they happen in the same neighborhood.

DarkFantasy: It's punishment for the unwanted child who will most likely not have the best life...
Dhrama: There are a half million kids stuck in the violent, abusive and neglectful foster care system in America because they couldn't get adopted.

I always thought this argument was arrogant and weird.

There may be people in the world who would look at your lives and think you'd have been better off aborted.
Is that up to them?

Talk to adults who were "unwanted" and tell them they'd have been better off unborn.

The government is regulating your sexualality.
How so?

Talk to adults who were "unwanted" and tell them they'd have been better off unborn.

You will find many of them in our prison system. :rolleyes:

You should know better.

You will find many of them in our prison system. :rolleyes:

You should know better.

yes,we all know yer the Thought Police,round this
hears Pop Stand.
But there ARE Grown-up Adults in America that don't require
the Government to dictate cradle to grave entitlements and
babysitting.

Why make the unwanted child go through a painfull death just for the simple crime of being conceived?

The abortions i'm talking about (IOW, the vast majority of the ones that are done) have nothing to do with 'pain' for a "child". They have to do with the elimination of unwanted embryos -- a clump of cells-- that feel no pain whatsoever.

Spewing sperm and killing innocent life are worlds apart.


LOL.

You and I both "kill innocent life" every time we wash our hands....... unlike you, I don't fret over "life" when that life consists of a mere zygote or a clumping of cells.

If you could get the job of making tiny, tiny little tombstones for all the millions of zygotes that are aborted --quite naturally-- every day on this planet, would you take it? After all, those zygotes were "life" , from your perspective. Maybe you could name all of them while you're at it. That ought to keep you busy.

_____________________________

A 3-day-old human embryo is a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst. In comparison, there are more than 100,000 cells in the brain of a housefly.

[QUOTE=Freethinker]The abortions i'm talking about (IOW, the vast majority of the ones that are done) have nothing to do with 'pain' for a "child". They have to do with the elimination of unwanted embryos -- a clump of cells-- that feel no pain whatsoever.



LOL.

You and I both "kill innocent life" every time we wash our hands....... unlike you, I don't fret over "life" when that life consists of a mere zygote or a clumping of cells.


***************************

Goot Tink yuz were niver just a clump of cells,eh ... Tadpole brains.?

What is it about religious people that makes them think they can make everyone else live by their beliefs?

If your faith tells you not to eat meat on Friday then don't eat it and leave the rest of us alone. Same thing with your reproductive beliefs and attitudes about gays. Do what you want but leave the rest of us alone to follow our own beleifs. It's called freedom of religion and is what this country was founded on.

What is it about religious people that makes them think they can make everyone else live by their beliefs?

If your faith tells you not to eat meat on Friday then don't eat it and leave the rest of us alone. Same thing with your reproductive beliefs and attitudes about gays. Do what you want but leave the rest of us alone to follow our own beleifs. It's called freedom of religion and is what this country was founded on.

Let's see now... if everybody kept their beliefs to themselves, wouldn't that make for a pretty dull discussion forum?

Please keep in mind, Echo -- we have freedom OF religion in this country. However, you do not have freedom FROM religion. I suggest you learn to turn the other cheek if you don't agree with those pesky 'religious people' who have the audacity to exercise their freedom of speech.

Really... the nerve!

;)
SMW

yes and if some people would not get all emotional when someone has a different opinion then them and think that is debating. And we do have freedom from religion in this country if we want it. It's not really freedom if you have to choose a religion now is it?

Afiner touch. Don't bother to try to discuss anything with SMW. From my experience she will either insult you or twist the discussion into something entirely different.

SMW - Let's see now... if everybody kept their beliefs to themselves, wouldn't that make for a pretty dull discussion forum?

The point was not about discussing, it was about trying to force others to live by beliefs they do not follow. Discuss all you want, just quit trying to pass laws and force the rest of the country into following and living by your beliefs.


