Protect All Human Life

8374 Responses




The heated debate about abortion is filled with emotional arguments that usually center on considerations such as sexual morality, religious beliefs, women’s rights, or purely on pragmatic reasons: if abortion were made illegal it would still take place – under unsanitary conditions that would endanger additional lives.

However, a rational evaluation of abortion must be built upon one single question: When exactly does human life begin? At conception, at birth or somewhere in between?

Not even the most radical feminist would find it okay to tear apart a recently-born baby just because it is not wanted by its mother. All other considerations aside, the only reason many individuals can support abortion with a good conscience is because they believe it’s not murder… and that unborn babies do not count as human beings.

Ron Paul has delivered more than 4,000 babies. He believes that human life starts at conception, and that casual elimination of the unborn leads to a careless attitude towards all life.

Recalling his personal observation of a late-term abortion performed by one of his instructors during his medical residency, Ron Paul stated, “It was pretty dramatic for me to see a two-and-a-half-pound baby taken out crying and breathing and put in a bucket.”

In an Oct. 27, 1999 speech to Congress, Ron Paul said:

“I am strongly pro-life. I think one of the most disastrous rulings of this century was Roe versus Wade. I do believe in the slippery slope theory. I believe that if people are careless and casual about life at the beginning of life, we will be careless and casual about life at the end. Abortion leads to euthanasia. I believe that.”

During a May 15, 2007, appearance on the Fox News talk show Hannity and Colmes, Ron Paul argued that his pro-life position was consistent with his libertarian values, asking, “If you can’t protect life then how can you protect liberty?” Additionally, Ron Paul said that since he believes libertarians support non-aggression, libertarians should oppose abortion because abortion is “an act of aggression” against a fetus.

At the GOP Values Voter Presidential Debate on Sep 17, 2007, Ron Paul was asked what he will do to restore legal protection to the unborn:

“As an O.B. doctor of thirty years, and having delivered 4,000 babies, I can assure you life begins at conception. I am legally responsible for the unborn, no matter what I do, so there’s a legal life there. The unborn has inheritance rights, and if there’s an injury or a killing, there is a legal entity. There is no doubt about it.”

At the GOP YouTube debate in St. Petersburg, Florida, on Nov 28, 2007, Ron Paul was asked what a woman would be charged with if abortion becomes illegal and she obtains an abortion anyway:

“The first thing we have to do is get the federal government out of it. We don’t need a federal abortion police. That’s the last thing that we need. There has to be a criminal penalty for the person that’s committing that crime. And I think that is the abortionist. As for the punishment, I don’t think that should be up to the president to decide.”

For many years, Ron Paul has been speaking up for babies’ rights. He passionately defends those who cannot speak for themselves because they haven’t been born yet.

In order to “offset the effects of Roe v. Wade”, Paul voted in favor of the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. He has described partial birth abortion as a “barbaric procedure”.

At the same time, Ron Paul believes that the ninth and tenth amendments to the U.S. Constitution do not grant the federal government any authority to legalize or ban abortion. Instead, it is up to the individual states to prohibit abortion.

Many people feel very strongly about the issue of abortion, and once they make up their minds they rarely change their opinion. If you are undecided and/or open-minded, check out this page and this site for more information about abortion, including images and a description of medical procedures.

8,374 responses to “Protect All Human Life”

  1. theplentysense

    Sorry but I think you missed the point. Education is not what people need. Every 12 year old boy knows condoms hold back his sperm from impregnating a girl. The PROBLEM is the MEN DON”T CARE if they impregnate a woman. They have been socialized to be TOTALLY IRRESPONSIBLE about their sperm and leave all the worry of contraception to WOMEN but women’s contraception takes planning and men’s contraception doesn’t. If it’s free in bathrooms and men are socially ostracized by MEN (not women) for being irresponsible or in other words, if it COOL to be responsible among men (which it’s not right now calling women bitches and ho’s) then all men would carry a free condom in their pocket and be more likely to use it when an opportunity arises.

    Men are extremely willing to conform to social pressure when it comes from men (not women) but there are no men in popular culture who will lead men to be better than they currently are. They are happy to coach men to be pick up artists – a new trend where men openly brag about lying to women so that women will trust them and sleep with them thinking there is a relationship – where there is not. Men brag about doing this and do it for revenge to feminists or women that cheated or rejected them. This is a huge trend with men right now. Sure it happened a bit in the past but today it’s a mass trend. Go on youtube and search for men are better than women or MRA’s or MGTOW’s or Mens Rights. They all say pretend to like women until the sleep with you then dump them. They all do it. There are NO men standing up against this although it’s just another form of rape and more women are being damaged and having abortions because they think a man loves them and wants a child then he leaves once she’s pregnant. Men do this on purpose, They plan it ahead of time. It’s really sick.

    Anyway, back to contraception. We don’t need education, We need popular opinion to change and it needs to be led by MEN not women. And condoms need to be free in men’s bathrooms with a sign that tells them to be responsible for their sperm. Currently not many are I can assure you.

