116 Comments

1. WhyamInotsurprised?:

Government mandated abortions for everyone at taxpayer expense.

More effective healthcare for everyone at lower cost.

Freedom of choice of health plan (unless you want to be penalized)

Ahhh, the Party of Death strikes again!

Jul 17, 2009 - 1:19 am 2. Kat in Indiana:

Don’t forget the undercurrent of eugenics that is the base for the Democrat Party’s raison d’etre. How better to “clean up” the gene pool than to mandate that undesirables are aborted?

Hitler and Sanger would be proud.

Jul 17, 2009 - 4:31 am 3. Josh Narins:

Listen to the horrors from the experience they have had in Japan.

According to the “Frontline” report, Japan boasts “the best health statistics in the world. The Japanese go to the doctor three times as often as Americans, have more than twice as many MRI scans, use more drugs, and spend more days in the hospital. Yet Japan spends about half as much on health care per capita as the United States.” The secret? In Japan, everyone must buy insurance, and insurers cannot turn away a patient for a preexisting illness; nor are insurers allowed to make a profit.

No profit = Tyranny of Horror, right?

Jul 17, 2009 - 4:33 am 4. Lisa:

Abortion is legal, should be easily accessible and should be paid for by insurance. Furthermore, most insurance companies already pay for abortion and sterilization since it is far cheaper than birth.

YOUR grave moral concerns do not have the right to restrict MY access to abortion just like MY grave moral concerns about the impact of large families on the planet do not have the right to restrict YOUR procreation.

Jul 17, 2009 - 4:46 am 5. Deep Brain Diarist:

Oh, it’s even worse than THAT! I am officially starting the rumor that, like the headline of this story implies, Obama will PERSONALLY go from hospital to hospital and MANDATE abortions for ALL! Want one? Don’t want one? Won’t matter. ABORTIONS FOR ALL!

Idiots.

Jul 17, 2009 - 4:49 am 6. "progressive"watch:

Why is Obama so in love with abortion? Abortion has always been a part of the Marxist belief system–abortion and death by other means.

Jul 17, 2009 - 4:50 am 7. Paul -Indiana:

Are you still proud that you voted for Obama?

Jul 17, 2009 - 5:05 am 8. RC:

I and my family all have current passports. We got them just in case we needed to use them.

Jul 17, 2009 - 5:29 am 9. Lynn:

Does everyone remember the warning? “Weep for yourselves and for your children. For if men do these things when the tree is green, what will happen when it is dry?”

I took seriously Obama’s statement that he would not want his daughter “punished” with a child before the were ready.

…and next will be an assault on the military where ‘anyone’ who signs on to be in the medical field to ’save’ lives will be forced to ‘end’ lives.

Are we proud of ourselves yet? Now we are throwing the baby out with the bath water and forcing our nothingness onto the world.

Jul 17, 2009 - 5:29 am 10. WhyamInotsurprised?:

#4 Lisa – You want an abortion, fine! I just don’t think taxpayers should have to pay for it.

#5 Deep Brain Diarist? WTF is that? Deep do-do maybe. So you are claiming to start the rumor huh? Wow, that takes a lot of guts and creativity!

Jul 17, 2009 - 6:25 am 11. Sebastian Shaw:

Welcome to Apokalips: Nancy Pelosi is Granny Goodness, Harry Reid is Desaad, & President Obama is Darkseid. Free will is a sin on Apokalips. And misery is the only company in the Democrats Utopia. Control the population & you control the world. Darkseid wanted to control the universe by finding the Anti-Life Equation.

Jul 17, 2009 - 6:38 am 12. David S:

It’s pretty clear the author does not understand the principles he espouses.

Government-owned health care will place bureaucrats in Washington in charge of your health care options. This is wrong. Health care decisions must be made by you and your doctor.

If you really think that health care decisions should be made by the doctor and patient, covering abortion seems pretty logical. Are you sure that you believe that placing “bureaucrats in Washington in charge of your health care options” is not what you are advocating?

It also seems the author doesn’t understand that taxes are not apportioned according to taxpayer earmarks.

Americans who are morally opposed to abortion should not have to pay for abortions with their tax dollars against their will.

I am an American morally opposed to pointless foreign wars – but I continue to pay my taxes because I understand that it is the legislative process that makes changes in policy – not petulance. Abortions should not be treated differently from other medical procedures. Coverage that does not include abortion is deficient – a specific exclusion is simply bad medicine. If you don’t want to pay taxes, that’s your call. But compromising reproductive health care for political purposes is, in the author’s own words, “wrong”. Leave the health care decisions to the doctor and patient.

Peace.

DS

Jul 17, 2009 - 6:57 am 13. Annie:

SSSOOOOO???, have you called your reprentatives and expressed your distain and asked not to vote for this bill?

yes, we did. In our state they are all well aware of how we as a state feel about all of this being rushed through wihtout, again, being read and discussed.

I’m not worried about the abortion issue as abortion is already legal, and Lisa is right in the fact that most insurances will pay for it. It’s a woman’s issue for another forum.

It is the INSURANCE BILL..,IN TOTAL..that we need to question !! and have a discussion about.

CALL YOUR REPS!!!! FIND OUT WHO YOUR PEOPLE ARE THAT WILL BE VOTIN GON THIS , EXPRESS YOUR OPINION!! DON’T JUST POST ABOUT IT!!!.

Jul 17, 2009 - 6:58 am 14. Montesquieu:

I just want to clearly or translate for our liberal friend:

Josh Narins:
No profit = Tyranny of Horror, right?

Translation:
Japanese Citizens Only = Medical Care

Josh Narins:
Yet Japan spends about half as much on health care per capita as the United States.

Translation:
If you go to the doctor in Japan you are provided with what the government will pay for and what treatment is option and you can pay for.

The problem with our liberal friends, they never tell you the whole story.

I have a friend that happens to be Japanese and he explained how their public or government health care system works and it is not ObamaCare. First of all they only cover citizens and do not cover non-citizens meaning illegal aliens and legal aliens are not covered. Second, they will only cover certain procedures or medicine and anything else is your own expense which ends up costing the individual more so that the government can boast about shrinking costs.

I’m sorry but liberals really need to start including all of the data not just the data that suits them.

