Wichita Abortion Protestors Don’t Know What To Do With Themselves
Operation Rescue moved from California to Wichita seven years ago specifically to focus on George Tiller. There were regular shifts outside Tiller’s clinic to plant crosses daily and tried to convince women not to enter. But now, with his death, there are a bunch of activists in search of a target. And what will become of the bloody “truth truck” that had a sign saying “Abortion is an ObamaNation”?
When blocking entrances to clinics became illegal in 1994, anti-abortion zealots took to hanging out at restaurants frequented by clinic workers, searching their trash for information, and showing up at Tiller’s home and church. And Mark Gietzen, head of the Kansas Coalition for Life, says he’s got 600 pe0ple ready to appear if and when the Tiller clinic reopens. An army in search of a war.
Blood on their hands…
Kregg Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 1:25 am
In what way? They have apparently been peaceful in their protests…
average james Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:14 am
Baby killer in hell—–
God is your enemy—–
America is doomed—–
What’s the problem ?
Peaceful “christian “protesters, full of God’s love, want to share the good news with you.
Attractive isn’t it.
Kregg Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:17 am
James, peaceful as in ‘didn’t torch the place’ or peaceful as in ‘remained within the law’. Christian decorum is a completely different thing and gets left in the closet far too often… ;-)
average james Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:34 am
Not since 1986 anyway.
What’s up brother Kregg ?
Christian decorum does get left in the closet far too often for sure.
It saddens me.
It compounds problems which already exist, pushes people away with the shear hatred.
Love is out the window.
Love is the only answer, and they’ve thrown it out the window.
What the HELL are these people really thinking ?
Kregg Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:43 am
Not since 1986 anyway.
James said: What’s up brother Kregg ?
K: Same-o same-0. We need to talk cheap tig welders sometime. I need one strong enough to weld .095 and .120 roll bar material but don’t want to sell my wife to do it.
J: Christian decorum does get left in the closet far too often for sure.
It saddens me.
It compounds problems which already exist, pushes people away with the shear hatred.
Love is out the window.
Love is the only answer, and they’ve thrown it out the window.
What the HELL are these people really thinking ?
K: Many of them may be simply reacting emotionally to the known killing of unborn children. Not all people act rationally to knowing this happens. Others may simply follow where they are led. And, still others may be purposely loud and obnoxious since it seems the only way to be heard in today’s kultursmog of news and views.
average james Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:27 am
God sent the shooter—–
These people do not follow the same Christ that I do. I pray for them, Operation Rescue.
Christian conservative right-wing pro-lifers, these same people are largely ok with torture, the death penalty, war.
They are not pro-life, anti-abortion or pro-preborns is more accurate.
Kregg Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:39 am
God sent the shooter—–
J: These people do not follow the same Christ that I do. I pray for them, Operation Rescue.
K: I don’t follow any of them so don’t know the full extent of their repertoire but I’d agree that they do not represent Christ in the way I’d expect christians to do.
J: Christian conservative right-wing pro-lifers, these same people are largely ok with torture, the death penalty, war.
They are not pro-life, anti-abortion or pro-preborns is more accurate.
K: I think the term ‘pro-life’ is limited to the issue of abortion just as is ‘pro-choice’. To extend the thought beyond that would include even you as I remember you being ok with ‘necessary war’. Whether or not a ‘right-wing’ christian possesses a coherent reason for being both ‘pro-life’ in regards to unborn children and ‘pro-death’ in support of war is a question you’d have to ask each and every one to determine the validity of their protests.
average james Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:47 am
Fair, Kregg.
pizzaman Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 9:38 am
“average james” says Christian conservatives “are not pro-life, anti-abortion or pro-preborns is more accurate.”
So “average james” thinks there’s a difference between being “pro-life” and being pro-pre-born.” Now walk with me, “average james,” walk with me babe. Are “pre-borns” alive or are they inanimate? Good. “average james” says they’re alive. “average james” says, “But they’re not HUMAN.” (Caps courtesy of Rottweiler, the ill-begotten toothless mutt with a meek bark.) Pizzaman says “‘Don’t get ahead of yourself ‘average james.’ Just walk with me, babe.” So here, paused at step one, we stand two-abreast, each of us clear in the knowledge that the pre-born are living, and therefore, to be pro-pre-born is to be pro-life. Taking a step forward, “average james” insists, “But they’re not HUMAN.” Pizzaman says, “Well, ‘average james,’ being ‘HUMAN’ or ‘horse’ or ‘hogwart’ means having a particular genus and species. So what is the genus and species of a living pre-born produced by two homo sapiens?”
average james Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 10:38 am
Pizzaman,
You are mistaken.
I am a pro-life liberal.
These people are pro-life only for the preborn.
It sounds as if you are, also.
I believe in dialogue and mutual respect. Let’s find common ground and see if we can build on that.
A common thread with the conservative right is the “my way or the highway” approach, internationally and here at home. I do not feel this to be a respectful or productive approach.
michael Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
Those poster remind me of the ones that Fred Phelps and his “church” use when protesting the funerals of dead soldiers.
June 8th, 2009 at 1:05 am
So whoever protests should be blamed for violence? Give me a break. Protesters didn’t incite any violence. A nutcase who was anti-government, anti-everything decided to commit murder. Other than that I see a lot of blood on Tiller’s hands.
Damn straight they should be protesting. We’re not talking appendectomies here. We’re talking about slaughtering late-term unborn children. This is all done under the guise of healthcare or privacy rights. Just because it’s legal doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be protested and doesn’t mean laws and minds shouldn’t try to be changed.
I’m sure many people who were for slavery never changed their minds (as many people who are for the sacrosanct right to kill their own children never will). Does that mean that the abolitionists shouldn’t have tried?
michael Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:48 pm
I support their right to protest 100%, but saying things like “God sent the shooter” and “God is your enemy” aren’t particularly productive, and in many ways glorify the same sort of violence they claim to preach against.
OldLefty Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
It’s just good to know that we have morally superior people out there to pass judgment on those whose circumstances they know absolutely nothing.
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Much like slavery was needed…people need to understand the “circumstances” of the antebellum South more. Right, Oldlefty? People need to stop passing judgment on slaveholders. None of anybody’s business if I want a slave. Who are you to tell me I can’t own property? CHOICE!
Late-term abortion is an abomination regardless of circumstance.
Weren’t you one of the ones talking about how late-term abortions were never or rarely performed? So how did Tiller make bank and live a cushy life off procedures that are never performed?
TDro319 Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
I’m always interested in these protestors’ god. Is it the same god that told Bush to invade Iraq and cause all the bloodshed? Does their god tell these people that he “sent the shooter” or that he hates abortion doctors and are, therefore, his enemy?
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
So Saddam Hussein gassing Kurds was okay with you?
There was a lot of bloodshed in WWII…do we allow Nazis to take over the world and continue killing Jews? What is your response to that?
OldLefty Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Why didn’t they try Saddam for gassing the Kurds?
Why didn’t the people who sold him the gas do anything about it at the time?
Why didn’t Bush/Cheney campaign in 2000 on “Saddam is evil. and we will start a war to take him out and set up a democracy there”?
pizzaman Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 10:16 am
TDro319 wants to know if the God of the anti-abortion protesters hates abortion doctors, and whether these doctors are therefore his enemy.
TDro319 seems to think that a good God, a real God, hates no one and is no one’s enemy. Maybe he’s right. But here’s a good test question, TRro319, and if you dodge it, we’ll all see your dodge. The people being slaughtered in Darfur: Does God hate their slaughterers? Are they his enemies?
I THINK I know how I would answer this, but I’m not sure. Educate me, TR.
Pizzaman
Daddio Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 10:30 am
I don’t know who or what is TDro’s god. But I can tell you without reservation that my God is a God of love. He is a God that cannot hate anyone. He is the God that loves each and everyone of us UNCONDITIONALLY. But He is also a God that can be vengeful. He is a God that hates evil and He is a God that will eventually destroy all evil.
God loves every terrorist out there. God will judge every man and woman some day. We will all have to account for our actions here on earth. Abortion doctors will have to stand before God account to God. Terrorists will have to stand before God and account for their actions.
You and I will someday have to stand before God. All humanity will.
TDro has a tendency of ridiculing people of faith. The faith of the one true God. But I am not offended. My faith gives me the confidence I need to stand up before such criticism.
Jesus said such things will happen. That those who follow Him will be persecuted. But those who follow Him will enjoy eternal life in His Father’s Heavenly Kingdom. The Kingdom without end. Forever and ever.
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Some of those signs go over the line, agreed. “God sent the shooter” is bad.
pizzaman Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 9:54 am
Michael says that “saying things like ‘God is your enemy’ . . . in many ways glorif[ies] the same sort of violence [the protesters] claim to preach against.”