    Women don’t have reliable contraceptives available at short notice. Men need to VOLUNTARILY make it socially uncool to use women like free whores with no responsibility for their sperm. It’s an attitude of contempt for both themselves and women that needs to change. That’s the point.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. DarrellRoss

      @theplentysense

      You are incorrect about every 12-year-old knowing what condoms are for. You may live in an area where sex education is common place in public schools and involves more than abstinence-only sex-ed.

      There are plenty of kids older and younger than 12-years who do not understand contraceptives both men and women.

      Although I do not approve of men who are bigots or misogynistic, not all men are like that.

      Part of education is creating the social pressure you speak of. Depending on where you live, there are places you can go to get free condoms. I like the idea bout free condoms in bathrooms. That would certainly be money better spent than pretending young people don’t have sex at all which is a common theme around where I live.

      Both men and women should be better aware of available contraceptives. It will be a great day when men can get on some sperm-inhibitor like the pill that women have. I think I read an article about how researchers almost have that available: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3543478/ns/health-sexual_health/t/male-birth-control-pill-soon-reality/.

      On contraception – it doesn’t matter how much we push it if nobody is educated about it. If people were educated about it and their attitudes adjusted as you mention, then they would seek out condoms. It all comes back to education.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. usapride

      @theplentysense Don’t blame men for all these problems. I suggest you stop hanging with boys and start socializing with real men, you know men with integrity. We are not mythical creatures, we do exist. Problem is women want the bad boys… “I can change him”. These guys will never change. Time to be more picky about what you put in your body!

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. giliardantunes

    Welcome to People’s Republic Obamaniacs Atheist of USA.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpGAql78K54

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. giliardantunes

    Yuri Bezmenov – Deception Was My Job – 1984 (Legendado)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0KVrr7mfQM

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. giliardantunes

      The brain of the American people was transformed to jelly.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpGAql78K54

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. giliardantunes
  4. Barton

    Hi there Pootie, we need to learn the differences in our views on what we’re talking about here. Once we’re able to learn that, we’re able to figure out a solution to our differences. I’m all for a woman’s right to choose what color hair she has, what tattoos she puts on her body, what kind of piercings she decides to wear, and I’m all for plastic surgery (a woman should have the right to look good if she wants to).

    What I am against is a woman deciding she has the right to murder another human being, get away with it, and in some situations, have the government pay for it.

    Imagine how outrageous it would be for a woman to kill her own 6 month old baby, or her 4 year old, or her 10 year old – just so she could live her life the way she wanted to if she had no children. We certainly make sure that after she killed her children she goes to jail to the fullest extent of the law. Don’t we?

    Look, women have the right to freedom of their own bodies. I agree with you on that. But listen, I don’t agree that a woman has the right to murder another human being. A great quote from Ron Paul, as said in the video, “…who are we to decide that we pick and throw one away and pick up and struggle to save the other ones. Unless we resolve this and understand that life is precious and that we must protect life, we can’t protect liberty.” I feel strongly against murder, and so should you, Pootie.

    »crosslinked«

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. JennieBrooksPetersen

      @Barton Well said Barton!

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. DarrellRoss

      @Barton

      Your straw-man argument holds no water. We are not talking about murdering 6-month olds. We are not talking about murdering 4-year olds. We are not talking about murdering 10-year olds. In fact, we are not really talking about murder. We are talking about freedom.

      You imply that anyone who is pro-freedom is not against murder. Like many pro-life folks, you make the mistake of describing what pro-choice people think and then ridiculing them for it. We are also against murder. But this is about women having freedom.

      You keep trying to twist the argument into one about abortion. It isn’t. It’s about choice. You are committing the classic crime of treating the symptom instead of the problem. I think that from your perspective, the real problem is that women are choosing to abort. If this is a problem, then in this FREE society we live in, you should endeavor to convince the women not to abort. In your callousness, you prefer to simply make the action of aborting illegal. Not only will this not solve your problem (because people will still abort), it will create a new problem by criminalizing women.

      Instead, why not work on solving the problem?! I have listed it several times but it bears mentioning again:

      1. Proactively: prevent unwanted pregnancies.

      Educate women on contraceptives. Educate men on contraceptives (thank you someone for pointing out we should be doing both!). Educate both men and women on sex and what it leads to. Do this as early as possible.

      2. Reactively: support women who have an unwanted pregnancy.

      Provide ample support networks for food, clothing, education, and anything else they might need.

      The above proactive and reactive strategies *WILL* reduce the number of abortions. Your head-in-the-sand attempt to take away freedoms will not.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. JennieBrooksPetersen

        @DarrellRoss@Barton Darrell Ross, you act as if pro-lifers are shoving their opinions down your throat. Are you not doing the same? You are passionate about your stance, just as pro-lifers are about their stance. You are basically saying it is wrong to state your opinion, unless they agree with your way? Come on now. And how do you come to the conclusion that this is not about abortion? It is about abortion, and choice. Someone is passionately arguing about why they think abortion is murdering an unborn child and you tell them the argument is not even about abortion? Your argument is arguing choice, pro-lifers is arguing no abortions. How is that not about abortion? Besides, you are under the abortion section on this site, so……

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      2. DarrellRoss

        @JennieBrooksPetersen

        Ah. Again with the telling me what I think.