SMW I suggest you learn to turn the other cheek if you don't agree with those pesky 'religious people' who have the audacity to exercise their freedom of speech.

Again, the point was not about discussing, it was about trying to force others to live by beliefs they do not follow.

Barack Obama: I Don’t Want My Daughters “Punished” With A Baby (http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/barack_obama_i_dont_want_my_daughters_punished_wit h_a_baby/)

The “punished with a baby” part is noxious enough, but get a load of him putting pregnancy on par with an STD:
“Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old,” he said. “I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby. I don’t want them punished with an STD at age 16, so it doesn’t make sense to not give them information.”
A child isn’t a punishment. In the case of an unwanted pregnancy it may be a consequence, but the term “punish” implies some third party sending the baby along in response to bad behavior. But that’s now how it actually works. An unwanted pregnancy can’t be a punishment because a child is the result of the actions of the parents.
Though I can see where a liberal like Obama would want to make it seem like those challenged with unwanted pregnancy are victims as that’s pretty much the liberal way. Nobody is ever responsible for their own actions. People don’t act, they are acted upon.
That’s the liberal way.

LF this is a bit of a cheap shot, c'mon.

If your gonna nit pic over every word, the current President would be the laughing stock of the western world.

There are a half million kids stuck in the violent, abusive and neglectful foster care system in America because they couldn't get adopted.

gmsisko1, How many kids have you adopted?

I don'/t know about sisko but I raised three children I did not father and my parents raised four, one legally adopted and three who aged out of the foster care system and simply continued to live with us as full members of our family

How many children have you adopted, dharmabum?

So your answer is to abandon innocent children.

Nice.

And yours is to kill them. Which is the worse crime, dharmabum, abandoning a child to a less than ideal life or killing that child?

You will find many of them in our prison system. :rolleyes:

You should know better.

Another in a long string of stupid statements by dharmabum.

So many people wind up in our prison system, some from deprived backgrounds where they were not loved and some from spoiled backgrounds where they were doted on rather than simply loved.

dharmabum, most of the people in our prisons happen to be black. Do you think that we should abort all black children to insure that none of them are raised in dysfunctional families or wind up in prison?

What is it about religious people that makes them think they can make everyone else live by their beliefs?

If your faith tells you not to eat meat on Friday then don't eat it and leave the rest of us alone. Same thing with your reproductive beliefs and attitudes about gays. Do what you want but leave the rest of us alone to follow our own beleifs. It's called freedom of religion and is what this country was founded on.

echo, a decision to eat or not eat meat on Fridays affect only the person who either will or will not eat the meat. The decision to abort a child affects the child more than it affects anyone else. The father and the mother soon go on their merry ways. The child is dead. There is quite a difference between deciding to not eat meat on Friday and deciding to kill an unborn child.

echo, a decision to eat or not eat meat on Fridays affect only the person who either will or will not eat the meat. The decision to abort a child affects the child more than it affects anyone else. The father and the mother soon go on their merry ways. The child is dead. There is quite a difference between deciding to not eat meat on Friday and deciding to kill an unborn child.

That is only if you believe that a bunch of cells are a person and that life begins at conception. My problem is with people who believe that life begins at conception, trying to get everone else to live by their beliefs.

LF this is a bit of a cheap shot, c'mon.

If your gonna nit pic over every word, the current President would be the laughing stock of the western world.

Excellent point.

It just goes to highlight the rabid hypocrisy of the right wing in America.

That is only if you believe that a bunch of cells are a person and that life begins at conception. My problem is with people who believe that life begins at conception, trying to get everone else to live by their beliefs.

Echo,

If I believe something is murder I am definetely going to speak out against it. We aren't talking about a difference of opinion about flavors of ice cream.

That is only if you believe that a bunch of cells are a person and that life begins at conception. My problem is with people who believe that life begins at conception, trying to get everone else to live by their beliefs.

