The Left Viciously Attacks Texas Gov. Rick Perry After He Calls Second Special Session

reply to post by windword

Still not real solution!

Better than murder

Just hyperbole about your personal morality.

Come again?

Murdering child because its inconvenient shows a fundamental lack of 'personal morality

No solution is still not solution.

And the repetition needs to end:

Grow up! Of course abortion is necessary. What is your solution? Really? No, I'm serious!

reply to post by neo96 So you have no solution AND you are out of touch with the problem. Mkay

reply to post by neo96 Still no solution from you? What is your position? Biological fate and forced births?

Have anything of real substance ?

The whole reason behind the entire 'life' movement is aimed at giving that potential person the same chance LIFE as its mother had

Yeah right, the so-called lifers love killing and torturing people around the world, and as for women's lives, they obviously don't give a crap about them when they won't let them get paid the same as men and are trying to get rid of birth control so they'll be pregnant and poor forever.

reply to post by windword


No, it actually is a solution. It may not be one that many people would opt for, but that doesn't make it any less of a solution.

reply to post by itssomethingyoudid


Forced abstinence is a solution to what?

I found a few things about the whole issue which are interesting to read over. First.. As far as why Texas wants this in their state? Well, it's really the business of Texas as much or more than those not living there. I work for a site in Texas but I haven't lived but 6 or so months there, early in life and in Abilene of all places. Not the full experience, to be sure. However, maybe they're just religious too and this is a major major issue to religious folks.

Carrying over those estimates into 2010 and adjusting for these additions, then the percentage of Texans that are adherents of a religion would be closer to 59.8 percent in 2010. [In addition, the religion census includes denominations that provide numbers of congregations, but who have not provided the numbers of adherents in each congregation. Even with factoring in an average congregation size of 100 persons for Protestant congregations, (a figure used by the census study) the total percentage would vary less than a one percent, to 60.7 percent.]

(Source)

Just a hair off 60%. In this current national atmosphere of 51/49 votes carrying the day on so many other things? That seems plenty to explain why Texans want it that way. That's their right too. Roe V Wade said it cannot be outlawed, it didn't say it couldn't be regulated. (where have I heard that near exact term before....cutting a different way on Constitutional issues? Oh.. Nvm.. it'll come to me...lol)

As it so happens, Texas is FAR less restrictive than all but a couple European nations.(Those few set 24 weeks where most E.U. nations set it at TWELVE weeks). In fact, most there are far more restrictive, since so many folks like international examples these days. Why not carry that with all topics?

(If that has dramatically changed somewhere in the E.U., someone feel free to correct)


Something else I stumbled upon though, and this one's a doozy. No one is quite as hard against Abortion as the Roman Catholic Church. They kinda wrote the book on it and I'm only half joking there. ...and who comprises a fair portion of Texas population? Mexicans. Nationals, not just by heritage and generations of Americanizing. ...legal and illegal. Why do Democrats in particular, seem to think that will help them in overall terms when all can give voice to their full opinion?

Mexico is one of the world's great Catholic bastions: 83% of its 112m people are loyal to the Vatican, and Mexico City's Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe vies with St Peter's in Rome as the world's most-visited Catholic church. The Pope will stay in Guanajuato, Mexico's most devout state, where 94% of the population is Catholic.

Source

I'm not the least bit joking when I suggest there are some issues that a measurable % of politicians won't want to hear from their latest additions to the voting rolls on. This will undoubtedly be one of them. Faith still drives lives, so to speak, in vast numbers....world wide.

This is that kind of issue to those folks, IMO. It also goes to how Texas likely develops it's cultural approaches to topics like this, too.

reply to post by CB328

Yeah right, the so-called lifers love killing and torturing people around the world, and as for women's lives, they obviously don't give a crap about them when they won't let them get paid the same as men and are trying to get rid of birth control so they'll be pregnant and poor forever.

Never seen a abortion performed?

Apparently not or they would know how ridiculous that comment is know how many of those are sometimes women,


53 million people have been aborted since Roe.

1 million are murdered every year,

endoftheamericandream.com...

The nerve of saying 'I don't care' guess someone would stoop to that level others don't have to.

Who said anything about "forced" abstinence?

I said that people wouldn't choose abstinence. But if they did, they would not get pregnant. No pregnancy, no abortion...Hence, the word "solution".

RE: Coat hanger back-alley abortions

FACTS:

--"How many deaths were we talking about when abortion was illegal? In N.A.R.A.L. we generally emphasized the drama of the individual case, not the mass statistics, but when we spoke of the latter it was always "5,000 to 10,000 deaths a year." I confess that I knew the figures were totally false, and I suppose the others did too if they stopped to think of it. But in the "morality" of the revolution, it was a useful figure, widely accepted, so why go out of our way to correct it with honest statistics. The overriding concern was to get the laws eliminated, and anything within reason which had to be done was permissible." - Dr. Bernard Nathanson, original leader of the American pro-abortion movement and co-founder of N.A.R.A.L.

--1,231 deaths from illegal abortions in 1942. 133 deaths from illegal abortions in 1963. 39 women died from illegal abortions in 1972, the year before Roe v. Wade - U.S. Bureau of Vital Statistics

--In 1958, 84% to 87% of all illegal abortions were performed by licensed physicians in good standing, in their own clinics - Dr. Kinsey, Institute for Sex Research at Indiana University

--"90% of all illegal abortions are presently done by physicians." - Dr. Mary Calderone, 1960 American Journal of Health - Former medical director of Planned Parenthood, 1960 American Journal of Health

--over 90% of all illegal abortions were performed by licensed physicians. - 1978 American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

53 million people have been aborted since Roe.