        I did not say that it is wrong to state your opinion.

        I have described several times how this is not about abortion. I stated very clearly what the problem is along with some strategies to treat the problem.

        Pro-life Evaluation of the situation (as often seen from my perspective):

        PROBLEM: Unwanted Pregnancies.

        SYMPTOM: Pregnancies are aborted. (murder in your words)

        SOLUTION: Outlaw the symptom.

        How does this solve anything? It doesn’t! It is fairly common for people in this country to see a symptom and instead of tracing it to the problem and treating the problem, they treat the symptom which fixes nothing.

        A few examples for you:

        1. Symptom: talking on the phone causes car accidents. Treatment for symptom: outlaw it.

        Root Cause: distraction while driving.

        Real Solution: educating the populace to pay attention while driving.

        2. Symptom: kids die while doing dangerous work on farm.

        Treatment for symptom: outlaw it.

        Root Cause: lack of safety and education about danger of job.

        Real Solution: educating the public on safety awareness.

        So…

        Symptom: pregnancies are aborted.

        Treatment for symptom: outlaw abortion.

        Root Cause: Unwanted Pregnancies.

        Real Solution: education to prevent unwanted pregnancies and support for those who do get them.

        Outlawing it is *not* the solution. Pretending it is is like being blind. This is a pretty sound argument. You continuing to gripe about it being “murder” doesn’t disprove the fact that you want to treat the symptom instead of the problem.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      3. jennyv

        @DarrellRoss @JennieBrooksPetersen.
        I can’t believe and understand how you think its perfectly ok to tell me I cant have an abortion (despite the circumstances) . It’dpa be like me (who’s opposed to guns) to tell u u shouldn’t have a gun… its your choice, yourhome, your life. Its unconstitutional to tell you otherwise. Now, back to abortion. So, since we are saying women should be penalized for abortion as if she killed a 10 year old… are we also charging men since its their sperm? Or men (who more often than not are prochoice) who agree with the woman’s choice for an abortion to be charged with accessory to murder? In that case, are 10,000 more jails going to be build for these people with your tax moneyBecause currently, were struggling to find room for criminals.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      4. jennyv

        Also, calling these women murderer’s is dramatic. A fetus at 12 weeks has no functioning organs nor has the brain developed. It relies 100 percent on the women holding it in her womb to eat right and take care of her body in order to develop into a baby. A baby born before 12 weeks will not survive outside the womb. Althought, discussing murder or not is a moot point. I’m all for lowering abortion rates, through educating on contraceptives NOT ridding the united stated of abortion.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      5. Ryan Woods

        @DarrellRoss@Barton I have to say that this is wrong. It is not about choice at all. It is simply about ending a life. There is more and more evidence coming out that fetuses start learning about the outside world earlier and earlier… What does this mean? I believe that it means that they are alive. Just because you can’t survive outside the womb, what if you were only able to survive on a life support machine. Does this mean that you aren’t alive? They are learning, absorbing nutrients, and developing/growing in size. Unless you get an abortion very early on, (I think that the first two weeks is a sufficient amount of time), that you should be barred by your local state govt from getting one. I think that the federal govt should have no say in the matter.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      6. Barton

        @DarrellRoss@JennieBrooksPetersen I think Darrell is trying to solve a problem that I’m not concerned with. I’m not concerned with unwanted pregnancies. People are always going to have unwanted pregnancies. Instead of spending tax dollars on helping people murder one another. I’d like to, as long as I’m being forced to spend the money, spend the money on life and finding ways to safe life. Why not take the baby and put it in another woman, or a machine. Okay, agreed, that’s a can of worms. What if people went around stealing babies from people? Yuck. Alright, so what are we talking about? With all the confusion… Oh yes, I’m talking about abortion being murder, and that murder is not the way to solve an unwanted pregnancy. Just because you made a mistake, or a condom didn’t work, it doesn’t give you the right to murder another human being. The gray area here is figuring out when a human is a human, and it’s gotta be earlier than 24 weeks. And by the way, what’s the difference between and unwanted pregnancy and an unwanted child? A couple weeks? A month? Some oxygen? I’m not understanding why someone thinks it’s alright to kill a living human being.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      7. DarrellRoss

        @Barton@JennieBrooksPetersen

        Wait… let’s look at something:

        A: Unwanted pregnancies lead to abortions.

        B: You are against abortions.

        And yet you claim you are unconcerned with unwanted pregnancies? WTF is up with that?

        If you reduce unwanted pregnancies, you reduce abortions. Pretty simple. Some of you have stated that you are aware that making abortions illegal will not stop them.

        It is a pretty clear fact that reducing unwanted pregnancies would stop abortions. Kind of hard to abort if there isn’t anything there.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      8. Barton

        @DarrellRoss@JennieBrooksPetersen Again, I’m not talking about unwanted pregnancies as something I’m trying to find a solution for. Some people may be, you are obviously, but I am not. People are always going to come into the situation where they have a baby that they do not want. People change their minds on what pair of jeans they’re going to wear each night. People have their own opinions, and opinions change. Right? Look, at this:

        Symptom: Someone gets mad at someone else and kills them

        Root cause: Not valuing life enough

        Solution: We really haven’t found a solution since people still commit murder everyday.