Think straight, Michael. The violence that the protesters preach against — not “claim” to preach against, as you cynically put it, but preach against — is the taking of innocent HUMAN life (caps courtesy of no-teeth, just gums Rottweiler). What violence do the protesters “glorify” that even approaches this? Aside from the rare protester who says, “God sent the Shooter” — and the pro-life movement roundly condemns this — what violence do they “glorify” at all? Why aren’t your gut feelings — and your brains — on the side of those innocents whose heads are crushed at a late stage of pregnancy, when even YOU would admit they’re HUMAN beings? You say I can never know what it’s like to be a pregnant woman in trouble. Granted. But have you ever tried to imagine what it’s like to have your head crushed? Think of being in a terrible car crash; we can all identify with that fear. Now just do a little transposing. What justification can you supply for doing that to another human being?
average james Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 10:45 am
Wrong about Michael too,
Pizzaman,
You are fast becoming one of the silly ones that are very hard to take seriously Pizzaman.
michael Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
Pizzaman,
If you’ve ever read my posts, you would know where I stand on the abortion issue. I think that our abortion rates are appalling and far too many unnecessary abortions take place. I also believe that far too many liberals make the mistake of placing more value on choice than on life. I’m not questioning the general sentiment of pro-life protesters, just their tactics.
EricG Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
“We’re talking about slaughtering late-term unborn children.”
Well we are talking about slaughtering innocent doctors doing their job.
“Other than that I see a lot of blood on Tiller’s hands.”
I see a lot of blood on the hands of antiabortion groups for what they do. They could pursue a course of action that wouldn’t breed insanity, they could take up for social programs that have shown to improve the situation, they could encourage their members to use civility even if passions run high.
But they don’t. Because they think killing certain people is just fine and they could really care less that some murderer took up the charge that they asked him to.
They have even gone as far to say that this murder of an innocent man is something to praise and celebrate.
They are anti-life and anti-American. End of story.
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 6:55 pm
Tiller killed 60,000 babies. His murder was not at all justified, but it’s hard to call Tiller “innocent” if you believe in science and factual reality, Eric.
Ohhhhhh, you’re not one to talk about civility when passions run high.
pizzaman Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 10:04 am
EricG says, “They are anti-life and anti-American. End of story.”
As usual, you folks see that your only way out of this is to tell a whopping lie and then declare the debate over, a la “End of story.” It’s obvious you guys rarely debate.
The truth is that although there are some in the anti-abortion movement who are joyful that Tiller got it, the overwhelming majority see Tiller’s killing as an outright murder that should be prosecuted. I totally agree. But, hey, that’s just MY moral point of view. I wouldn’t want to forcei it on you. Ha! Keep thinking EricG, that’s what you’re good at. And please, tell those who think like you do to keep posting; it’ll take years, but eventually America will come to see what liars you are.
June 8th, 2009 at 1:19 am
I never realized that Alan was anti-protest…oh wait what’s that? He’s only anti-abortion protest? Oh ok…that’s not hypocritical at all…
EricG Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
Blah, blah, blah. Show me where he is anti-protest.
As usual you have just managed to make some weird point that doesn’t make any sense and are trying to throw dirt on Alan because he puts out the truth the right wing doesn’t want people like you to see.
Explain to me how harassment is protest, explain to me how digging in someone’s trash is protest, explain to me how shooting someone in the face is protest.
The entire right wing and all Pro-Lifers should really get with the program before we have more incidents like this. They are immoral and disrectful people who hold no interest in protecting the common good and care only for their ‘moral law’ which allows them to kill their own children.
Hypocrites? HAHAHAHAHAHA! Pot called the kettle black.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 3:02 am
I didn’t say Harassment is protest…you did.
I make my ascertion on the point that Alan has never derided any other group of protesters…(except maybe Pro Prop-8, protesters).
I’m firmly on the record in other posts that protestors should be “peaceful” and not physically do anything other than be where they are and waive their signs and yell their chants. They shouldn’t go into churches, they shouldn’t as a matter of good taste go to their homes, they shouldnt’ block doorways, and they should never shoot doctors. However if they wish to peacably assemble and use their right to free speech, then so be it.
June 8th, 2009 at 1:42 am
Since these people are such great Americans, and they view life as so sacred, and they are such devout Christians that they would doubtless surrender their lives for God, let’s send them over to Iraq on a mission to persuade everybody there to stop killing each other.
Or let’s send them to Texas, the leader in US executions, or to China, which leads the world in executions, to put an end to state-sponsored killing.
Or send them to Darfur to protest the slaughter there.
EricG Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
Damn straight!
I am sitting here wondering the same thing.
When did these people start screaming about the genocide in Dafur between harassing aboprtion clinic workers?
They didn’t. Because they could give a damn about Christians and could give a damn about murder and killing. They only care about one thing:
A law.
And none of them want to protect children, only their on faith and view of the world.
If even ONE of them would talk about preventing pregnancy and sex education for minors then I would be proven dead wrong. But they don’t.
This group of people proves to me that some Americans truly hate their country and hate freedom. They would better suited to live in a dictatorship.
pizzaman Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 10:24 am
EricG says:
“If even ONE of them would talk about preventing pregnancy and sex education for minors then I would be proven dead wrong.”
EricG, I am “ONE” of “them.” I would talk to you about preventing pregnancy and sex education for minors.” From which it follows that . . .
You are not only wrong, EricG, but “proven dead wrong.”
Daddio Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 10:37 am
Pizzaman,–I also have talked about preventing pregnancy and sex education, but Eric doesn’t agree with me so therefore he will never admit to be proven wrong.
I am all for preventing pregnancy, but where I think I differ from Eric on this is I believe there is and should be personal responsibility with the individuals. You know one of two things can happen when two have sex. You either become pregnant or you don’t. Knowing there is a chance you may become pregnant, but you don’t want to become pregnant, then the ONLY sure way not to become pregnant is to abstain from sex. WORKS EVERY TIME IT HAS EVER BEEN TRIED. That is where personal responsibility comes in. JUST SAY NO!!!
I believe in sex education. I think it starts in the home. But I also think that if it is taught in schools then abstinence should be also incluced. Again, abstinence is personal responsibility.
June 8th, 2009 at 2:01 am
Operation Rescue = American Taliban
goliath43 Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 3:06 am
Peaceful protesters that disagree with your liberal views and you want to label them…what a suprise
Montana Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 4:50 am
Peaceful protesters preaching hate so they can rile up the mental retard right wingnuts to do their killing for them. American right wing extremist are a greater threat to this country than the foreign terrorist.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 6:41 am
The protestors that are peaceful I’m sure would have settled for Tiller simply stopping his practice, and most publicly have denounced his killing. (there are some that revel in his death, and those people are sick) I’m sure most of even the more peaceful protesters don’t feel all that bad about his death, but they also weren’t advocating for Mr. Tillers brutal killing.
I guess what I’m trying to say Montana, is that your post is ignorant…at best.
Daddio Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 9:43 am
Like the left wing nuts that surrounded the homes of the band CEO’s like AIG and threatened them with death? Like the pro gay protesters who interrupted a church service and shouted obscenities and threw fliers all over the church and engaged in behavior with sexual overtones?
Is that the kind of “peaceful protests” that the right should engage in Montana?
placefield Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 10:59 am
Montana,
Maybe you know more about these protesters them me but I missed the part about them preaching hate. I like you do not agree with there agenda, but if you are going to label them wingnuts it might be good practice to not act like one yourself. Calling them the American Taliban is definatly a wingnut move.
placefield Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:36 am
Alright, I looked at the above picture a little closer and I see the hate in the signs. Still think calling them the American Talivan is a wingnut move though.
goliath43 Reply:
June 10th, 2009 at 3:59 am
I can’t tell from the picture that they are right wing or left wing so from your comments you can tell. Who are the right wing extremist that you are refering to the people in the photo using there constitutional rights to protest something they don’t agree with.
June 8th, 2009 at 2:10 am
To Rocky the Liberal Dachsund, er, “Rottweiler,” and all such with toothless logic: The implicit premise of your attempted sarcasm is that anyone who “views life as sacred,” and is such a “devout Christian that he would surrender his life for God” should be sent on a mission to Iraq to persuade everybody there to stop killing each other. Keep thinking, Rocky. That’s what you’re good at. You don’t view life as sacred? Oh, you do? Bye. Write to us from Iraq. Oh. You say it’s necessary, in addition, to be a devout Christian in order to qualify for this mission?
