Ah, what the heck. Way too many people are getting along here, so lets go ahead and lob a grenade into the lovefest.

 

Anticipating a day when American women no longer have a federal constitutional right to abortion, a number of states are considering laws that would automatically outlaw the procedure if the U.S. Supreme Court reverses itself.

 

Such "trigger laws" are designed to ban abortion as soon as the court overturns Roe vs. Wade or the Constitution is amended to give states a free hand to regulate abortion. Louisiana lawmakers passed such a bill in the last week, and other states recently considered them.

 

Seven states, including Illinois, already have trigger laws on the books, although legal experts say it's not clear the older ones would result in an immediate ban.

 

Rest of story at the link...

First of all I do not believe that murdering your unborn children is a constitutional right no matter what the courts say.

First of all I do not believe that murdering your unborn children is a constitutional right no matter what the courts say.

 

You know, usually when you start off a post with "First of all," you keep elaborating on your point. Secondly, what to you is "an unborn child?" Is it a group of cells right after the sperm enters the egg, a fetus, or third trimester fetuses? You can't be be vague and expect to be taken seriously.

 

I'll leave it at this: abortion shouldn't be an important issue right now. There are much more important things to discuss, and just because some states and fundies think they're being attacked because a woman can have the right to choose to have a pregnancy is ludicrous. But I forgot that the most important topics today are about gays, abortion, and flag burning.

But I forgot that the most important topics today are about gays, abortion, and flag burning.

 

And #%&@*! Mexicans picking all our lettuce and not leaving any for us to pick.

And #%&@*! Mexicans picking all our lettuce and not leaving any for us to pick.

I could really go for a salad right now.

First of all I do not believe that murdering your unborn children is a constitutional right no matter what the courts say.

 

its amazing how people don't understand what the courts actually ruled. It isn't our right, its that the government doesn't have the right. There is a difference. Everything we are allowed to do isn't because the government allows us to. Its the opposite. Everything the government does its becasue WE THE PEOPLE allow them to.

its amazing how people don't understand what the courts actually ruled. It isn't our right, its that the government doesn't have the right. There is a difference. Everything we are allowed to do isn't because the government allows us to. Its the opposite. Everything the government does its becasue WE THE PEOPLE allow them to.

 

And that's the way it should be. The Government has no right to tell my wife what to do with her body. What really pisses me off is when people say, "Yeah, well you're pro-abortion!"

 

Actually, no I'm not, I'm pro choice, which is a completely different thing. I think you can be pro choice and pro life at the same time...here's how:

 

When it affects YOUR life, then you say, not a chance in hell, I don't support it and I won't condone it.

 

When if affects EVERYONE ELSE'S life, then you say, I wouldn't do it, but it's not up to me.

 

See how easy that is?

 

PS...bmags, this wasn't directed at you...

Edited June 12, 200619 yr by CanOfCorn

I checked the Tennessee book we also have trigger laws and also have a new liecense plate that has support life on it of course it is voluntary and the money raised goes to the choose life organization. And of course the lovely ACLU has an appeal to the Supreme Court which hopefully gets rejected. If the people want to pay money for these plates let them.

I checked the Tennessee book we also have trigger laws and also have a new liecense plate that has support life on it of course it is voluntary and the money raised goes to the choose life organization. And of course the lovely ACLU has an appeal to the Supreme Court which hopefully gets rejected. If the people want to pay money for these plates let them.

The ACLU "choose life" furor is because there is no option for people to buy "pro-choice" plates. If they have that, then I wouldn't mind so much. But when the gov't is only allowing for promotion of one POV, then it is bulls***. Plus, think of all the money they could make since 2/3+ of the public agrees with the pro-choice position.

 

/still thinks that a logical and rational discussion with teens via parents and teachers to discuss the risks and benefits of sexual activity + allowing for easy procurement/knowledge of contraceptives is going to do much more to lower the rates of abortion than merely banning a procedure.

First of all I do not believe that murdering your unborn children is a constitutional right no matter what the courts say.

 

 

The question is does the right to privacy that the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled exists in the Consitutution apply to a woman and her body? How can a right to privacy NOT include one's own body?

The question is does the right to privacy that the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled exists in the Consitutution apply to a woman and her body? How can a right to privacy NOT include one's own body?

 

 

By that logic you could murder your spouse in the "privacy" of your own home and say that was protected under the Constitution. You have to find where to draw the line.

By that logic you could murder your spouse in the "privacy" of your own home and say that was protected under the Constitution. You have to find where to draw the line.

 

 

I agree. But any extension of privacy should reasonably include one's own body, no?

I agree. But any extension of privacy should reasonably include one's own body, no?

 

 

If you were talking about getting a tattoo or a piercing I would agree but we are talking about another human life here.

If you were talking about getting a tattoo or a piercing I would agree but we are talking about another human life here.

 

 

Well, the debate on when human life begins is an on going one. The arguements are old and the talking points on both sides are known to all. I don't feel like rehashing them here. I don't believe a month old fetus is human life, obviously you do. Niether of us will change the others opinion.

