It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bush's partial birth abortion ban shot down by California Supreme Court Judge.

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 08:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyJethro

Originally posted by Hoppinmad1
Oh and if you think partial birth is humane and is a given right go here and take a peek before you say anything else.

www.partial-birth.com...





I am prolife (aka - on your side), but shame on you for posting this Bull# site.



Well I hate to see those pictures too but some people continue no matter how much you say that oh it is just a mass of cells and it's not murder. They think partial birth abortion is some small tiny thing, just a fetus. They don't understand that this isn't typical abortion. They don't understand and cannot untill they see with their own eyes that these are full grown babies having their brians sucked out. It's brutal and people need to see.

It is a bad site I agree and shouldn't have posted it on the first page. I could have found a more appropriate site maybe with a little more reasearch. I appreciate your point of view on this also. I don't take offence to construtive critisism at all. All I hope is that I can convince just another person to see this for what it is and any help will be appreciated.







[Edited on 4-6-2004 by Hoppinmad1]




posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hoppinmad1
All I hope is that I can convince just another person to see this for what it is and any help will be appreciated.


Agreed, and I agreed with the view of the site. It was the method.

I wrote them, as I'm sure you've read, and told them as much. I'll post any reply I get, although if I even get a responce, I'm sure it will be either a nasty one or a canned responce.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 10:23 AM
link   
I wasn't on line yesterday and haven't read anyone's post here since my last one day before yesterday but see that the debate has continued. I was thinking a lot about this topic and was wondering why it's so hard to get thru to pro-lifers. I see them as very narrow minded and unable to grasp what I call "reality". That reality is that there are many cases, whether you want to see it or not, whether it is RESPONSIBLE or not, were a woman gets pregnant and just can not, for whatever reason, keep the child. Maybe she's only 14 and can't handle it, or maybe she is 24 and already has 5 or 6 kids and can't afford birth control or another mouth to feed. Maybe the baby is seriously ill or deformed....whatever the reason, whether you agree that it murder or not, the option should always be available. The men on this board seem to take the approach that it is murder and the woman should be held responsible not matter what. I see the option of abortion as being responsible. Those who say "what about adoption"....well, I for one would rather abort then abandon, but that is just me. I could not carry a child to term and then give it away. I don't respect women who can. That too is narrow minded but I feel really strong about it. Bottom line to all this is.....No matter what the reason or circumstance, the fact remains that women do get pregnant and are not always in a situation where they can raise a healthy and happy child and are not able to carry the baby to term and hand it to a stranger. Sorry guys, but them there are the facts......and I am positive that abortion will remain a legal choice....like it or not!

[Edited on 6/4/2004 by Venus]



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Venus
I see the option of abortion as being responsible. Those who say "what about adoption"....well, I for one would rather abort then abandon, but that is just me. I could not carry a child to term and then give it away. I don't respect women who can. That too is narrow minded but I feel really strong about it.
[Edited on 6/4/2004 by Venus]



UNBELIEVABLE.
The reasons most abortions are performed is as a direct result of IRRESPONSIBILITY (with the exceptions of rape pregnancies, and when the baby or mom has serious health problems)!

The idea of giving a child up for adoption is to provide a better life for a child than one you can provide (or not provide). It is one of the most completely unselfish acts that I can think of. To say that you don't respect a woman who does that is absolutely astounding to me.


P.S. And before you call me a chauvinist Nazi, know that I am PRO-CHOICE. I also acknowledge that people f*** up from time to time.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 12:08 PM
link   
To each his own HomerJay.

What makes you think the child will get a better home? What makes you think even in the case of open adoption that you will ever get to see your child? What makes you think you won't spend your life time wondering if the child is ok or is being mistreated? Do you realize how many children are in abusive foster care programs or are sitting waiting for a family to adopt them? MILLIONS MY FRIEND! Once the children reach a certain age, they are almost NEVER adopted. Look into it. I have and firmly believe that a woman that can hand her child to a stranger is completely HEARTLESS.

Once you make either choice....there is NO TURNING BACK....EVER....NO MATTER WHAT IS HAPPENING TO YOUR CHILD

[Edited on 6/4/2004 by Venus]



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 12:29 PM
link   
Let me start off by say I am PRO Choice, and I mean that in every sense. What I am hearing you say is you are NOT PRO Choice but PRO ABORTION. Pro choice is having the right to choose. Whether to have it and put it up for adoption, which you are sadly mistaken to be hard to do because I have 2 married couple friends that cannot concieve and would like to adopt, there happens to be a shortage. Or the right to terminate a pregancy in the first trimester.