What a deliciously illogical bigot. Colmes and his friends are the best thing for conservatives since George McGovern. Said Colmes of Tiller: “He’s an American hero.” This is high comedy, folks, brought to you by Fox, no less. If I were a conservative radio station, I’d have Alan on all night. Tell us Alan (and the rest of you “logicians”): What’s the difference in essence between a fetus 20 minutes before delivery and a new born baby? Why do YOU call it murder to kill in one case and not in the other? Oh, I forget, Obama doesn’t even call the LATTER case murder, as evidenced by what he did while a senator in Illinois.
Pizzaman awaits your comical delivery, Rocky.
Kregg Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 10:18 am
Pizza said: Pizzaman awaits your comical delivery, Rocky.
K: Hey Pizza, give Rocky a break. He’s not going to respond to you because he’s having trouble with those really big words you used in your response.
EricG Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
Pizzaman – well first off screw you and the horse you rode in on. Your obviously one more anti-life wing nut who wants to defend a fetus but could care less about anyone else.
“What a deliciously illogical bigot.”
Sounds like your average “pro-lifer” to me. Bunch of bigots who hate the fact that we have freedom of choice in this nation.
“What’s the difference in essence between a fetus 20 minutes before delivery and a new born baby? Why do YOU call it murder to kill in one case and not in the other?”
We will go through this until all you low brain-space conservative can finally grasp it. The issue is not when life begins.
The issue is what kind of PUBLIC POLICY should we have in America.
And outlawing abortion is downright wrong for America, wrong for children and wrong for mothers.
If you would just put down the Bible and read some data you would leave the “pro-life” movement and become an advocate for early sex education and birth control programs.
But that doesn’t matter to you. You have your enemy and you could care less who gets hurt in your crusade to ’save life.’
I question your willingness to protect life and your willingness to be an American.
Life is sacred. Just that doesn’t mean you or anyone has to go and do somethign about it.
That’s why Tiller got killed. Because of people like you out there advocating to GO GET EM! when you should be trying to be intelligent and not a useless moron.
Too bad. I guess your just one more idiot who can’t hear anything but religious propaganda and right wing lies … it’s a shame.
pizzaman Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 10:39 am
The recently proven “dead wrong” EricG says:
“The issue is not when life begins. The issue is what kind of PUBLIC POLICY should we have in America.”
So according to EricG, even if HUMAN life (caps courtesy of mangy Rottweiler) has already begun, an individual’s living is not a matter of that individual’s RIGHTS, but rather of PUBLIC POLICY. Now there’s an American for you. If PUBLIC POLICY says its more useful to “the public” have slaves, then that’s OK, and screw the slave’s RIGHTS. Gee, just think, PUBLIC POLICY might even make it useful to “the public” to lynch a few of the most troublesome slaves, just to make an example of them. Screw their RIGHTS as HUMAN beings. After all, as EricG says, “The issue is not when life begins.”
Keep talking, you guys. You’re stepping all over your most private parts. I hate to see a man do this to himself, but if he refuses to tell the truth and refuses to use his brain, well . . .
average james Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 10:56 am
Hey Pizzaman,
You remind me of infidel.
Are you infidel ??
goliath43 Reply:
June 10th, 2009 at 4:02 am
EricG
you have got to be the most two faced person on here. You talk about public policy about abortion but scream about equal rights for gay marriage even though it was voted down in California. what a joke
June 8th, 2009 at 4:07 am
“The implicit premise…”
It’s not my implicit premise. There’s nothing “implicit” about it. I made a statement. You quoted it. End of story.
“You don’t view life as sacred?”
I view most HUMAN life as absurd. Your toothless attempt at creating an argument only confirms my opinion.
“What a deliciously illogical bigot.”
I would be a bigot if I singled out some particular group for my contempt. In fact, I’m a misanthrope, because I have contempt for everyone in equal measure. Well, except for radical rightwing evangelical extremists, who lurk at the very bottom of the cesspool of humanity.
“Why do YOU call it murder to kill in one case and not in the other?”
If you had half a functioning braincell you’d realize that’s exactly what I just said to all the folks like you down at the bottom of the cesspool.
“What’s the difference in essence between a fetus 20 minutes before delivery and a new born baby?”
The difference is one got born, the other didn’t, but it’s doubtless too fine a point for someone with a Texas education to ever comprehend.
pizzaman Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 9:14 am
To Dachsund, er, “Rottweiler”:
Learn how to bite. I ask you do you not consider life sacred?” — using YOUR phrasing — and you answer that you consider most HUMAN life absurd. So because you consider most of your fellow HUMAN beings to have absurd lives, their lives are not “sacred”? No wonder we had Dachau and Darfur. What easy fun you are.
You say you would be a bigot if you had singled out some particular group for your contempt. Are you senile? You DID single out a group for your contempt: “devout Christians.” By your own admission, you’re a bigot.
As for the most interesting point, the difference IN ESSENCE between being inside the womb and being outside . . . How does going from inside to outside change the essence of the thing? Do you change, IN ESSENCE, when you walk out of your house? (I’m assuming someone with a mind like yours isn’t housebound, which assumes a lot.) Do carrots change, IN ESSENCE, when they are unearthed?
Please continue, mon poseur.
Kregg Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 10:23 am
PIzza said: Do carrots change, IN ESSENCE, when they are unearthed?
K: Rocky, just a hint: Pizza’s not asking wether carrots smell different when they’re unearthed…
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
Pizzaman, didn’t you know that sliding down the birth canal conveys humanity, personhood, and rights?
It’s like the tooth fairy. Magic vagina!
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Pizzaman, I’m surprised you don’t understand that a birth canal conveys humanity, personhood, and rights.
It’s magic, like the tooth fairy. Magic va-gina!
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
June 10th, 2009 at 3:10 am
It’s magic, like the tooth fairy. Magic va-gina!
—
I was a c-section baby…am I not a person?????
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
“…the difference IN ESSENCE between being inside the womb and being outside…”
You can repeat it as much as you like, pizzaface, and the answer is you’re not born till you’re born.
“…and you answer that you consider most HUMAN life absurd. So because you consider most of your fellow HUMAN beings to have absurd lives…”
If you could read, you might be dangerous. Considering human life absurd is not the same as considering people’s lives absurd.
“…their lives are not “sacred”?”
Let’s face facts. The quality of something being “sacred” is religious dog-crap. It’s superstition. I.E.: it’s meaningless. And, by the way, it’s got nothing to do with Nazi death camps.
But as for carrots, >>>!!!IN ESSENCE!!!<<< heck yeah they change. They change from being a plant to being food.
EricG Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
ARGH!
Seriously!
This issue of when life begins is not part of the discussion.
It’s all interesting and we all have our own little takes on it, none of which align.
The bottom line is what kind of public policy are we going to have. Are we going to have a public policy that leaves women going to back-alleys or are we going to have a public policy that lowers the number of abortions each year?
The Republicans and conservatives want to talk about when life begins because it distracts from the issue and doesn’t help to solve the problems.
Thus we go round and round until someone stands up and says:
“Pro-Lifers” hate the poor and want to see women dead.
That’s it.
The murders and ‘killers’ are the antiabortion people. They have no solution but to take their Bible and transcripe it into law and not a single idea in how to limit abortions in the US. All the while they harass and demean their fellow human beings with hateful words and now … bullets.
Shame on you all!
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 6:56 pm
“The Republicans and conservatives want to talk about when life begins because it distracts from the issue…”
That’s the whole damned issue, Eric. Don’t you think it’s relatively important to legally determine when life begins? Or are you like the other close-minded “pro-choice” libs who assume that it begins at birth?
June 8th, 2009 at 8:00 am
So called Pro-Life people appear to be in a blind rage over abortion. As Alan says, they are Pro-fetus more then Pro-Life. All these protesters ready for action might want to spend their time and energy say, as foster parents or actually adopt some children.
Late term abortions are for MEDICAL reasons and are LEGAL.
It is a fetus not a child or an accountant for that matter…they project too much
It has never been called murder legally, medically, scientifically or socially until pro-fetus zealots came along.
You want less abortions? Then help prevent unwanted pregnancies…with real sex education, readily available contraception and even minors ability to get RU469.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 8:30 am
I’m gonna guess your RU469 is an attempt at a joke..but I think it is RU486.
Budda Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 8:38 am
yeah, and I’m numerically dyslexic…
placefield Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:02 am
Dyslexia, affecting 10 out of every 1 people.
Kregg Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:11 am
Place said: Dyslexia, affecting 10 out of every 1 people.
K: ROFLMAO!
average james Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:36 am
Place man hahahahaha
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Did you all hear about the insomniac agnostic dyslexic who was up all night wondering if there was a dog?
Thank you!
average james Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
Flap,
You forgot the rimshot.
Hehehe
Daddio Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 8:38 am
It’s real simple Budda. If a person does not want to become pregnant all they have to do is refuse to have sex. (Exceptions in rape and incest where the person is forced into it)
Have you ever wished your mother would have had an abortion Budda?