The people who push this agenda rarely think what they are saying through very well. For instance, if life begins at conception then every miscarriage should be investigated as a possible infanticide. Every mother would be criminally liable for what they ate, drank and smoked while pregnant in case it contributed to the miscarriage.

There would be a lot more investigations and more time taken up by the courts which means a lot higher cost which would mean higher taxes.

If abortion is murder than it is between the mother and God. The people who want to legislate their morality on everyone else are trying to play God.

And yours is to kill them. Which is the worse crime, dharmabum, abandoning a child to a less than ideal life or killing that child?

A blastocyst is not a child. Get a clue.

It is wrong to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her own body. It is wrong to force your religious and morale beliefs on another human being.
And while we are on the subject; How come the "no rights over your on body" people are very supportive of fetuses but once the fetus is born they do not want to help it in any way. They don't want to give it health care, pay for its schooling, food, cloths, love it, care for it, raise it, etc. They don't want to help the parents or the child. It must be born, but they could care less whatever happens after that. Let it be raised by parents who don't want it and can't afford it. Let it be put in foster care to be shuffled around and abused for the next 18 years while it waits for someone to adopt it. As long as it is alive we have done our moral duty.

The limited vision that “no rights” people have on this subject amazes me even more than the audacity it takes to force others to live by their religious standards.

A blastocyst is not a child.

EXACTLY!

It is wrong to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her own body. It is wrong to force your religious and morale beliefs on another human being.
And while we are on the subject; How come the "no rights over your on body" people are very supportive of fetuses but once the fetus is born they do not want to help it in any way. They don't want to give it health care, pay for its schooling, food, cloths, love it, care for it, raise it, etc. They don't want to help the parents or the child. It must be born, but they could care less whatever happens after that. Let it be raised by parents who don't want it and can't afford it. Let it be put in foster care to be shuffled around and abused for the next 18 years while it waits for someone to adopt it. As long as it is alive we have done our moral duty.

The limited vision that “no rights” people have on this subject amazes me even more than the audacity it takes to force others to live by their religious standards.

The conservative mantra: Love the fetus. Hate the child.

It is wrong to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her own body. It is wrong to force your religious and morale beliefs on another human being.
And while we are on the subject; How come the "no rights over your on body" people are very supportive of fetuses but once the fetus is born they do not want to help it in any way. They don't want to give it health care, pay for its schooling, food, cloths, love it, care for it, raise it, etc. They don't want to help the parents or the child. It must be born, but they could care less whatever happens after that. Let it be raised by parents who don't want it and can't afford it. Let it be put in foster care to be shuffled around and abused for the next 18 years while it waits for someone to adopt it. As long as it is alive we have done our moral duty.

The limited vision that “no rights” people have on this subject amazes me even more than the audacity it takes to force others to live by their religious standards.

Geesh, sounds like Frogger and Echo need to pick a different issue. Either that or we're already in summer reruns.

10-10-2005, 11:58 AM
Echo2
Senior Member Join Date: Jul 30, 2004
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 3,533

Quote:
Originally posted by Frogger
It isn't about the babies, it's about punishing women for having sex. (Echo)

A statement like the above makes it seem you feel having babies is some sort of punishment.

Abortion isn't really about the woman, echo. It is about the child. Pro-lifers aren't out to punish women, they are trying to protect the unborn.

You may not agree with them but don't assign them motives they don't have.



Originally posted by Echo
I disagee. If they really wanted to "save babies" they would take the next step and back the programs that would give these unwanted kids a better start in life. Pro lifers want the children born but they do not want to carry any responsibility for their future. i.e. upbringing, daycare, education, health care, after school programs, etc.

It is more about forcing the evil women who have sex out of wedlock into taking responsibility for their actions than about "saving" children. And when these children grow up in poverty, with parents that didn't want them and become pregnant at 15 or 16, the same people that forced their mother to have them will force them to have children they don't want.