Jul 17, 2009 - 7:24 am 15. antaine:

@ Josh – watch the Frontline episode on socialized health care. They look at Japan, specifically. The only thing that keeps their system afloat (it, like all of them, is a massive money sink) is a network of 10-bed private hospitals where those with the money can go when they really want care.

and that’s the same all over. Only the middle class get screwed. Nothing changes for the poor, except that their time in clinic and ER waiting rooms will go from four to ten hours (like in Canada), the wealthy will go elsewhere if nothing private is available here.

Jul 17, 2009 - 7:28 am 16. Delia:

*sigh* I don’t have the strength today.

Jul 17, 2009 - 7:28 am 17. Banned by Huffpo:

The unborn should have the same right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that a baby one minute out of the womb enjoys.

Jul 17, 2009 - 7:44 am 18. seven:

Population czar President Obama’s top science adviser has toyed with extreme measures of population control, even suggesting in one book how to make it more publicly acceptable for the government to spike drinking water in order to sterilize people. John P. Holdren, named as Mr. Obama’s science “czar” earlier this year, described this in a book he wrote with Paul Ehrlich — author of the …

Let’s call out Obama’s wicked jestures by name.

Lets again read up on Mass. Healthcare. It is cutting corners, hospitals going broke and coverages go down. The best way to stretch hamburger is with hamburger helper. Stretching healthcare with diluted medicine, shorter visits and less of them and denial of more services is a way to raise taxes and spread services .

ACORN can do digital prostate exams for less money than a PA can.

Jul 17, 2009 - 7:55 am 19. Bender:

The pro-abortion mantra of “freedom of choice” was always a lie.

What they are for and have always been for is power — their absolute power. Their power to do whatever the hell they want whenever they want, including the power to coerce you and deny you the freedom of choice to not participate in or fund abortion.

Jul 17, 2009 - 7:56 am 20. Saltherring:

Lisa, @4, demonstrates moral relativism at work. “Large families” are evil, but butchering unborn children is a constitutionally protected right. How do these creepy leftists sleep at night?

Jul 17, 2009 - 7:57 am 21. Delia:

http://joseromia.tripod.com/samuel.html

Nuff said?

Jul 17, 2009 - 8:10 am 22. moon slayer:

whoa is me….Okay, abortion is an issue of the medical bill that obama wants to pass…

they are not NOTNOTNOTNOT going to take out just the abortion thing. The pro choice movement is STRONG! They don’t scream and yell and kill people, they just go about their business.

No one cares about slogans, even your opinion on abortion is not in question…the medical crap they are trying to pass on us without research is the big big big issue!!

Obama wants the medical stuff passed, signed, anointed RIGHT NOW, why???!!, even though they have admitted NO ONE has had time to read it.

We have sent sniveling suck up morons to Washington. Do something about it!! Call or email these peopole and tell them you are unhappy and will campaign AGAINST them if they go along with it!!!!

DO SOMETHING POSITIVE!! CALL!!!! NOW!!! NOT NEXT WEEK!!!! NOW!!!

Jul 17, 2009 - 8:30 am 23. Bender:

The pro choice movement is STRONG! They don’t scream and yell and kill people, they just go about their business.

Huh? They do A LOT of screaming and yelling, and they do A LOT of killing.

Screaming and yelling and killing IS their business.

Jul 17, 2009 - 8:39 am 24. acj:

Unwed mothers, unwanted babies statistically go on welfare. Republicans detest welfare-DOH!
Save the unborn so you can send them to war. WAR-how Christian is that? Republicans think nothing of having someone’s son or daughter killed in a war based on false information.

Not every person is as lucky or as righteous as you. Freedom to own a gun? Freedom of choice. No matter how you look at it, or how you tend to use it, it is still our freedom.

Jul 17, 2009 - 8:54 am 25. paul_unalaska:

David S: ‘But compromising reproductive health care..’

Uhm, abortion isn’t ‘reproductive’ health care. It’s opposite as such.

As for being opposed to, what was it, oh yeah – ‘pointless foreign wars’.

Obama was sure against it while a Senator and Pres. nominee. Now that he’s read the intel on the matter, he’s stepped up troops into Afghanistan and the U.S. will have a presence in Iraq and myriad of other locales similar to that of Korea, Germany, Guam, Honduras, et al.

So you see David S, this is the action taken by someone who is in THE KNOW. ‘R’ or ‘D’. The problem in your and like minded people is we as the American public will never get ‘full disclosure’. Earlier comments such as yours is why that is..

Jul 17, 2009 - 8:54 am 26. Lynn:

Obama signed into law taxpayer money going overseas to organizations that promoted or performed abortions.

We are surprised at this new assault on life?

It seems the world has become convinced that the welfare of the earth will be at the expense of new life.

Jul 17, 2009 - 8:58 am 27. Clayton E. Cramer:

“YOUR grave moral concerns do not have the right to restrict MY access to abortion just like MY grave moral concerns about the impact of large families on the planet do not have the right to restrict YOUR procreation.”

Except that in this context, the effort is not to restrict your access to abortion, but to not require others to pay for it. Your analogy fails, unless you think that people with large families (what, three kids?) are forcing you to support them.

Jul 17, 2009 - 9:01 am 28. Fantom:

Lisa @ 4

You have no right to murder another. A baby in the womb is just such “another”.

Jul 17, 2009 - 9:06 am 29. AThinkingPerson:

I’m with Moon Slayer on this. CALL YOUR CONGRESSPEOPLE NOW! Obama’s health care bill stinks from start to finish. That’s why there’s NO hearings on it and NO discussion whatsoever. He’s out on the campaign trail again as we speak selling it to the uninformed.

WILL THEY EVEN READ IT? Any guesses? The reason he’s ramrodding it through is that support is quickly dwindling and the radical left that he owes a huge debt to (hello ACORN) is going to be really peeved if they don’t get free health care.

ENOUGH TALKING. CALL/EMAIL your Congresspeople NOW!

Here’s how to find their email addresses: http://www.webslingerz.com/jhoffman/congress-email.html

Jul 17, 2009 - 9:06 am 30. Clayton E. Cramer:

“In Japan, everyone must buy insurance, and insurers cannot turn away a patient for a preexisting illness; nor are insurers allowed to make a profit.”

As I recall, it took 19 years for Japan to approve the birth control pill, and 6 months to approve Viagra. Yes, a patriarchial model society to emulate!

Jul 17, 2009 - 9:06 am 31. AThinkingPerson:

Here’s the Senate email AND phone numbers:

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Here’s the House contact information:

https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

If you do nothing, you have no right to complain.

