"Legitimate rape" rarely results in pregrancy...

[Tornado2dr]

Oh, really? As a father of 2 at 13mo. apart, i'm going to have you look up the response to Billy Madison at the school competition... Just imagine he's talking to you...


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

He is saying that there is nothing the father can do or can not do that will affect the health of the fetus. It is all on the mother to grow the kid. Once she's cooking the father is in the "set it, and forget it" mode while the mother has the burden of keeping herself and the baby healthy.

[Jader Pack]

People just differ here. You can say whatever you want, but for some people that's their kid.

So can you see why someone who feels it's already their child might have strong feelings about aborting that child?

Yes, I can see that difference and don't dispute the validity of thinking so. I simply can't see anyone thinking that they should be allowed to force a woman to undergo a pregnancy, though. That line of thinking actually shocks me.

[PolskiHetzen]

Yes, I can see that difference and don't dispute the validity of thinking so. I simply can't see anyone thinking that they should be allowed to force a woman to undergo a pregnancy, though. That line of thinking actually shocks me.

But for someone who thinks its their little Johnny in there, it's shocking to allow someone to kill him.

On one hand, no one has the right to tell a person what to do with their body. But on the other, if someone in their mind already has a kid, then does anyone have the right to take that kid away from them?

[TigerinColorado]

It is shocking what people will say on camera/in an interview.

Sooooo.... not to go too OT here but anyone here still think the genius who spoke these words has a chance of winning a seat in Congress still?

Back on topic!

You'd think the fallout would prevent that. Speak up ladies?! His own party has roundly criticized him in the press too. Dunno. How strong are those allegiances he has made over the years?

[StormChaser]

Sooooo.... not to go too OT here but anyone here still think the genius who spoke these words has a chance of winning a seat in Congress still?

Not a chance. AND he's greatly hurting the GOP in the process.

[2.0T_Convert]

Back on topic!

You'd think the fallout would prevent that. Speak up ladies?! His own party has roundly criticized him in the press too. Dunno. How strong are those allegiances he has made over the years?

I thought of it because I was doing a face today when my Orlando friend told me about how her mother is going to volunteer to help campaign for this D-bag. She wants another GOP member to help fight the "commie" in the white house.

Sadly that seems to be the GOP message: "Ignore what we do or say and just think, you need us to stop Obama because he is BAAAAADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "

[GreenandChrome]

Not a chance. AND he's greatly hurting the GOP in the process.

Nope. Chuck Testa.

If Dan Q. didn't hurt the GOP, then nothing ever will. People that can count to potato can spell it, for cryin' out loud!

[BrianC]

Political whack job 'foot-in-mouth' disease is spreading, apparently:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/23/us/tex...ss_igoogle_cnn

CNN -- An elected county judge in Texas is warning that the nation could descend into civil war if President Barack Obama is re-elected, and is calling for a trained, well-equipped force to battle the United Nations troops he says Obama would bring in.

I know this guy is just an elected judge (and emergency planning coordinator)... but srsly?

[FlashRedGLS1.8T]

Political whack job 'foot-in-mouth' disease is spreading, apparently:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/23/us/tex...ss_igoogle_cnn



I know this guy is just an elected judge (and emergency planning coordinator)... but srsly?

I saw that this morning. Maybe I've built up some type of immunity but I ignored it.

[cockerpunk]

It is shocking what people will say on camera/in an interview.



Back on topic!

You'd think the fallout would prevent that. Speak up ladies?! His own party has roundly criticized him in the press too. Dunno. How strong are those allegiances he has made over the years?

his party thought doesn't say he is wrong. none of them have come out and said that raped women should have exceptions to there pro-life policy.

they merely keep saying he said something dumb.

[Egilbe]

Political whack job 'foot-in-mouth' disease is spreading, apparently:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/23/us/tex...ss_igoogle_cnn



I know this guy is just an elected judge (and emergency planning coordinator)... but srsly?

Lunatic fringe

[Eberger]

his party thought doesn't say he is wrong. none of them have come out and said that raped women should have exceptions to there pro-life policy.

they merely keep saying he said something dumb.

THEIR pro-life policies aren't in effect, as abortion is still plenty legal. The word would be "belief", not policy

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

[2.FOH!!]

Your special brand of dumb is always appreciated...

his party thought doesn't say he is wrong. none of them have come out and said that raped women should have exceptions to there pro-life policy.

...except the guy running for President....

"I am pro-life. I believe that abortion is the wrong choice except in cases of incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother." ~ Mitt Romney

& the last Republican that ran for President

& the last Republican President.....

[Jader Pack]

So how would this exception for rape work? Would there need to be a conviction? Just an allegation?

[2.FOH!!]

You're a lawyer. How do you think it would work?

Is an allegation of rape, rape?

[Jader Pack]

You're a lawyer. How do you think it would work?

Is an allegation of rape, rape?

I've seen people accused of things, and who probably did those things, acquitted or never even charged. I've also seen people accused of things, and who probably didn't do those things, convicted. I've also heard of many crimes, including sexual assaults, for which an accused was never found.

Maybe most importantly, it's not at all uncommon for a decision to come down later than 9 months after the commission of the act in question. If you commit a sexual assault where I live today you'll be arraigned in a matter of hours or days but your trial date won't be for, at the earliest, 6-12 months from today. What if it's too late to abort by the time the conviction comes down?

Also, if you appeal that decision, the final appeals decision could be 2-10 years away. What if you abort a fetus and the conviction is later overturned? What if you refuse to abort a fetus and an acquittal is later overturned?

It also seems a bit of a heavy burden to subject the claim of rape of a woman who is seeking an abortion to the criminal standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt."

[worth_fixing]

I think Todd Akin should get raped. Not legitimately thought, the kind where his a**hole closes up and prevents a d*ck from blowing right through it. Anyway, if his a**hole doesn't close up, it's because he wanted to get raped in the a**.

[Eberger]

I think Todd Akin should get raped. Not legitimately thought, the kind where his a**hole closes up and prevents a d*ck from blowing right through it. Anyway, if his a**hole doesn't close up, it's because he wanted to get raped in the a**.

Let your progressive love shine for all to see...

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

[zukiphile]

Yes, I can see that difference and don't dispute the validity of thinking so. I simply can't see anyone thinking that they should be allowed to force a woman to undergo a pregnancy, though. That line of thinking actually shocks me.

Presumably a woman considering an imminent abortion of her pregnancy is already pregnant, so a regulation of the circumstances in which the state will sanction a killing a human doesn't force a woman to undergo pregnancy.

Not at all the same, you are requiring some perfection of an attribute in humans to meet your definition of a human. That thought process leads to racism, slavery, genocide, and many other persecutions that were rationalized by using the differences to make the oppressed to be sub-human.

That's ridiculous. My thought process leads to no such thing. No race lacks the capacity for consciousness, and therefore no race deserves to be discriminated against on that basis, enslaved, exterminated, persecuted, or anything else of the sort.

I believe you missed PP's point. When you mistake a common attribute of humanity for humanity itself, you may permit yourself to treat people who lack the attribute as less than human. NSists didn't contest that jews were conscious, but they did hold them to possess a genetically based inferiority that permitted or manadated their liquidation. Slave holders from a culture in which everyone had the atribute of whiteness, would concede that africans and their descendants possessed consciousness, but lacked some of the other attributes that would give them the status of free, white men.

Life and death considerations may be littered with prudential concerns. We don't have an objective measure of the moment at which we would all recognise the genetically distinct and genetically complete human life as obviously and indisputably a person entitled to the protections we afford everyone else. For most people and in most circumstances, killing a feotus at nine months is clear murder, while washing out a zygote that has not yet taken hold is a less obvious transgression.

Where a prudential consideration drives people to protect life that they do not know, but do suspect, is an innocent human life, that is an imposition of a reasonable prudential concern.

First-and-second-trimester fetuses lack the capacity for consciousness ...

I look forward to the peer reviewed article on that point.

[mx5er]

"New England Journal of Crazy"

[cockerpunk]

I look forward to the peer reviewed article on that point.

Consciousness requires a sophisticated network of highly interconnected components, nerve cells. Its physical substrate, the thalamo-cortical complex that provides consciousness with its highly elaborate content, begins to be in place between the 24th and 28th week of gestation. Roughly two months later synchrony of the electroencephalographic (EEG) rhythm across both cortical hemispheres signals the onset of global neuronal integration. Thus, many of the circuit elements necessary for consciousness are in place by the third trimester. By this time, preterm infants can survive outside the womb under proper medical care.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...iousness-arise

[Slapoquidik]

"...elements necessary for consciousness are in place by the third trimester."http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...iousness-arise

Wow, I didn't expect anyone to find an article in support of Zuk's point that quickly.

[Slapoquidik]

Women are no longer chattel. They can make their own choices. As a person still living in the 21st century, these discussions are discouraging. May as well be christian taliban.

Whoa there Nelly. Women are still chattel, if they're owned in the correct jurisdiction. And I'm pretty sure some of my slaves were purchased from the Taliban. They only get fussy about slavery if the slaves pretend to convert to Islam. Christians are the ones who have become unreasonable about the appropriateness of slavery in some parts of the world.

[2Cor]

I've seen people accused of things, and who probably did those things, acquitted or never even charged. I've also seen people accused of things, and who probably didn't do those things, convicted. I've also heard of many crimes, including sexual assaults, for which an accused was never found.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_saUN4j7Gw