God's Quarterback

[guido911]

No it doesn't. My wife and I never considered an abortion when she was pregnant with our children. We are not pro-abortion. That still allows me to believe the decision of others is their decision and should be made without government involvement.

Speaking of strawmen...what the hell are you trying to say about orange jumpsuits? (The government can arrest us and make us cheer for the OSU football team?) No they can't. I cannot be held without committing a crime. I also have the option of packing my child's lunch. 

Get off the backpedaling with the orange jumpsuit point. You are the one that made that borderline moronic point about government interference/involvement in our lives to justify making abortion unlawful. RM, I am still waiting for your Christian-based defense of abortion rights.

[ZYX]

You are assuming (wrongfully) that all abortions are done to save the life of the mother. But please, keep doing whatever convinces you that supporting abortion rights is a good thing. Lemme ask you something, from one father to another, which of your children would be better off aborted. Because that is a question a woman who has had one either before or one having other kids answers with "that one".

He doesn't have children.

[AquaMan]

I understand the strength of your faith. This is a faith decision for you, but you want government to enforce your faith decision for everyone else. For a moment, drop the fact that you want government to trample on a woman's right to her own personal health. Yes, at some time during gestation it is a viable life but the mother is a life as well and in nature she must fend for herself too. Law can work with that. For a moment forget the slippery slope argument that a possible next step is to eliminate birth control devices since you opened the door. For a moment, forget all the hypocrisy of your past political stands against intrusions on liberty by overzealous government.

Its those other little details like- not even allowing abortion to save the life of the mother, that incest or rape victims have to carry the child of their molester and that you arbitrarily decide that life begins at conception.  These are the details that ruin the logic of the no-choice argument.

IOW, you support laws that tell me that if my wife gets raped, I must pay for and probably have to raise her assailants child. You're telling me that if my wife faces death when she delivers, that we have no choice in the matter which in effect prioritizes life on your religion's basis. One life is more valuable than another which neither law nor religion espouse. You're also telling me that you and your religion know when life begins.  Because your religion says so? All this even though I'm not Catholic?

To me these details invalidate a "no choice" option.

[Teatownclown]

Just checking in and noticing a thread gone wild today!

Wouldn't you think Heysuess might have more concern in child homelessness being up 33% in the last 3 years rather than annihilating a fertilized egg? It's real hard to believe the Obummer Admin. failed to make the "morning after" pill over the counter. Now, young sexually free women will need to go to a doctor to get a script. You think the Obummers might understand the fact that opiates are easily obtained so why wouldn't the "morning after" pill?

Freedom means choice! Focus on The Family means Fascism.

Dawg is dead....Wooo hooo!

(AOX Thread killa! )

[Red Arrow]

You are assuming (wrongfully) that all abortions are done to save the life of the mother. But please, keep doing whatever convinces you that supporting abortion rights is a good thing. Lemme ask you something, from one father to another, which of your children would be better off aborted. Because that is a question a woman who has had one either before or one having other kids answers with "that one".

Are you responding to me?  You know I have no kids.

My statement about abortions still happening is based on general knowledge of what happened before Roe v Wade.  (No personal involvement.)

[Teatownclown]

Why should anyone be concerned about private decisions? This is a political issue not a moral issue....why? because some of us don't believe it's murder or killing to save a pre born glob from entering into our atmosphere into this declining world. Take it to the church and leave it out of my government.

[guido911]

Are you responding to me?  You know I have no kids.

Absolutely not. The guy I am responding to knows who he is. Come on Red. And I look forward to lunch tomorrow with this crew.

[ZYX]

Why should anyone be concerned about private decisions? This is a political issue not a moral issue....why? because some of us don't believe it's murder or killing to save a pre born glob from entering into our atmosphere into this declining world. Take it to the church and leave it out of my government.

"Pre born glob."

What a disgusting person you are.

[Teatownclown]

"Pre born glob."

What a disgusting person you are.

Just trying to bring science into the discussion....

It's hard to believe others see the world differently....

Freedom is choice. We are not all bound by your political aims, unless this is a moral decision. Then the church should be your sanctuary and not the US government. Little rat bastards running round controlling freedom.....

[ZYX]

Just trying to bring science into the discussion....

It's hard to believe others see the world differently....

Freedom is choice. We are not all bound by your political aims, unless this is a moral decision. Then the church should be your sanctuary and not the US government. Little rat bastards running round controlling freedom.....

If we want complete freedom then let us remove all laws. Let's just kill whoever we want.

A developing baby is not a glob. It is alive. I understand someone seeing the world differently than I, but I cannot believe the heartlessness in that statement. You should not be able to kill a child because you don't want he/she.

It nearly makes me physically sick that you seem to be fine with stopping an unborn baby's heart.

[Teatownclown]

If we want complete freedom then let us remove all laws. Let's just kill whoever we want.

A developing baby is not a glob. It is alive. I understand someone seeing the world differently than I, but I cannot believe the heartlessness in that statement. You should not be able to kill a child because you don't want he/she.

It nearly makes me physically sick that you seem to be fine with stopping an unborn baby's heart.

So, I'm not entitled to my free thinking? People who judge others based on just their perception of life need to be corrected. You need to breathe to be alive. Heartlessness? Hardly.

So, what's your feeling on the death penalty?

[ZYX]

So, I'm not entitled to my free thinking? People who judge others based on just their perception of life need to be corrected. You need to breathe to be alive. Heartlessness? Hardly.

So, what's your feeling on the death penalty?

My little brother did not breathe for seven minutes after he was born. You're saying it would have been okay to kill him?

Babies recognize the speech patterns of their mothers and fathers before they are born. How can a non living thing do that?

[custosnox]

So, at what point does it become a child?  That is the crux of it all.  Otherwise we could really go down the rabbit hole (not to mention the catholic bend on it) and say that your wrong for using any kind of birth control because you are preventing a conception.  Then you can take it even further and say anytime you abstain from intercourse you are preventing the possibility of a child coming into the world.  Yes, that goes to the extreme, but my point is, how do you decide when it stops being cells and actually becomes a child.

Just another argument to throw into the fire, what is everyone's thoughts on filing double homicide charges when someone kills a pregnant woman?

[Teatownclown]

So, at what point does it become a child?  That is the crux of it all.  Otherwise we could really go down the rabbit hole (not to mention the catholic bend on it) and say that your wrong for using any kind of birth control because you are preventing a conception.  Then you can take it even further and say anytime you abstain from intercourse you are preventing the possibility of a child coming into the world.  Yes, that goes to the extreme, but my point is, how do you decide when it stops being cells and actually becomes a child.

Just another argument to throw into the fire, what is everyone's thoughts on filing double homicide charges when someone kills a pregnant woman?

Reshaping the argument. This is about freedom not killing.

[custosnox]

Reshaping the argument. This is about freedom not killing.

How is it reshaping?  It's putting the argument in a different light.