If life was really so damned important to them they would not support war or the death penalty. If they REALLY cared about these kids they would support daycare, after school programs, healthcare, financial aid to dependant children, etc.

They claim to care about the child, but in reality all they care about is that the women be forced to have the child. They could care less if the child lives in poverty, with abusive parents, no healthcare and sub standard education. Having forced the woman to give birth, they wash their hands of it.

I don't see these people out fighting for better healthcare for the babies that are already alive, or better education for the kids that are already born, or subsidized day care for poor children so their parents can get a job, or after school projects to keep the already born children out of trouble.

It seems to me that their priority is not the welfare of the child, only that the woman be FORCRD to carry the fetus to term.
*********************

*yawn*

It is wrong to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her own body. It is wrong to force your religious and morale beliefs on another human being.
And while we are on the subject; How come the "no rights over your on body" people are very supportive of fetuses but once the fetus is born they do not want to help it in any way. They don't want to give it health care, pay for its schooling, food, cloths, love it, care for it, raise it, etc. They don't want to help the parents or the child. It must be born, but they could care less whatever happens after that. Let it be raised by parents who don't want it and can't afford it. Let it be put in foster care to be shuffled around and abused for the next 18 years while it waits for someone to adopt it. As long as it is alive we have done our moral duty.

The limited vision that “no rights” people have on this subject amazes me even more than the audacity it takes to force others to live by their religious standards.

Great point. They demand that the child be brought into a "less than ideal life" and then blame the child for not being able to "make it on his own".

Not every ejaculation deserves a name.
George Carlin


:hitout:

Brooks: Talk to adults who were "unwanted" and tell them they'd have been better off unborn.
Dhramatic: You will find many of them in our prison system. :rolleyes:
You should know better.
You can also find many black people there.
So what should we do to the rest of the group?

You should kn.... actually, probably not.

What is it about religious people that makes them think they can make everyone else live by their beliefs?

It's not a religious issue, there are pro-life athiests you know.

If someone truly believes that that is a life then how can they want it to be ended.

Imagine you lived in the 1700's and a plantation owner killed his slaves when he was angry at them. Many "owners" truly believed they weren't human.

Would you have stuck to your "Do what you want but leave the rest of us alone to follow our own beleifs" philosophy as you do on this issue?
That would be consistent.

I'm not asking if you agree on the abortion issue because I really don't care. But I think you should understand the analogy and why some people feel so strongly about it.

1. For instance, if life begins at conception then every miscarriage should be investigated as a possible infanticide.
2. Every mother would be criminally liable for what they ate, drank and smoked while pregnant in case it contributed to the miscarriage.
3. There would be a lot more investigations and more time taken up by the courts which means a lot higher cost which would mean higher taxes.
4. If abortion is murder than it is between the mother and God.
1. If every heart attack were investigated as a murder that would be an excellent analogy.
But they aren't so it isn't.

2. In some jurisdictions mothers are responsible for their pre-natal behavior.
"Some States have adopted statutes and/or regulations that clarify the rules for evidence of prenatal alcohol exposure in child welfare proceedings (e.g., those alleging child abuse, child neglect, child deprivation, or child dependence, or concerning termination of parental rights)"
http://www.alcoholpolicy.niaaa.nih.gov/index.asp?SEC=%7B0026308A-1BF0-421A-8EA2-E4E824220DEB%7D&Type=BAS_APIS

3. Is that how you feel we should determine which laws are important enough to enforce.

4. Unless you believe that statement applies to all murders I don't get your point.

1. It is wrong to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her own body.

2. ....the "no rights over your on body" people .... do not want to help it in any way.....don't want to give it health care, pay for its schooling, food, cloths, love it, care for it, raise it, ....don't want to help the parents or the child......they could care less whatever happens after that..... Let it be put in foster care to be ....abused for the next 18 years while it waits for someone to adopt it.