Budda Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 8:41 am
Denying libido is foolish and just ignorant, and if my mother would have chosen to have an abortion it would be her choice not mine or yours.
Daddio Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 8:45 am
Sure, but I wouldn’t have the pleasure of discussing issues with you Budda.
Kregg Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 10:28 am
Budda said: Denying libido is foolish and just ignorant,
K: Well, thats thinking with – uh – your ‘brain’… Of course, denying libido is perfectly logical, practical, and smart. It’s called, in the vernacular – self control. Works every time it’s tried.
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
My mother didn’t have the right to kill me despite whatever cockamamie law or laws exists.
placefield Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
That’s not what my mom used to say. She alway’s told me that she brought me into this world and she could take me out of it also.
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
lol…Post-birth abortions by mothers are allowed. :)
TDro319 Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
“lol…Post-birth abortions by mothers are allowed. :)”
And the U.S. commander-in-chief.
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
Barack Obama is killing Americans every day…no blood for oil! Gimme a break.
pizzaman Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 9:37 am
To my conservative friends: Don’t get mad at Dachsund and friends; just relax and enjoy them. Absurdity is to be enjoyed. Enjoy the play of their wonderfully ludicrous minds upon the world.
Like Alan’s and “Rottweiler’s”. (Woof). A caller pointed out to Alan last week that the “God” of American tort law, William Prosser, said as far back as 1971 — that is, BEFORE Roe v. Wade, that “if existence (of human life) at the time (of prenatal injury) is necessary, medical authority has recognized long since that the child is in existence from the moment of conception.” Prosser, Law of Torts, 4th Ed., 1971. And how did Alan handle the problem? He says, “Well, that doesn’t prevent me from arguing that it was only AFTER pro-life extremists became active that doctors began saying that life begins at conception.” Well, uh, yes it does, Alan; Prosser does pretty much prevent you from arguing that, unless you refute him, which you didn’t.
And you can’t, because at the time Roe v. Wade was decided, an overwhelming number of states prohibited had prohibited abortion for YEARS — precisely for the reason Prosser said: They considered HUMAN life (as absurd as “Rottweiler” thinks it is) to begin at conception.
Any reply, toothless dog?
Southern Girl Lib Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:23 am
Woman is raped, sweep it under the rug. Women having back alley abortions, bleed to death, sweep it under the rug. Incest, pregnant at 10 years old, sweep it under the rug.
Until your side acknowledges these facts, the dialogue is going nowhere.
average james Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:41 am
SGL,
Big time agreement.
This sucks from every angle.
Nobody wants more abortions. period.
Hate is not an answer.
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
“Women having back alley abortions”
That’s like me shooting myself as I’m killing my kid. That’s tough crap, SGL. If you’re killing your kid and you bleed to death, perhaps you shouldn’t be trying to kill your kid in the first place.
We’re not talking about a damn appendectomy or tonsillectomy or whatever.
Sweep what under the rug? SGL, even if you don’t believe abortion is killing a human being, consider conservatives. We believe, with pretty overwhelming evidence, that abortion extinguishes a human life. Do you honestly and truly think it is moral or rational to justify killing an INNOCENT life because a gross evil has been committed?
The dialogue gets no place because you refuse to recognize basic biology and instead insist on empty pep rally phrases like “pro-choice” and “reproductive freedom” and “it’s MY body” and other nonsense that is essentially irrelevant.
michael Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
flap,
Am I hearing that you do not support an exception for rape/incest? I would have to take issue with that. Even if in that case it would not be your personal choice, I don’t think that you are in any position to tell a woman who was raped what to do.
average james Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
Flap,
A dialogue cannot even get started with all of these pre-conditions.
SGL raises legitimate points as does Lefty and others.
Flap and others raise legitimate points.
You may disagree but, to simply dismiss anothers’ point of view as not valid will not facilitate discussion.
What commanalities do we share ?
Less abortions for starters.
Pretty solid common ground, in my opinion.
TDro319 Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
Flap:
You seem to think that if abortions were made illegal, women would simply stop getting them. WRONG! The women will just find somebody else to perform the procedure and may settle for someone less qualified – which is why they’re called “back alley abortions”. This could endanger not only the babies life, but the mother’s as well.
TDro319 Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
“Less abortions for starters.
Pretty solid common ground, in my opinion.”
True AJ. Nobody wants an abortion. A woman doesn’t wake up one morning a decide to have one. I’m sure this is a very difficult decision for women to make.
What would promote less abortions? Less sex. I really don’t know how we’re going to convince people to have less sex, especially teenagers with their raging hormones.
pizzaman Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Woman has inconvenient pregnancy that gets in the way of “empowerment,” innocent child must die if mommy wants. Sweep it under the rug.
Woman gets raped. Rather than give up child for adoption, innocent child must die if mommy wants. Sweep it under the rug.
1.5 million abortions a year (total) since 1973. That’s 525,000,000 million. IF ONLY ONE PER CENT of these were killed in the 9th month, when any sane person would consider the fetus HUMAN (caps courtesy of toothless “Rottweiler”), that’s still about 5 million killings of what almost all agree are HUMAN beings. Until one of you credibly explains to me the ESSENTIAL difference — the difference in ESSENCE — between a 9th month fetus and a 10 year old Jew, the abortion industry will be America’s Dachau. Go ahead you toothless Rottweilers, cast your lot with death camp operators. I’ll side with the HUMANS, even if they carry posters saying “God is your enemy.” Nazis were God’s enemies. Tell me the difference IN ESSENCE between an about-to-be-born fetus and a 10 year old Jew. You can’t, and still you support partial birth abortion. You’re right, Rottweiler: (Your idea of) Life is absurd.
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
TDro, I am not for banning all abortions, but I am for raising awareness that we’re dealing with very important stuff here…the lives of the unborn. The “choice” argument doesn’t work if there’s a human life at stake.
EARLY term abortions (1st trimester), though repugnant to me, I’d say would be very hard to ban or make a scientific case to ban them. At least for the mainstream. 90% of abortions occur during this period. That should probably stay legal. Birth control can potentially cause abortions when an embryo does not implant. I’m sure a lot of pro-life people are on birth control and don’t even realize that.
“Am I hearing that you do not support an exception for rape/incest?”
Again, what is at the heart of the abortion issue, at least for conservatives? Human life. Unborn human life. Are you trying to tell me that because a human life was created based on rape or incest, it is an “exception” to other life? Let’s say a mother births said child conceived of rape and then CHANGES HER MIND. Shouldn’t that child be able to be killed? Why or why not? It’s not logical, folks.
Am I saying it’s an easy issue for the woman who is raped? NO. If my daughter became pregnant due to rape, would it be easy? NO. But our system of laws and justice doesn’t always deal with easy decisions. Like I said, 1st trimester should probably stay open. That allows for child-killing to legally occur.
Why should we have less abortions if there’s nothing wrong with them? Is there something wrong with them? If so, what?
“You seem to think that if abortions were made illegal, women would simply stop getting them.”
I’m not naive. And you made the point about endangering the baby’s life…uh, obviously the baby’s life is being extinguished so it is certainly endangering it. Do you think I want to hurt women? Good grief, no. As I said, 1st trimester abortions. But very early on, 2nd trimester or so, the baby develops senses, taste, hearing, etc. Who knows when the baby can feel pain? I’ve heard 29 weeks but perhaps it’s earlier. And is that even relevant? Is killing an unborn child okay even if he/she feels no pain?
EricG Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
“Woman has inconvenient pregnancy that gets in the way of “empowerment,” innocent child must die if mommy wants. Sweep it under the rug. Woman gets raped. Rather than give up child for adoption, innocent child must die if mommy wants. Sweep it under the rug.”
So you are fit to describe what women both think and will do with their own bodies?
Isn’t that nice for you. Being a lord over women.
You are just one more example of someone who has NEVER been effected by this personally thus you have a shallow and ridiculous point of view on the matter.
You have never ONCE faced these decisions or had someone who you care deeply about face them.
I wish you could get pregnant. That would be fitting.
Your whole point of view is founded on … what?
The Bible? Something you heard on the radio?
Don’t waste the time of real Americans out here in the trenches of the real world with your BS.
Your comments only prove to everyone not biased to the point of insanity that you hate women having reign over their own bodies and cannot be trusted to make the right decision.
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
My whole point of view is founded on…SCIENCE.