You stating that there are millions in foster care, those kids were taken from homes deemed to be abusive. And not to be confused with a womans right to choose.

This particular debate is about a partial term abortion, which should be illegal as a medical procedure all together. It is barbaric and serves no purpose other than to take the life of a defensless baby.

A woman should have the right to choose in the first 16 weeks...NOT at 24-28 weeks when the baby is aware and can feel pain.

You are judging a womans right to choose adoption as a CHOICE. Sad really that you take this position. I have several friends that were adopted and that come from healthy homes and went to good schools. Adoption should be encouraged as an option. The problem I have with my side of Pro choicers argument is that instead of giving a woman information to make a decision, abortion instead is the propagated option.

Know anyone who has had an abortion? I do and every one of them regrets it and wishes they were told the psychological turmoil they'd go through, even years afterwards.


Originally posted by Venus

What makes you think the child will get a better home?

I have and firmly believe that a woman that can hand her child to a stranger is completely HEARTLESS.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Venus
I wasn't on line yesterday and haven't read anyone's post here since my last one day before yesterday but see that the debate has continued. I was thinking a lot about this topic and was wondering why it's so hard to get thru to pro-lifers. I see them as very narrow minded and unable to grasp what I call "reality".


That's funny, I was just thinking the same thing of pro-choice folks, much like yourself. I find those like you, while not stupid but well thought out, I still find you to be misguided.


That reality is that there are many cases, whether you want to see it or not, whether it is RESPONSIBLE or not, were a woman gets pregnant and just can not, for whatever reason, keep the child.


What I find so unbelievable, is that pro-choice folks like to concentrate on the effect rather than the cause. The cause is sex. Sex is the problem. Truth be told, sex is not a problem but rather the choices made with respect to sex are not only poor, but irresponsible for the most part. This is not true across the board (rape, birth control failure, and incest to be more specific).


Maybe she's only 14 and can't handle it,


I have little compassion for these types. Parenting might have had some bearing on this little screw up. Then again, the parents should make the choice that is best for the girl, not the girl herself. If a 14 year old gets pregnant of her own volition, then she has proved herself incapable of making mature choices (which is pretty much granted at that age anyway).


or maybe she is 24 and already has 5 or 6 kids and can't afford birth control or another mouth to feed.


If there really is some girl who is 24 who has 5 or 6 kids already, and gets pregnant again, I would say that this girl is either a whore with little morals to begin with or an complete idiot. Most likely it's both considering the local 7-11 has those funny things called condoms 24 hours a day. I have even less compassion for a woman like this.


Maybe the baby is seriously ill or deformed....


Ah, finally a valid situation. Modern medicine is very good, and is getting better everyday. There is a multitude of thing that can be done in a number of these situations. But there are times when the baby poses a severe health risk to the mother. In that case, the doctors should do what is needed to maintain the most amount of life possible. If the baby doesn't make it, well then sometimes that happens, but the goal is in the effort.


The men on this board seem to take the approach that it is murder and the woman should be held responsible no matter what.


While I agree that it IS in fact murder, I do not think the responsibility lies solely on the woman. I find it sickening that the lack of responsibility has permeated the male part of our society so deep that there is now a culture of "baby's daddy" ducking payment on their children. They bear half of the responsibility and should assume them. Anything less is cowardice in the extreme.



Those who say "what about adoption"....well, I for one would rather abort then abandon, but that is just me. I could not carry a child to term and then give it away..


a•ban•don
To withdraw one's support or help from, especially in spite of duty, or responsibility

Adoption is drastically different than you paint it, and the parents looking to adopt grow everyday. Because you could not inconvenience yourself to carry out 9 months of punishment for a mistake you made, but give someone else a chance at parenthood speaks volumes.


I don't respect women who can..


I disagree with you more often than not, but this I find offensive. I would counter this point, but I think my wife could do it better than me considering she did it when she made the mistake of trusting someone that turned out to be a bag of ass. That boy is now 5, and happily in a good home not too far away.


Bottom line to all this is.....No matter what the reason or circumstance, the fact remains that women do get pregnant and are not always in a situation where they can raise a healthy and happy child and are not able to carry the baby to term and hand it to a stranger. Sorry guys, but them there are the facts.


You confuse fact with your opinion and speak to a true weakness of character in women. True, women will get pregnant who can not raise a healthy happy child, but they can give it away to "strangers", as you put it.

