3rd Shock Video Catches Planned Parenthood V.P. Selling Body Parts of Aborted Babies

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: Gryphon66

jesus...I already answered that. Did you not read the post? Apparently you stopped half way through. I am not repeating myself.

Yeah, there was a lot of nonsense in that post that I skimmed over, because I like to think better of you than to think you knowingly plopped down a pile of screed like that.

Here's your answer/non-answer:

originally posted by: bbracken677

Your last 3 questions? Lets start with the last: I already stated my position on this. It is a rare situation, (as are the previous 2 situations...but always gets tossed out there like some kind of ignorant gotcha!) but in the case of a pregnancy threatening the mother's life there are no good answers. Therefore, the abortion should be an option for the parents to exercise. Main point, it being their choice... a hard choice, perhaps, but theirs to make.

So, according to you, murder is an option for the parents to exercise.

Let just that line sink in. No waffling, no special pleading, in black and white, that is what you said.

I love the feigned outrage from the right.

The schizophrenic duplicity on full display is laughable.

Odd how "the children" wail from them is right as paint when it comes to abortion, but when a gun grabber says "the children" they're all 'OVER MY DEAD BODY" or "molon labe".

FWIW I do agree with the "Molon labe", nobody is getting my guns!

And unless you dunk a basketball, run the 100 in less than 11 seconds, score 150 on 3 different IQ tests and con a ship w/o any point of reference in the dark while on '___' and still get to where you meant to go, abortions should be mandatory.

Let's face facts guys, we're all pathetically mediocre.

Derek

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: ~Lucidity


Just a quick remark: I read the bottom of your post and there in rather bold letters is:

Deny Willful Ignorance

And yet you ask who exactly is the judge of responsibly...... As if having unprotected recreational sex resulting in a pregnancy and an abortion is considered responsible behavior in any world other than Bizzarro world.

You certainly are not the judge of that. In every single case and situation? Can you see into peoples' lives and souls and hearts and walk in their shoes? If not, you cannot judge them.

And now perhaps time for a question for you. Who will judge them? And how? And how will this be enforced?

a reply to: ~Lucidity

Firt off: no where have I advocated any "judgement" or "enforcement" ...

We were discussing a single scenario: unprotected recreational sex resulting in a pregnancy and an abortion.

I would like you to tell me, point blank, that the scenario is an example of responsible behavior. I am not looking for some bizarre scenario that rarely happens... Most abortions are the result of simple unprotected recreational sex resulting in an unwanted pregnancy.

From the "womenscenter.com:

The most common underlying reasons for abortion were 1) they could not afford a child at the time and were unmarried (42%), 2) it would interfere with their education (38%), 3) it would interfere with their employment (38%), and 4) they were students or planning to enroll in studies (34%). Other reasons are having relationship problems, not ready for another child, or don’t want people to know they had sex or got pregnant, the health of the fetus, victim of rape, or became pregnant as result of incest.

If you look at reasons 1 through 4, I have to ask the question: If you didnt want a child, why did you take the risk? Additionally I would also ask: Why should the child have to pay the price for your error? In the best of worlds I would be asking both parties the question, since it takes 2 to tango. Real world is, sadly, often the "dad" is not present, does not participate in the decision and is not accepting his responsibility in the matter. (there is that bad word again: responsibility)

The following reasons are increasingly statistically rare and, IMO, are statistically more important.

There are facts, there is common sense, and then there is opinion. When I identify a statement as opinion then I am typically open for discussion but I recognize the complexities.

Life is never simple, life is never white and black... life is complicated shades of grey. It's how you navigate through all the grey and maintain a sense of ethics that defines you as a person. I am pretty sure that all of us have done things we wish we could undo... that's just being human.

The core of the discussion, I think, is whether irresponsible behavior resulting in an abortion is acceptable. To say yes,is to say that it's ok to kill someone if they are an inconvenience. Perhaps the core of the question is: Is abortion an acceptable solution? Perhaps it is as simple as: Is abortion murder?

For all the above, I have presented my opinions, my thought processes and have made exceptions since every rule should have an exception or 2......

I would like to hear reasons why people believe a fetus does not, at the very least, represent an individual life. Oh, and why said fetus/unborn child should not have the same rights as guaranteed by the Constitution of these US.

originally posted by: bbracken677


People are effed up...there are any number of reasons to abort a child. Does the presence of a reason, any reason, make murder acceptable? It might, given life and death situations, but I do not happen to believe that abortion should be the answer in most cases.

That is your belief and you are entitled to it. However it is not

every one else's belief. So stop trying to shove it down every one else's

throat!

This is the final time of my saying it ... I wont be answering any more

posts on this subject .... So loud and clear >>>>

ABORTION IS LEGAL AND WITHIN THE LAW....MURDER IS ILEGAL

In the situation you present, the mom was not the irresponsible one. The dad was. Does the irresponsible actions of the father make it fine and dandy that mom is ok making a decision resulting in the death of her child?

She took the responsible decision which was right for her.


This is not previewing hope it posts out OK

a reply to: eletheia

Sorry if I touched a nerve...I am, for the most part, illustrating the illogical and farcical thinking applied to the topic of abortion.

Either the fetus/unborn child represents a human being and is due the rights and protections of the Constitution or it is not. If it is, then to deprive it of life without due process is in violation of the Constitution.