Jul 17, 2009 - 9:09 am 32. crazynut:

If the new health plan has goverment mandated abortion. What happens if the ultra sound shows a defect in the baby since it will be the goverment’s decision. Didn’t we have some kind of trial about this sort of thing in the 1940’s. It makes me wonder why these same people are against the death penelty to get people out of society so they can do no more harm, but still want to kill the innocent. Very twisted. Of course just my opinon

Jul 17, 2009 - 9:31 am 33. eburchelli:

Maybe the best we can hope for is that liberals abort themselves out of existence.

Jul 17, 2009 - 9:45 am 34. Lisa:

Fantom

You have no right to deny any woman access to abortion.

Jul 17, 2009 - 10:00 am 35. Delia:

34. Lisa,

You must identify a LOT with Susan Smith.

Jul 17, 2009 - 10:17 am 36. moron:

Lisa, ever thought about paying for your own abortion?? That way those that favor morality and life over “a woman’s right to privacy” won’t have to pay for sins.

Jul 17, 2009 - 10:27 am 37. Blarty Blarckleblart:

The article neglects to mention that the mandatory Obama abortions – or Obamortions, as they will be referred to in the regulations – will only apply to white Christian babies, whose forced abortions will be funded specifically by the tax dollars of pro-life white Christians from the Heartland. This is the kind of fact I would have expected PJM to pick up on.

Jul 17, 2009 - 10:32 am 38. Lynn:

#37
The proper word would be O’bortions and I think everyone here knows that tax money going toward the promoting or conducting of abortions is color blind and faith blind. It’s something the whole world can participate in. The O’bortion ship will sail to any port of call.

Jul 17, 2009 - 11:04 am 39. Delia:

37. Blarty Blarckleblart:

Nice try. Now insert your head in a toilet and flush. You deserver a ’swirly’ for that inane comment.

Jul 17, 2009 - 11:29 am 40. moon slayer:

CALLED YOUR REPS YET???? Campaign against them if they vote for this at this point in time. When you do, come back and tell us what their robot call screeners had to say…

The medical bill in it’s present form will be stopped. Abortion will not be the stopper though. I think it will be included in the long run in some form.

When these people have read this medical stuff, discussed with their people that voted them in to office, then vote, not before. We actually need some sort of reform. Medical costs are more than the average can afford unless you have really goo d insurance…then you pay dearly for the insurance.

Things are just strange, people voting for things they do not understand, have not read..bull $$

Jul 17, 2009 - 11:45 am 41. Blarty Blarckleblart:

38 Lynn

Thank you. “O’bortions” is far superior to my awkward “Obamortions.”

39 Delia

Why do you want the horrible truth about O’bortions withheld?

Jul 17, 2009 - 11:48 am 42. cackcon:

“You have no right to deny any woman access to abortion.”

So Lisa, does that mean I have to go pick up a poor pregnant woman and take her to the clinic?

Any bets on how long it would take the federal bureaucracy to dictate abortions for certain women as a more “cost-effective” alternative to pre-natal care?

Jul 17, 2009 - 11:59 am 43. Lynn:

#41 Your welcome Blarty Blarckleblart, your word was indeed awkward and your point unclear. I am unable though to help you with your point as you seems to lack one.

Jul 17, 2009 - 12:10 pm 44. Geoff:

“You have no right to deny any woman access to abortion”

Does that include unborn women?

Jul 17, 2009 - 12:53 pm 45. ked5:

President Obama himself stated that “reproductive care is essential care, basic care.”

~~~~

and about 75% of the populace DO NOT need “reproductive care”. men just don’t get pregnant, no matter what the enquirer says. Women post menopause/hysterectomy just don’t get pregnant. that is one very expensive redundant requiremtn.

Jul 17, 2009 - 12:56 pm 46. Delia:

Here you go, Blarty:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfFVKqHWJU0

Jul 17, 2009 - 1:16 pm 47. Tri Geek:

I have said it before, but is worth repeating- The ultimate hypocracy- When my brother and his fellow soldiers returned from Vietnam, they were spit on and called “Baby Killers” by those on the left. This was the worst insult they could lay on our brave men. Now- those same lefties worship abortions and abortion doctors. So maybe they were not insulting our guys, maybe it was their twisted way of worshipping the soldiers.

By the way, for those lefties who claim abortions help limit the over population of our planet, open your eyes. All of the European nations are shinking rapidly, so is Japan. As a matter of fact of all developed nations, only the US is not shrinking. We are at an equalilibrium. Only the third world and Muslim populations are growing, and they are growing FAST! Keep your head in the sand and your abortion doctor by your side, and we will all be heading back to the dark ages.

Jul 17, 2009 - 1:23 pm 48. Blarty Blarckleblart:

When my brother and his fellow soldiers returned from Vietnam, they were spit on and called “Baby Killers” by those on the left. This was the worst insult they could lay on our brave men. Now- those same lefties worship abortions and abortion doctors. So maybe they were not insulting our guys, maybe it was their twisted way of worshipping the soldiers.

You totally have our number, Tri Geek. We worship everyone who kills babies. Number one on our list is God, because through miscarriages He kills the most babies of all.

Jul 17, 2009 - 1:44 pm 49. Mike W.:

Blarty Blarckleblart: “You totally have our number, Tri Geek. We worship everyone who kills babies. Number one on our list is God, because through miscarriages He kills the most babies of all.

…and tornadoes! God makes tornadoes too, and how many white Christain babies in Kansas and Oklahoma do you think get killed by tornadoes every year?

Jul 17, 2009 - 2:01 pm 50. Tri Geek:

So in other words, since misscarriages happens, it is certainly okay to kill perfectly healthy babies through abortions. Nice reasoning.

Jul 17, 2009 - 2:02 pm 51. Heather:

I don’t need an insurance plan that covers abortions because I’m never going to have one (I’d have to get pregnant–why do people like Obama and Lisa assume all women are too stupid to use birth control?). Why should I pay the extra money each month for a plan that covers procedures I don’t want?

I feel the same way about acupuncture, massage, and Viagra…I’ve no problem with people offering or purchasing plans that cover those things for a larger premium, but there’s no ethical reason to force me to buy all that stuff I don’t want.

Jul 17, 2009 - 2:07 pm 52. Delia:

Blarty, the ‘draft’ doesn’t happen any longer.

Grow TF up.

Jul 17, 2009 - 2:10 pm 53. Fantom:

“34. Lisa:
Fantom

You have no right to deny any woman access to abortion.”

Actually I do. Just as people of good conscience stopped someone’s access to owning another human being. People of good conscience will stop the murder of the unborn.

As to Rights.. consider “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, ……”

The first unalienable Right… is to Life…. not to end life.

Jul 17, 2009 - 2:24 pm 54. Strawman:

Delia, that’s next on the agenda. Conscription for the Bamajungen (remember the “civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded’ as our military”?). But trolls won’t have to be drafted; they’ll be lined up to volunteer like there’s some Grateful Dead concert.

Remember when he said “you haven’t seen anything yet”? That, you can take to the bank.

Jul 17, 2009 - 2:33 pm 55. Delia:

P.S. I believe EVERY WOMAN who wants an abortion should see the same babies *I* saw pickled in a jar at every fetal stage and THEN make up their ‘minds’.

Jul 17, 2009 - 2:39 pm 56. Delia:

54. Strawman,

ACORN is already primed and ready. Why do you think they funneled all of that moula to ACORN in the last B.S. bill?

Jul 17, 2009 - 2:41 pm 57. Saltherring:

Delia, It is my turn to be deeply touched by a posting of yours, #21. Thank you for posting such a beautiful story. Lisa, I urge you to read this story, it just may help you to develop something resembling a conscience.

Jul 17, 2009 - 3:13 pm 58. Tri Geek:

My wife had an abortion when she was young, years before I met her. Now that she wants to have a baby, the doctors tell her she can’t. Don’t tell me abortions are harmless.

Jul 17, 2009 - 3:16 pm 59. momof3:

I am in tears, Delia, over post #21. Thank you so much. I have saved that for future use in these type of discussions. How anyone can worry more about the “poor, overpopulated earth” (that, by the way, isn’t even at half of carrying capacity) than a human being-a baby at that, is beyond me.

Should this go through, I shall stop paying taxes. Jail me if they will, enough is just enough and I have to answer to my maker someday. And why is it that people who don’t want kids can’t just use birth control like the rest of us?? I’ll happily give my taxes for that! But no, that would make sense and be responsible-something too many people nowadays just can’t stomach.

I am a proud mom-using NONE of your taxes-of 4 kids now. Oh, no, the poor earth is bleeeeeeeding!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jul 17, 2009 - 3:32 pm 60. Mike2:

“Coverage for abortion will be mandated under the Democrats’ plan, and those whose plans do not cover it will be penalized.”

This is probably the reason for the “health care ” bill in the first place. Abortion is one of the 10 commandments of the socialist religion.

Jul 17, 2009 - 3:48 pm 61. Moogie:

Don’t worry Delia – I do have the strength today.

Why is it so hard for liberals (eh – baloney with that: SOCIALISTS) to understand that I do not want to pay out of my own pocket so they can use the murder of their babies as their own personal birth control? “Abortion on demand.” What the hell? Do they think it is like “Movies on demand?”

And just because our government has stamped this in-utero murder with their little “sanctioned” stamp does not make it right. Denying blacks the right to vote used to be a law. Was it right? Denying women the right to vote used to be law. Was it right?

You see, this is what we REALLY get in these convoluted bills: extraneous bullshit and teeny tiny little “on condition of” and “as mandated by” clauses. They slip these seemingly trivial little bits of legislation in between loads of incomprehensible jargon that makes no sense whatsoever to even the mightiest law interpreter.

Yeah, I’m pissed.

Jul 17, 2009 - 3:55 pm 62. Delia:

57. Saltherring:

Aww (((HUG))) and I agree, I hope Lisa takes a look-see at that link and grows a heart and soul.
~
59. momof3,

momof3, I’ve posted a similar link one other time here on another ‘abortion’ thread. Every time I look at that baby’s hand reaching out of the womb to grab the finger of the surgeon I bawl my freakin’ guts out. You’re not alone in being emotionally moved.

UGH. NOT GONNA CRY AGAIN.

61. Moogie:

AMEN, sista fren’! I’m pissed off too but I refuse to let the 0bama administration stress me out to the point of affecting my health.

So, I’m going to smile and say, “I never did mind about the little things.” -Bridget Fonda in Point of No Return (1993)

Jul 17, 2009 - 5:13 pm 63. Reclass:

I presume we are all ok with tax dollars funding executions?

Jul 17, 2009 - 5:45 pm 64. Tri Geek:

