GOP: Female body has natural defense against pregnancy in case of legitimate rape

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/XDlmUn1kBgA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

Except that abortion has been practiced since ancient times along with the knowledge that conception leads to pregnancy which leads to birth. For whatever reason establishment of personhood wasn't considered except at birth.

 

The legislation in question is not banning abortions. The Supreme Court ruled long ago that such prohibition is not permissible. The legislation is question regards federal funding of the procedures. On that issue, I do not entirely disagree. I am just not convinced that this is the type of thing the government should be paying for. Those funds would be much better spent on education on contraception and aid in providing access to contraceptives for those who cannot afford them.

 

Do you know of any legal attempts to weigh the right of the fetus versus the right of the mother and/or society at large?

I am wondering this in a Mills/utilitarian way. In other words, is the fetus's right to be born greater than the "good" of society with regards to the extra strain and burden on the social and health care system, increased crime and other related issues as the poor get poorer, etc.?

 

Not that I am aware of, and I would be very scared if it was tried. I don't think we want to go down the road of "we have determined that society would be better off if this person wee not born.".

Yikes...on a number of levels.

 

Nothing is more final than death; I have yet to bring it upon anyone so I sleep fine. No moral judgment is more supreme than life or death. Chew on that!

IN GENERAL: Who would have thought that trying to save innocent young babies could generate such vitriol. Don't know if it is too funny or too sad. Why is it that your arbitrariness is fine but mine is disallowed? BTW, I'm the one trying to save lives. Your web of lies and definitions kills children.

 

So have rape and robbery been committed since ancient times. What aspect of those acts is right and just? I thought we were in favor of social progress, extended civility and increased sensibility?

 

No one has control of the fact about the beginning of life. You believe one thing; I believe another. Operating from your sphere of beliefs kills a human being in my sphere of beliefs. Operating from my sphere of beliefs inconveniences a being from your sphere of belief. Oh, and by the way that inconvenienced human being likely participated willingly in the events that led to this crossroads.

Then why are third trimester abortions limited?

That's just whacked and perverse. The only elevating I'm doing with regards to the rights of the unborn is to put them on the same plane as everyone elses. Murder a pregnant lady and you've commmitted a double homicide, no?

I've said a hundred times over the years that I'm willing to make an exception for rape victims. I'm not entirely comfortable with that but it is an acceptable compromise because it will severely reduce the number of abortions.

A dead human was a human... by definition. It wasn't always dead and even you are still describing it as a human.

You are making a positive statement that it is but a clump of cells. Can you prove that is all it is? No.

We make lots of laws for the protection of the innocent. I'm no longer a child. Are you saying that adults cannot make a wide variety of laws that protect all of our children? I think not...

 

I think comparing blastula's to Jews is a bit....dude what are you thinking?

Do you know what the difference between a living human being and one that is not?

Living: Heart beat, brain activity, breathing, motor control and nervous system, organ's functioning, vital signs. Consciousness

Not Living: No pulse. Brain activity gone. No consciousness.

When you die, man of your cells are still alive. They may live for days. Your hair and nail cells may live for weeks. That does not mean you are living by the spirit of the word.

A blastula is not a living human being. Period.


You keep saying this is a believe thing. IT IS NOT. It is facts.


Hindus believe that animals are merely humans who have been reincarnated, and that killing animals is the same as killing people. Does that mean we should not ever kill animals - why take that chance? They could be people after all!

You can not limit people's rights based on BELIEFS. It must be on facts. That is what makes this country great.

Please don't compare me to a Nazi. That's just moronic, it's too moronic to even be offensive.

Trader Jorger - where are you? Police your own!

 

At 5 to 6 weeks, an ultrasound can often detect a heartbeat. The first thing a doctor checks for to make sure whether you are alive or dead is a pulse. If that is the metric you are using, by the time a lot of women have missed their period and realize they are pregnant, the fetus already has a pulse.

 

That would be your belief. You are limiting your analysis to things that can currently be measured by our science. Remember, wacky medical theories from the 16th century were state of the art, too:

"Medical practice in Elizabethan times, did not imporove as much as other aspects of Elizabethan life. Advancements were made, but overall the impact was not great.

Beliefs. All in all, medicine remained mostly medieval in Elizabethan times. Many physicians based their philosophies on the teachings of Aristotle and Hippocrates. These beliefs were widely accepted during the Medieval period. However, the emphasis on magic and astrology diminished in Elizabethan times. Yet, some physicians still believed that if the planets were out of line, an individual would get sick, according to his or her own sign.