As I identified early on when I joined the discussion, my intent is to advocate, in a sense, for the defenseless fetus/unborn child. I refuse to accept that a fetus is no different than a kidney, or a tumor.

You have your own reasons for supporting abortion, I just havent heard anything logical yet.

To merely use the law as your reasoning is not logical. I could point out how at one point in time slavery was legal and upheld by the highest court in the land. That does not make it right...does not make it moral, does not make it ethical, does not make it honorable. Oh, and for my buddy: Does not make it responsible behavior lol

a reply to: eletheia

OH...I missed the 2nd to the last sentence: Responsible only if a fetus/unborn child is no different than a tumor. Not responsible if the fetus/unborn child represents a human being.

a reply to: bbracken677

Either the fetus/unborn child represents a human being and is due the rights and protections of the Constitution or it is not. If it is, then to deprive it of life without due process is in violation of the Constitution.

It is not.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
www.law.cornell.edu...

A person has to be born to be eligible for constitutional rights.

a reply to: bbracken677

All very nice.

And so who's going to sit in judgement and enforcement as to which people have done this thing of recreational unprotected sex again?

Illogical and farcical thinking like "It's okay to murder under certain conditions."

Never ceases to amaze (and disappoint) me.

a reply to: windword

"It is not"

Then what is it? Don't describe it...what IS it?

a reply to: Gryphon66

It is never permissible to murder under ANY condition. Period. I assume you do know the definition of "murder"?

It never ceases to amaze me how simple English language needs to be defined to otherwise very intelligent people. I feel like I'm talking to Bill Clinton.

Words have meaning.

originally posted by: bbracken677



Either the fetus/unborn child represents a human being and is due the rights and protections of the Constitution or it is not. If it is, then to deprive it of life without due process is in violation of the Constitution.

Somewhere in this constitution does it not say:-

*Rights of citizenship to all people BORN in the USA or naturalised*

doesn't mention the unborn, the foetus, or a 'potential person'

As I identified early on when I joined the discussion, my intent is to advocate, in a sense, for the defenseless fetus/unborn child. I refuse to accept that a fetus is no different than a kidney, or a tumor.

As I said earlier you are entitled to your opinion .... but not every one agrees

with your opinion?

To merely use the law as your reasoning is not logical. I could point out how at one point in time slavery was legal and upheld by the highest court in the land. That does not make it right...does not make it moral, does not make it ethical, does not make it honorable. Oh, and for my buddy: Does not make it responsible behavior lol

We all have to live within the law .... and as you pointed out slavery was within

the law, but humanity moved on and saw sense, and slavery is now illegal....

Likewise

Abortion was illegal and then humanity saw sense and moved on and now it is

legal.

Modern times eh? ...

a reply to: eletheia

"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, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men,...." (The Declaration of Independence, United States, July 4th, 1776)

Our government dropped the ball on this one when Roe v Wade was decided. This country has been in a moral trainwreck ever since.

a reply to: eletheia


You are comparing the legalization of killing unborn babies with the outlawing of slavery?

Killing unborn babies = good.... eliminating slavery = good.. okie dokie. One is, the other is not.

As you stated, it is my opinion.

But I fail to see how anyone with a heart can call abortion a good thing. I fail to see how anyone with a brain can maintain that an unborn child should have no rights. I fail to understand how an unborn child can be equated with a tumor. Or worse yet, with a nose job, since both abortions and plastic surgery are both elective surgeries, in a sense.

originally posted by: Ignatian
a reply to: Gryphon66

It is never permissible to murder under ANY condition. Period. I assume you do know the definition of "murder"?

It never ceases to amaze me how simple English language needs to be defined to otherwise very intelligent people. I feel like I'm talking to Bill Clinton.

Words have meaning.

Yada yada yada. Speaking of assuming, perhaps you should read what's written before you make a public braying ass of yourself.

Talk to the anti-abortion supporters above, they're the ones that are claiming that murder is an option for parent to utilize or that murder is acceptable sometimes.

When you read what has been written, let me know.

a reply to: eletheia

An unborn child is NOT a tumor. An unborn child is NOT a kidney. An unborn child is an unborn child !

This is not an opinion. This is a fact.

It's SELF-EVIDENT!!. (See Constitution)

Words have meaning. Moral relativism is inherently flawed. Baseless. It's actually delusional.

a reply to: Gryphon66

I'm not talking to those other posters. I'm talking to you.

Deflect much?

I say murder is wrong, and I'm a "braying ass"? I believe that's an ad hominem attack. I thought T&C forbade that. Maybe I'm wrong .

originally posted by: Ignatian
a reply to: windword

"It is not"

Then what is it? Don't describe it...what IS it?

It is a potential person. That's also Self Evident.

a reply to: bbracken677

Most abortions are the result of simple unprotected recreational sex resulting in an unwanted pregnancy.

Not true.

The Guttmacher report shows “54 percent of women who have abortions had used a contraceptive method *usually condom or the pill) during the month they became pregnant.” These figures are similar to those of a report in Spain showing abortions doubling despite increased family planning promotion.

And, of the women who say they did not intend to become pregnant, the report said “most of these women have practiced contraception in the past.”
www.lifenews.com...