Executions are for those proven guilty of crimes against society. I always am amazed that the same people who protest execution of murders, anr the same that find it perfectly okay to murder innocent babies. Hypocracy at its finest.

By the way- execution save tax dollars, because we no longer have to house and feed those low lifes.

Jul 17, 2009 - 5:57 pm 65. momof3:

Reclass-I can’t speak for others but for me, YES! I am perfectly A-Ok. The people executed put themselves there by their own actions. Babies are put there by men and women who then want to undo it-like they think the world owes them a mulligan or something. They also typically get 10-12 years worth of appeals. All on our dime, as well. Why is it that people who are not okay killing murderers are okay with killing innocent babies? How does that mesh, exactly, in their brains?

Jul 17, 2009 - 5:59 pm 66. Reclass:

I guess the death penalty then is one issue on which many Christians and Muslims can find common ground!

Given that an alarming number of “murderers” it turns out were not guilty of the crime of which they were convicted (over 100 in the last six years–ONE HUNDRED) I cannot support such a system when there is the smallest chance that someone is in fact innocent of the crime of which s/he was found guilty.

Moreover, those executed, I think we can all agree, are undoubtedly “alive,” have life, or have “personhood.” The abortion debate which revolves around life’s beginning or the beginning of personhood, or the point at which a collection of cells or a human being has rights IS NOT a debate that can be solved by science (and please don’t quote me any “scientists” on this: I have read both sides, and there ARE two sides). The debate is religious and philosophical and thus in the realm of speculation. And while it remains there, stick to your convictions, Lisa.

Jul 17, 2009 - 6:27 pm 67. Fantom:

“63. Reclass:
I presume we are all ok with tax dollars funding executions?”

Yes.. but only if they are members of moveon.org.

Unlike babies, certain actions forfeit rights.

Jul 17, 2009 - 6:29 pm 68. Delia:

63. Reclass:

“I presume we are all ok with tax dollars funding executions?”

Let’s see now?

The cost of paying for JAILING a pedophile/rapist/murdering scumb-bag costs how much?

Killing them might not be CHEAP, but, hell yes, to snuff those cretins out of society with my tax dollars is much better than HOUSING and FEEDING and ‘holding hands’ and ‘counselling’ and ‘wahhhhhhh’ on my f*cking tax dollars.

GOT IT? GOOD.

Jul 17, 2009 - 6:55 pm 69. Delia:

I would rather see tax dollars helping children who are innocent of ANY and ALL crimes, grow up to be productive citizens rather than tax dollars spent on ’supposedly’ helping reform pedophiles/rapists/murderers.

Jul 17, 2009 - 6:58 pm 70. Reclass:

Delia,

“I would rather see tax dollars helping children who are innocent of ANY and ALL crimes, grow up to be productive citizens”

Oh, so you would support planks in a health care plan for tax dollars to go towards mothers who cannot afford pre-natal care, fertility treatments, post-natal care for themselves and their children etc etc etc?

And I never said anything about tax dollars being spent of “reforming” convicted murderers/rapists etc. Why not just imprison them for life–no cable, no carpet, not carpe diem?

Jul 17, 2009 - 7:23 pm 71. Tri Geek:

Reclass: Just ask anybody in jail, they all claim to be innocent. With DNA testing and the ability to appeal, appeal and appeal, it is very unlikely an innocent person gets executed, but you go ahead an go with your ACLU stats. I can tell you for a fact that ALL babies are innocent, but go right ahead and feel no shame about sucking their brains out.

Jul 17, 2009 - 7:34 pm 72. Eric:

The need for an abortion is a statement about the irresponsible behavior of the couple that produced the fetus. It’s amusing to me how the pro-abortion crowd always makes abortion sound so benign like having a mole removed, “reproductive services” LOL!

The right to an abortion is in no way morally equivalent to opposing abortion no matter how high minded you attempt to make the word “choice” sound.

Forcing the public to pay for abortions is no different than forcing the public to cover obesity related diabetes or smoking related emphysema. It is the behavior of the individual that resulted in the problem in need of a cure. Don’t want the problem, don’t engage in the behavior. The person responsible for the behavior should not be able to offload that responsibility onto anther.

Jul 17, 2009 - 8:11 pm 73. WhyamInotsurprised?:

#12 David S (Stupid) –

Against war but pay taxes? Well, you idiot, maybe, just maybe, those wars whether you believe in them or not keep you free to express your idiot beliefs and to propagate your tainted genes. But what does abortion do, especially when paid for by taxpayers? Kill an innocent life for the sake of “convenience?”

Typical liberal, talking out both sides of the pie hole!

Piece out. Dickwad.

Jul 17, 2009 - 8:20 pm 74. Saltherring:

My, God, it must be moral relativist day. Now we have one (Reclass @ 63) equating tax dollars spent to abort innocent unborn children with tax dollars used to execute murderers! Innocent children = murderers? Executing murderers is lawful justice. Are you contending that executing unborn children constitutes the same? These leftists grow more irrational by the moment. What has happened to this country?

Jul 17, 2009 - 9:12 pm 75. Marilyn:

When I read the casual/dismissive comments about abortion from so many, it drives home to me why America will soon, very soon, cease to exist. We as a nation have now completely turned into ancient Rome and Greece, and history tells us what happened to those great civilizations. Abortion is MURDER, willful, premeditated, violent MURDER! Women are murdering their own children. No society will survive this…look at history.

Jul 17, 2009 - 11:24 pm 76. TurfMonster:

Lisa:
“You have no right to deny any woman access to abortion.”

Including those women who are aborted?

Jul 17, 2009 - 11:51 pm 77. Lisa:

Many of you ask why should you be forced to pay for someone’s abortion. That’s what insurance is. We collectively pool costs so no one’s health care can be derailed by finances. I may not lke the fact that ‘my’ money will pay for someone’s illness caused by smoking or abusing alcohol or drugs but that is part of the agreement.

Jul 18, 2009 - 6:34 am 78. Lisa:

Only fetuses are aborted, not women.

Over half of all abortions take place when the embryo still has a tail. Almost 90% of all abortions take place in the first trimester.

Some of you seen to place more value in an embryo than you do a woman’s life and health

Jul 18, 2009 - 6:41 am 79. Kipling:

The very fact that abortion has to be debated is very saddening. It is especially saddening that our progressive / liberal friends are so ashamed of their position that the have to disquise it by using words like “choice,” “reproductive health,” and “rights.” They also feel the need to hide behind such false arguments as the one Lisa posted at #78.

Abortion is a narcissistic decision made by a woman to kill another living being to benefit her. Only in a small number of cases is an unborn child killed to save the life of a mother. The abortionist who was recently killed would perform late term killings for such health reasons as “I have a prom coming up.” Is that really a health issue?

As to abortion being a right, where does that right come from? Please do not say the Constitution because we all know – including the dunces who made that ruling in the Supreme Court – that the Constitution written in the 18th century did not quarantee abortions. We also should know that the Constitution and the government does not give us our rights but only secures them for us. If you doubt this point, please read the Declaration of Independence on where our rights come from. The Federalist Papers also make this argument in regards to the Constitution.