Well, the debate on when human life begins is an on going one. The arguements are old and the talking points on both sides are known to all. I don't feel like rehashing them here. I don't believe a month old fetus is human life, obviously you do. Niether of us will change the others opinion.

 

 

Fair enough. One thing we can agree on is this debate is a really interesting one. Both sides have pretty good arguments to back themselves up. I guess now it all comes down to what the courts rule.

The ACLU "choose life" furor is because there is no option for people to buy "pro-choice" plates. If they have that, then I wouldn't mind so much. But when the gov't is only allowing for promotion of one POV, then it is bulls***. Plus, think of all the money they could make since 2/3+ of the public agrees with the pro-choice position.

 

/still thinks that a logical and rational discussion with teens via parents and teachers to discuss the risks and benefits of sexual activity + allowing for easy procurement/knowledge of contraceptives is going to do much more to lower the rates of abortion than merely banning a procedure.

 

This sounds like an acknowledgement of supply and demand to me.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jun 12, 2006 -> 09:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

By that logic you could murder your spouse in the "privacy" of your own home and say that was protected under the Constitution. You have to find where to draw the line.

And unborn fetus and full grown woman are too way different things.

 

 

I wonder what evil monkey's take on abortion is consider he complains about people on welfare in his signature

And unborn fetus and full grown woman are too way different things.

I wonder what evil monkey's take on abortion is consider he complains about people on welfare in his signature

 

 

I can answer that one for you. Don't concieve children that you can't afford to raise.

 

Thats common sense talking but then personal responsibility is about the only cuss phrase a liberal knows.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jun 13, 2006 -> 07:52 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can answer that one for you. Don't concieve children that you can't afford to raise.

 

Thats common sense talking but then personal responsibility is about the only cuss phrase a liberal knows.

It seems so simple to understand, but there will always be deadbeats who are too cheap to use protection, or too stupid to not care about how much it takes to take care of a child.

 

Would you rather have deadbeats get an abortion if it was their choice, or would you rather have them give birth to the kid knowing they can't afford it and would be sucking away at the welfare system?

 

For those that think an unborn fetus is a child, does that mean they are entitled to the rights of all individual under 18? Should a mother be able to collect more support while she is pregnant? Should one of these s***bags that we always see on Maury Povich be forced to pay child support while the mother is still carrying the child?

It seems so simple to understand, but there will always be deadbeats who are too cheap to use protection, or too stupid to not care about how much it takes to take care of a child.

 

Would you rather have deadbeats get an abortion if it was their choice, or would you rather have them give birth to the kid knowing they can't afford it and would be sucking away at the welfare system?

 

For those that think an unborn fetus is a child, does that mean they are entitled to the rights of all individual under 18? Should a mother be able to collect more support while she is pregnant? Should one of these s***bags that we always see on Maury Povich be forced to pay child support while the mother is still carrying the child?

 

 

Id rather they give up the child up for adoption so that some real parents can take care of them.

 

I do think that an unborn child is entitled to the same rights other children have, not the least of which is the right to live. As for support, you obviously wouldn't have the father paying more support because the mother doesn't have to feed & clothe the child yet.

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20060612/sperm_hea.html

 

Masturbation must be stopped.

Id rather they give up the child up for adoption so that some real parents can take care of them.

 

I do think that an unborn child is entitled to the same rights other children have, not the least of which is the right to live. As for support, you obviously wouldn't have the father paying more support because the mother doesn't have to feed & clothe the child yet.

 

 

Yes right again. Adoption is such a good option why kill a child when there is such a good alternative that works out well for the mother as well as the child. I just don't see how this could be a choice only if the mothers life is in danger or maybe in the case rape or incest. The only other reasons to get an abortion is to serve selfish purposes and will judged accordingly when the time comes.

Edited June 14, 200619 yr by minors

Yes right again. Adoption is such a good option why kill a child when there is such a good alternative that works out well for the mother as well as the child. I just don't see how this could be a choice only if the mothers life is in danger or maybe in the case rape or incest. The only other reasons to get an abortion is to serve selfish purposes and will judged accordingly when the time comes.

 

I'm no adoption expert but I get the feeling that their are way more unadopted children in the system then there are families adopting...I think that the situation would only get way, way, way, way worse...

I'm no adoption expert but I get the feeling that their are way more unadopted children in the system then there are families adopting...I think that the situation would only get way, way, way, way worse...

 

 

Actually not true. The problem is that there are too many what could be called "undesirable" children out there to be adopted. The majority of prospective adoptive parents (white folks with $$ - adoption is soooo expensive) want healthy white babies. Not children born to welfare and crack mothers. It's an extremely sad situation. If I was unable to have a child naturally, I'd take whatever I could get.

Yes right again. Adoption is such a good option why kill a child when there is such a good alternative that works out well for the mother as well as the child. I just don't see how this could be a choice only if the mothers life is in danger or maybe in the case rape or incest. The only other reasons to get an abortion is to serve selfish purposes and will judged accordingly when the time comes.

 

 

What time are you speaking of? The time after we die that we may or may not come face to face with a God that may or may not exist?