Have you ever studied Biology and Human Development, Eric? Surely you at least have a GED.
michael Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
flap,
I never said that it would be MY choice to abort a fetus that was the result of rape or incest, but just as you say that even though early term abortions are repugnant to you but you would still keep them legal, I don’t think I would feel comfortable telling a 14 year old girl who was raped by her father what to do. It’s a case where I believe that there is enough moral debate that choice is warranted.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 3:08 am
.5 million abortions a year (total) since 1973. That’s 525,000,000 million. IF ONLY ONE PER CENT of these were killed in the 9th month, when any sane person would consider the fetus HUMAN (caps courtesy of toothless “Rottweiler”), that’s still about 5 million killings of what almost all agree are HUMAN beings
—
Pizzaman, care to do your math again. Even though we are essentially on the same side of the fight, lets at least use credible math.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 3:09 am
sloppy cut and paste…1.5 million abortions a year since 1973.
June 8th, 2009 at 8:05 am
Why are these people going after the doctors? Are the doctors holding guns to the expectant mother’s heads and forcing her into their office?
average james Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
TDro,
You raise an oft forgotten point.
Another thing,
I have never seen an ad campaign soliciting abortions.
I have seen billboards with anti-abortion messages.
Why is that ?
TDro319 Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
That’s a good questions, AJ. Perhaps the doctors aren’t trying to sell their services. That would mean that pregnant women actually seek them out.
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
What would be nice is if there was a way to “undo” a pregnancy so an abortion wouldn’t even be an option and then no one would give a crap on either side of the issue!
EricG Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
This has been my point for awhile now.
The so-called Pro-Life Movement doesn’t seem to care to hear the facts about the matter. They don’t want to make the women the ‘evil doers’ but then when someone explains that no abortion doctor has ever performed even one without a direct request directly from the mother.
So why exactly is it that only the doctors need to be shot in the face and called ‘baby killers?’
Let’s see O’Reilly and all the Media Hacks jump up and call for the ‘disgusting abortion mothers’ to be sent to hell … let’s see that!
They all have no stance beyond reading the Bible with coke-bottle glasses on.
Each and every one of them holds a hand in the murder of Dr. Tiller.
June 8th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
Woman gets raped. Rather than give up child for adoption, innocent child must die if mommy wants. ~ Pizza
I cannot have a dialogue with you if that is your stance. You are a male, right? You have no clue. None.
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Isn’t he telling the truth, though? Where is the logical flaw in the argument? A mother, under current laws, has complete control over life and death.
Life is unfair and is not easy. Of course he has no clue. Neither do I.
Does he or me having no clue justify terminating the life of an unborn child under any circumstance?
Southern Girl Lib Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
A little mercy and understanding goes a long way.
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 7:10 pm
SGL, I know you can’t get it through your liberal head, but I am not trying to pass judgment on ANYBODY. Life is complicated and harsh.
One of the reasons I’m a Christian is I realize what an evil person I am. In God’s eyes, any of my (many) sins are no better or no worse than abortion or whatever sin you wanna bring up.
I believe abortion in most cases to be murder. This is based on science, biology, etc., not a RELIGIOUS belief. I believe it should be codified into law that the murder of the unborn (especially late-term) should not be allowed. Simple.
michael Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
Codifying it into law wouldn’t go very far, Flap, If Roe v. Wade were to be overturned, only the states with the lowest abortion rates would ban it anyway. Even then, women would continue to seek out back alley abortions.
What we REALLY need is to take pragmatic steps to reduce unwanted pregnancies, and influence cultural change so that we all have more respect for human life, in-utero or otherwise.
TDro319 Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
” A mother, under current laws, has complete control over life and death.”
Just like Bush and Cheney had. And their excuse was basically “I’m in charge, I’m calling the shots. If it means killing innocent people, so be it.”
But somehow the killing of innocent post born people doesn’t seem to bother you. I’m sorry. I don’t understand this logic at all.
average james Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
This is something I’ve puzzled about for years. Duplicity.
Also, it seems to me that the pro-choice argument is Libertarian/Republican in it’s logic.
Leave me alone, don’t tell me what to do.
I’ll decide for myself, I don’t want some law telling me what I can or can’t do with my body.
Aren’t the right all about school choice, retirement fund choice, union or no union choice, big car-small car choice, health care choice, etc…..
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
AJ, those “choices” all don’t involve killing an unborn child. It doesn’t make sense to me how you people conflate those issues with the abortion issue.
DID I EVER SAY KILLING OF THE POST-BORN DOES NOT BOTHER ME, TDRO?! NEVER. In some cases, killing of the post-born is justified. And of course it bothers me. I think (and many concur) that killing of the unborn is a much worse evil. Much, much worse. Completely innocent life extinguished as it is born.
TDro319 Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
Flap:
Seriously??? You actually think losing a pre-born person is much worse than the killing a post-born person? You must be devoid of emotion.
I hope you never have to be told that your child will be coming home in a body bag.
Daddio Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
You don’t understand much of anything that isn’t way, way far left wing TDro.
You keep repeating your mantra of “…killing of post born people doesn’t seem to bother you.”
Such drivel is getting boring. If you actually believe that about Flap then you really don’t read his comments or you simply cannot comprehend what he is saying. You have said the same about me many times here. But nowhere can you find any comments from me that the killing of “post born people doesn’t…bother” me.
You really cannot score any points with your arguments anymore.
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
TDro essentially thinks that because war exists, I can’t be against abortion.
TDro319 Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 8:50 pm
Daddio:
Believe me, I’m not trying to score any points with you. You can keep your “save the fetus, kill the child” attitude. And nothing’s going to change your mind. But who cares?
Flap:
Of course we know you’re against abortion. You remind us daily. And as long as you keep reminding me about your anti-abortion stance, I’ll keep reminding you of my anti-war stance.
flap Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 12:28 am
TDro, you’re making no sense. War deaths versus abortion deaths are completely different issues. War deaths occur in the context (or guise) of trying to defend the country. Abortion deaths occur when a mother chooses to terminate a pregnancy. Can you not separate the two issues?
You’re saying that because I am against abortion I must also logically be a pacifist? That’s like me saying you must be for war since you are for abortion.
EricG Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
No, Pizzaman is not telling the truth.
You and he are not fit to sit in judgment of a woman’s decision.
Are you two God?
Well that’s the standard required for you to be so righteous about sanctimonious about this.
“Does he or me having no clue justify terminating the life of an unborn child under any circumstance?”
Can anything anywhere justify the loss of life?
You say this sentence but if you follow the logic through you’ll see that all you can base yourself in is scientific fact. Facts like:
Birth control and sex education limits the number of abortions each year.
Life does not begin at conception and recent data suggests that personality may not even form until after birth.
—–
If even one so-called pro-lifer would show me anything but Bible quotes and spit all over the table I would take them more seriously.
I was raised Catholic and other things in my life directly connect me to this issue.
So I really have no tolerance for the Pizzaman, Guido and Flap stance on this.
It just begs the question if ANY pro-lifers ever read anything about this issue or if they just scream into people’s faces while ignoring all facts.
June 8th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
“Until one of you credibly explains to me the ESSENTIAL difference — the difference in ESSENCE — between a 9th month fetus and a 10 year old Jew, the abortion industry will be America’s Dachau.”
Sez who? You? Why the heck should anyone care what you have to say? You’re spending time here venting along with all the rest of the peons, so likely your opinions don’t amount to a hill of beans.
pizzaman Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Rottweiler:
Your reply is so lacking in substance that I’m not even going to pick on your puny arguments anymore, except to say this: When are you guys going to do the math? Even when I, drunk with the power of my own argument, missmultiply by ten-fold the number of abortions in the 9th month since Roe v. Wade, you still don’t get it. I correct myself: It’s not 5 million; it’s only 500,000 or so that MOST OF US HUMANS consider to be lost HUMAN life. There; feel better? But who’s counting? Obviously not you.
And Southern Girl: You seem to say that a woman cannot talk to man who thinks a fetus near birth is HUMAN. That says much worse things about your sex than it does mine. Let me get this straight: Although the critical question is: “What is this being? A HUMAN or something less?”, a woman under stress and with great personal interest in the outcome is more apt to have an objective answer to that question than a male. Ha! So the essence of a thing depends on what we desperately want it to be. Sweetheart, I’ve got a ‘96 Honda outside, and I’d love it to be a 2009 Lexus. So it must be one. Geez, how “empowering” that is.
Go back to the basic question: What is this thing? A HUMAN, or something less. Reasonable people might disagree about what it is in the first trimester, but nobody in their right mind thinks it’s non-human just before birth. By your logic, you’d kill a newborn. You’ll have mercy, provided you don’t kill. But why should those who kill in this circumstance get mercy they don’t give it to a newborn or a soon-to-be-born?
You folks crack me up.
Rottweiler: Go get a new name and come back to Liberland as someone else. Make a new start for yourself, this time with a brain. Or stay on and give us conservatives some fun.
Pizzaman
EricG Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
You folks crack me, too.