Another question avoided by abortionists is when does life begin. Since no one can answer it with certainty, should we really be killing unborn children. For those that argue yes, please do not claim to know when life begins just be honest and state that you do not care.

Abortion and other societal ills are the product of moral relativism. When we deny the truth of Scripture and give ourselves over to the wisdom of man then confusion and moral relativism will reign. Supporters of abortion have no real agrument but must resort to slick marketing and name calling to justify their posistioins. What a way to live.

Jul 18, 2009 - 7:37 am 80. Kipling:

I did not mean to leave out the men who sometimes abandon the mother to pursue their own narcissistic goals. Pregnancy, at least in most cases, takes two and both are equally responsible for the life of that child. A man who is not mature enough to have a child is simply not mature enough to have sex. Why should society and the unborn child have to pay for the fact that the man acts like a beast out for primal sexual fulfillment and refuses to control himself.

Jul 18, 2009 - 7:42 am 81. momof3:

“Some of you seen to place more value in an embryo than you do a woman’s life and health”

Please cease and desist with the bullshit, hon. Less than 1% of abortions have anything to do with the mother’s health. Preeclampsia can kill a mom if it’s severe, and the only way to treat it is to deliver the baby. It is almost unheard of prior to viability. You can treat cancer while pregnant-chemo doesn’t cross the placenta. You can have surgery while pregnant. Yes, there are some risks of losing the baby there, but it’s a lot less than the 100% loss of abortions. Past those 2, I am unaware (and I’m an RN) of ANY situations requiring an abortion to save the mom. Once the baby’s viable, a c-section is less risky than an abortion, and it has the happy side effect of not killing the baby.

And quite frankly, yes, I am more worried about a baby with potential than a woman who would choose to kill her own child.

One again-don’t want a baby? Don’t MAKE one!

And as to your “that’s what insurance is” argument-last I checked, I had the choice to buy insurance and help defray other’s costs, or I could choose not to. This new plan takes my tax dollars with no choice to me. Aren’t pro-choice people all about people getting to exercise their right to choose? Or is that only when it’s choosing to kill?

Jul 18, 2009 - 8:17 am 82. Joe Bison:

#12 David S Peace-The goal of medical
service and treatment is to treat and
prevent illness. When did pregnancy
become an illness and abortion a cure?

As they involve bodily intervention
perhaps we should include piercings
in medical treatment among other things.

Glad to hear you pay your taxes. Are you
really a Democrat?

Enjoy

JB

Jul 18, 2009 - 8:31 am 83. Saltherring:

The more you attempt to defend an indefensible position the deeper you dig your own hole, Lisa. How many abortions are the result of concerns over “a woman’s life and health” and how many are just after-the-fact birth control? So the perpetrators “free” themselves and a living human being is denied the opportunity to breathe and make his/her own “choices”. Quite a sacrifice just to ensure your “right” to breed like irresponsible animals.

Jul 18, 2009 - 8:32 am 84. Blarty Blarckleblart:

Nobody approves 100% of the way their tax dollars are spent. I’d tell you guys to grow up, but you’re too funny the way you are.

Jul 18, 2009 - 8:32 am 85. oldfatso:

Government Health Edicts Result: Cigarette ban. Booze ban. Once upon a time I was obese (over 200 lbs). How could I get the fat to go away? I realized when I smoked and drank gin/rum I was 126 lbs. So, contrary to the surgeon general’s advice I began smoking again to cut my appetite. My afternoon snack became a gin and tonic (or planters punch) instead of the recommended apple. In the 50s and 60s one did not see the great fat obese people seen today with their huge bulging abdomins barely able to walk. In the 50s and 60s we all smoked. Anyone else see the connection? So, the government stepped in and reduced lung cancer but produced a population that is even less healthy. That’s how government health plans work to destroy overpopulation.

Jul 18, 2009 - 9:28 am 86. Lisa:

Mom of 3,

This time last year I was 12 weeks pregnant and I was told that it was very likely that I had lymphoma which had spread into a secondary cancer. I was told in no uncertain terms that if a biopsy came back showing I did in fact have lymphoma I would have a choice between aggressively fighting the cancer after an abortion or attempting to come to term and likely leaving my oldest child without a mother and without a sibling.

I was lucky, the biopsy was benign though I did require major surgery a few weeks later and now I am relatively healthy with a beautiful baby.

But I would have put my oldest child first if I had had to make a decision.

You don’t know anyone else’s circumstances and you have no right to judge, no right to decide for them.

Jul 18, 2009 - 10:47 am 87. Saltherring:

Lisa,

I am very happy that you are free from lymphoma and that you now have a healthy baby. I’m certain you are relieved and thankful. Situations such as the one you faced last year should be the only time abortion should be considered, but sadly, this is not the case. Killing unborn children as a birth control measure or a matter of convenience is a national disgrace that all Americans will regret deeply when each of us comes face to face with God. Until then, all the souls of murdered unborn children can do is call for justice.

Jul 18, 2009 - 11:09 am 88. momof3:

Lisa, I most certainly do have a right to judge. The problem in this world is there’s not enough judging people’s shitty actions. Unless you needed radiation, there was no need to abort. I worked at a cancer center and now work high-risk deliveries. And if you did HAVE to, you were one of the less than 1% (more like .005%) of women in that situation. Pretty shitty reason to keep abortion on demand. Ludicrous, in fact. A strawman for women (and men) wanting to keep being lazy about birth control and just kill the resulting kid. Pathetic.

Jul 18, 2009 - 11:22 am 89. momof3:

ps: glad you love the baby now. I hope the “stress” of raising kids doesn’t endanger your health. I shudder to think how you might “protect” yourself then.

Jul 18, 2009 - 11:26 am 90. Blarty Blarckleblart:

Shorter momof3:

“Screw your cancer, your womb is MINE.”

Jul 18, 2009 - 2:48 pm 91. Saltherring:

#90, You sound like one of those who wants abortion as an option so he can sow his oats indiscriminately and without consequence. After all, Blarty, “Dogs run free…so why can’t we?

Jul 18, 2009 - 2:59 pm 92. Blarty Blarckleblart:

91 saltherring

You sound like one of those who believes the government has the power to regulate the most intimate areas of our personal lives.

Jul 18, 2009 - 3:19 pm 93. Reclass:

Saltherring et al,

The inability to engage in a meaningful debate and resort to name calling and a willful misinterpretation of what other people say and write is why this country will tear itself apart.

Jul 18, 2009 - 4:28 pm 94. Banned by Huffpo:

75. Marilyn:

“When I read the casual/dismissive comments about abortion from so many, it drives home to me why America will soon, very soon, cease to exist. We as a nation have now completely turned into ancient Rome and Greece, and history tells us what happened to those great civilizations. Abortion is MURDER, willful, premeditated, violent MURDER! Women are murdering their own children. No society will survive this…look at history.”

Thank you for expressing what any thinking person knows intuitively.

As far as the “woman’s health is in danger” . . . my wife would have gladly given up her life if came down to a choice between her and the baby