        My point? I’m against murder, and I feel abortion is murder (for the most part, again, gray areas there).

        Problem: People think it’s an issue of choice, or it’s an issue of unwanted pregnancies.

        Symptom: People are given choice and babies are murdered

        Solution: Persistence. Reiterating that murder is murder and that life should be valued.

        What else? This is an abortion page right? Create an unwanted pregnancies page and I’ll come up with some solutions to help with your problem, Darrell.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      9. DarrellRoss

        @Barton@JennieBrooksPetersen

        Nice! I like that you tried to use the simple statement form. But the idea is to keep it simple.

        Your attempt reads like this:

        Problem: people disagree with me.

        Symptom: people have a right to disagree with me.

        Solution: repeat my opinion over and over.

        On the gray area – it is very important that laws be as easy to interpret as possible. Gray-area laws are not good.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      10. Barton

        @DarrellRoss@JennieBrooksPetersen How do you think ugly guys get pretty girls? They keep at it and eventually win the girl over. In this case, I’ll just reiterate that murder is bad, and that I’m not talking about choice. I’m talking about murder, and murder being bad, mmkay? And I’m not saying the laws are gray or that they should be gray, I’m saying it’s still kind of gray on when a baby is baby. I’m not exactly sure because I’m not a doctor. But from all the pictures I’ve seen of abortions, they look like babies to me. At the very least, we’ve outlawed murder, right? So what we need to do is figure out when abortion is murder, and outlaw it at that point. And then of course we can start you up a page about unwanted pregnancies and come up with some solutions to that.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      11. DarrellRoss

        @Barton@JennieBrooksPetersen

        Yes you keep harping on murder. I also think murder is bad.

        Just like I think I should be able to control what goes on with my own body. Do you think you should get to control that?

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      12. DarrellRoss

        @Ryan Woods@Barton

        You cannot claim it is not about choice. You are choosing the fetus over the mother hands-down every time and then claiming it is not about choice.

        Are there any circumstances under which you would permit abortion? Rape? Possible danger of the mother dieing?

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      13. DarrellRoss

        @Ryan Woods@Barton

        You cannot claim this is not about choice. You are choosing the fetus over the mother every time.

        Are there any instances in which you would choose the mother? Rape? What if the mother’s life were in danger?

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      14. Ryan Woods

        @DarrellRoss@Barton We do not give people the right, in this country, to murder other human beings. Under no circumstances, unless the mother would die, should there be an abortion. Don’t try to twist my words around. This is very straight forward. You may not murder someone else unless it is shown that they will kill you (in which case, it is self defense if it is at your home). This applies to the fetus as well. If you do not want this child, give him up for adoption. That is the way it should be done. Just because you created something doesn’t mean that you have the right to destroy it! The choice issue is a joke. Since when has it been a rightful ability to choose to murder someone? I hope that answers both of your questions.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      15. DarrellRoss

        @Ryan Woods@Barton

        “Under no circumstances, unless the mother would die”

        You state there are “no circumstances” and then immediately provide one which allows for it. It is not straight-forward. I am not twisting your words. This is a complex issue.

        Ok so the mother does not have the right to refuse the use of her womb to the fetus. Does the fetus then have the right to use the womb without the mother’s permission? It seems to me that this affords the fetus more rights than the mother.

        Support that both the mother and fetus have a right to life. Does the right to life necessarily guarantee the fetus the right to be allowed continued use of another person’s body?

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      16. Ryan Woods

        @DarrellRoss@Barton That is a twisting of my words. I knew you would… *facepalm*. It is very common to say there are non except to mean that the only ones allowed are… This is English. If you don’t have a grasp of it, don’t debate in it. The baby has every right to use the mother’s body to grow. The mother must bear this and unless her life is at risk, give birth to this child. I don’t understand why you believe that a fetus is worthless and should be destroyed (both points are under the following circumstance) if the mother says so… This goes back to my point: Just because you create something does not give you the right to destroy it.

        This is the last time I will talk to you about it. I have clearly stated my beliefs. Your only response is to twist my words and you have no point to stand on. Good bye. I won’t allow you to troll me any further.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      17. DarrellRoss

        @Ryan Woods@Barton

        You are arguing that the fetus has more rights than the mother. The mother does not have the right to refuse the use of her body by the fetus.

        I am not twisting your words. I am offering valid argument. If you choose to flee from such, so be it.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. giliardantunes
  6. masopotamia

    I agree with about half of these. Unfortunately, it’s the moronic “abortion pledge” which will do him the most damage. Too bad he has let a wedge issue like abortion distract from the urgency of his message.