3. .... to force others to live by their religious standards.
1. If that philosophy was really a driving force for you, you would also feel strongly about drug laws, helmet laws, seat belt laws, rights of porn actresses and statutatory rape laws would also bother you.

2. a. So-called liberals are capable of grossly generalized bigotry.
b. Your love and concern just pours out with your adorable use of the word "it"

3. That is becoming such a tired, worn out and desperate cliche'.

The conservative mantra: Love the fetus. Hate the child.
You and Echo should battle for the title Cliche' Queen.

But don't worry, your daughter's will alway have the right to abort your grandchildren.
Even a little piece at a time into their 8th or 9th month.

A blastocyst is not a child. Get a clue.

Stop being so dishonest. It isn't only blastocysts being aborted.

The AMA estimates that approximately 1/2 of all pregnancies end in miscarriage during the first 45 days of pregnancy. Nature’s natural selection. If life begins at conception then every one of those miscarries should be investigated to make sure that the mother did not do anything to cause it. Or the father for that matter since sex can cause miscarriages in some instances.

We all know how accurate and exacting our legal system is...How would you feel if you and your wife had a natural miscarriage and were brought before the grand jury to determine if any action she or you may have participated in during the last 45 days had any negative effect on the fetus.

Conservatives say they want a smaller government but then they turn around and want to pass a bunch of laws that put the government inside our bedrooms, homes, sex lives, etc.

If life begins at conception then every one of those miscarries should be investigated to make sure that the mother did not do anything to cause it.
To quote myself:
"If every heart attack were investigated as a murder that would be an excellent analogy.
But they aren't so it isn't."

It is wrong to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her own body. I am not telling her what she can do with her body. I am telling her what she can't do with the baby's body.It is wrong to force your religious and morale beliefs on another human being. Liberals force their moral beliefs on other people all the time. You force your belief in welfare on others, your belief in a soak the rich tax system on others. Liberals even resort to violence to force their beliefs on others, ala Berkely and the Marine recruiters.
And while we are on the subject; How come the "no rights over your on body" people are very supportive of fetuses but once the fetus is born they do not want to help it in any way. They don't want to give it health care, pay for its schooling, food, cloths, love it, care for it, raise it, etc. They don't want to help the parents or the child. It must be born, but they could care less whatever happens after that. Let it be raised by parents who don't want it and can't afford it. Let it be put in foster care to be shuffled around and abused for the next 18 years while it waits for someone to adopt it. As long as it is alive we have done our moral duty. This is a gross and distorted generalization. Not all people and not even a sizeable minority of people want to abandon young children. Your description of foster care is also so distorted as to be laughable. My parents were twice foster parents of the year for Suffolk County, New York and they never abused any child in their care. Most foster parents are loving people who give of themselves. If you are so concerned about foster care why don't you take in a foster child or adopt a child. The same goes for dharmabum and Frannie.
The limited vision that “no rights” people have on this subject amazes me even more than the audacity it takes to force others to live by their religious standards. The limited vision is on the part of the pro-abortion people not the pro-life people. The only option you people see is killing the unborn child. Why not take the money spent on killing the unborn and use it to offer assistance to living children. Offer to help the mother take care of the child rather than offering to help her kill it.

Originally Posted by Echo2
It is wrong to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her own body.

I am not telling her what she can do with her body. I am telling her what she can't do with the baby's body.

Noooo.....you and your fellow religionists (read; superstitionists) are trying to tell her what she can't do with her 'baby's body' (IOW, her embryo/zygote/fetus).............thankfully, so far you and your ilk have not managed to usurp that right from pregnant women.

Noooo.....you and your fellow religionists (read; superstitionists) are trying to tell her what she can't do with her 'baby's body' (IOW, her embryo/zygote/fetus).............thankfully, so far you and your ilk have not managed to usurp that right from pregnant women.

Yep! You're right. I'm telling her she can't kill it.