You'd be surprised what a person can do when up against a wall. I think that is what created the epidemic of abortion in the first place. I always believed that people thought human life, in any capacity, was precious. I find that you however, do not believe so. Regardless of whether you believe it is a person yet, you can not separate yourself from the FACT that it has a propensity to be one, and is on a rapid crash course with humanity. Under your logic, killing a child could be ok, if we could just justify "life" to ourselves as being a self-sufficient being, otherwise known as an adult.

Fetuses are parasites, as they can not live without the support of a protective being, that being the mother. But if I remember correctly, you have kids. If so, then you know that children are parasites too, living only from direct care in almost the same capacity as a fetus. The only reason my son Jack continues to live, is because I feed him, keep him warm when it's cold, provide him with a roof over his head, etc.

A child in a dumpster can not live for that long. But it's SO different from a fetus. It must be the placenta.


But hey, maybe you can show me "reality" sometime. Must be nice in your world.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 01:39 PM
link   
I see we can come up with every imaginable reason to have an abortion, but we all know the reason the majority are carried out. Besides, none of the above stated reasons are justification to murder an innocent life. Interesting, the people above who claim to be "pro-choice" are totally omitting one human being in the equation, and nobody is concerned with the choice that person might make were they to be considered.
Maybe she's only 14 and can't handle it." The girl was too young to handle sex, too, but that didn't stop anything. No reason too murder, there's adoption.

"Maybe the baby is seriously ill or deformed." So? Are you saying the mother has the right to play God and determine that the human has no right to live? Are you saying that my cousin, Tony, who had Muscular Dystrophy, never walked a day in his life and died in his 20's, didn't have the right to feel the joy of a loving family and all the happiness that he did give and take? What a sad way to see life, that only the healthiest have the right to have life. God determines that, not you, not the mother.

No use to go on; there is nothing but rationalization and the slinging around of an empty term, "Pro-Choice". You have the right to have sex. If you excercise that right and a responsibility hits you square between the eyes, you and the guy need to buck up and take the responsibility, not commit murder, the most heinous murder, to run from your obligation.

As far as that website with the "offensive" pictures of the dialation and extraction procedure, everyone should see it. Look at that baby at the bottom of the bucket, murdered, robbed of its chance, just so that someone else can go unconstrained. Look at it and cry, cry for a nation that no longer can tell the difference between right and wrong.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Narnia
Let me start off by say I am PRO Choice, and I mean that in every sense. What I am hearing you say is you are NOT PRO Choice but PRO ABORTION. Pro choice is having the right to choose. Whether to have it and put it up for adoption, which you are sadly mistaken to be hard to do because I have 2 married couple friends that cannot concieve and would like to adopt, there happens to be a shortage. Or the right to terminate a pregancy in the first trimester.


I am pro-choice. To me the two choices are to abort or to KEEP. Adoption is not a part of the arguement. No one is debating the issue of adoption. Although I am against in the sence that I feel it is abandonment, I would never rally to try and stop it. But I do see where you are coming from on that.

You stating that there are millions in foster care, those kids were taken from homes deemed to be abusive. And not to be confused with a womans right to choose.


That is not true. Where do you think they keep the children waiting to be adopted?


This particular debate is about a partial term abortion, which should be illegal as a medical procedure all together. It is barbaric and serves no purpose other than to take the life of a defensless baby.


Please look back at one of my first posts. There are many reasons for a pregnancy to be ended in the last term. I do not think that one of the reasons should be "because she changed her mind"....but if you put a restriction on any type of abortion, you are creating a grey area and in this day and age.....we can't afford any grey areas.


You are judging a womans right to choose adoption as a CHOICE.

As I said before....No I'm not.


Know anyone who has had an abortion? I do and every one of them regrets it and wishes they were told the psychological turmoil they'd go through, even years afterwards.


Ya I do......me! And at no time in my life have I regreted it. I explained before in another debate that at the time I got pregnant with the child I aborted, I was addicted to Methamphedamines. I already had one child and was in no way in a situation to take care of a baby that would probably have some type of defect. I did have the abortion in the first tri-mester. I also know a girl who was also addicted to meth and decided early on to keep the child and give it up to adoption. What I saw her do was horrific. She continued to use and use and use. She would say "so what? I don't care what happens to it....not my problem....let the state worry about it". I also know someone very very close to my immediate family that was adopted. Although he grew to be a wonderful person and a equally wonderful father himself, he is constantly being compared to the other child he grew up with that was his adoptive parents real child. They have always told him he was not as good as his brother. He was not "abused" in the traditional sense but he was always put down and belittled. He has no urge to meet his birthmother. He resents her. That is what I can no live with. I would have rather been aborted than abandoned. It's only my opinion and I don't expect to change anyones mind.