    Abortion is an issue best left to a woman and her doctor, not the meddling of theocratic politicians.

    http://www.elephantjournal.com/2011/12/20-reasons-i-wont-vote-for-ron-paul/

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. theplentysense

    I just wish SOMEONE would berate all the men and women that have sex without contraceptives. Worrying about abortion is a bit late. Nowhere and nobody takes aim at the men who push for unprotected sex with women they don’t care about and are not committed to. Every singe unwanted pregnancy was fertilized by a MAN who DOESN’T TAKE RESPONSIBILITY for his SPERM. This has to CHANGE. Contraceptives need to be free for men AND women.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. JennieBrooksPetersen

      @theplentysense LOL….the poor, pitiful woman who couldn’t speak up for herself and tell him to use protection. Brains….they come in handy sometimes! Just because the woman doesn’t want to offend her partner by asking him to use something, doesn’t mean an unwanted pregnancy is his fault. She is EQUALLY responsible. Part of being a grown up is making responsible choices.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. giliardantunes

    (…)the spirit is coupled to the physical body only when the newly-born takes the first breath of vivifying air; after waiting for this moment to reincarnate throughout the pregnancy, the spirit takes possession of the body at the exact moment when the child fills the lungs with air for the first time.(…)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. giliardantunes

      “If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief [damage] follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief [damage] follow, then you shall give life for life, Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.”

      Exodus 21:22-25

      “There is a spirit [Hebrew, ruach, breath] in man: and the inspiration [breathing in] of the Almighty gives them understanding. … The spirit [Hebrew, ruach, breath] of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty has given me life.”

      Job 32:8 and 33:4

      “Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was [before your birth]: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.”

      Ecclesiastes 12:7

      http://www.askelm.com/doctrine/d050201.htm

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. giliardantunes

      By God’s own desire and design human beings born today don’t breathe the breath of life through their nostrils until they’re born.

      http://www.lifeandlibertyforwomen.org/issues/issues_god_bible_abortion.html

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  9. giliardantunes

    (…)the spirit is coupled to the physical body only when the newly-born takes the first breath of vivifying air; after waiting for this moment to reincarnate throughout the pregnancy, the spirit takes possession of the body at the exact moment when the child fills the lungs with air for the first time.(…)

    Brazilian law works like this:

    (…)Onde o nascimento com vida caracteriza-se pelo ato do nascituro RESPIRAR.(…)

    (…)Where live birth is characterized by the act of the unborn BREATHING .(…)

    In Brazil we do not say: “Estado Secular”.

    Here in Brazil we say: “Estado Laico”.

    “Laico” means the people, the peaple of the God of Abraham.

    Within our state. The priests did not have political power.

    Our people are a people legally NOT ATHEIST.

    Secular state, does not censor the churches, and does not prevent fights between priests:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpPwWEsk0OY

    hehehehe Fights are normal.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. PCUK

    A women has the right to choose whether she kills HERSELF or not, not any other living being.

    The act of sex has a function, namely to produce children, if people are to use sex simply for gratification they must ensure at all costs to avoid creating a new life (if they don’t intend to create one)

    We as humans must strive to eradicate the taking of innocent lives whether through war, abortion or murder. This must be the progressive objective for current and future civilisation.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Borsia

      @PCUK

      Sex is now, and has been throughout history, recreational.

      Only in the twisted eyes of some religions, that aren’t shared by many, is sex only for reproduction.

      Sex is both enjoyable and healthy and science has proven that people who have a good sex life are happier and healthier, regardless of whether they have children.

      If you believe that and want to be celibate have, or don’t have, at it. Don’t try to push your sick concepts of sex on the rest of us; we don’t really care what you think about it!

      If that is what you want to believe you are welcome to it, nobody is going to try and force you to have an abortion,,, yet.

      As the world continues to overpopulate beyond this planet’s capacity more and more countries will be forced to go the way of China with a 1 child, or even no child, policies.

      Assuming that mankind doesn’t self destruct or get ravaged by some great plague to cull our numbers a day when having a child will be a luxury.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. DarrellRoss

        @Borsia@PCUK

        I believe Stephen Hawking recently stated that it is imperative that we colonize other planets. We need to get off this rock before the lunatics kill us all.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. skralogy

      @PCUK Yes your right we must prevent creating life if we don’t intend to keep it. that is why my friend used a condom and took plan B. both are contraceptives that are over 95% effective. she is still pregnant, the world doesn’t work out that easily. now I never said she got an abortion in fact she is keeping it. which will put a huge burden on her, her family, her friends and especially the child. Why did she want to keep it? because of the stigma and ridicule that pro lifers put on women who choose abortion. If it is inside of your body it is simply cells dividing, once it has a heart beat than it is living. end of discussion

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    3. jax.uzpen

      @PCUK Sure, but does she lose the right to kill herself, starve herself or otherwise hurt herself when she becomes pregnant? Because, you know, kill the woman, kill everything inside of her. And what happens if the woman doesn’t eat? The baby DIES. Does that give the government the right to force-feed her to prevent the loss of that fetus?