during any point in the pregnancy . . .

What kind of woman would choose her life over the life of her son/daughter?

Jul 18, 2009 - 8:57 pm 95. TurfMonster:

You really need to educate yourself on what constitutes life, Lisa. A human embryo is a human being from the moment of conception – and that is what the definition of life says. Three of the four characteristics which define life are readily apparent (metabolism, growth, and reaction to stimuli), and the fourth, which deals with the capacity for reproduction, is present somewhere within the genetic code and will eventually manifest itself if given the opportunity to do so.

Those embryos that you would dismiss so casually, are human and should be granted the same protection under the law that the rest of us enjoy.

Jul 18, 2009 - 9:06 pm 96. TurfMonster:

Number 66:

“The abortion debate which revolves around life’s beginning or the beginning of personhood, or the point at which a collection of cells or a human being has rights IS NOT a debate that can be solved by science (and please don’t quote me any “scientists” on this: I have read both sides, and there ARE two sides).”

Wrong. Science already has already adequately addressed this question. Just pick up a copy of Webster’s Ninth Collegiate dictionary and look up the definition of life. There you will find four criteria which have be present in order to differentiate life from inanimate objects and they are: Metabolism, reaction to stimuli, growth and the capacity to reproduce. All are present at conception, though reproduction hasn’t yet reached its final form.

It’s just too bad that the pro-choice crowd would rather play games with semantics than to take a real serious look at what science has said on this topic.

Jul 18, 2009 - 9:17 pm 97. Saltherring:

Blarty doesn’t seem to believe the government should “regulate” murder. And what name were you called?

Jul 19, 2009 - 7:14 am 98. Blarty Blarckleblart:

Blarty doesn’t seem to believe the government should “regulate” murder.

Blarty doesn’t believe that an embryo and a full-grown human are the same thing.

Jul 19, 2009 - 8:49 am 99. Delia:

98. Blarty Blarckleblart:

“Blarty doesn’t believe that an embryo and a full-grown human are the same thing.”

So you’re an admitted ‘Susan Smither’ then? A full-grown human being is about the age of 19 or 20. Yes, you are STILL forming and growing as a child.

Why is it a ‘crime’ then, when a mother throws her newborn baby in a dumbster?

You’re whack.

Jul 19, 2009 - 12:03 pm 100. Saltherring:

Blarty, Someday you can offer that as an excuse to God, face to face. Are you ready?

Jul 19, 2009 - 12:03 pm 101. Blarty Blarckleblart:

Why is it a ‘crime’ then, when a mother throws her newborn baby in a dumbster?

Because the state has a legitimate interest in the life of the child that makes criminalizing that action a legitimate exercise of government power. Pre-viability, the state’s interest in the fetus does not outweigh the mother’s right to privacy.

Blarty, Someday you can offer that as an excuse to God, face to face. Are you ready?

Which god? There are lots to choose from. Let me know which is the one true god so I can determine what I should say when I meet him, her, or it. Please provide empirical evidence. Tnx

Jul 19, 2009 - 1:11 pm 102. Lynn:

Throwing a baby in a dumpster is a crime because the government has offered an alternative to mothers who abandon their children. They can drop them at a firehouse, a police station, or a hospital without fear of prosecution. It’s a crime because it is criminal behavior and the laws have taken away any reason for a man or woman to abandon their child for fear of prosecution.

The state has a legitimate interest in the life of the unborn, it is just that they have chosen to give the woman the right to end the life of the unborn child up to a certain point and then the state has the right to step in and make laws where the woman no longer can claim the right to privacy as a legitimate reason to end the life.

That is why the term person-hood came into being. The left wanted the child to be given the title of person hood and civil rights, only when the child’s head exited the woman’s body. This would draw a sharp line between the the child’s rights became equal to the woman’s rights.

The states have stepped in and refused this definition and various states have different laws as to when a woman or a doctor can legally terminate that life.

Privacy Rights are NOT the all encompassing dictate for giving a woman the right to end the life of an unborn child. That is not to say that there are those on the choice agree with this. There are those who believe the woman should have the right to end the child’s life up to the point where the child’s head exits the body.

It is a constant battle between the left wanting to take away ANY rights of the unborn child, and the right wanting give the unborn child rights from the time of the conception.

Jul 19, 2009 - 1:53 pm 103. Lynn:

Please forgive my clumsy writing. I meant to say; This would draw a sharp line between when the child’s rights become equal to the woman’s rights.

and…That is not to say that there are those on the choice side who agree with this.

I should do a better job of editing.

Jul 19, 2009 - 4:03 pm 104. Saltherring:

Blarty, There can only be one true God, the Creator of the universe and all that exists in it. If you truly want to find Him, pray that he will reveal himself to you, and I guarantee He will. If you pray selfishly or lacking sincerity, you will receive exactly what you deserve…nothing.

Jul 19, 2009 - 5:38 pm 105. momof3:

“Privacy Rights”

And where is this right again in the Constitution? Oh, that’s right, SCOTUS made it up out of whole cloth.

“It’s a crime because it is criminal behavior” -Way to state the obvious.

“laws have taken away any reason for a man or woman to abandon their child for fear of prosecution.” Where to start? Ok, first, it’s only wrong to kill your kid because the law gives you other options?? Second: birth control gives you options too. Use them.

Jul 19, 2009 - 5:51 pm 106. Lynn:

momof3: I should have said that there is no excuse for a person to put a child in the trash when laws have been passed that they will not be prosecuted if they leave the child at a fire station, hospital, or police station.

I was trying to counter Blarts statement that the state had no interest in the pre-viable human life. I disagree, and think the state is doing what it can to grant the unborn child rights by limiting the time when a woman can seek an abortion. They also offer many services to woman and men who do not want to take responsibility for the child that they refuse to, or can’t take care of.

In my opinion they are trying to balance an interest in the unborn child while still attempting to stay out of every minute detail of an individual’s life. In other words avoid becoming Big Brother. I think an example of a government that regulates every detail of life would be the Chinese where neighbor spies on neighbor and reports unauthorized pregnancies or unauthorized children to the authorities.

I agree there are options to unwanted pregnancies such as birth control, and I also agree that we will have to face our G_d one day with our choices. I just think it would be impossible for the government to control completely our behavior and choices and they are doing what is humanly possible without meddling in every part of our lives.

When Roe v. Wade passed, I was a young girl, and even then knew it was not a good thing for women, men, or children (stating the obvious). I don’t believe it has made life better for women, and I don’t believe it has contributed to their liberty or their pursuit of happiness.

