Would the left be less likely to 'club' them?
2007-03-15 09:04:34 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Ironically enough, early feminists like Susan B. Anthony were vehemently against abortion.
Although quite a few conservatives are pro-choice (remember there are far more pro-choice Republicans on the national scale holding office than pro-life Democrats), the pro-choice position is predominantly the domain of liberals.
I've never understood why those who are vocally committed to helping the weak and helpless would so ardently defend abortion rights -- including partial birth abortion!
The property rights argument (my body, my choice) or the "that's-not-a-human-being" argument are substantively no different from pro-slavery arguments in the 1800s (slaves are my property and only 3/5ths human under the Constitution).
The fact that babies develop in the womb of another human being is a distinction without substance. The ONLY way human beings can be objectively classified is through the human genetic code, and the offspring possesses it's OWN genetic identity at conception. Any other position is NOT science, but a logically indefensible justification of opinion.
2007-03-15 09:51:20 · answer #1 · answered by ScaliaAlito 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
"Eliot is one of an estimated 300,000 children of illegal immigrants born in the United States every year, according to the Pew Hispanic Center. They're given instant citizenship because they are born on U.S. soil, which makes it easier for their parents to become U.S. citizens. That's because those babies can eventually sponsor their parents - when they turn 21 years old." This is not true for these illegal immigrants. If they sneaked across the border they cannot get a green card and of course not citizenship at any time. The fact that their kids are US citizens is irrelevant. It is true that a US citizen over age 21 can sponsor his non-citizen parents but only if those parents came here legally. People that came here by swimming across the Rio Grande can never get a green card or citizenship.
2016-03-29 00:13:26 · answer #2 · answered by Sandra 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably. Or if they could somehow commit some criminal act in the womb, then they woudl be protected by the libs
2007-03-15 09:08:16 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, I think you have a good point. lol Where I live seagulls are prized far more than children.
2007-03-15 09:12:16 · answer #4 · answered by Ricky 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, probably. Or maybe sea turtle eggs...
2007-03-15 11:30:39 · answer #5 · answered by Truth B. Told ITS THE ECONOMY STUPID 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, they wouldn't be safer then you Republicans would just skin them alive and wear their skin as coats.
2007-03-15 09:09:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
very good. Thanks for this one.
2007-03-15 09:14:25 · answer #7 · answered by THOR! 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