Sunday, August 17, 2008
posted by Spencerblog at
This comment has been removed by the author.
"So, you think that Supreme Court justices can actually render a definitive answer to a theological question?"No, and they shouldn't. They should leave it to a democratic republic to decide this issue democratically and not decide it by judicial fiat. Period.Obama's slippery answer is nothing but an evasion. He has a pro-choice (pro-abortion) even pro-partial-birth abortion record. Simply put Obama doesn't recognize any "human rights" for the unborn. He just doesn't have the guts to say it.
Obama has an A-plus rating from both the National Abortion Rights League and Planned Parenthood. Both groups fought the ban on partial birth abortion. Obama himself voted against the ban and born-alive infants act. He'll have a tough time selling himself as a candidate who is truly interesting in reducing the number of abortions if he can't muster the political courage to buck the abortion rights lobby on the partial birth "procedure" (which is partially delivering a child, then stabbing it in the head and sucking out its brains with a vaccum tube). It seems Obama has never met an abortion he couldn't justify protecting. What a thoughtful guy. And what a difficult "theological" question.
AND Obama has voted AGAINST the rights of those who survive partial birth abortions while in IL legislature, despite hearing some horrifying and saddening testimony.Obama's got NO leg to stand on here, no pro-abortion types ever do (The safe, legal and rare statement never cuts it). Based upon what I've heard with his record, the man's a monster.I don't want to hear about your Guantanamo or your death penalty b.s., you believe in human rights, back it up at the beginnings of life!
Pro-baby murder Libs hate graphic descriptions of what takes place during an abortion. Makes it hard for them to sell is as a “choice” and somehow a good thing. So they’d rather keep it quiet. There’s that inherent dishonesty of Modern Libism again.
And they utilize sickess of the mother/emergency situation as the only reason to justify their actions, despite Obama's line about his daughter earlier this summer where he made it sound like a teenage necessity almost in line with getting a driver's license and filling out a FASFA.This is why I can't agree with Democrats, they make all these PC arguements, they complain about human rights, yet they back abortion like the child is nothing more than a tumor. If more Democrats had a platform like former Governor Casey, I'd probably vote left.
Diano:I have to agree with Gil that no court should rule on theological issues any more than the courts should abandon the doctrine of church autonomy. However, if Hussein wants to champion human rights, why can't he state that life begins at conception. How can he deny that purely on scientific grounds? There is better and real science to support that life begins at conception than the "science" that supports global warming.Even you were an embryo at one time, so when do you think that life begins?
There is better and real science to support that life begins at conception than the "science" that supports global warming.LMAO! Killer line! (but not baby-killer)
Libs care not about science and pesky facts when there’s their agenda to be driven.
Diano:Stop being a weasel, and answer the question. When does life begin and when does it deserve human rights?
rule of diano - when you got nothing left, spew insults. If men like you could get pregnant, you would cook up church law to make abortion a sacrament. check.I'd consider an embryo much more than a couple cells. Much more in fact. It's amazing how uber-liberals want to eliminate guns to save lives, show compassion for gitmo prisoners no one wants to see free on this planet, and want to DP our favorite terrorist leaders for photo ops, yet they consider the first stages of life "just some cells". I hear about women's rights, what about the individual's right to life?
absolutely it is diano. you're never going to make a correct arguement against it!
Man, DDD really gets grasping on this one. The men shouldn't even get a vote on the issue.Uh, sure we should. Just as non-soldiers can support, comment on and even wage war. Hehe...
Diano:You are still doing the name calling and I am resisting it with you as I thought we could elevate the discussion and have a civil debate.Your arguments make no sense and your worldview on when life begins is scary and disgusting. I thought it was interesting though that you used the term hot young second wife as a place for an unused embryo (or something like that). What about same sex between two men. When they sword fight and leave their deposits in or on each other, which one gets pregnant? Is it even possible?
I don't agree with the holding/freezing of embryos to begin with diano. Society's treating life as if it's nothing more than an accessory to people's lifestyles, use them at your convenience. Just a sad sign of how low we consider life in this nation - its suprising cloning hasn't had a larger arguement on its behalf. Let's get back to my earlier comment on how Obama finds abortions as important to teens as getting drivers licenses and takign the SATs!
And for every emergency situation or sickness there are dozens of "oops, I didn't want that to happen" issues that the left constitutes as a need for convenience. Who cares about responsibility, throw it out the door, have a ball!!! Deny someone the opportunity to open their eyes to the world, as long as you can continue sleeping around, right?The left has made the gift of life nothing more than a material convenience. Want it but want to live your "Sex in the City Life" first? Freeze away next to the ice cream. Don't want life? Flush it away at the local clinic! Feel offended that you're not doing your part? Give everyone on the soccer field a trophy!!!This world has become pathetic. The Greatest generation is leaving this world and replacing us with The PATHETIC generation.