Please let me know what state your friend is in and I will gladly post a link to children waiting to be adopted.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 03:38 PM
link   
ThomasCrowne -

Ya know I hate to argue with people such as yourself because I know how completely whole-heartedly you feel about the issue. I am not saying that how you feel is wrong. What my point is, is that not everyone feels the way you do. All of your arguements are valid but there needs to abortion available to women. I do not believe it should be used as birth control. I think there should be limits set too. I am against abortion for teens under 16 without parental consent. I am against late term abortion when it because the mother changed her mind. There are some very good reasons for it and I think the option should be left available. That's it....that's where I stand. I don't think everyone who gets one is scum and I'm sorry you feel that they are. There's a song by EverClear called "what it's like"....give it a listen.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 11:23 PM
link   
I understand that many of the “Right to life” folks would like to make abortion against the law as it once was…….Is this true?

If so, then they would also look to criminalize abortion - Can’t have a law banning a practice with out having a sanction. Right!

So it would follow those who practiced abortion and those who sought abortion would be prosecuted under the law. The basic of such a law would be found as the logical extension of murder theory.

If so enacted, I would also seek enforcement and prosecution of accessory before the fact for murder for the men who made the women pregnant now seeking abortions.

Only by a strict and broad enforcement of the law can we prevent the wholesale murder of our innocents the RTL’ers how to protect.

Nip it in the bud. (Excuse my pun, boys.) And keep it in your pants.

Zipper check in 15 minutes.



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by gmcnulty

Nip it in the bud. (Excuse my pun, boys.) And keep it in your pants.

Zipper check in 15 minutes.


Girls too, I met many women who like to get nasty just as much as men. It's not about sex. It's about someone choosing to kill a child, and a ignortant judge saying it's unconstitutional to prevent it. That is ignorance.



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 10:01 PM
link   
There is a display of ignorance around here but not by any judge.........DID YOU EVEN bother to read the decision of the court?

Don't you know the law could have been written to meet the objections of the court that made the law unconstitutional?

And have you no eye for irony?

Ye ignorance is like the flu..........it's going around and it seems to be pandemic.....



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 10:33 PM
link   
Originally posted by gmcnulty
There is a display of ignorance around here but not by any judge.........DID YOU EVEN bother to read the decision of the court?
Don't you know the law could have been written to meet the objections of the court that made the law unconstitutional?
And have you no eye for irony?
Ye ignorance is like the flu..........it's going around and it seems to be pandemic.....





You make this into a conspiracy when it isn't. This wasn't written to keep the subject of abortion alive. Your saying all these members of the senate and the house and the president made this just to be shot down. No not hardly this is a disgusting procedure and people with common sense see that. They wanted it to end. California is an unrightious socially liberal state. No suprise that the decision came from a woman there.

Heres how the house voted: the House voted 281-142Wednesday to ban a procedure that abortion foes call "partial birth" abortion

Heres how the senate voted:The 64-34 vote came three weeks after the House passed the same measure by 281-142.

Heres the link to the roll call for the senate
www.senate.gov...

Heres the one for the house
clerk.house.gov...

So regardless of anything a judge declared it unconstitutional. Murder is legal and protected by the u.s. constitution according to this judge. Viewing the voting record it is rediculous to say that 345 members and our president passed a law to see it be declared unconstitutional.

YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING ME

[edit on 5-6-2004 by Hoppinmad1]

[edit on 5-6-2004 by Hoppinmad1]



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 10:40 PM
link   
Wake up my friend...............and pay attention........YOU ARE BEING USED...

What is unfortunate here is that the partial birth abortion law, written, passed and signed in to law by Republicans was done so with full knowledge the law was, on its face, unconstitutional. And that was done intentionally, as a political sham to create a wedge issue for the 2004 election.

It was brought by the Ashcroft Justice Department (an oxymoron in and of itself), which could have chosen any other federal district in the nations most liberal federal district. The choice of this district was to allow those sweet words ‘those damn activist liberal judges’ trip off the lips of those running in Republican district in the fall. It made no matter where the case was head, the law was unconstitutional on its face.

Why would the Republicans, who say they are against abortion, do such a thing?
Because they lie. They are not against abortion on a national level because to ban it would be like having a death wish fulfilled.

Writing an unconstitutional law keeps the issue alive; provides the front of “were trying our best but those liberal activist judges………..” to keep the electorate engaged and not turning on them;

And provides a reason for those letters you’ll get saying “We need your money to fight to save America from………..”