I think that organizations like Planned Parenthood try to downplay the seriousness of what young girls who choose abortion are doing, by telling them things like “When you walk in to the clinic, your pregnant and when you walk out your no longer pregnant.” I think that when you have to use deceit or airbrush facts to influence a person to choose abortion, your wrong from the beginning.

I think that the people who try to educate men and woman about the wonder of the new life they create are doing a great service to the world. I think that those who defend life are doing G_d’s work and I think they have changed minds and hearts. I think that many people are doing the best they can to save unborn lives and I think it is a constant battle since time immortal. I wish all children were welcome in the world.

I hope this has cleared up some misconceptions you be have about what I wrote.

Jul 20, 2009 - 7:06 am 107. Free Quark:

Those who describe themselves as ‘pro-choice’ should cease hypocrisy and allow others (whether insurance plans or doctors) their choice not to be involved in abortion. If you think abortion is a worthy cause donate your own money to cover those procedures for those that cannot afford them.

Oldfatso;

Your theory doesn’t account for the large numbers of overweight children seen today.

Jul 20, 2009 - 7:49 am 108. Blarty Blarckleblart:

Blarty, There can only be one true God, the Creator of the universe and all that exists in it.

Really? Why’s that?

Jul 20, 2009 - 8:43 am 109. Blarty Blarckleblart:

106 Lynn

I was trying to counter Blarts statement that the state had no interest in the pre-viable human life.

Please note that I didn’t say the state has NO interest; it does. The Court simply found that, before the fetus can live on its own outside the womb, the state’s interest does not outweigh the mother’s right to privacy – the right to control her own body. It is the state’s legitimate interest in the fetus that allows it to regulate abortion AFTER viability.

105 momof3

And where is this right again in the Constitution? Oh, that’s right, SCOTUS made it up out of whole cloth.

The right of privacy was first officially established in Griswold v. Connecticut, although Justice Brandeis had written influentially on the topic a century before. Ironically, although it is decried by modern “conservatives,” recognition of the right of privacy limits the power of government to intrude in our personal lives. That’s why true Goldwater-style conservatives (to the extent they still exist) tend to keep their opinions on Roe to themselves, while their big-government children scream for the government to have more intrusive power over the most intimate areas of our lives.

Jul 20, 2009 - 9:00 am 110. Lynn:

Here is a link that seems to be up to date with abortion law by state. It shows that not all states follow the rule of viability. It shows that most states excersise some form of regulation over the women’s right to terminate the life legally, even before the child is considered viable.

http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_OAL.pdf

Interesting use of the word government ‘children’.

Jul 20, 2009 - 10:01 am 111. momof3:

The Court has no business establishing a right not granted in the Constitution. Especially a right that clearly invalidates another’s ultimate right-the first one granted us-the right to life. Healthcare is not a right. Privacy is not a right. The government does have business getting up in our life’s details when it’s protecting a basic right-the right to life.

Anyone who thinks they have any privacy anyway is seriously misled. If you use a cell or cordless phone, the details of your life are all out there for anyone who cares to listen. Ditto the internet.

Lynn, I’m glad we’re closer on the issue than I thought. Thank you. I’ve never (other my own personal opinion for myself) said a woman who literally has to abort or die should have to die legally. I merely think it’s absurd to keep holding up a woman’s health as a reason to allow abortion in general, when it’s such an impossibly small segment of the abortions done.

I also don’t really understand the whole putting-the-kids-you-already-birthed-first thing. I can’t imagine that knowing mommy killed my little brother to save her life would be good for a kid. It would lead to “what if I’d threatened her life” questions. I think knowing mom puts her kids first is better. But, I also think people should have a plan of what will happen to the kids if they die thought out BEFORE they breed. Had I died with the last pregnancy, DH would have made sure they grew up knowing mommy would have given her life to save you if needed, just like she would for your siblings.

My mom counsels at a crisis pregnancy center. The key to saving the baby (they do have to present abortion as an unbiased option) is to make it all about the mom. How is she doing, how can they help her. If you make it baby focused, you’ll lose the baby.

Jul 20, 2009 - 10:54 am 112. momof3:

More of my thoughts on the “mother’s health” issue:

What a person’s really saying, when they say they’d choose to raise the kid they’ve already given birth to, is that they love their firstborn the most, and each following child a little less. Enough less, in fact, that the mom would kill that child rather than not be around to raise the preceeding child. Strange. Just stop having kids, if that’s the case.

Also, a mother crocodile will die fighting to defend her nest. Eggs-not hatched yet even. Shouldn’t we strive to be a little better than reptiles in our parenting? Protecting one’s offspring is written in the genes-the term mother grizzly didn’t get famous for ferocity for nothing!

Jul 20, 2009 - 11:09 am 113. Blarty Blarckleblart:

Privacy is not a right.

Thank you for stating the crux of the anti-choice argument so succinctly.

Most Americans would disagree with your statement, which is the fundamental reason Roe has stood for 36 years and Griswold has stood for 44 years without being seriously challenged despite the Court having had many opportunities to re-visit the issues. Americans like to be the only ones who decide when and how they have children.

Let me put this another way: if Roe were overturned and the Court were to declare that the government is free to regulate the most intimate activities of our personal lives, there would be nothing stopping states from legislating the number of children you are allowed to have, or forcing the abortion of children with birth defects, or children of the wrong gender. You could have been “momof2″ or “momof1″ if it were up to somebody else to decide how many children you were allowed to have. Is that what you want? Because that would be quite possible.

Jul 20, 2009 - 1:15 pm 114. Saltherring:

“Really? Why’s that?” How many “truths” can there be, Blarty. When major conflicts separate the various religions’ written articles of faith, only one can be accurate and true. If I was interested in such timeless questions as, “How did all this get here?….Who established the sun, moon, stars, planets, seasons, tides, climates, etc?….How do I fit into the equation?….Is this short season on this planet all there is?….Could someone have the answers?…Where do I look? The Bible does have the answers, for anyone desiring to find the truth. I sincerely hope you do, Blarty. Take care.

Jul 20, 2009 - 5:16 pm 115. momof3:

Blarty, abortion has been illegal before. None of those things happened, nor would they. No one has any problem with individuals deciding how many children they have. We just want them to do it BEFORE they make the kids. That’s not unreasonable.

And polls-a wide variety of them-now show abortion support at less than 50% of Americans. They’re waking up to what it really is.

Jul 21, 2009 - 6:31 am 116. myth buster:

113. No, the crux of the anti-abortion argument is that the fetus is a human person and therefore entitled to legal protection from being murdered.

Jul 29, 2009 - 6:32 pm