And you say your vote does not count...
The constitution was upheld today...
You want to vote for an ass who talks like this:
HILLARY: 'Erosion of our constitutional rights'...
or this ass
OBAMA: 'I strongly disagree'...
Show me where it says you have a right to stab a baby in the back of the head when it is perfectly able to live outside the body?
Why do liberals want women to have the right to kill a baby but not the right to "choose" to be prostitutes? or use drugs?
Lets hear it liberals...You are not really pro choice...just pro dead baby...
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Supreme Court OKs Abortion Procedure Ban
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
9 comments:
stab a baby in the back of the head when it is perfectly able to live outside the body?
This shows how little you know about the issue: These late-term abortions are not only rare, but done when either the child will not survive, or when the mother might not.
Read this, for example, for a real-life story of when and why someone had to have this done.
One of the most prevalent fictional characters in conservatives' imaginations is the 18 or 20-weeks pregnant woman who waddles past a Planned Parenthood and says, "D'oh! That's what I forgot to do!"
Fighting this imaginary woman is going to kill or seriously injure real ones. Go ahead and celebrate if you wish.
As far as I know you can still have an abortion if the health of the mother is at risk...and I think most would agree with that...liberals should be willing to agree that the life of a baby should be saved if at all possible...but they don't
As far as I know you can still have an abortion if the health of the mother is at risk
Well, no; that's why Justice Ginsberg was so furious about the majority ignoring the previous health precedent the court hard carved out.
I believe this decision does NOT prevent the procedure if the mother's life is at risk. It's a pretty far fetched notion that it could ever be the case, especially considering the fact that they begin the delivery process and take it to the brink. The chances of anyone here going to the moon are better than the odds that this procedure is ever necessary.
Jay Bullock's link is a total waste of time. The dude who authored the sad story even admits he doesn't know if this procedure was used in his mother's case. So what, then, is the point of his going on? A true story that isn't relevant to the topic is what it is. Particularly considering the decision doesn't prevent saving a mother's life.
Speaking of sad stories, Jim weighed in on an aspect of the topic we haven't discussed as yet. Just as I can kill Jim if he puts my life at risk, so can a woman abort if the pregnancy puts her at risk. So less than 1% of abortions are performed to save the life of the mother, and an even smaller percentage of that require partial birth abortions. Nonetheless, I do indeed celebrate this decision with joyous enthusiasm. Now on to the 99.99% or more of abortions that are performed for selfish and self-serving reasons. Health of the mother? I've yet to hear what health concern trumps the life of an innocent. Got any links for that Jay?
those are the facts...Jay likes to talk about the imaginary woman...abortions to save the life of the mothers are practically the imaginary abortion
Jay,
The Democrat tool mouthpiece has arrived to spread left wingnut propaganda.
Jay, familiarize yourself with Dr. Tiller of Kansas City. He specializes in 3rd trimester Partial Birth Abortions. They are neither rare nor necessary. Tiller makes a lot of money off these abortions. So much co that a number of years back he was able to buy out some of his abortion competition in town.
I've known of Tiller for over 10 years. I've heard every Democrat tool from LA to DC deny he exists and than that he is a lone example when he isn't.
Jay, you may be a big wheel among the other true believing Democrats, but then again, we aren't on a daily conference call with the Democrat party to be told how to think each day.
Whether you are pro-choice or pro-life, to argue that abortion rights are written into the Constitution is the foulest form of doublethink.
Perhaps one can argue the Due Process Clause of the 14th amendment, intended to confer rights upon free slaves, establishes the right to crack open your kid's skull and vacuum its brains out. But this is implausible at best and judicial activism at worst.
You can't make up the Constitution based on your feelings.
Oh, but Jason, didn't you hear? It's a "living" document. It can mean whatever you like!
No wait! It's got hidden meanings that certain Supreme Court Justices can discern much like the Amazing Kreskin! Or is it Carnac? Anyway, it's all there. We just don't know it cuz we're not lefties.
Or just like the stuff they made up in December of 2000 and said don't EVER use this as precedent.
Post a Comment