The strongest and most widespread belief was that of the four humours and four elements. The humours are bodily fluids, and the seat of all these fluids was thought to be the liver. The four humours are blood, phlegm, yellow bile, and black bile. Supposedly the level of humours in the body characterized the personality. If a person had more blood in his body, he was characterized as having a sanguine personality. These people were very passionate, amorous, joyful, and kind. With abundance of phlegm, the personality was characterized as being phlegmatic or cowardly, unresponsive, and lacking in intellectual ability. Yellow bile meant that the person had a choleric personality. These people were generally believed to be obstinate, vengeful, impatient, and easily angered. Black bile meant that the person was melancholy or excessively brooding, gluttonous, and satiric.

There were also four elements that were thought to determine a person's personality and health. The four elements were air, water, earth, and fire. Air was the cold element, water the moist, earth the dry, and fire was the hot element. Belief in the humours took a long time to die out.

Elizabethan physicians also believed that certain gemstones held medicinal powers. Garnets were believed to keep sorrow at bay. Topaz and jacinth were used to alleviate anger. Emeralds and sapphires were thought to ease the mind. "

My living body also contains dead skin cells, so which is it? You are the one that keeps pointing a finger and making derogatory claims about my beliefs. Everyone has beliefs and to challenge them is fair but understand that everyone has a set of beliefs under which they operate-- including you.

Obviously there is a difference between a blastula and Lance Armstrong but still uniquely human:

"Day 1: A Zygote, 1-Celled Embryo
Conception ZygoteAt last, the nuclei of the egg and sperm fuse; the egg and sperm cease to exist individually as they unite to form a zygote. The 23 single chromosomes from the egg combine with the 23 from the sperm, forming a complete set of 23 pairs, 46 in total; and at this moment, the life of a new and unique human being begins. This singular genetic blueprint, defining every trait of this new person, has been uniquely defined among a billion possibilities, and can never be changed; nor will it ever be repeated."

It is a fact that you are treating the blastula as a sub-human. Even though it has the complete human genome. Now that, sir, is a fact.

 

no brain activity. You can have a pulse and still be brain dead. Happens all the time.

Equipment working doesn't = life.

 

Agreed, however im curious as to what ur stance is on aborting in the early first trimester (about the first 4 weeks while the fetus is still a blastocyte).

 

Yes, that is the nature of science - to only rely on empirical evidence and deduction. I am limiting myself to the fact, not to a belief or philosophy. This is too important to take people's rights away based on anything but the facts.

This was not science, it was a religion / pseudo-science. Note the word beliefs. Science is not about beliefs.

More beliefs. Again you are proving my point. Beliefs are dangerous - they lead to all sorts of strange experiments. Stick to the facts.

I am not insulting your beliefs. In fact I respect them. You are projecting that - look back no where do I insult your beliefs. However, they are not fact, it is a religion. And I am not required to follow your religion. Instead I follow the facts. I don't operate under what I belief. I operate under what I know from experiment data and understand that there are gaps in my knowledge. I do not need to fill them with beliefs to operate in this world.

It will be repeated - billions and billions of times. The one cell goes through mitosis many many times producing duplicates necessary for life. The only thing after it divides that makes it any different is the fact that it is in contact with other cells and bathe in certain chemicals. You can take a blastula and divide it 10 times and create 10 new lives. Each of those cells can form an independent life. Did you know this?

No the fact is I am treating a blastula like a blastula - which is what it is.

An acorn is not a tree. An egg is not a chicken. A tadpole is not a frog. A blastula is not a human being.

 

Didn't want to start another thread for fear I could be accused of piling on but another member of the GOP has given us a glimpse into the conservative mind.


May Want to Rethink That One

Pennsylvania Senate candidate Tom Smith says his daughter’s decision to give birth to a child conceived out of wedlock is “similar” to deciding to give birth to a child conceived from rape.

Isn’t that kind of ridiculous? “Put yourself in a father’s position, yes, I mean it is similar,” said Smith.

-- Josh Marshall

 

So is he pro-life, or is he pro-chose? I mean, she got to choose. Seems like something is odd here...

 

All of these primary things are in the busy process of becoming the latter things. Your deciding when the changeover has taken place is rather arbitrary. I don't really care about tadpoles and eggs and acorns but I do care about "blastula." :grin:

 

nevertheless, 'becoming' does not make it "one in the same."

that is the truth and reality. it's your choice, ironically enough, whether or not to accept it.

 

so giddyupp are you a one issue voter? Do you for instance support Dems on other issues? that impact life? Health care, Education, Income support? etc.