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  11. skralogy

    My friend just got pregnant, she is 24, unemployed, living at home. her family is too poor to afford to raise this kid and have no health care. the living conditions are too small and unsanitary. the father is not in contact as he got a job out of state and cant be found. I believe that as a person in america, you have the right to your life. If you are conceiving a life you have a right to that as well and you should be able to choose what is in the best interest of that life and yours. clearly this example shows that raising a child under these conditions would be wrong and not good for the child or mother. if abortion was banned, it would be forcing women to give up their dreams to take care of a child they have no means to do. this is dangerous for the children and raising children like this is far more dangerous to the mother, child and society.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. giliardantunes

    FAST GOOGLE SEARCH:

    Oct 23, 2008

    forum: topix.com

    user: ell bell

    (…)no its very illegal. once a child takes its first breath its considered a person… no presidentat canidate can hange that. obama cant make laws yet so idk what that guys talkin about .. but no its not legal…its jsut as illegal as watching someone drown or watching sumone choke to death and not doing anything about it. girls who give brith and throw their babies out in the trash are prosecuted as murderers(…)

    http://www.topix.com/forum/news/sex/TBE21IIBVB6GSH22V

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  13. RightHereRightNow

    i would vote for Ron Paul but i do disagree with the no abortion i do not believe it should be used as a form of birth control as some woman do having multiple abortions. We have to realize though that there is some instances where it should be allowed in cases of rape and and when it is rape by incest, a woman should then have a choice but only in these situations. The window of time in which an abortion can be performed is what needs to be changed woman are having them to late in a pregnancy it should be within at least 8wks.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. micka

      @RightHereRightNow

      agreed

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. saramic

      @RightHereRightNow I agree in principal that it is preferable to have the abortion within the first 8 weeks, but the reality is that that isn’t possible for most women. I volunteered for awhile in the abortion recovery room at planned parenthood where I helped the nurses out with basic after care things and also picked up a lot of information. It is not possible to have an abortion before 6 weeks because the embryo (it is not considered a fetus until it reaches 8 weeks) is not large enough to be seen and found inside the uterus. Even at 6 weeks it is not advised, because the embryo is still very small and poses a higher risk of complications. Abortions performed prior to 8 weeks require more followup appointments to make sure that no tissue was left behind in the uterus, which would cause infection. In addition, most women do not know they are pregnant until 6-9 weeks, because they have to miss a period or two. And sometimes it does take missing more than 1 period because it is very common for women to have one lighter-than-usual period after becoming pregnant (and many women’s periods vary in heaviness from month to month so this wouldn’t be cause for alarm for a lot of women). Then there are a couple of health checkups and a blood test that are required before an abortion can be performed, and if you don’t live in a big city with a lot of resources, then abortions aren’t performed that often. The planned parenthood I worked at only had the funding to perform them every other thursday. The only other facility offering abortions in my town was Kaiser Permanente, an HMO that has it’s own medical facilities and staff, which you can only use if you are a member. So, say you realize you’re pregnant at 8 weeks, it can be 2-3 weeks longer before you can actually have your abortion. The majority of women who came into the clinic were between 8-10 weeks along, but I can’t say it didn’t bother me when the occasional woman would come in who was 12-14 weeks along. But, I don’t know what her circumstances are, so I tried not to judge.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. giliardantunes

        @saramic@RightHereRightNow

        Please, now, you look up, here at this same site, and you will see written as:

        (…)Ron Paul stated, “It was pretty dramatic for me to see a two-and-a-half-pound baby taken out crying and breathing and put in a bucket.”(…)

        You should know, once a child takes its first breath (SPIRIT) its considered a person. Murder is murder, do not make matter pro-choice or pro-life. Murder is murder. Ron Paul is a very brave doctor, unfortunately I did not vote, can not vote for him. I think positive here in Brazil.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        1. Borsia

          @giliardantunes@saramic@RightHereRightNow

          Less than 1% of abortions are after the 21st week, late term is defined as 24 weeks.

          The vast majority are before 18 weeks and most occur as soon as the woman realizes she is pregnant.

          This whole thing about crying children being ripped out and thrown in buckets is nothing more than sympathy mongering.

          Perhaps in that insentience it happened, I would never call Dr. Paul a liar, but the picture of buckets filled with live unwanted infants gasping for life is BS.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  14. micka

    I, too, have delivered babies, and I have these questions as a resullt of my experiences. How does Dr. Paul deal with the pregnancy that threatens the mother’s life? Is it better to maintain the fetus life, or save the mother? What of that mother’s other children? Do we consider the effect on the whole family? What about the pregnancy that is clearly non-viable, like the fetus with no head?How does Dr. Paul handle those issues? I do not believe in abortion as a means of birth control, but I have seen a 10 year old pregnant rape victim, and wondered how we can allow this child to bear the burden of the rape. Is that morally correct? This is not such a clear issue, folks. Try asking yourself if you are willing to adopt and spend the rest of your life caring for the child born with severly disabling birth defects. If you can’t take that step, do you have the right to tell a mother that she must do so?