Yep! You're right. I'm telling her she can't kill it.

LOL. "Tell" all you want to, pal.

Because she does not have to do what you and your superstitious brethren say. You have not been granted that power over her, thankfully.

She can have a wart removed if she has one, she can get a tattoo, and she can abort a zygote.

And you and the BibleGod's adherents cannot stop her from doing so.

You're right. We can't stop her, NOW. The time will come when that will change.

You're right. We can't stop her, NOW. The time will come when that will change.

You are --sickeningly-- probably right.

This country seems headed for a rock-ribbed theocracy, where people will be forced to conform to the mores, taboos and beliefs of the adherents of the predominant religion (Xtianity).

What a fucking hoot that will be. I'm glad I'll be gone before you and your ilk are able to bring about that despicable circumstance.

Stop being so dishonest. It isn't only blastocysts being aborted.

Sure. Zygotes get aborted too. They're still not "children." And do please note that the abortion rate in the United States is at a thirty year low, due at least in part to sex education in schools and access to birth control, both things the right-wing nutbars HATE. If you and your ilk had your way, you'd get rid of both of those influences, adding even more (a) abortions to the list or (b) unwanted children dumped into the foster care system.

Of course, since you're so anti-abortion/pro-foster care, one can only wonder why don't YOU adopt them all.

I am not telling her what she can do with her body. I am telling her what she can't do with the baby's body.

Who the fuck are YOU?

But don't worry, your daughter's will alway have the right to abort your grandchildren.
Even a little piece at a time into their 8th or 9th month.

I chose not to bring another life into a world already overflowing with unwanted children, so you can put that friendly little sentiment of yours where the sun don't shine.

To quote myself:
"If every heart attack were investigated as a murder that would be an excellent analogy.
But they aren't so it isn't."

What a horribly inaccurate analogy.
Nobody is claiming all heart attacks are "murder". :slap:

You are --sickeningly-- probably right.


No, he is not right.

Even if he gets his way and criminalizes abortions, he will NOT stop them from happening.

DarkFantasy: It's punishment for the unwanted child who will most likely not have the best life...
Dhrama: There are a half million kids stuck in the violent, abusive and neglectful foster care system in America because they couldn't get adopted.

I always thought this argument was arrogant and weird.

There may be people in the world who would look at your lives and think you'd have been better off aborted.
Is that up to them?

Talk to adults who were "unwanted" and tell them they'd have been better off unborn.
Hey now, I never said anything about abortion. That could just as easily be an argument for forcing all teenage mothers to give their babies up for adoption. Quit putting words in my mouth.

Like FT, dharma, and Marzipan already pointed out, the fetus is nowhere near being a child in the early stages of pregnancy. I certainly don't support abortions after the first trimester for reasons other than health/safety concerns, and in fact I'd probably set the limit to even sooner if I had the choice. There is certainly a point at which an unborn baby does not have a brain and cannot feel pain, and I think at this point there is nothing wrong with abortion. "Potential" life is not the same as actual life.

I don't like the idea of abortion at all, but I know that making abortion illegal doesn't get rid of it. Women have been aborting their children themselves for thousands of years - the only thing legalizing it does is make it safer for the woman. If it's a choice between the death of a tiny undeveloped fetus that doesn't even have a brain yet and the death of both the fetus AND its mother, what would you choose?

And by the way, to some of you... What's with this: "Let's characterize all abortions as killing a fetus in the 8th month of pregnancy!" ... Yeah, because all pro-choice people are totally advocating that.