If you take the time to read the court’s decision (just focus on the 4 Issues as presented form page 13) you may then begin to understand.

The law may very well have been written in a fashion (had could have met the courts objections) that would have made the law constitutional. But they did not. …..AND DID SO DELIBERATELY.

I am opposed to abortion – always have; always will.

But more so, I hate deceit; and liars who practice political manipulation on those who trusted them to represent them -These are the folks who deserve God’ full wrath. More so then the pregnant woman – all alone, to make a monumental decision which will affect the rest of her life.

They seeking to make political hay should be first in line to rot in hell well before anyone else.

Courts decision:
us.rd.yahoo.com...=11vt1mh1b/*news.findlaw.com... pash60104ord.pdf



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 10:50 PM
link   
Hence why so many democrats voted to pass the bill also and republicans voted against. Makes sense to me. I don't think I'm being used I think I am using my brain.

Guess some of them republicans and democrats didn't get the message about the conspiracy to keep the abortion debate alive. Or did they just vote that way to make it not look suspicious. HMM. By the way Im being sarcastic.

Oh Also I would never vote for bush. So I am not being used. I am a socially conservative democrat. They exist belive it or not. Kinda like ghosts but they exist.



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 11:06 PM
link   
If you believe it or not.......you are being used.

I live in the real world and understand a bit of politics.........what I say is nothing you could not find on your own.......It's all in the public domain.....widely reported in political junkie news sources.........

Most of the noise out of Washington is BS...........and on balance the Republicans hvae the Democrats beaten hands down.....they have a machine of enviable proportion...........they have been buiolding it since '62 and have a monster message and myth maker in operation

Start with the The Hill if you want to start learning what really going on............and froom there you'll find your own way............don't be a rube. Dont believe anyone till you check it out from 2 independent sources........

I have no pony in this race..............either way.....I just telling you how it is.



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 02:44 AM
link   
Sorry, Venus, but I don't have time to listen to the lyrics of a rock song for bits of philosophy.

Not everyone feels as I do? So? Not everyone feels as I do about many things. You realize that some people actually believe they are entitled to your wallet and should be able to take it merely because they have the might? Some believe they can terminate your existence if you get in their way, do you realize that? Luckily, we have these things called laws. A law is IAW the constitution, which is IAW natural law, which is God's Law. We have these laws because not everyone has the ability to understand certain moral concepts, but they do understand they do not want to go to jail, or worse, fry in the chair.

There are no reasons for abortion that necessitates the so-called "pro-choice" notion. What, do you believe that before Roe-v-Wade, the mother automatically died if there was a medical emmergency? Seriously? You say there are reasons for D&X abortions? Really? Name one. That procedure is more traumatic to the woman than natural birth. You see, the butcher, erm, I mean "doctor", turns the baby around to where he comes out feet first. While the head is still in the canal, and therefore the baby is technically not "delivered", the back of the head is stabbed, and then typically, the brain of the defenseless child is sucked out. Then the precious little baby is thrown in the can. No, there is no medical purpose in that procedure.

You don't like arguing with people like me because I am not so "open minded" that I'll let any old piece of garbage enter my mind. I also understand that morals and ethics are not relative, but are a predefined and solid set of concepts that don't redefine themselves according to the changes in the evil hearts of mankind.



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 03:08 AM
link   
Besides, Venus, you mean to tell me after all this dialogue, we still don't see eye to eye? Well, I guess that is how it is. Guess we'll have to resign ourselves to being friends that don't agree on everything. Makes discussion more interesting. Otherwise, we'd be taking turns singing to the choir, and that is pretty boring!



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by gmcnulty
If you believe it or not.......you are being used.



What I still don't understand is how I am being used. I am not a republican and never have voted for one. Like I said in my first post abortion and social issues that are controversial such as this will always be shot down in supreme court by some activist judge so I don't let it affect my presidential choice at all.

So how am I being used? I just can't figure it out.

I am using the brain that wasn't sucked out with a vacumm after having scissors cut into my skull. Am I being used because I see those pictures and know that ending the life of up to 6 month old children as brutaly as that is murder.

You can say oh it was done to keep the abortion debate alive and it's bull$%&&. Why would you have to do this to keep the abortion debate alive anyways? The abortion debate has been alive for decades and very heatedly I might add. Your saying the republicans want to keep showing they're trying to fight against it. They why did some vote against it and why did some democrats vote for it. Can you explain that please.

So I am being used in some unforseen way and the republicans want to keep an issue alive that has been alive for decades. Makes a lot of sense if you had your brains sucked out.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join