Your so twisted into intellectual gymnastics it makes the head spin.
I forgot to praise the Lord named Pizzaman … forgive me! Oh no!
Your obviously in touch with God and talk to him over breakfast to have such a clear view of exactly when life begins and who exactly is the ’sinner.’
Did you cry in the opening days of the Iraq war or only when you went on some Pro-Life website with disgusting images on it?
I don’t think your pro-life. You’re pro-fetus. And the only reason you defend them is because they can’t respond to your negative and hateful BS and declare themselves to have nothing to do with your baloney.
I think your hatred for ‘woman empowerment’ speaks volumes of why you hold this position. It has NOTHING to do with fetus’ or anything except that women have something you can’t control.
Wah, wah, wah, Cry me a river and welcome to America you fascist pig.
You should get yourself a new name too.
here are some ideas:
FetusLoverWomanKiller
IHateFreedom
LiberalsShouldAllDie
KillTiller
BushIsLord
DeadWomenIsMyBusiness
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
Eric, the intellectual gymnastics are on your side, where “pro-choice” refers to terminating a human life. Women’s empowerment should not equal control of another human being’s life or death.
Maybe, Eric, you think your mother had a right to abort you in utero. She didn’t have a right to do it to me, I can tell you that. Despite the legal status of it, I had a right to live as a fetus.
Try studying human development. You and other libs might be surprised at the humanity that you find in a mere fetus.
pizzaman Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 11:25 pm
TDro319: Thanks for acknowledging that my reply to you was “all very nice.” Not as praising as my argument actually deserved, but hey, this is an Alan Colmes blog, after all.
As for your next line, “Now ask Bush and Cheney ‘when life ends.’?” I have two responses: First, WTF does THAT have to do with it? Does it means that if they agree with you on the question, my argument is wrong? Or that if they disagree with you, my argument is wrong? A plain “No” to both questions. So what is your point? Stop using your reflexes — as in knee jerk — and start thinking. You can no more win an argument by using the names Cheny and Bush than you can by saying, “Yo mama.” Sorry, sorry. I didn’t mean to implicate a large number of liberals who actually use “Yo mama” as an argument-ender. (Honestly, have you ever heard a conservative end an argument that way?)
But at any rate, just to perpetuate the immense fun that you provide, I’d like you to tell me what YOU think Bush and Cheny would say about when life ends. And why you think it. The world is waiting.
Pizzaman
June 8th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Why didn’t they try Saddam for gassing the Kurds?
They did, we facilitated it.
Verdict: Guilty
Sentence: Rope.
Until your side acknowledges these facts, the dialogue is going nowhere.
I agree. There have to be exceptions:
1. Victim of crime
2. Health of Mother.
Peaceful protesters that disagree with your liberal views
This is true. Pro-choice advocates are not interested with offering these women choice:
I especially appreciate “the likes of…” part.
This same thought process was behind Spitzer pressuring GE form marketing ultrasound machines to small clinics. See it turns out that when a woman sees her child, she is more likely to change her mind and keep the baby.
Crazy crazy right wing nuts! Actually providing information to these women.
OldLefty Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
No, he wasn’t. Saddam Hussein and seven different defendants were put on trial for the killing of 148 Shias who tried to assassinate him in Dujail in 1982.
” Pro-choice advocates are not interested with offering these women choice:”
……………………..
Actually Planned parenthood offers contraception, breast cancer screening, men’s health services, parenting and adoption counseling.
average james Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Thanx again Lefty,
That Planned Parenthood is exclusively an abortion mill is a common misconception that I laboured under for years. The picture is of PP is painted all black by the folks on AM and “christian ” radio.
I have real trouble with the whole misrepresentation thing, especially from those that purport to speak for God.
June 8th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
No, he wasn’t. Saddam Hussein and seven different defendants were put on trial for the killing of 148 Shias who tried to assassinate him in Dujail in 1982.
The kurd thing was simply going to be next in line at some point.
Actually Planned parenthood offers contraception
But no choices. And when someone tries to council these women, they are rewarded by having the police called on them. And offering free ultrasounds? The THOUGHT of validating that these women are mothers carrying children!
Can’t have THAT.
Daddio Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Yeah, I don’t understand why Planned Parenthood would be against using ultrasound to show these women a picture of what is in their womb then let them decide after and only after the ultrasound.
As of right now that seems fair.
OldLefty Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
‘The kurd thing was simply going to be next in line at some point’.
……………………………………………
So why execute him before they get justice?
From KurdishMedia:
“Crimes on such magnitudes require a credible international court as the crimes Saddam Hussein committed not only had domestic repercussions, but regional and global impact as well. However, from a political viewpoint, an international trial could expose many countries who provided Saddam / Iraq with chemical and other lethal weapons to carry out these atrocities. It would have created international scandals and embarrassed many governments. Therefore, every effort was made to have Saddam Hussein tried away from international scrutiny in an Iraqi court.
Thus, instead of within an international court, Saddam Hussein was tried in Iraq for the Dujail massacre in which 148 people were killed. He was executed immediately to prevent any embarrassment that might follow in the subsequent trials. Even though Saddam Hussein and his cohorts were convicted for genocide in an Iraqi court it does not carry the legitimacy such a sentence would have had in an international court.
His execution might have been a cause for celebration for the families of those who were killed in Dujail but many other Iranian, Kurdish, Shi’ite and Kuwaiti families did not have the chance to see Saddam Hussein’s atrocities exposed and their grievances heard. Survivors have been left mute and gagged by the lack of opportunity to tell their stories to an impartial authority who would listen, and redress their plight.”
It just stirred up more suspicions.
………………………………………
So contraception, parenting and adoption counseling not ENOUGH choice for you?
As for Ultrasound, under prenatal care:
Prenatal Testing
A pregnant woman may choose to have tests during pregnancy to check if the fetus is developing normally.
Some common tests include
• Ultrasound
• Multiple Marker Screening
• CVS — chorionic villus sampling
• Amniocentesis
Many women worry when they have prenatal testing. But you should be reassured to know that most tests do not find any abnormalities, and show that the pregnancy is developing normally.
Below are some basic answers to questions about the most common procedures. Be sure to talk with your health care provider about the pros and cons of testing, and whether testing is right for you.
TDro319 Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
“But no choices. And when someone tries to council these women, they are rewarded by having the police called on them.”
As I understand it, Planned Parenthood does a very good job of couciling these women. They explain their options and, if the woman decides to have the baby, the prenatal care necessary in order to deliver a healthy baby.
EricG Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Yup, yup, yup.
Planned Parenthood is one of the most lied about groups when it comes to right wing politics.
Just one of millions of examples where the right wing hates facts and data and love it’s lies.
I have been with women as support to PP and they do exactly what you say. Nobody in those buildings ever suggests abortion or anything other than bringing the baby to term. The mother has to say it first and when the antiabortion people realize they have been bashing a community agency doing good works they have to shove their heads in the sand and go listen to some hate preacher or wherever they get their noise to fix their heads.
They come to realize they are fighting a war against poor women and rape victims and are trying to kill them with every word from their mouth.
Ignorance is no excuse. I don’t think these people know what they are doing. They are so full of themselves (including people on this thread) that something like LOGIC is not allowed to penetrate.
June 8th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
will do with their own bodies?
Except it’s not their body.
fighting a war against poor women and rape victims
What % of abortions are done as a result of rape or other crime?
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 3:18 am
extrapolated numbers show about 200-1000 pregnancies per year by result of rape, by no means do all of them get an abortion.
I personally know one lady who kept hers.
June 8th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
“What % of abortions are done as a result of rape or other crime?”
…………………..
It’s no one else’s place to decide.
June 8th, 2009 at 6:31 pm
It’s no one else’s place to decide.
Typical liberal answer. Not one ounce of truth or fact.
Again, what % if abortions are performed as a result of rape or other crime?
OldLefty Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 6:42 pm
Again, who cares??
It’s HER business, not yours, or the government’s.
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
Just like a slave is a SLAVEMASTER’S business, and not the government’s. I’m tired of the government trying to usurp MY property rights. Sheesh.
June 8th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Actually Planned parenthood offers contraception,
So why strong arm GE into stopping the marketing of ultrasound devices to small clinics? Further, the “John” Spitzer worked to shut down those clinics with ultrasounds as operating without a medical license.
Sa-weet.
June 8th, 2009 at 6:41 pm
Fett stomping. Darn it darn it darn it!!! Lefty says…
It’s HER business, not yours, or the government’s.
It most certainly is NOT her business. In the same way that you or me taking the life of a 3 year old [as opposed to 3 month old] child is not “my business”.
So tell me, what % of abortions are performed as a result of rape or other crime?
OldLefty Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
But it’s not a child, and it is her business…that’s the law.
