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.

 

Republican Senate Nominee: Victims Of ‘Legitimate Rape’ Don’t Get Pregnant

page: 10
66
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


I obviously do not defend rape and I never said I agreed with his opinion. I think his words were chosen poorly. It is a serious question and I think it comes down to how much do we value life and when does life begin? If we can define when life begins, we can more easily use tools like abortion for situations such as rape/incest. For instance, if we say life begins with a heart beat, then you have a few weeks prior to that where abortion would be acceptable - well within the window needed for a rape victim.

I'd also like to add that the man is a politian not a doctor. Just because a man runs for office doesn't mean he should know the entire history of the medical profession, religious dialogue, and the exact second we landed on the moon. The words were chosen poorly, that I will admit, but I think it's more the subject than the actual speech that is stirring up so many emotions.
edit on 20-8-2012 by Lannister because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by cassiper
OMGosh this is atrocious! Really!? Is that why there are children that are a product of rape?

If he looks like an idiot and sounds like an idiot... (wait for it)... he's probably an idiot!


yes we are to believe these poor women and girls "LET" it happen or they would not have become pregnant!

Sounds like he thinks we should all carry a knife to kill ourselves if we are being raped, safe from pregnancy then.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lannister
reply to post by sonnny1
 


I obviously do not defend rape and I never said I agreed with his opinion. I think his words were chosen poorly. It is a serious question and I think it comes down to how much do we value life and when does life begin? If we can define when life begins, we can more easily use tools like abortion for situations such as rape/incest. For instance, if we say life begins with a heart beat, then you have a few weeks prior to that where abortion would be acceptable - well within the window needed for a rape victim.


Well this question for the religious is not about how many cells are there or active, it is about when is a soul stuck into the body. That can not be answered to satisfy the religious.

A clump of human cells is precious no matter how few but we can torture and enslave any other full developed species and take their life at will how stupid is that!
edit on 20-8-2012 by Char-Lee because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lannister
reply to post by sonnny1
 


I obviously do not defend rape and I never said I agreed with his opinion. I think his words were chosen poorly. It is a serious question and I think it comes down to how much do we value life and when does life begin? If we can define when life begins, we can more easily use tools like abortion for situations such as rape/incest. For instance, if we say life begins with a heart beat, then you have a few weeks prior to that where abortion would be acceptable - well within the window needed for a rape victim.


You may have a point., and by no means was I trying to imply you were defending rape.

Regardless, this man is basing his thoughts on a Medieval "Theory". That has to scare the bejesus out of you, that he would have power, through Legislation, to carry out whatever Theory's he has.........



Deny Ignorance indeed..............



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


That's the problem right there. Not that the Senator has this uninformed and ignorant belief, but that there are VOTERS out there who agree with him and will use their votes to keep him in office and help him get his controlling agenda passed.

reply to post by jimmyx
 



Originally posted by jimmyx
matter of choice?....yes, yes it is. now you got it....china= no choice...america=choice


I once used this argument to turn a staunch anti-abortionist into a pro-choicer.
The question boils down to: Should a woman have the choice to get an abortion or NOT to get an abortion - or should the government make this choice for her? The choice must remain in the hands of the people, not the government.

To the argument, "Is abortion killing"? I say yes, IMO, it is. But we "kill" viruses, germs, and even ants and mosquitoes every day and we don't consider that "murder". It all depends on the value of the "life" to each person. My husband captures almost any bug in the house and takes it outside to set it free. I'm likely to swat it and be done with it. But I'm not going to be bothered by people calling abortion "killing". If something is growing in my body and I don't want it there for any reason, I have the right to make it stop (or kill it), because I own the rights to my body. The government does not.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lannister

If a man murders a pregnant woman he would be charged with 2 counts of murder. Yet if that same woman aborted that same child that same day it's called family planning. Only in the twilight zone. But sure, make sure a woman never has to be responsible for a child that she doesn't want, but make sure you throw a man in prison for 18 years and destroy his entire life for missing a single child support payment.


These are two entirely separate issues. The fact that you cannot see why they are demonstrates far more eloquently than any reason anyone can give, that your opinion and thoughts on the matter are irrational and ignorant.

Candidates like this one demonstrate exactly what is wrong with the Republican party in general. Quit putting up crazies for office. It isn't voter fraud costing you elections, it is putting up irrational right wing crazies for office. The 2010 election was supposed to give us a Congress with a laser like focus on jobs, instead we got a laser like focus on repealing healthcare and restricting reproductive rights. Which is pretty absurd since they have made a focus on "protecting" future unemployed citizens, but they never did put a laser like focus on creating jobs.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by neformore
 


That's the problem right there. Not that the Senator has this uninformed and ignorant belief, but that there are VOTERS out there who agree with him and will use their votes to keep him in office and help him get his controlling agenda passed.

reply to post by jimmyx
 



Originally posted by jimmyx
matter of choice?....yes, yes it is. now you got it....china= no choice...america=choice


I once used this argument to turn a staunch anti-abortionist into a pro-choicer.
The question boils down to: Should a woman have the choice to get an abortion or NOT to get an abortion - or should the government make this choice for her? The choice must remain in the hands of the people, not the government.

To the argument, "Is abortion killing"? I say yes, IMO, it is. But we "kill" viruses, germs, and even ants and mosquitoes every day and we don't consider that "murder". It all depends on the value of the "life" to each person. My husband captures almost any bug in the house and takes it outside to set it free. I'm likely to swat it and be done with it. But I'm not going to be bothered by people calling abortion "killing". If something is growing in my body and I don't want it there for any reason, I have the right to make it stop (or kill it), because I own the rights to my body. The government does not.



