Doe anyone else think the best thing for Obama right now would be for him to Become a mute for the next 8 months....


Right....

Aricle - Obama's Abortion Extremism


The child is a person. He or she isn't a cow or a duck .. but a person.
A human heart beat is stopped. That person has been murdered.


Many people do. They understand that it was a person .. their child.
The child is named. They bury the child. The child is mourned.
He or she is mourned even if he or she is 'lost in the toilet' as you say.

Others? Perhaps they've listened to those who say the child was just a
lump of cells. At any rate .. the loss of the child is mourned.


Adoption would have done the same thing .. and no one would have died.


...you have a dead sibling.


Yes .. who knows. Your sibling could have been the one to find the cure for cancer. Your sibling could have been the one to write the next great novel. Your sibling could have been the one to be a great Senator. Yes .. who knows what could have happened.


Ah yes .. the mantra of the pro-aborts. Those who point out what's wrong with abortion must be 'judging' the person who does it. Silly, silly, silly. Pointing out that abortion is a wrong act in no way 'judges' the people who have them. It just points out the error of that decision.


A few??? Abortion IS birth control unless it's used because the life of the woman is in danger. Almost all abortions are for 'birth control'. It's a late version of it.


Uh .. no. There is a waiting list for babies that is YEARS long. Years. There is a baby shortage in America. Babies don't end up in 'group homes'.


Adoption is a better solution then murder.


This is another funny mantra from the pro-aborts. "anti-choice"
No one took away their right to choose if they want to have sex.
That person made their own choice .. fully knowing that a child
is the original intended outcome of a sexual union.

When a woman commits abortion she doesn't kill herself .. she kills another human being. She stops another human beings heart.
Murder isn't a 'choice'. It's wrong.


Thanks. Same to you all. If you don't agree .. fine. But a lot of people do agree that abortion is killing a human child. Especially those who survived abortion or who had moms who decided to let them live.


apc .. you are a gem.

For those of you who agree with Obama ... I offer you this ....
Go have a nice day. Enjoy yourselves. It's a beautiful spring day.
Go appreciate it. Thank God and your mom for allowing you to live.
And remember those who were killed before they could appreciate the day.



[edit on 4/3/2008 by FlyersFan]

reply to post by TKainZero

---

Exactly. What's that old saying? "Better for someone to think you're a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." Obama needs to stick to his scripted conversations and not try to wing it. He's going to sink his own ship if he continues like this.

Are people on bypass machines dead?

If someone gets their head cut off but their heart still beats, are they still alive?

I qualify a person as a human that is self-aware at some level. I think therefore I am. A lump of cells that does not have a brain is not a person. Not until around 8wks does the brainstem form and reflex action is observed. Followed by the pons and medulla. Somewhere after 8wks heartrate changes and stimulus discrimination can be observed indicating the premature brain is operating independently. This is where I draw the line unless extreme circumstances exist such as definitive defects or adverse impact on the mother that outweigh the risks of continuing gestation.

Those first two months are when most fetuses are naturally aborted (miscarried) by the body. Often lost unknowingly during menstruation. This is the time period where if the woman decides she does not want to continue I do not condemn her for making that choice. I encourage counseling because often time psych issues are already present and can be made worse by termination, compounded by any religious enslavement they were brought up in, but if she knows the risks and has weighed them against the consequences of continuing (read: punishment for a mistake), it's her call.

GOOD!


Their blood still flows and the heart is intended to start again after repairs.
Their souls are in their bodies. They are alive.


People in comas are still alive. So are people in deep sleep.
They are alive but aren't 'self aware'. Doctors think new born babies
aren't self aware. When they are able to think that way, for the first
months they think they are an extension of the mother and not their own person. Does that mean it's okay to kill babies under four months of age
because they aren't self aware?


I undersand what you are saying apc. Really.

The problem is that very soon in the pregnancy a heart is beating. Nerves are established. PAIN RECEPTORS are there. Babies sleep in the womb and even suck their thumbs very early on. They play with their toes. They open and close their eyes.

Babies in the womb who are operated on are given pain killing drugs during surgery. If it is acknowledged that they feel the pain of surgery .... it shouldn't be too hard to see that they feel the pain of being burned to death with the solutions .. or feel the pain of being ripped apart by a vacuum... or feel the pain of being shredded by the abortionists medical instruments.


VERY good advice. The emotional scars are many times deep and heavy.


[edit on 4/3/2008 by FlyersFan]

We are in agreement on some aspects. When a fetus has thumbs to suck and toes to wiggle, the brain has formed significant structure. I'm talking about when it's just a tadpole right down to a zygote. Generalize all you want but pain receptors don't mean squat if there isn't a brain to process the signals. The brain stem which is responsible for the reflexive action observed doesn't count.

But you can't fall back on your book and say, "It has a soul." Abstract intangible concepts are subjective and therefore invalid when passing law and making policy. There are other people who believe the "soul" does not enter the body until the first breath is taken. You say they're wrong, they say you're wrong. Neither of you has any right to force your will onto the other.

Just live your life in what you consider a dignified manner. If everyone else is wrong and are murderers, you can be content knowing they will burn. But don't try and use violence (government) to force your beliefs onto them. That is one of the top reasons Christians conservatives and Christian liberals alike are hated so much in the world. Christian anarchists are possibly the only ones without blood on their hands.

reply to post by FlyersFan

---

I guess we'll just agree to disagree then?

And others still who think the "soul" is something that doesn't even exist. None can prove their assertions.