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Barton

      @micka You know how if someone comes into your house or your property or threatens your life, you know how you’re allowed to shoot them, and in some states, kill them? You’re not allowed to murder, but you’re allowed to protect yourself. I’m not sure about Ron Paul’s stance on this, and you know what, his stance doesn’t matter because he’s running for PRESIDENT. He’s clearly stated that this is a states rights issue and that it’s not up to the PRESIDENT to decide these things. So, that being said, you’re still allowed to vote for Ron Paul, even if you’re pro-abortion. Now back to what I was talking about. Alright, just like you can’t murder someone, and you’re allowed to protect your own life (some religions even say you can abort a rape), you should be allowed to abort should your life be in danger. I’m pretty sure this is what a lot of pro-lifers say. Agreed, it’s not a black and white topic; there are gray areas.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. micka

        @Barton

        Yep.I’m voting for Dr. Paul anyway. I believe that he has the best interest of the citizenry at heart, not his own pocket. I live in AZ and do have some serious doubts about how justly this state will do things given its history of abusing the poor, the ill and anyone with brown skin, but better to fight the battle locally than try to deal with a federal program.

        FYI, for those supporting the immigration law, did you know that 82 US citizens have been arrested and held here in Arizona for up to a year because they didn’t have a passport or birth certifcate with them? Look it up. It’s true.Not so great a law after all, eh?We need immigration reform, not repressive laws targeting anyone who “looks Mexican”. In my neighborhood, the illegals we know about are German, Japanese and Irish. Needless to say, nobody bothers them. Sick!

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      2. Borsia

        @Barton@micka

        He has also talked about revising the Constitution or its interpretation to reverse R v W.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  15. giliardantunes

    344. At what moment is the soul united to the body?

    “The union begins at the moment of conception, but is only complete at the moment of birth (FIRST BREATH). From the moment of conception, the spirit designated to inhabit a given body is united to that body by a fluidic link, which becomes closer and closer up to the instant of birth; the cry then uttered by the infant announces that he is numbered among the living.”

    (REMEMBER THAT, AMNIOTIC FLUID DO NOT ALLOW TO CRY)

    351. Does a spirit, in the interval between conception and birth, enjoy the use of all his faculties?

    “He does so more or less according to the various periods of gestation; for he IS NOT YET INCARNATED in his new body, but only attached to it. From the instant of conception confusion begins to take possession of the spirit, who is thus made aware that the moment has come for him to enter upon a new existence; and this confusion becomes more and more dense until the period of birth. In the interval between these two terms, his state is nearly that of an incarnated spirit during the sleep of the body. In proportions as the moment of birth approaches, his ideas become effaced, together with his remembrance of the past, of which, when once he has entered upon corporeal life, he is no longer conscious. But this remembrance comes back to him little by little when he has returned to the spirit-world.”

    353. The union of the spirit and the body not being completely and definitively consummated until birth (FIRST BREATH) has taken place can the fetus be considered as having a soul?

    “The spirit who is to animate it exists, as it were, OUTSIDE OF IT; strictly speaking, therefore, it has no soul, since the incarnation of the latter is only in course of being effected; but it is linked to the soul which it is to have.”

    359. In cases in which the life of the mother would be endangered by the birth of the child, is it a crime to sacrifice the child in order to save the mother?

    “It is better to sacrifice the being whose existence is not yet complete than the being whose existence is complete.”

    (COMPLETE EXISTENCE IS FLESH+SPIRIT, JOHN CAPTER 3, 6 “(…)That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.(…)”)

    http://www.spiritwritings.com/kardecspiritsbook2chapt7.html#Union

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. giliardantunes

      GOD of Abraham bless Brazil.
      :-D

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. Borsia

        @giliardantunes Perhaps you would like to live in the slums of Brazil or one of the other South American countries?

        I have lived in SA and it isn’t pretty when you are in the poor areas. The number one reason that the people there stay dirt poor and barely hanging on is too many children and children with problems.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        1. carrie1108

          You’ve got to be kidding me. The number one reason people stay dirt poor there is because of imperialism, colonization, NAFTA, etc. And the effects of being left to dry once the colonizers have exploited and polluted all the resources. Too many babies doesn’t help, but it isn’t the cause.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  16. jennyv

    Pro-lifers. Have any of you worked in social services? !?!?! I have. For 8 years now
    . I’ve worked with thosands and and thousands of children unwanted by their parents…..lost in the Foster care system….. thousands of children in the juvenile jails…..unvisited and unwanted by their parents. This will quadruple if women are forced to have babies they dont want. Wake up. There arent nearly as many people adopting than having babies they are giving up. If a woman makes a choice to abort …… what concern is that of yours? Does that effect your life and happines??? Last i checked it only effected that womanns life and happiness. … keep your laws off my body.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. giliardantunes

      @jennyv Qual a diferença entre um adulto e uma criança? If uma criança tem sopro de vida, é um ser humano completo, igual a mim, igual a todos vocês.

      What is the difference between an adult and a child? If a child has the breath of life, is a complete human being, like me, like all of you.

      jennyv , you are more a communist psychopath, I despise you, despise and ignore its subversion.