Steve:Didn't Hussein say in March of this year that if his daughters make a mistake they shouldn't be burdened by a baby? Even Diano supports abortion as a family planning tool. It is scary, and if Hussein gets elected and there is a Democratically controlled fillibuster proof Congress, what will he also do in additiona to expanding abortion... The libs will start rationing health care to the disabled and elderly. It will happen unless people wake up really fast.Steve you are right, life has no respect in our society. The reason why Ronald Reagan was so great is because he knew that absolute respect for life enabled him to be a strong leader, and the world stood down. If you don't respect life you will never be a great and enduring leader.Scott
No. You shouldn't.Says you. But then, you also advance the lie that only those with a kid in the Iraq sand is permitted to intone on the war –Allah Michael Moore. Which of course is nothing more than another Liberal lie designed to silence those with opposing views. I say that, yes, we all should be involved in deciding the abortion debate due to how it impacts our society as a whole. Just as one need not be a cop or a criminal in order to speak on crime and punishment. So there, my vote cancels out yours, DDD. That was easy.
And yet you are the one who deleted your own post. Lol... Irony... Hey, didja like how I substituted “Allah” for ‘a la’ when referring to your Lying Lib God Michael Moore? Lol… You gotta admit that was sweet! :D
mayor C. Scott, he did. diano's trying to change the subject by shifting over to embryo's to get away from that line. I'll answer the rest of his embryo questions when he decided to answer our questions about teenage abortions being as american as apple pie to barry o.
"If my daughter gets pregnant, I don't want her to be stuck with a baby"teenage abortions - making it sound like a necessity since 2008.Discuss.
Study out today shows that the unwed minority women are still the ones having most of the babies. Great. Maybe we should be promoting abortions more in urban areas. But the pro-baby murder Libs won't go for that. No, that would cut into their future voter base. We should license parenthood. You can’t catch a fish without a license but you can have as many kids as you irresponsibly can and just dump them on society to carry, all with no repercussions. Nuts.
Randal:I think that you are on to something. Libs want to license gun owners pursuant to the argument that we license drivers. I think it is a great idea to force someone to get a license before they have sex and start having babies. Diano and Bobby, isn't this a great idea?Scott
And the parasites should be precluded from having more kids while on the public dole. No sense forcing the rest of us responsible folks to pay to support the irresponsible. With technology available today temporary infertility could be easily administered. “You’ve come for your Welfare check? Roll up your sleeve.” “You need public housing? Roll up your sleeve.” “We’ll take that out of your arm once you are capable of supporting yourself and your kids on your own.”
Lame. See, Libs like DDD really see nothing wrong with eternal handouts to the irresponsible parasites. Thus ensuring future appreciative Dem voters for his side, never mind the cost to society. “By any means necessary…”
Dopey Diano:Listen to Randal, he has some really great ideas. How about having people forfeit welfare if they fail a drug test(s)?Scott
Yep! “You want this Welfare check? Roll up your sleeve and pee in this cup!” Sure, it seems like common sense, very reasonable, but the Apologist Libs with their misplaced sympathies and want for black votes will never go for it. They stand to gain more by continuing to blindly give expensive handouts that the ingrates have come to demand as entitlements. Forgive us if some of us are sick and tired of our hard earned money going to assist lazy and irresponsible ingrates from their self-wrought problems, all the while we’re being called “racists” as they bite the white hand that feeds them.
I’d be willing to take drug tests and forgo having kids while I was on the public dole, DDD. How many of your lazy black system-sucking ingrate friends would be willing to do that?
diano - I don't see lawyers on welfare.randal/c. scott, can you imagine the public outcry if drug tests were required for welfare recipients? The PC movement would be all over it! Still, I'd love to see a study over welfare recipients and drug use - I'm sure there's a healthy interpolation involed.Oh, and, of course, this is W's fault.
Protecting the parasites by looking the other way on drug use, etc, is classic Liberal misplaced sympathies, S. They attach little to no expectation of conduct or obligation to the handouts. One can’t even get a job today without submitting to a drug test but the lazy can sit on the couch and watch Oprah all doped up while collecting our charity. How f-ing backwards is that! While we’re at it we should institute a One Strike Rule for the system suckers under which if they are convicted of committing any crime they lose their handouts. It’s not asking too much for people accepting our help to not be criminals or on dope.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
Create a Link
View my complete profile
Subscribe toPosts [Atom]