This is a relatively new phenomenon designed for politics and fund raising.
An unborn fetus in Jewish law is not considered a person (Heb. nefesh lit. “soul”) until it has been born. The fetus is regarded as a part of the mother’s body and not a separate being until it begins to egress from the womb during parturition (childbirth). In fact, until forty days after conception, the fertilized egg is considered as “mere fluid.” These facts form the basis for the Jewish legal view on abortion. Biblical, talmudic, and rabbinic support for these statements will now be presented.
I have not heard one male who have given one shred of evidence that one of them cares more about the embryo or fetus as they need to feel holier than thou and hates women.
flap Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 7:19 pm
New phenomenon? So is the theory of evolution. Does being new negate something that is true or factual?
Why are you quoting Jewish law? Pick up an embryology book. Look at 4d ultrasound. We’re talking about a human life, especially late-term.
“I have not heard one male who have given one shred of evidence that one of them cares more about the embryo or fetus as they need to feel holier than thou and hates women.”
Sounds like you’re a misandrist…a man hater. I couldn’t care less what a woman does with her body. When said body starts killing human beings, then I care.
OldLefty Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 7:57 pm
“Pick up an embryology book. Look at 4d ultrasound. We’re talking about a human life, especially late-term”
……………………..
Tell that to the doctors who have abortions for whatever reason.
Perhaps you should start a movement to get people to have the fertilized eggs in petri dishes implanted, or maybe a movement to stop buying cheap crap from China, until they stop FORCED abortions, or even to bring down OUR infant mortality rate.
I feel that if men got pregnant, most men would call it a sacrament.
As for the late term:
Again, Kansas’ post-viability abortion restriction provides that no abortion may be performed after viability unless the attending physician and another financially and legally independent physician determine that an abortion is necessary to preserve the woman’s life or continuation of the pregnancy would cause a “substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function” of the woman. Kan. Stat. Ann. § 65-6703(a) (Enacted 1992; Last Amended 1998).
So many rare conditions, (including incest), like, twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome with Maternal Mirror Syndrome, In the case of intrauterine fetal death, there is Severe shoulder dystocia, uterine dehiscence, (where there is already scarring from previous C section, endomyometritis, development of DIC…..
From OBG Management:
Complaining of decreased fetal movement and cramping, a 36-year-old gravida with a prior cesarean presented to a hospital with a fever. A sonogram revealed fetal demise. Labor induction was scheduled for 5 days later, and the patient was sent home.
Two days later, the woman returned to the hospital with pain and bleeding, but was sent home and instructed to return for the scheduled induction. That same night, however, she once again presented, demanding the fetus be delivered. Blood tests revealed a white blood cell count of 9,900 with 88.7% neutrophils.
Then we have:
Your Phyllis Schlafly, answered a question, “Could you clarify some of the statements that you made in Maine last year about martial rape?
“I think that when you get married you have consented to sex.”
You don’t want the government to provide contraception, you don’t want to aggressively pursue the fathers and make unwanted pregnancy to be as difficult for them as for the woman, You want to insert yourselves into a woman’s uterus, you don’t the government to pay for the product of that uterus, and if the medical problems are extreme, you don’t a gay couple to adopt them.
That’s why I really want to hear from sanctimonious men on the subject.
flap Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 12:49 am
You throw in a lot of red herrings and straw man arguments about fertilized eggs and petri dishes, OldLefty. I specifically said first trimester abortions should probably be allowed, so you can feel good knowing that I believe in the sacred, sacrosanct, direct-from-God right for you to control “your body” by killing “your child.” I’m glad you believe it empowers you and all women to have the right to kill your children and that because you can do that, you somehow win a small victory over men.
“Substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function” of the woman…so two radical late-term pro-abortion docs trump up a psychiatric reason? Please. I’m sure Tiller cooked up some diddies in order to continue his butcher shop…er, practice. And just because I think Tiller was floridly evil doesn’t mean his murder was justified. It was not. Just wanted to throw that in…again.
“A sonogram revealed fetal demise.” Intrauterine fetal death? That’s a natural abortion. If the fetus is dead, deliver it, abort it, whatever. I don’t see that case as even relevant.
You give a laundry list of “you don’t”s. I don’t want the government to allow killing of human beings. If that involves the government inserting itself into a woman’s uterus, a woman’s house, a woman’s car, a woman’s life, so be it. If I have a child and kill it, the government will be inserting itself into my business, wherever I am.
What does her reply about marital rape specifically have to do with abortion? I do wonder why Phyllis Schlafly allows all these horrible men to control her uterus!
michael Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
Lefty,
Just because Jewish law doesn’t see a fetus as a full human being doesn’t mean it condones abortion on demand. It supports abortion for legitamate medical reasons that should be judged on a case by case basis.
TDro319 Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 9:01 pm
“It most certainly is NOT her business. ”
Absolutely! It is the resposibility of the church to control womens’ bodies.
June 8th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
When did these people start screaming about the genocide in Dafur between harassing aboprtion clinic workers?
So switch it. When did the people protesting the deaths in Darfur start screaming about the needless deaths as a result of abortion?
June 8th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
Hmm….
Does a man have a right to an abortion?
Does the father of the child have a say in the matter?
Well, it seems we may have a constitutional issue here…..
The law is required to protect everyone equally, what applies for one applies for all……
If a man can’t have an abortion, then a woman shouldn’t be having one either.
TDro319 Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 9:08 pm
And since women can’t have operations for prostate cancer, neither should men – gotta keep it equal.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
June 10th, 2009 at 3:16 am
women aren’t expected to pay prostate support either.
Epiphany Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 4:24 am
I would hope, TDro, that you have explained the predicament satisfactorily.
But just in case… Men don’t have a uterus.
Thank you very much.
June 8th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
If you’re so anti-abortion, than do you still vote to cut social programs for the needy? After all, 21.3% of abortions are due to financial troubles. If you want all these children brought into the world, don’t make them be born into poverty.
flap Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 12:53 am
So if they will be born into poverty, kill them instead! Yahoooo! Very logical.
June 8th, 2009 at 7:33 pm
What a fuss, (as usual), some of you men are making over something that you will never have any control over. Yeah, it really isn’t any of your business and it never will be. Roe vs. Wade isn’t going to be overturned anytime soon and you know that.
As a woman let me say that I neither seek your approval nor do I need your permission.
Ok, carry on now…
flap Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 12:57 am
Just because Roe v. Wade will not soon be overturned doesn’t mean we should ignore the evils of abortion.
Epiphany, you should not have the legal right to have an abortion just as you or I should not have the legal right to have a slave. I’m sure you have a reasonably nice body (is that sexist?), but I honestly don’t give a care what you do with it and neither should anyone else. However, if YOUR body or YOUR house or YOUR car or YOUR anything contains another human life, you shouldn’t have the right to get terminate that life.
trees are people too Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 1:17 am
Responsibility is our word for today.
You have the responsibility to control your body….while driving your car….while operating a chain saw…..while blogging on Liberaland etc….
If you become pregnant accidentally you have acted irresponsibly…..
Terminating life because of irresponsible actions is not acceptable.
You are not allowed to terminate life while you’re driving you’re car……cutting wood with your chainsaw, or blogging at Alan.com…….
Epiphany Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 4:36 am
Flap, as I’ve told you before I find no similarity between my body and an inanimate object or structure.
Unfortunately we will never agree about this.
More than reasonable. :)
Epiphany Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 4:17 am
“Terminating life because of irresponsible actions is not acceptable.”
Except that I’m not terminating a life the way you would define it as in, “it’s a baby, child, person, human being etc. I’m terminating the pregnancy, and yes, having the fetus destroyed before it becomes a baby, child. person, human being etc. I know, I know, you don’t see it that way. Well we can go around in circles forever but we will never agree, that’s just how it is.
It’s not acceptable? Well either way you want to state it… yes it is. It is acceptable. It’s legal. It’s not acceptable to you? Too damn bad. It’s acceptable to me. And your right to prevent it ends, frankly, where my vagina begins. End of story.
June 8th, 2009 at 9:14 pm
the basis for the Jewish legal view
What are the Jewish legal views on the right of women? Can they own property? Vote? Decide if they are going to marry? Or have sex? Are they able to decide if they can leave their husband?
I am going to quote Frosty.
LOL.
If you’re so anti-abortion, than do you still vote to cut social programs for the needy? After all, 21.3% of abortions are due to financial troubles.
So, if I lose my job and am no longer able to support my children, I can just, you know; kill ‘em?
That is according to Jewish law?
Nice.
June 8th, 2009 at 10:54 pm
To fellow conservatives and the few liberals who can still appreciate what it means to be an American: In just a few sentences, EricG has just given us an object lesson about how the liberal mind sees abortion, human rights, the Supreme Court, citizenship, and the right of free speech.