2. a. So-called liberals are capable of grossly generalized bigotry.
Conservatives say they want a smaller government but then they turn around and want to pass a bunch of laws that put the government inside our bedrooms, homes, sex lives, etc.
Liberals force their moral beliefs on other people all the time. You force your belief in welfare on others, your belief in a soak the rich tax system on others. Liberals even resort to violence to force their beliefs on others, ala Berkely and the Marine recruiters.
Can you three lazy debaters at least try to keep this debate about the fucking issue rather than fall into the simple, "us vs. them" mentality of American politics? Jesus Christ, you three are too intelligent to make generalizations like this. Abortion is not a topic (nor IS there a topic) that is LIBRULS VERSUS CONSERVAFASCISTS. Good God. Such "debate" is pointless and unproductive, and is, frankly, lazy reasoning.

Can you three lazy debaters at least try to keep this debate about the fucking issue rather than fall into the simple, "us vs. them" mentality of American politics? Jesus Christ, you three are too intelligent to make generalizations like this. Abortion is not a topic (nor IS there a topic) that is LIBRULS VERSUS CONSERVAFASCISTS. Good God. Such "debate" is pointless and unproductive, and is, frankly, lazy reasoning.

I beg yer Politico.
THE only thing that differentiates McCain as a Conservative is his
Pro Life stance.
Man are you ever dense.
He's " Hillary in a suit " udderwise.

THE only thing that differentiates McCain as a Conservative is his
Pro Life stance.
By whose standard? Yours? Thank you, I'll form my own opinions.

By whose standard? Yours? Thank you, I'll form my own opinions.

But even " Opinions " have to have udder Danny Long leggs.
get it.?

At conception the baby has his/her own DNA. That is a simple fact that many of you try to ignore.

Oh wait, it's not a baby, it's a fetus. (what a cop out)


That is only if you believe that a bunch of cells are a person and that life begins at conception. My problem is with people who believe that life begins at conception, trying to get everone else to live by their beliefs.

People like me say life begins at conception.

Peple like you want to push that back and say life begins at birth.

You simply forget that if you allow the life that begun at conception to take its normal course, it will probably turn into a birth.


The abortions i'm talking about (IOW, the vast majority of the ones that are done) have nothing to do with 'pain' for a "child". They have to do with the elimination of unwanted embryos -- a clump of cells-- that feel no pain whatsoever.



LOL.

You and I both "kill innocent life" every time we wash our hands....... unlike you, I don't fret over "life" when that life consists of a mere zygote or a clumping of cells.

If you could get the job of making tiny, tiny little tombstones for all the millions of zygotes that are aborted --quite naturally-- every day on this planet, would you take it? After all, those zygotes were "life" , from your perspective. Maybe you could name all of them while you're at it. That ought to keep you busy.

_____________________________

A 3-day-old human embryo is a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst. In comparison, there are more than 100,000 cells in the brain of a housefly.

At conception the baby has his/her own DNA. That is a simple fact that many of you try to ignore.

Oh wait, it's not a baby, it's a fetus. (what a cop out)
Guess what else has its own DNA.... The bacteria that you kill when you wash your hands. MURDERER!!!!!

People like me say life begins at conception.

Peple like you want to push that back and say life begins at birth.
Have you ever thought that maybe there was a.... less radical way to look at it? But no, that's not possible, is it? Anyone who doesn't believe that an embryo is a "baby" must be for the murder of 8 month old fetuses!

At conception the baby has his/her own DNA. That is a simple fact that many of you try to ignore.
Ants have DNA. As DF said, bacteria have DNA. Hell, smallpox has DNA.

Ants have DNA. As DF said, bacteria have DNA. Hell, smallpox has DNA.
do they have unique human DNA?

regardless of when any of us believes life begins, should we show less respect for a body before life than we do after death?

Have you ever thought that maybe there was a.... less radical way to look at it? But no, that's not possible, is it? Anyone who doesn't believe that an embryo is a "baby" must be for the murder of 8 month old fetuses!
embryo, fetus, infant, toddler-where do you want to draw the line?

do they have unique human DNA?
Hmmm, let's see, do ants have human DNA? Good question.

embryo, fetus, infant, toddler-where do you want to draw the line?
I'm sorry, but if you think that a weeks-old fetus that doesn't even have the capability to feel pain is the same thing as a 3 year old, you are insane.