Or to force them to behave in a manner that suits YOUR beliefs. If you don't believe in gay marriage, don't marry a gay person. If you don't believe in birth control, don't use it. If you don't believe in abortion, don't get one.

But kindly, get off my Kool-aid.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

---

Can I have some Kool-Aid?

Oh, and good post.

Very true.


Yes and no. The proof is there that children in the womb feel pain during surgery and require pain killers. Therefore, people should be made aware that the children they are about to shred will die in a painful manner. It's legal. They are allowed to do it. But they aren't being told everything. Educating with the facts isn't 'forcing your will' .. it's just educating. Discussion makes people think. It's good.


Yep.


Back to that, eh? BH .. that's the same as saying - if you don't believe in murder then don't go kill someone but leave us to kill who we want. If you dont' believe in stealing then don't steal anything, but leave us to steal what we want.


Grape or Cherry kool-aide?

Nope. Sorry BH. It's a discussion board and I'm going to 'discuss' the other aspects of abortion. You are free to discuss and disagree ... and I am free to bring up adoption and pain killers in pre-natal surgery.

Again, no brain no pain.

Educating people based on provable fact, like those I've been using, is one thing. Using straw-man arguments and eventually falling back on a storybook to support them is not education. It's indoctrination.

That's true. That's why I don't like to use the bible. There are too many contradictions in it. Too many local traditions made it in the book with people saying 'God said ...' And I'm pretty sure that somewhere in the Old Testament (I used to know where) there is a place that says people would go to the 'jewish priests' to get an abortion (through chemicals - ingestion of plants or something). I used to know where that was ... but I'm old and I'm forgetting.

I’ll just leave it at this – here is one of many stories – with pictures – of fetal surgery. The baby is 21 weeks old in the womb. It's not a bible thing .. it's a science thing .. babies feel, move, open eyes, suck thumbs, play with toes .. feel pain.

Might I distill Roe vs Wade into an apt summary:

1. The entire debate will rest on the definition of "life".

2. For the mother's right of self-decision to be maintained, the baby's right to life must be ended.

IF

3. The baby is considered to be a life form and have rights.

Personally, I am totally pro-choice. The pragmatics of pro-choice make it hard to back up with logic the idea that forcing crack addicted 16 year olds in the inner city to have kids is somehow the moral high ground.

That said, I doubt it is acceptable to have an abortion beyond a certain medical point (18/24 weeks), whereafter the baby has a chance of survival.

Its free choice citizens, you dont need the government to tell you what to do- use your brains/ bibles... whichever you prefer.

reply to post by FlyersFan

---

You have used the Bible to support your argument.

I've made it very clear I do not approve of termination at 21wks and that age is not what I am talking about. I think by 21wks the woman should damn well have already figured out if she wanted to continue and has decided by default, absent extreme circumstance, to keep the child. Do I consider it murder at this point? Yes. Do some others? No. I think if a woman wants the fetus out after 21wks it is still her body and she has that right but the child should be placed in incubation as its chances of survival are good. Killing it is pointless and insane.

Actually - I showed one point in scripture and said 'IF YOU WISH to use scripture ... " I didn't say 'hey .. scripture says .. so buckle down ... " I said IF YOU WISH. In other words - take it or leave it. (some times it's hard to get ideas across on the internet. If I wasn't clear .. my apologies)

And again - I don't like to use scripture. I have 'personal problems' using scripture (which I won't get into).


I agree.

Story Here

A Christian Group is demanding an apology from Obama for his - punish with a baby - remark.

Oh .. and they PROTESTED him when he was in West Chester PA a few days ago. But the media, who are madly in love with him, never showed the protesters or reported that not everyone was happy with him.

No it's not the same. Murder and theft are actions taken against somebody else. Abortion is something someone decides on for themselves. Now, you may say that abortion is also an action taken against someone else, but that's where our difference of opinion comes in. And if having an abortion is really a "sin against God", I think he can handle it.

The law should NOT enforce religious judgment.

If you don't want to commit suicide, then don't, but if I want to, I think I should have that choice (and I do). If you don't want to shred all your money, don't. But let me make the decision to shred mine or not. If you don't want to remove unwanted things from your body, don't. But let me remove the stuff from MY body that I want to.

[edit on 4-4-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

---

BH, while I am wholely on the same side as you in viewpoint, you have to concede that there is an issue surrounding the conflict of natural right protection with abortion.

If the fetus is considered a life, then would it not violate its natural rights to be terminated?

While simultaneously it is a violation of the woman's right to self choice.

Nobody should force the woman what to do, but nobody should allow the fetus to be killed either if it is considered a life.

Rather sadly, the declaration of independence says "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal". Had they used the word "born" equal, there would be no debate about the constitutionality of abortion because it would be a system of birth rights rather than natural rights.

Hence the moral dilemma. Pragmatically of course, abortion is a massive victory for the social and economic infrastructure of a country.

reply to post by 44soulslayer

---

That, of course, has always been the crux of the debate - when does life begin?




I've tried parsing that last sentence several ways, and still cannot understand what you mean. Please elaborate.

Certainly.

The easiest way I can describe it is to envisage the effect of forcing a teenage girl in the inner city who has no means of supporting herself, let alone her child, to have an unwanted baby.

What would the effect of this be? The child would grow up neglected, in poverty and subject to the vices of the inner city.

By the passing of Roe Vs Wade, statistics show a massive drop in crime approximately 14 years onwards as there was a drop in the number of kids born into these conditions, which were more likely to result in them being criminals.