Pro life taken to a new extreme

[Surf Green]

Until they take a breath, they are not living.
They are just a PARASITE, and we kill parasites.

What if someone kicks your preggo wife/gf in the babybump?

[barry2952]

Hope you meant manual and not digital

It's called a digital exam, as in a finger being a digit.

[MAC]

This is exactly how I feel. Abortion is not an option for me. But I don't think it's my right to take away that option for someone else.

Stop being reasonable, it scares the religious nuts.

[Tornado2dr]

You do realize that women are the gate keepers right?

There is a large chasm between saying that women are the ones who have to say "yes", and giving women the education and understanding of the FACTS so that they can make the proper decisions on their terms about saying "yes".

Educating women improves life for everyone in society.

[Mike!]

A question for those who are against abortion:

What do you think of "the morning after pill"? Do you consider it an abortion?

It's important to note that for all the raving against "the morning after pill," it's basically a strong dose of 'birth control pill' hormones and completely distinct from an 'abortion pill'. It's only effective in a very narrow time window before implantation (ergo pregnancy) occurs.

I don't like abortions. I'm also not in favor of an outright ban. I believe women should be able to make an informed decision. But the 'morning after pill' is no more abortion than masturbating into a Kleenex.

[Chris Stack]

Stop being reasonable, it scares the religious nuts.

I know. And this issue, the one on gay marriage, and things like sex ed/intelligent design make me embarrassed to vote Republican sometimes. Imagine how much more support they could get if they'd drop these dumbass issues?

[ATL_Av8r]

I love the vitriolic passion that comes from pro-lifers.

Especially when discussing the death penalty.

[barry2952]

Electing women improves life for everyone in society.

FTFY.

[Metallitubby]

Imagine how much more support they could get if they'd drop these dumbass issues?

/thread

[Turbio!]

I know. And this issue, the one on gay marriage, and things like sex ed/intelligent design make me embarrassed to vote Republican sometimes. Imagine how much more support they could get if they'd drop these dumbass issues?

I personally think that the Republicans would be strengthened immeasurably by cutting loose the social issues entirely. I think the voters that are obsessed with social issues would fall into line because they also care about fiscal conservatism, and they'd pick up a bunch of moderates, possibly including me. I'd vote for Teddy Roosevelt.

[ATL_Av8r]

Bull ****ing ****, Orwell.

What's ****ing hilarious here is that a) this legislator thinks this move is remotely analogous and b) that most of you do too.

Easy there, cowboy. I was merely talking about an inconsistency in terminology. Do you not agree that this bill would limit ones ability to CHOOSE to have a vasectomy?

[Chris Stack]

Especially when discussing the death penalty.

I've honestly never seen the hypocracy in being pro-death penalty and anti-abortion.

To me, killing an innocent unborn child is FAR different than killing a convicted murderer. It's like saying I can't be against armed robbery if I think it's okay to shoot someone who intruded into my house.

[ModernMaven]

It's important to note that for all the raving against "the morning after pill," it's basically a strong dose of 'birth control pill' hormones and completely distinct from an 'abortion pill'. It's only effective in a very narrow time window before implantation (ergo pregnancy) occurs.

I don't like abortions. I'm also not in favor of an outright ban. I believe women should be able to make an informed decision. But the 'morning after pill' is no more abortion than masturbating into a Kleenex.

Under that same premise, a politician in my state is moving to limit (wants to ban) the use of an IUD. The IUD works the same. Keeps a fertilized egg from implanting. Even that, to many people, is 'abortion' and therefore unacceptable.

I feel like this country is moving backwards for women. As a woman, and a mother of a girl, I am finding it extremely scary.

[Surf Green]

I don't like abortions. I'm also not in favor of an outright ban. I believe women should be able to make an informed decision. But the 'morning after pill' is no more abortion than masturbating into a Kleenex.

I'm with you. Except you're rationalizing a bit.

Jacking into a kleenex is different than the morning after pill because with fappage, there is no conception, and no fertilized egg that results.

[2.FOH!!]

I've honestly never seen the hypocracy in being pro-death penalty and anti-abortion.

To me, killing an innocent unborn child is FAR different than killing a convicted murderer. It's like saying I can't be against armed robbery if I think it's okay to shoot someone who intruded into my house.

This.


& this part bears repeating:

As members of Georgia’s House of Representatives debate whether to prohibit abortions for women more than 20 weeks pregnant, House Democrats planned to introduce their own reproductive rights plan: No more vasectomies that leave "thousands of children ... deprived of birth."