Hmmm, let's see, do ants have human DNA? Good question.
you missed the point-even a moment after conception, that child is unique. there has never been anyone like them, and there will never be again.

I'm sorry, but if you think that a weeks-old fetus that doesn't even have the capability to feel pain is the same thing as a 3 year old, you are insane.
i might be, but is a toddler aware of their mortality? it's not about what they feel, it's about what they are. everybody is somebody's child. it's a matter of family, not legal status.

you missed the point-even a moment after conception, that child is unique. there has never been anyone like them, and there will never be again.
So what? Fruit flies are unique too. In fact, one fruit fly can be as genetically different from another fruit fly as a human is from a chimpanzee. Do you think we should stop killing them?

Can you three lazy debaters at least try to keep this debate about the fucking issue rather than fall into the simple, "us vs. them" mentality of American politics? Jesus Christ, you three are too intelligent to make generalizations like this.
Normally I don't.
But if someone says this:
"....the "no rights over your on body" people .... do not want to help it in any way.....don't want to give it health care, pay for its schooling, food, cloths, love it, care for it, raise it, ....don't want to help the parents or the child......they could care less whatever happens after that..... Let it be put in foster care to be ....abused for the next 18 years while it waits for someone to adopt it."
and tells me I feel this way.
and claims to be liberal....

then I think they should be called on it.
If nothing else, I'm defending actual liberals.


And please don't talk about intellectual laziness in a post where you curse.

regardless of when any of us believes life begins, should we show less respect for a body before life than we do after death?
I don't believe there's any need to show respect to a body after death, either, beyond that necessary not to freak out loved ones and so on.
And please don't talk about intellectual laziness in a post where you curse.
It's a word. Big deal. As it happens, it was the proper English way to say what I wanted to say.

What a horribly inaccurate analogy.
Nobody is claiming all heart attacks are "murder". :slap:
No. Your and Echo's eerily similar analogy stated that "if life begins at conception then every miscarriage should be investigated as a possible infanticide." as if natural deaths were investigated as homicides.
They aren't.

It was a poorly planned comparison.

Hey, if an abortion is murder then a miscarriage could easily be manslaughter. If the mom does crystal meth during her pregnancy, and has a miscarriage, would you not say she's at fault?

If a fetus is a person, why don't we have a funeral for a miscarriage?

Hey now, I never said anything about abortion. That could just as easily be an argument for forcing all teenage mothers to give their babies up for adoption. Quit putting words in my mouth.
Hey sorry.

Someone said this: "However, saddling some 16 yr old with a baby when there are ways of preventing or terminating that pregnancy is punishment."

To which you replied: "It's punishment for the unwanted child who will most likely not have the best life..."
(the person you were responding to was talking about birth vs. not being born)



If that wasn't about abortion you really really fooled me.
But even you thought it could just as easily have been an argument for abortion.
You fooled both of us.

Guess what else has its own DNA.... The bacteria that you kill when you wash your hands. MURDERER!!!!!
I think he was implying human DNA in the case of the fetus.

If that wasn't about abortion you really really fooled me.
But even you thought it could just as easily have been an argument for abortion.
You fooled both of us.
And of course you completely ignore the rest of my post, in which I say what I actually think.

I think he was implying human DNA in the case of the fetus.
So he could say that it's important because it's human, which is a valid argument. Saying that fetus shouldn't be aborted because it has DNA is not.

Hey, if an abortion is murder then a miscarriage could easily be manslaughter. If the mom does crystal meth during her pregnancy, and has a miscarriage, would you not say she's at fault?
Some states do hold the mother responsible for certain behaviors while pregnant.

And of course you completely ignore the rest of my post, in which I say what I actually think.
Here's your post in its entirety
"It's punishment for the unwanted child who will most likely not have the best life..."

Am I missing something here?