It is disturbing that the issue of abortion resides primarily inside a woman, but fat old republican guys feel like they need to make laws governing it. These are usually the same guys that support the death penalty, so when they say " right to life" do they mean their right to decide who lives and who dies? Also if they are so concerned with protecting a fetus, why do they cut the funding for health care of babies already born?
2007-03-23
10:05:58
·
22 answers
·
asked by
cycozomatic
1
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
(The death penalty is for sick creeps that rape little girls, beat them, and then bury them alive. Peole like that deserve to be put to death.
Men don't have a right to decide if a woman has an abortion, but you automatically had to blame republicans, didn't you? You must be an enviro wacko, tree hugging, march against the white house activist. You need to get out some more. )
Show me a democrat that votes to outlaw abortion...and by the way i work in the oil industry not exactly an "enviro wacko" friendly field
2007-03-23
10:37:20 ·
update #1
(Well Id have to go w/ the this little book called The Bible talking about how murder is a sin and all that, you should check it out some time. )
the guy who posted this is "I hate liberals 4" and hate is such a christian emotion!
2007-03-23
10:39:44 ·
update #2
i notice all you people bashing me still have yet to justify saving a fetus and denying it health care once its born, see how hollow the right to life argument is?!?!
2007-03-23
10:48:28 ·
update #3
I don't think much gives a man that right, and I think it should be up to the woman, BUT with that I also think the man should not have to send money every week to a women (especially if they were not together at the time of the baby's birth). Women get the right to choose, but it's their responsibility (seems fair).
2007-03-23 10:18:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by Nate D 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
A fetus is a growth in the human body. Until it emerges at the end of its growing period it is a fetus. At point of birth it becomes a babby; Billy or Sally. . No one intends to use abortion as birth control so why are a lot of you people even bringing that into the subject. Abortion is used as an accidental correction to an emotional deviation, in most cases, The most contencious issue I see in here is who is to pay .Well why not split the cost ? She gets to abort, he pays half and the state the other half. OK? The State should not have anything to say about the disposition of a growth we call a fetus. I n other words the state should be pro choice, letting the parents decide, or if need be with an adjudicator.
Capital crimminal cases are another issue in itself. How is it possible to equate the two and make any sense of the subject? People should dicuss these one subject at a time.I would like to someday discuss with people who have been personally involved in these situations and get their feeling and their take on it all.
2007-03-23 13:38:41
·
answer #2
·
answered by reinformer 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
You are making the assumption that no women oppose abortion, and that therefore elected officials are not representing the preferences of the general public.
We live in a republic (a form of democracy, but not a country where the popular vote does not drive national laws). Politicians up for election state their views, and based on those views they are elected into office. Once that happens, they represent groups of people that encourage them to vote one way or the other. So, don't simply blame the person in office, blame those voting for them - both women and men! Little statistic here -there are more women in the United States then men.
Personally, I think it is a woman's right to choose. But, I also don't like the idea that some treat abortion as birth control (that's a bit cruel). I also believe that once a baby is a few months along they are more than a thing in a womb - again, cruel to abort at thispoint. Rape and incest are no brainers. I also think most Americans are in the middle (like me), so the odds of Abortion ever being banned are slim. If they were, it would last for about 2 years (until the next election cycle).
2007-03-23 10:21:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by Isaac 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
The death penalty is for sick creeps that rape little girls, beat them, and then bury them alive. Peole like that deserve to be put to death.
Men don't have a right to decide if a woman has an abortion, but you automatically had to blame republicans, didn't you? You must be an enviro wacko, tree hugging, march against the white house activist. You need to get out some more.
2007-03-23 10:11:59
·
answer #4
·
answered by arwenlotr2 3
·
4⤊
2⤋
I don't know and I don't know if that is true. Don't lay around and you don't have to deal with abortion. I am am an atheist and I think it is wrong to abort but if you are going to do it I cannot stop you. Anyone Republican or Democrat, etc. with half of a brain can tell abortion is murder and against laws of nature. There are too many birth control methods available that prevent promiscuous birth syndrome. Get off your back and you won't have to worry about having to murder an innocent human that is helpless to greedy doctors and people that sleep around.
As far as funds that support children... The two that created the baby should pay for the baby not the other tax payers. Cut off all funding and people will be more careful and learn how to take care of their own. All this is proof of how ignorant and lazy people can be that sleep around, have babies, kill unborn babies, dump them in foster care, dump them in orphanages, dump them on doorsteps, dump them in dumpsters, etc. Take care of your own with whoever you sleep around with and leave the taxpayers out of your mistakes and murder.
What about the rights of the fetus? I have seen films of the fetus trying to avoid the blades of the abortionist that chops up the baby. Imagine a fetus fighting for it's life before it is born. They are alive no matter what you say or think. Ask people that survived a premature birth and some that even survived abortion.
2007-03-23 10:12:13
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋
Your statement is amazing to me. The issue of abortion resides primarily inside a woman? Unless women have suddenly been given the skill of impregnating themselves and I do not know about it the the man (father) is the other half of the equation. He should have rights because he is the father (upon conception) All that women have to do to maintain complete control is use birth control of some type and then the issue is all yours but a vagina does not make a woman any more special than a man. The death penalty? You are not comparing the death penalty to abortion right? Are you for real?
2007-03-23 10:20:57
·
answer #6
·
answered by M B 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
We all have a voice in the issue because we were all unborn babies once.
Using your "logic", only actively serving members of the military can legitimately express an opinion regarding the war. Somehow, I doubt that statement reflects your philosophy...so why and how is this different?
Either an unborn baby is a human being or it is not. Either the state has a compelling interest in preserving human life or it does not.
As far as the "choice" argument is concerned, nobody is allowed to choose whether or not to rob a bank...why is this? Could it be that society deems some issues to be of sufficient importance as to take certain choices away from the individual, i.e. bank robbery?
2007-03-23 10:14:04
·
answer #7
·
answered by Rick N 5
·
3⤊
2⤋
did a man not contribute anything to the child? or did she get pregnant on her own. The issue does not reside within the woman.
Astounding that ALL the medical textbooks in America at the time of Roe vs. Wade said that life begins at conception - but the Supreme Court could not find a 'consensus' within the medical community for that conclusion.
And if you really want to see something worse than Saw III - see a documentary on partial birth abortion.
The death penalty is for those who have taken an innocent life(lives) - so theirs is now yielded as their payment to society.
We would have a tax surplus at this time - if all our aborted little ones were paying taxes as we do.
And how many Einsteins, Will Rogers, Martin Luther Kings, Florence Nightingales, George Washington Carvers - have we let slip through our hands........
we have lost so much treasure
2007-03-23 10:18:32
·
answer #8
·
answered by tom4bucs 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
Have you EVER paid attention to how many Democrats out there are also opposed to "abortion rights" ????
Like Harry Reid?
Government does not have the "right" to make any laws at all. Government has POWERS, not "rights." And as of 35 years ago, the vast majority of states were banning abortion. Those laws did not spring into existance overnight because "fat old republican guys feel like they need to make laws governing it."
2007-03-23 10:14:00
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
What does the weight of anybody have to do with the issue or their age for that matter? Are you unaware that there are actually women in Congress who are making laws concerning abortion? Why try to mask your hatred of Republicans with your question? Oh, and I'M a Republican who IS pro-choice! Didn't think they existed, did you?
2007-03-23 10:15:41
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