      Tomas Schuman (Yuri Bezmenov) – Legendado

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3td97vgQaMA

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. giliardantunes

      @jennyv

      Qual a diferença entre um adulto e uma criança? Se uma criança tem sopro de vida, é um ser humano completo, igual a mim, igual a todos vocês.

      What is the difference between an adult and a child? If a child has the breath of life, is a complete human being, like me, like all of you.

      jennyv , you are more a communist psychopath. I despise you, despise and ignore your subversion.

      Tomas Schuman (Yuri Bezmenov) – Legendado

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3td97vgQaMA

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. WendyDavis

        @giliardantunes @jennyv My mother, born in 1931 after her mother was raped, spent most of her childhood in an orphanage. Her birth mother came for her eventually. Then she was moved from family to family, with a suitcase and ill fitting cloths. Mental illness was hid well but it was there, maybe a survival technique. Her children she revealed it to. I believe my mother being conceived in anger and developed in utero tainted with repulsion gave my mother a character trait called meanness. She would attempt to ruin people if you upset her, their reputation in town. Lies. Her family avoided her for 45 years. I really think there are worse things than death. I am sorry.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        1. JennieBrooksPetersen

          @WendyDavis That’s not the case of every rape, and though it sounds like your mother lead a sad life, you have no idea if she would’ve had the same behaviors had she been conceived differently. I know a man who was born because his mother was raped. He is a totally normal, happy married father of two children. So, the defense of aborting the baby because it will have mental issues is not fair to the unborn child. Just my opinion.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        2. jennyv

          @WendyDavis
          im very sorry for how things have turned out for u. I see kids in the jail I work at everyday. Not necessarily because of rape… but for some reason …. they are unwanted by their parents which, 85% of the time, leads to crime, poverty and more unwanted pregnancies. THIS is why women want choice. Some women might choose to keep the baby,and more power to them. RAPE is a violent,degrading,demoralizing act of forcing penetration upon someone that is unwilling. Those of you who can sit and say women should be forced to have babies when they were forced to accept that seed was obviously never raped if you think women can just ignore the emotional and psychological damage and accept the pregnancy with open arms are absolutely insane.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      2. Borsia

        @giliardantunes@jennyv

        Abortion is legal in Brazil if it threatens the life of the mother or is conceived as a result of rape or incest.

        Of course the wackos of the Catholic Church are against it but their main goal is to keep the people poor and uneducated. “Better to get pennies from paupers than risk knowledge and ultimate irrelevance”.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

      3. carrie1108

        You didn’t answer the question, nor did you respond in any way to her logic.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        1. carrie1108

          I don’t know why the above post shows here – I wasn’t responding to your post, Borsia. My apologies for any confusion. I was responding to something the Brazilian man stated.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  17. saramic

    You’re right. I really really like Carl Sagan’s analysis of the abortion issue-it’s the most thorough, analytical, educated, and unbiased analysis I’ve ever read. I think everyone should ready it before they even get to discuss the issue. He very thoroughly analyzes the root of the issue just like you’re talking about. Here’s a link:

    http://www.2think.org/abortion.shtml

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  18. giliardantunes

    “(…)I reiterate once more that the spirit is coupled to the physical body only when the newly-born takes the first breath of vivifying air; after waiting for this moment to reincarnate throughout the pregnancy, the spirit takes possession of the body at the exact moment when the child fills the lungs with air for the first time.(…)” http://www.inricristo.org.br/index.php/en/theological-enigmas/329-inri-cristo-abortion“By God’s own desire and design human beings born today don’t breathe the breath of life through their nostrils until they’re born.” http://www.lifeandlibertyforwomen.org/issues/issues_god_bible_abortion.html“And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” http://www.askelm.com/doctrine/d050201.htm

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. DarrellRoss

      @giliardantunes

      Bringing any god into an argument about law in a secular nation is silly. I kindly direct you to read about the separation of church and state which we enjoy in this secular country. There are some fun quotes by the founding fathers available at this site: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ed_buckner/quotations.html. The results of these quotes are evident in the design of our government.

      What do you make of women’s rights to decide what happens to their own bodies?

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. giliardantunes

        @DarrellRoss Secular State is not atheist state. It is not possible to build a state that is Atheist. The beginning and end of the personhood status, depends on the prophets of the God of Abraham.

        Look Brailian laws (use the google translator, portuguese to english):

        “O artigo 2º do Código Civil dita que a personalidade civil da pessoa começa com o nascimento com vida; mas a lei põe a salvo, desde a concepção, os direitos do nascituro (pessoa por nascer, já concebida no útero materno). Onde o nascimento com vida caracteriza-se pelo ato do nascituro RESPIRAR.”

        Junior, N. N.; Nery, R. M. A. Código Civil Anotado e Legislação Extravagante. Editora Revista dos Tribunais. 2 ed. São Paulo. 2003. pp. 8-9.

        http://jus.uol.com.br/revista/texto/6462/inicio-da-vida-humana-e-da-personalidade-juridica

        “Dispõe o artigo 2º do Código Civil Brasileiro: “A personalidade civil da pessoa começa do nascimento com vida; mas a lei põe a salvo, desde a concepção, os direitos do nascituro”. