Baby butchers admitting prenatal infantacide kills a baby

[Tennesseahawk]

I'm glad you have never made 1 mistake in your life...congrads..

Mistakes are made...things do happen...people are not perfect..
Why not a little now ..as in planned parenthood and its services...
Or a lot later as I in ..welfare..medicare...food stamps...foster homes...etc.
Seems like a no brainer to me...preventive maintenance.. I'm sure you have a good PM program for your truck....fix it before it becomes a problem..
We as society are going to pay....A. or B. Take your pick...because unfortunately there is no C.....I vote for A...so everybody needs to get there heads out of sand...and realize there is a problem ..and it is not going to fix its self...

1+6 = 8 is a mistake. Going to bed with someone you don't want to have a baby with is taking a chance. It's a gamble, same as throwing down your life savings on red or black. This is a life situation that brings MANY people into the equation, and people have the nerve to calling it a mistake. No... it's undoubtedly a f***-up! It's like drinking your fill, driving thru a red light, and running over a little kid. You made a decision that was above your pay scale. You played Russian roulette while high on aphrodisiac... but still should have had common sense to prepare for that.

A mistake is leaving your keys in a locked car, not playing with a loaded gun.

 

[AMonger]

As Roe v Wade hoped, abortion should be legal, safe, and rare.

That was not at all the goal of Roe vs. Wade. Roe vs. Wade was to give women the ability to kill their babies for the dale of convenience. Margaret Sanger also wanted to limit the number of minorities. Safe and legal (and profitable), yes; rare, no.

 

[Turtle]

who's this "we", Kemosabe? Why should "we" be prepared to take responsibility for someone else's actions? Clearly, whoever gets pregnant should be the one to be prepared for the fact that it isn't going to work all the time.

We is American citizens - the people who pay for everything in this country.

Speak for yourself, not me and everybody else.

And yes, the person who gets pregnant [or makes her so] should be prepared for it - but if they're not, who will support the innocent [can't say 'baby' without the qualifier anymore, lol] baby that results?

The parents, whether they are prepared for it or not. Failing that, anyone who wants to help pitch in, kinda the way it's been done since humans first started giving birth.

Or do we [that's you too, Kemosabe]

Hey, I'm Tonto, you're Kemosabe.

just say "Sorry, little innocent baby - you got the wrong parents if you want to eat."

Pretty much, yeah. Life isn't about fair. If someone, or a group, like a church or other charitable organization wants to help out, great. If not, well, that's life. Harsh, maybe. The thing is, my bleeding heart tells me what to do with my money, while your bleeding heart tells you what to do with my money. Something's wrong there.

I think you mean, "Access to free and cheap birth control has been eroded..." That's because people are sick and tired of paying for it.

Penny wise and pound foolish: birth control is far cheaper than raising babies [ooops, forgot to say innocent!] to adulthood.

Tell that to the people who get pregnant when they aren't ready or don't want to be. Nobody said birth control must be free. I shouldn't have to pay for someone's birth control any more than I should have to pay for their abortion, or to raise their child. I've got enough problems of my own.

Free birth control doesn't teach much in the way of responsibility, just the same as feeding a man a fish isn't gonna feed him for a lifetime. It fosters irresponsibility, actually. It[s like throwing money at the poor. History has proven time and time again that when you throw money at the poor, you just get more poor people.

I think birth control does teach responsibility, as it acknowledges that a baby is not a responsible outcome at that point.

Well lookie there, I pееd in my pants just a little. I'm sorry. I had to take a few minutes to quit laughing. The sexual revolution and the dramatic independence of women that came with The Pill also came with a significant reduction of responsibility. Before The Pill and other reliable birth control, women, married or not, had to be very, very careful if, or when, they got pregnant. Along with the independence came less of a reliance on men for their financial security, and the Roe v Wade decision only added to less financial dependence and even more irresponsibility. The creation and cessation of a new human life has become a commodity, an afterthought, something that's no big deal one way or the other. But, having said that, please note that I said "FREE birth control," not a simple and unqualified "birth control." There's a difference. Birth control, unqualified, teaches responsibility, but only if you are responsible enough to take the necessary steps to afford it. FREE birth control, on the other hand, removes even that basic responsibility, creating a mindset that the government will take care of me therefore I don't have to mess with all that responsibility stuff. The government has taken upon the role of husband and father, providing security to those without responsibility.

I don't happen to agree that not wanting a baby should mean not having sex - at least for consenting adults. For minors, that's what it should mean.

Minors or majors, doesn't matter. If you can't afford kids, or aren't prepared for them, don't put yourself in a position to have them. If you do this, that might happen.

All the more reason to take extra precautions to ensure you don't get pregnant.

You know what they say about the best laid plans....

Yeah, life's a bіtch and then you die. If you screw up, it's on you, not me or everybody else.

The cheapest method of birth control ever devised is also 100% effective.

And nearly that unrealistic, given the factors involved.

Worked reasonbly well for hundreds of centuries until The Pill and the Women's Liberation movement. Now women are liberated, but they don't want to own it. They want someone else to pay for and own it.

So you are, in fact, advocating a lack of responsibility, or at the very least, absolving it due to human nature, and letting others instead take on the responsibilities that the unwanted pregnancies demand. It's real simple - if you can't afford children, don't have them, or be prepared to bear the consequences of responsibility if you do.

It's as simple as 'just say no' and is working as well, too.

Thank you for not denying it.
The reason "just say no" isn't working when it comes to unwanted pregnancy, is because people have ready access to free birth control and free abortions. Make 'em pay for it and take full responsibility, and the numbers of abortions and unwanted children plummet, putting places like Planned Parenthood out of business.

On a side note, replying to you when you've replied inside a quote box is an absolute bіtch, and I ain't doing it again.

 

[Turtle]

Criminalize guns, and only criminals will have guns.
Criminalize abortion, and only criminals will perform abortions.
Women will still have them, though.

With that I agree one hundred percent.

Not because I'm a big fan of abortion, 'cause I'm not at all, but because I'm a big fan of liberty, and people should be able to make their own decisions, be it keeping and bearing arms, or not keeping and bearing children. Just like anything else, if you can force someone to do something, you can force someone to not do something. I don't want The State to force anyone to have a child, anymore than I want The State to force people to not have a child. It's none of their business.

 

[Turtle]

That was not at all the goal of Roe vs. Wade. Roe vs. Wade was to give women the ability to kill their babies for the dale of convenience.

Not even close. The goal of Roe v Wade was a right to privacy issue under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment. You should probably peruse the actual opinion and decision of The Court, instead of someone else's summary opinion of it.

 

[AMonger]

Not even close. The goal of Roe v Wade was a right to privacy issue under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment. You should probably peruse the actual opinion and decision of The Court, instead of someone else's summary opinion of it.

No, the stated goal of Roe v. Wade was privacy. The goal was to allow women to escape what they considered slavery to biology that inconvenienced them. That's rather obvious.

 

[AMonger]

I don't want The State to force anyone to have a child, anymore than I want The State to force people to not have a child. It's none of their business.

The state doesn't force women to have children. Except in cases of rape, women have babies because they engage in an activity that causes them.

 

[Turtle]

No, the stated goal of Roe v. Wade was privacy. The goal was to allow women to escape what they considered slavery to biology that inconvenienced them. That's rather obvious.

There is absolutely nothing in the case history, nothing in the written or oral arguments, none of the supporting documents or the supporting opinions, to support such a statement. Nothing. Any conclusions drawn outside of the case can only be to further one's agenda, regardless of which side politically the conclusions reside.

 

[Turtle]

The state doesn't force women to have children. Except in cases of rape, women have babies because they engage in an activity that causes them.

Oh, that's true even in cares of rape.

 

[AMonger]

There is absolutely nothing in the case history, nothing in the written or oral arguments, none of the supporting documents or the supporting opinions, to support such a statement. Nothing. Any conclusions drawn outside of the case can only be to further one's agenda, regardless of which side politically the conclusions reside.

Do you need a guide dog, or is your blindness willful? That prenatal infanticide was decriminalized for the convenience of women is beyond question.

 

[Turtle]

Do you need a guide dog, or is your blindness willful? That prenatal infanticide was decriminalized for the convenience of women is beyond question.

The right to privacy, and liberty, illegally deprived by the state, is hardly a convenience. In addition, "prenatal infanticide" is (a) an invented, nonsensical oxymoron of a term, and (b) was not decriminalized, "abortion" was. In addition in addition, it wasn't until a couple of religious doctors and a handful of religious leaders in the 1800s got together and managed to get their agenda confirmed by religious legislators in some of the states, and most of the states by 1900, where due process took a back seat blinders eye to the religious wishes of a special interest few. Sixty some odd years later that legal violation of the Bill of Rights was rectified in Roe v. Wade. Criminalized abortion (or prenatal infanticide, if you like) is a recent, and short-lived 'do as I say because Jesus is my co-pilot' phenomenon which casts a bloody shadow on the history of liberty in America. That's the problem with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights (which you hold so dear in other areas), you can't just pick and choose which parts you like and which parts you don't like based on personal preference or some special agenda - it's all or nothing.

 

[layoutshooter]

The right to privacy, and liberty, illegally deprived by the state, is hardly a convenience. In addition, "prenatal infanticide" is (a) an invented, nonsensical oxymoron of a term, and (b) was not decriminalized, "abortion" was. In addition in addition, it wasn't until a couple of religious doctors and a handful of religious leaders in the 1800s got together and managed to get their agenda confirmed by religious legislators in some of the states, and most of the states by 1900, where due process took a back seat blinders eye to the religious wishes of a special interest few. Sixty some odd years later that legal violation of the Bill of Rights was rectified in Roe v. Wade. Criminalized abortion (or prenatal infanticide, if you like) is a recent, and short-lived 'do as I say because Jesus is my co-pilot' phenomenon which casts a bloody shadow on the history of liberty in America. That's the problem with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights (which you hold so dear in other areas), you can't just pick and choose which parts you like and which parts you don't like based on personal preference or some special agenda - it's all or nothing.

The problem with R v W is that it NEVER should have even been heard by the SC. IT is not a federal issue. IT is a states rights issue, just as "gay marriage" is. They overstepped their bounds, again.

 

[asjssl]

The state doesn't force women to have children. Except in cases of rape, women have babies because they engage in an activity that causes them.

You have never had sex for pleasure??? Your perfect.. never have made any mistakes??? Dont make yourself so righteous...

 

[layoutshooter]

Why is it that SO many people have a problem with the concept of personal responsibility? Why is it that SO many people believe, and agree with, the idea that government has the authority to FORCE some people to cover the costs of OTHER'S sloth, lack of planning or their inability to THINK about the possible result of the voluntary actions that the willingly choose to take part in?

The indoctrination system, public schools, seems to have done a wonderful job in making bums out of millions. The more you coddle the more they take.

 

[LDB]

The problem is that abortion isn't an individual situation. It's not like a woman deciding to get implants or reduction or liposuction or botox or whatever that only affects the life of the woman. Abortion affects a minimum of two lives.

One group wants to focus on all sorts of things like viability, when life begins and other stuff that ignores the fact it's snuffing out a life by distracting and redirecting to a tangent.

One group wants to only consider women's rights and other liberal talking points, that can only talk about costs and adoptions and other tangentials while ignoring the real point.

Fecal encephalopathy abounds in those groups.

And then one group recognizes the second and unheard voice in the discussion. The only group that doesn't ignore the innocent victim. The only group that doesn't suffer from fecal encephalopathy. The only group that doesn't accept oopsie as a legitimate argument. The only group that's right, not wrong.

 

[davekc]

The trouble is you now have a liberal government combined with a culture that embraces these concepts. All of these are the faults of government that we elected.
In otherwords, "the horse has already left the barn" on numerous issues.

Abortion is now one of them. Too many irresponsible people that the government promotes through entitlements. "Someone else will pay if I don't want to".

Immigration. Government failed to secure the borders for a quarter of a century. Look what we have now. Others (taxpayers) being forced to absorbed the costs of them being here.

Gun Control. Throwing money at the poor has done nothing. Look at Chicago. Billions poored in for poverty and it did nothing. Strict gun laws have accomplished nothing but create more guns.
Millions of guns out there so anything now is pretty much a joke. Too late. Had they eliminated the majority of entitlements, you would have less poverty, gangs, and guns because people would be working.
Gee....what a concept. Making people work to survive. Seem like it worked pretty well before there was welfare. If a stockbroker is making millions, the poor can't use that as an excuse for not working. One has nothing to do with the other.

All kinds of other examples but most can be traced back to government failure in some capacity.

 

[layoutshooter]

Much of the gang activity is related to the black market trade in illegal drugs. Just as much of the violence during prohibition was related to the black market trade in beer and booze. Government has been the cause of MUCH of our crime for a very long time and MANY of our politicians benefit from the corruption created by foolish, unenforcable laws.

 

[davekc]

There is no doubt about. Our current culture also promotes this line of thinking. I wouldn't be surprised that at some point in the next ten years they will be providing abortions at Walgreens.
Provide the right climate, and someone in government will be looking to profit from it.
No different than the "green energy" industry. All government created and look who the primary investors are.

 

[Turtle]

The problem with R v W is that it NEVER should have even been heard by the SC. IT is not a federal issue. IT is a states rights issue, just as "gay marriage" is. They overstepped their bounds, again.

Roe v. Wade is about the due process clause of the 14th Amendment. It became a federal issue for the SC when states decided they could pick and choose which constitutional rights they would afford and infringe upon the citizens of their states. The states do not have the right to selectively apply or grant the right of due process.

Leo (and many others, to be sure) thinks it's not an individual issue, not an issue of personal liberty, yet going back as far as recorded history it always has been. It wasn't until very recently that certain religious folks decided they needed a new hobby horse to use as a vehicle to control and tell other people what to do.

 

[layoutshooter]

Using that argument negates just about anything then.

Not that it really matters anymore. The Constitution is all but been killed. We are going to be told and controlled from here on out.