Rep. Yasmin Neal, a Democrat from the Atlanta suburb of Jonesboro, planned to introduce a bill Wednesday that would prevent men from vasectomies unless needed to avert serious injury or death.

As Andy mentioned, it's a joke.

[ModernMaven]

I know. And this issue, the one on gay marriage, and things like sex ed/intelligent design make me embarrassed to vote Republican sometimes. Imagine how much more support they could get if they'd drop these dumbass issues?

I made the mistake of voting for a repub/conservative in the last few years on the state level because I felt his economic policies were in line with where I thought this state needed to go. He made a lot of promises to get this state of of the downward spiral it was in. I did so even though I didnt agree with his other policies. I will never make that mistake again. I will never make the mistake of thinking that a politician is really going to 'work on the economy' and jobs and ignore the other stuff, because since he has gained office and his party has control over my state, it's been all about dismantling ecological protections I agreed with and legislating women's uterus... with this heartbeat bill and this IUD bull**** now. No jobs. No forward thinking has happened. Never again.

[Chris Stack]

I personally think that the Republicans would be strengthened immeasurably by cutting loose the social issues entirely. I think the voters that are obsessed with social issues would fall into line because they also care about fiscal conservatism, and they'd pick up a bunch of moderates, possibly including me.

I can't tell you how many times I've talked politics with people (especially younger people) and they've said "how could you possible vote Republican given their stance on gay marriage/ID/abortion/etc" and my only response is "well, I'm a straight married guy, those issues really don't affect me..." but I absolutely see their point. Things like gay marriage, I really don't care either way, but I think A) the GOP should try to always chose the option that is "more free" in terms of personal liberties, and B) try not to alienate so many people with a stance that really doesn't gain them anything. What do I as a married straight dude, get from keeping gays from marrying? Nothing. So what's the point?

[ATL_Av8r]

I've honestly never seen the hypocracy in being pro-death penalty and anti-abortion.

As long as the person claims to be both. The hypocrisy lies when some says they are "pro-life" AND "pro death penalty". Death penalty would be anti-life, wouldn't it?

[Turbio!]

I'm with you. Except you're rationalizing a bit.

Jacking into a kleenex is different than the morning after pill because with fappage, there is no conception, and no fertilized egg that results.

Which raises the question of whether a fertilized life gets the same moral weight as other life stages.

[VdubChaos]

I can't tell you how many times I've talked politics with people (especially younger people) and they've said "how could you possible vote Republican given their stance on gay marriage/ID/abortion/etc" and my only response is "well, I'm a straight married guy, those issues really don't affect me..." but I absolutely see their point. Things like gay marriage, I really don't care either way, but I think A) the GOP should try to always chose the option that is "more free" in terms of personal liberties, and B) try not to alienate so many people with a stance that really doesn't gain them anything. What do I as a married straight dude, get from keeping gays from marrying? Nothing. So what's the point?

Proper answer would be

"How can you possibly believe the BS they feed you and even consider voting for EITHER of the idiots"

[barry2952]

I can't tell you how many times I've talked politics with people (especially younger people) and they've said "how could you possible vote Republican given their stance on gay marriage/ID/abortion/etc" and my only response is "well, I'm a straight married guy, those issues really don't affect me..." but I absolutely see their point. Things like gay marriage, I really don't care either way, but I think A) the GOP should try to always chose the option that is "more free" in terms of personal liberties, and B) try not to alienate so many people with a stance that really doesn't gain them anything. What do I as a married straight dude, get from keeping gays from marrying? Nothing. So what's the point?

I always wonder when they say that gay marriage dilutes or demeans ours. I would think that a 50% divorce rate does that, all on its own.

[Turbio!]

I can't tell you how many times I've talked politics with people (especially younger people) and they've said "how could you possible vote Republican given their stance on gay marriage/ID/abortion/etc" and my only response is "well, I'm a straight married guy, those issues really don't affect me..." but I absolutely see their point. Things like gay marriage, I really don't care either way, but I think A) the GOP should try to always chose the option that is "more free" in terms of personal liberties, and B) try not to alienate so many people with a stance that really doesn't gain them anything. What do I as a married straight dude, get from keeping gays from marrying? Nothing. So what's the point?

Gets back to my earlier point, which is that there's a healthy subgroup of social conservatives that seems much more concerned with their own sexual and social morality, and harassing and punishing those who don't hew to that morality, than about the things they use as a stalking horse to advance their agenda, like the rights of the unborn or the stability of hetero marriage and so forth. But they show their hand when they freak out over IUDs, contraception, HPV vaccines, civil unions, and so forth - which as you say, don't actually affect them and in fact are strategically counterproductive.

[Turbio!]

I always wonder when they say that gay marriage dilutes or demeans ours. I would think that a 50% divorce rate does that, all on its own.

And see above. They don't really care about marriage nearly so much as they care about bossing around people who don't share their views.

[Heathcliff Huxtable]

I always wonder when they say that gay marriage dilutes or demeans ours. I would think that a 50% divorce rate does that, all on its own.

here in Pittsburgh, the local Catholic league jerkoffs are staging a 40 day lent protest in front of Planned Parenthood. 3rd time in as many years. mind your beeswax is what I say.


pro-choice, pro-death penalty, pro-gay marriage over here . isn't my business what you do with your body or who you choose to marry.

[Chris Stack]

As long as the person claims to be both. The hypocrisy lies when some says they are "pro-life" AND "pro death penalty". Death penalty would be anti-life, wouldn't it?

I think that's a semantic argument. Everyone knows "pro-life" means "anti-killing-unborn-fetuses" not "anti-killing."

[ATL_Av8r]

I always wonder when they say that gay marriage dilutes or demeans ours. I would think that a 50% divorce rate does that, all on its own.

I wish someone would calculate the statistics of cheating percentages of people who say that. Bet it would be interesting.

[rsj0714]

Proper answer would be

"How can you possibly believe the BS they feed you and even consider voting for EITHER of the idiots"

Not voting is just as volatile as supporting a group or rather fighting against the other.

As for gay marriage, I have always held the thinking that as a conservative this debate shouldn't even be on the radar because government should have no hand in what people do or marry. It shouldn't even be a political discussion, just like birth control and contraception shouldn't.

[Chris Stack]

Gets back to my earlier point, which is that there's a healthy subgroup of social conservatives that seems much more concerned with their own sexual and social morality, and harassing and punishing those who don't hew to that morality, than about the things they use as a stalking horse to advance their agenda, like the rights of the unborn or the stability of hetero marriage and so forth. But they show their hand when they freak out over IUDs, contraception, HPV vaccines, civil unions, and so forth - which as you say, don't actually affect them and in fact are strategically counterproductive.

Oh, yeah, but those people have to be, what, 5-10% of the party? What are they going to do, switch sides and vote Democrat? More likely they'd stay home, but how many independant/swing/middle voters would the right pickup if they'd lay off the social engineering bull****? I gotta think it's more than would stay home/leave the party.

[barry2952]

I wish someone would calculate the statistics of cheating percentages of people who say that. Bet it would be interesting.

If I understand you, do you mean the high-horse crowd? I think I know the answer.

[Tornado2dr]

I personally think that the Republicans would be strengthened immeasurably by cutting loose the social issues entirely. I think the voters that are obsessed with social issues would fall into line because they also care about fiscal conservatism, and they'd pick up a bunch of moderates, possibly including me. I'd vote for Teddy Roosevelt.

You're goddamn right you would.

or ELSE.

[ATL_Av8r]

I think that's a semantic argument.

Yeah.....but when has that ever stopped this place? Zukiphile LIVES for semantic arguments

[Turbio!]

Oh, yeah, but those people have to be, what, 5-10% of the party? What are they going to do, switch sides and vote Democrat? More likely they'd stay home, but how many independant/swing/middle voters would the right pickup if they'd lay off the social engineering bull****? I gotta think it's more than would stay home/leave the party.

I think it's more, unfortunately. But I happen to agree that they'd either stay home (which I don't think is a loss) or, much more likely, bitch for a little while and vote for the guy with the R next to his name anyway. The gains would outweigh the losses, because the social conservatives are probably fiscal conservatives too, and they'd gain all the people who think it makes sense to conserve money, resources, and energy and don't care if a gay dude can visit his partner after he gets in a car accident.

[Turbio!]

You're goddamn right you would.

or ELSE.

Teddy Roosevelt/Teddy Roosevelt's Giant Cast-Iron Balls '12

Because he don't need no stinking veep.

[Tornado2dr]

Oh, yeah, but those people have to be, what, 5-10% of the party? What are they going to do, switch sides and vote Democrat? More likely they'd stay home, but how many independant/swing/middle voters would the right pickup if they'd lay off the social engineering bull****? I gotta think it's more than would stay home/leave the party.

FAR more.

Most people espouse a belief in a fair bit of fiscal conservatism, but are 'meh' on social issues.

[Surf Green]

Which raises the question of whether a fertilized life gets the same moral weight as other life stages.

Fertilized, implanted, development stages, brain function?... I do not want to be the one who tries to make that determination for everyone.