He says: “The issue is not when life begins. The issue is what kind of PUBLIC POLICY should we have in America.” Hey, EricG, PUBLIC POLICY is something that’s decided by legislatures over matters where there’s room for give and take; inalienable rights are not up for negotiation. So, for example, it’s a matter of PUBLIC POLICY whether to make illegal entry into the United States a crime. Same with whether to outlaw crack distribution. What’s NOT a matter of PUBLIC POLICY is whether, for example, white men can own slaves. Not even on the table. Why? Because the question whether a HUMAN being should be someone else’s property is NOT a matter over which there is any give and take, compromise, or negotiation. But, in any case, when it really is a matter over which there is room for give and take, it’s the LEGISLATURE — not the Supreme Court — that makes PUBLIC POLICY. If you don’t understand that it is YOU who get to make PUBLIC POLICY through your ELECTED representatives, then you don’t understand what it means to have American freedom.
You would surrender PUBLIC POLICY to the courts, rather than retain the freedom of the ballot. EricG is typical of how most liberals now view human rights, public policy, the role of the courts, and their role as citizens.
Now let’s see how he views free speech. He says “Life is sacred. Just that doesn’t mean you or anyone has to go and do somethign about it.” Say whaa?? “Life is sacred,” but I as an American who oppose the taking of human life have no right to protest the taking? EricG says, “I didn’t say you have no RIGHT to protest; I said “you don’t HAVE to go and do something about it.” So Eric, I “should” do only what I “have” to do? OF COURSE I don’t “have” to go out and “do something” about it, you idiot. But I do have the RIGHT to, and if YOU truly believe, as you say you do, that HUMAN life is sacred, then when are you denigrating me when I judge that I “should” exercise my RIGHT to go out and “do something” about it?
TDro319 Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
That’s all very nice, Pizzaman. Now ask Bush and Cheney “when life ends”.
June 9th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
That’s all very nice, Pizzaman. Now ask Bush and Cheney “when life ends”.
So, lemme get this straight. You are pro-abortion because two despicable people are pro-war?
June 9th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
You are pro-abortion because two despicable people are pro-war?
I mean, if you are going to draw the parallel, you have to assert that one position is wrong and then point out your opponents position is incongruous. But you can not simply say “because of this, that”.
June 9th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
I think that our abortion rates are appalling and far too many unnecessary abortions take place. I also believe that far too many liberals make the mistake of placing more value on choice than on life. I’m not questioning the general sentiment of pro-life protesters, just their tactics.
VERY well said. Even if you are a Cheese Head.
michael Reply:
June 9th, 2009 at 7:35 pm
Glad to see that we can agree on something :). And you’re never going to let up about the Packers are you? haha
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
June 10th, 2009 at 3:18 am
I’m actually pissed at the Packers right now…they broke my 20 game winning streak on Madden yesterday…
June 9th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Daddio says, in answer to the question whether God hates the people who slaughter others in Darfur: “I don’t know who or what is TDro’s god. But I can tell you without reservation that my God is a God of love. He is a God that cannot hate anyone. He is the God that loves each and everyone of us UNCONDITIONALLY. But He is also a God that can be vengeful. He is a God that hates evil and He is a God that will eventually destroy all evil.”
Damn, Jack. You phrase Judeo-Christian teaching perfectly. God is a god of uncompromising, infinite love. But there is also justice — and so a hell that Scripture says exists. Judeo-Christian teaching is that God loves even the souls that he consigns to hell, but thaere is a hell because that’s what justice requires. Just how much it takes to anger Him this this much is not for me or anyone else to answer, but I wouldn’t presume on His mercy or think He’s a push-over.
June 9th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
EricG’s statements on abortion are either plain stupid or outright lies.
Here’s a collection of them.
EricG says: “THE QUALITY OF SOMETHING BEING “SACRED” IS RELIGIOUS DOG-CRAP. IT’S SUPERSTITION. I.E.: IT’S MEANINGLESS.
Pizzaman: So according to EricG, no atheists believe human life is sacred. Hmmm. And we wonder why . . . nevermind.
EricG says: “THIS ISSUE OF WHEN LIFE BEGINS IS NOT PART OF THE DISCUSSION. * * * THE BOTTOM LINE IS WHAT KIND OF PUBLIC POLICY ARE WE GOING TO HAVE.” So according to EricG, Thos. Jefferson himself was wrong when he said that the “right to life” is “inalienable.” According to EricG, it doesn’t matter whether a HUMAN is born or unborn; as a matter of public policy, a human’s right to life IS alienable. Now that’s an American for you. Tell me, EricG: If a human doesn’t have the right to LIVE, how can she have the right to CHOOSE? How can she even claim freedom from a slave-master?
EricG says: “‘PRO-LIFERS’ HATE THE POOR AND WANT TO SEE WOMEN DEAD.” Guess what EricG. I argue legal cases for the disabled poor, the great majority of whom are women. That’s ALL I do, professionally . . . all day, every day. And I detest that women die in botched back-alley abortions. I hate that innocents are killed in Darfur, China, the United States, or anywhere. I would have supported a slave rebellion in the American south and a black rebellion in South Africa. In fact, I oppose the guilty being killed via capital punishment. This stance against capital punishment, BTW, is anti-Biblical, so don’t tell me my opposition to abortion is based solely on the Bible. You literally don’t know what you’re talking about.
EricG says: “YOU [Pizzaman] ARE JUST ONE MORE EXAMPLE OF SOMEONE WHO HAS NEVER BEEN EFFECTED [sic] BY THIS PERSONALLY THUS YOU HAVE A SHALLOW AND RIDICULOUS POINT OF VIEW ON THE MATTER.”
But EricG: You were never a Jew at Dachau, a slave in Alabama, a defender of the German homeland in WWII, or a southern plantation owner. So you were never affected by any of these things personally. And yet you would surely claim the right to pass moral judgment on them. Why would then you deny me the right to form a rational judgment on the wrongness of crushing the skull of a soon-to-be-born fetus?
EricG: “YOUR COMMENTS ONLY PROVE TO EVERYONE NOT BIASED TO THE POINT OF INSANITY THAT YOU HATE WOMEN HAVING REIGN OVER THEIR OWN BODIES AND CANNOT BE TRUSTED TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION.”
The fact that I see no real distinction between a soon-to-be-born fetus and a day-old child proves that I am “biased to the point of insanity and hate women”? You are either lying or stupid. I think the former. No one could be that stupid.
You say I think that women “CANNOT BE TRUSTED TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION” No, I don’t think that of women in general. So many women think abortion is wrong that I culdn’t rationally form that opinion of women in general. Obviously, though, a shocking number of women do kill babies who are about to be born, and thus, independent of their sex, they AS INDIVIDUALS “cannot be trusted to make the right decision.” A shocking number of weak men go along with this for fear of being called sexist. You are one of them. I defend the rights of the unborn, both male and female. To the extent that any woman ties her rights AS A WOMAN to the “right” to kill what almost all would agree are HUMANS — and here I’m talking mainly about THIRD trimester babies, not FIRST — you betray the dignity of the female sex. But such betrayal is the necessary consequence of your absurd statement that “THIS ISSUE OF WHEN LIFE BEGINS IS NOT PART OF THE DISCUSSION.”
Note to EricG and the like-minded: I HAVE NOT USED ONE WORD OF THE BIBLE TO SUPPORT MY POSITION. I STAND ON THE SELF-EVIDENT TRUTH “WE ARE ENDOWED BY OUR CREATOR WITH CERTAIN UNALIENABLE RIGHTS.”
EricG says: “LIFE DOES NOT BEGIN AT CONCEPTION AND RECENT DATA SUGGESTS THAT PERSONALITY MAY NOT EVEN FORM UNTIL AFTER BIRTH.”
To the contrary, Willam Prosser, the leading scholar in American tort law, says that “medical authority has recognized long since that that the child is in existence from the moment of conception.” Prosser, Law of Torts, 4th Ed. 1971, p. 336. He’s said this since at least two years before the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade. Let’s see: Prosser … EricG . . . Prosser . . . EricG. I’ll go with Prosser, the leading scholar in American tort law.
As for EricG’s statement that “Recent data suggests that personality may not even form until after birth.” NO, SH*T, Sherlock!! But does this mean that unless a person has developed a “personality,” he has no right to live? Your logic would say that’s right.
EricG is simply spouting the positions that his uncritically-accepted beliefs require him to take. He ultimately cannot defend these beliefs with reason, and when they force him into a corner, he defends them with lies. Don’t accept this crap.
Pizzaman
June 10th, 2009 at 2:24 am