I honestly don't think the Government should demand that you keep something growing in your body that you don't want there, but the problem I have with your arguement is that you did not place that "something" in your body on your own. The way I see it, it took 2 people to make a child and it should take both people to abort it. A woman should not be able to walk into a clinic and abort a child on her own. Signatures from both parties should be needed to perform an abortion.

I'm sorry but the day you can create a child on your own is the day you will have the right to abort it on your own. It is not a woman's right to murder.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by seagull
Let the stereotyping begin...

Oh, wait, it has...pity.

Yes the comments were outrageously stupid...god yes they were. Certainly worthy of a "WTF did he just say?" moment, or even two. He'd certainly have lost my vote...assuming for a moment I'd have been contemplating voting for him in the first place.

Honestly now... Dems don't say equally stupid things? Really? Honesty should compel some of you to at least pretend to search for living breathing examples of Dem stupidity...



Yes, the equally messed up sides of the American politics. WHY, why do people keep doing it? Why do we not stop making our country into a child's game? Why can't people let go the ball game feelings and your team, my team, and start growing up?



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Until such time as the law is changed, it is most definitely her right to abort should she feel it necessary. ...and the male has no say. It's her body, her choice. As a male, I may not like it; but I'm not going to argue it, either.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by de_Genova
 



Originally posted by de_Genova
A person is not a part of another person. They are independent in soul and body. The mother is host


Independent and Host... I don't think these words mean what you think they mean.



Independent - : not subject to control by others : self-governing (2) : not affiliated with a larger controlling unit (1) : not requiring or relying on something else
...
Host - a : a living animal or plant on or in which a parasite lives


edit on 8/20/2012 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Not surprised in the least. Religious people are completely insane but they are the majority so nothing we can do. Republican = religious nut bags.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by zero1020
Not surprised in the least. Religious people are completely insane but they are the majority so nothing we can do. Republican = religious nut bags.


I'm a registered Republican and I do not believe in religion. You do not need to be a religious nut to understand that human life deserves more than a cold slab and a coat hanger.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   
For those who are interested - a pretty good summary of Congressman Akins voting record, by category. This helps with context and to counter any "You're basing your opinion on one gaff" arguments.


~Heff



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   
Some people are stupid.

Some of those are Republicans.

It's not an indictment against all Republicans or all Christians.

This just shows that some people are stupid.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide
For those who are interested - a pretty good summary of Congressman Akins voting record, by category. This helps with context and to counter any "You're basing your opinion on one gaff" arguments.


~Heff


See there he voted for the Patriot Act. I already dislike him. Some other interesting choices though.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by zero1020
 



Not surprised in the least. Religious people are completely insane but they are the majority so nothing we can do. Republican = religious nut bags.


By this comment I'm guessing you're not Republican, or religious?

By this comment I'm guessing, however, that you're judging an entire group for the words of this one man. Yes, I know he's not alone in this crass stupidity...I also know that a majority/plurality of Republicans don't share this misguided notion. Despite hysterical reports to the contrary...



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Lannister
 





I'm sorry but the day you can create a child on your own is the day you will have the right to abort it on your own.


I can create a child on my own. I may have needed a man to put his penis inside of me before but thanks to years of modern science and Playboy magazine there is now and will be for the foreseeable future plenty of sperm available that has been freely given, all rights to any resulting children signed away by the person who donated the genetic material.

Thanks for acknowledging my rights. Appreciate that.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:35 PM
link   
How easy it is to forget the First Amendment and "separation of church and state". Everyone is entitled to their religious beliefs, even atheists, but shouldn't try to force those beliefs down people's throats through legislation. I guess it's easier to just ignore certain parts of our Constitution when it helps your agenda.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Lannister
 



Originally posted by Lannister
It is a serious question and I think it comes down to how much do we value life and when does life begin?


How much we value life and when we think life begins varies from individual to individual. We can't come up with a universal values system that will serve everyone. How much do you value a spider's life? Many people just kill them, but some people wouldn't ever THINK if killing them. The government shouldn't be dictating our values.

I believe life begins at conception, therefor I wouldn't have an abortion (even in the case of rape), unless it threatened my health. But I want that choice for myself and I believe every woman should have it.
reply to post by Lannister
 



Originally posted by Lannister
... the problem I have with your arguement is that you did not place that "something" in your body on your own.


So, if I put a piece of chicken on the counter and don't wash it carefully, and as a result, I get salmonella, I should just buck up and get through it without medical help to kill it in my body? I made my bed by not being careful enough, so ... my tough luck?



The way I see it, it took 2 people to make a child and it should take both people to abort it.


That's an entirely different subject. We're already off topic and I won't wander farther away.
Suffice it to say, I support the male having the choice to get out of parental obligations when a pregnancy results from his actions.



I'm sorry but the day you can create a child on your own is the day you will have the right to abort it on your own. It is not a woman's right to murder.


But it is a couple's right to murder?



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by otherpotato
reply to post by Lannister
 





I'm sorry but the day you can create a child on your own is the day you will have the right to abort it on your own.


I can create a child on my own. I may have needed a man to put his penis inside of me before but thanks to years of modern science and Playboy magazine there is now and will be for the foreseeable future plenty of sperm available that has been freely given, all rights to any resulting children signed away by the person who donated the genetic material.

Thanks for acknowledging my rights. Appreciate that.


I'm curious, why would you purposely impregnate yourself only to abort it the next day? But if you're serious, then yes, I support your right to abort the child you just put into yourself...




top topics



 
66
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join