Eggs aren't people, but if you're so convinced that the world can't exist without millions more people I hope you're doing your part by having at least ten kids.

reply to post by Shimri

Dear Shimri,

This may only be an off-topic distraction, but I would like to applaud you and any ATSer who can continue ahead with a discussion in the face of nearly continual non sequitors, hatred, and non-responsive comments.

It appears that everyone here has pretty much accepted that the 20 week limit is an acceptable precaution. The objection seems to be the medical requirement. But let's consider some of our history.

Matthew Shepard's death raised pressure on the issue of violence against gays. The Hate Crimes Prevention Act was passed and signed by Obama in 2009 as a result. Few people really cared that Shepard was not killed because he was gay, it was a useful tool to get legislation passed.

Newtown has been the emotional driver behind Obama's gun control push.

Gasland, a scientifically invalid film has been used to agitate against fracking.

My point is, that it is common procedure to use the drama and emotion from a significant event to push legislation.

Now consider the Kermit Gosnell trial. He, a doctor, did unspeakably horrible things, in nearly prehistoric conditions. He was not associated with a hospital. Surely, it is not unreasonable to think Texas legisltors had him in mind when they were considering the bill. In effect, abortionists may have brought this on themselves by Gosnell's utter disregard for human life beyond the conscience or imagination of any American.

With respect,
Charles1952

Well since the government recently made it O.K. for 15 Year olds to commit self inflicted abortion with the morning after pill, I can see the Whole Abortion Issue changing lanes within the next couple of years. I suspect eventually the Catholic Church will accept it in the same way they finally accepted the use of condoms.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by ThinkingCap

 

Abortions are a necessary evil ve

Seriously?

Thats like saying there are bad people in the world so they get to spy on everyone 'it's a necessary evil'

Which would not fly so don't expect that to fly here.

insert noun here are a necessary evil is still evil,

You don't get to insert a noun until you can insert someone's full quote.



Two people disagree, two people do the best they can to quote me out of context.

Neo, I almost always agree with you but you'll never reach me with this one. I respect your views as a man, and as a man I simply happen to respect the views of the women in this case.

Regardless of :god damned choices:, what it comes down to is health. It is a woman's prerogative to carry and birth a child. It's their right, not their condemnation. Women must be given the choice as to whether they are ready to become proper mothers, and how DARE anyone who is not that woman to judge them.

It is a very touchy subject on all fronts, therefore like the millions of sperm that lost the race to that egg must also be regarded with equal reverence.

So until you start canning your seed out of fear of waste, stop judging a woman's choice to be a mother....

reply to post by brandiwine14

Perry has a hard fight ahead of him but it's a worthy cause.

How is it a worthy fight? So you are ok with the government telling a woman what she should do with her body?

reply to post by Shimri

sperm != fetus

You forgot the other main ingredient. Sperm + egg = fetus.

Perry is a sore loser. If they couldn't pass it in the regular session, it shouldn't be in the special session unless it deals with budget issues IMO. To call for a second session just shows that Perry and company are trying to get their way at all costs.

Peace

In 1946, my mother was pregnant with her first child. My dad was a WW2 veteran with undiagnosed PTSD. He was an alcoholic. They killed their first child when my mom was 8mos pregnant. My dad beat her so bad, she lost the fully developed baby boy in the toilet. She tried drinking lye then drano with subsequent pregnancies. She was a devout Baptist Christian white woman. I have never judged her because I am mother too. Open your wallet, your home, your heart, your spare bedroom, babysit for her. Or stay out of her decisions about her health and well being.

reply to post by charles1952
Dear Charles,

I also believe that the Kermit Gosnell trial did much to bolster the determination of those who would seek to deny a woman's right to choose what is necessary for herself. Even in those who support a woman's right to determine her own fate did the case bring a horrid picture of just how horrible very late term abortion is. I think we have finally reached a point where almost everyone on either side of the fence can agree that at a certain point we can no longer disillusion ourselves with the terms "fetus" versus "baby". Note that I said ALMOST- there will always be a few that will argue that it is a "fetus" until it is born naturally regardless that they know better. The greatest majority can agree that around 20 weeks pregnancy is an acceptable cutoff period.

The main subject I have noticed proponents of abortion become irate over is that the proposed bill, if passed, will limit women severely in the availability of clinics legally able to perform the procedure, and that the regulations that clinics will have to abide by will force them to pay much,much money to add space, expensive medical equipment and additional professional staff members- thus driving up the cost of the procedure exponentially- and that it will basically put the option out of reach for the majority of women who won't be able to afford to travel a great distance nor pay for the highly inflated cost of the procedure. The mere thought of the situation brings to mind days of back alley abortions that put the very lives of the women who sought them at serious risk.

While I'm sure the abortion battle will continue well beyond our lifetimes, I hope for the sake of women everywhere that a compromise can be reached. There are many loud voices on opposite ends of the spectrum in the pro-life/pro-choice debate, but I believe there lies a solution in the "not so loud" majority who can empathize with both sides of the issue. Abortion is far from an easy decision, and it is one that will be lived with for the rest of the woman's life. While we may or may not agree with that decision she is the one who must deal with the consequences eternally. Rather than spew hatred and condemnation we should feel sorrow for her at having to make such a difficult decision and feeling that there was no other feasible option. We should withhold our judgements until we have walked a mile in her moccasins.

Best Regards, littled16