Planned Parenthood Ever So Quietly Defunded

a reply to: worldstarcountry

if I remember right, my biggest gripe was that the way your wrote it, technically didn't give any exemption when it came to the father's consent, meaning that if the mother's life was at risk and he refused, well tough luck I guess...
the last time I read it, it still seemed like this was the case..

originally posted by: kaylaluv

Margaret Sanger was a saint who saved many many women from a life of misery and early death.

100%
margaret sanger was representing when not many people would.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: lordcomac

Not just MSM, it is all the news. It is screened, cut up and filtered so it is easy to digest for the little people.


My question is who and and how is the news (free press) controlled?

It seems the pendulum regarding the MSM being Fed.gov lapdogs has finally flipped. WOWOWOWOW did they hustle this interim period playing as if that isn't how it works, and yet when you look how hardcore Democrat they ran things on the way out its was more than obvious they're controlled.

All Trump had to do was start acting like a Neocon and the MSM began swooning.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

Not ALWAYS sarcastic; www.abovetopsecret.com... you still haven't blessed us with your response to my reasonable scenario.

And besides, your response is a misdirection from my previous post. In summation you're saying that you yourself have proposed 'Baby Murder' legislation (because its the only thing that will have a chance of working). You can't have your cake and eat it to without drowning in hypocrisy. If your proposed legislation is indeed your best attempt at a solution, that makes you a 'Baby Murderer' as well.

Or, god forbid, you take some time to understand the complexity of the situation vis-a-vis the morally ambiguous stance it presents, and not seriously spout such extreme catchphrases that are synonymous with extremist viewpoints bereft of the situational understanding necessary to make any cooperative headway (the same kind of cooperation you actually want to engender with your proposed legislation).

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: kaylaluv

Margaret Sanger was a saint who saved many many women from a life of misery and early death.

100%
margaret sanger was representing when not many people would.

Right. She stood up and pretty much single-handedly fought the female oppression of the Catholic church, which wasn't an easy thing to do back then.

The Catholic church was who Margaret considered the enemy - not black people.

a reply to: dawnstar

Oh no I revised that. In fact I had it in there from the get-go, but when you pointed out it was kind of poorly worded, I revised it to make it more clear. I know its there, so if it was not in the OP edit window, I think I re posted it on a later page. I would never force a mother to die so that her baby may be born. Although, ultimately some mothers will willingly make that sacrifice, God bless them for it.
a reply to: Wayfarer
I just went ahead and gave you my reply in that thread. As far as my legislation proposal, if you would read it, I have quite a clear understanding of the complicated reasons for these procedures and outline that understanding with two whole sections of exemptions. Its almost as bullet proof as that OT bill you refuse to read

This is a good thing. People shouldn't rely on the government for birth control and abortion, and take responsibility for their own actions.

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
I have quite a clear understanding..

Then why call women who seek abortions and those that provide them "Baby Killers"?

a reply to: Wayfarer

Then why call women who seek abortions and those that provide them "Baby Killers"?

Probably because abortion involves the extinguishing of life.

originally posted by: Wayfarer
Its a good thing they're de-funding PP, because did you know that abortions are just a tiny, Tiny, TINY fraction of the services they provide. They are also responsible for such evil as preventative women's health screenings (mammograms, pap-smears, birth control, etc) for low income or financially limited women.

At last some common sense truly godly folks are in control to reign in this abhorrent evil.

This is so totally untrue.

a reply to: TheTory

Tell that to your buddy who agree's with you but has also proposed his own legislation legalizing it. Are you familiar with the concept of hypocrisy?


But if you're raring for a go then could you please educate me on this: Is a baby's life worth more than an adults? Are soldiers 'People-Killers', and if so, when they kill is it ok because the government sanctions it?

a reply to: Fools

No its not, but feel free to make up (because you won't find the data from anywhere other than Conservative sources lacking actual data to derive their assertions) a bunch of fluff to prove your case if you think it will make you look like anything other than a fool(s).

a reply to: Wayfarer

Tell that to your buddy who agree's with you but has also proposed his own legislation legalizing it. Are you familiar with the concept of hypocrisy?

But if you're raring for a go then could you please educate me on this: Is a baby's life worth more than an adults? Are soldiers 'People-Killers', and if so, when they kill is it ok because the government sanctions it?

Sorry I was responding to your baby-killer comment, not your conversation in general.

I'm not in the business of placing value on this or that human being without knowing them or their circumstances. Yes, killing people involves killing people. I think it is right to combat evil and sometimes that involves killing an enemy.

originally posted by: Wayfarer
a reply to: Fools

No its not, but feel free to make up (because you won't find the data from anywhere other than Conservative sources lacking actual data to derive their assertions) a bunch of fluff to prove your case if you think it will make you look like anything other than a fool(s).

Call one yourself and ask them what they cover. It won't be pre-natal care.

a reply to: Fools

PS I am "pro-abortion". I am just "anti-BS".

a reply to: worldstarcountry

OT bill??

a reply to: Fools

I have, and I've already mentioned it. Various health services such as: mammograms, pap-smears (and other vaginal screenings),HIV testing(along with other STI screenings), female sterilization procedures(tubal ligation), prenatal services (such as Dr./Midwife visits for in-utero health/wellness checks) and birth control to name a few off the top of my head again.

I believe that would invalidate your last assertion.

a reply to: Wayfarer

Is a baby's life worth more than an adults? Are soldiers 'People-Killers', and if so, when they kill is it ok because the government sanctions it?

I dislike this kind of analogy. I disagree with abortion in most instances and I disagree with war in most instances.

I think the key difference which never seems to get talked about is that the "enemy" in war can usually speak or advocate for themselves, may even have a country and government of their own to defend them.

Who advocates for those who are not born yet? Whether killing in war is any more or less justified is a worthy, but separate, discussion, in my humble opinion.

originally posted by: Fools
a reply to: Fools

PS I am "pro-abortion". I am just "anti anyone's but my own BS".

Fixed that for ya.

a reply to: PrairieShepherd

I respectfully agree that it's a whole other discussion. My point was merely to increase the granularity on killing (regardless of the motive) to contrast the fact that many anti-abortionist have no problem killing enemy combatants (with the only requirement to being an enemy being that their government tells them so). All killing seems wrong (enough so its a foundation of Judeo-Christian teachings) yet one that is conveniently ignored and disguised under the guise of patriotic defense.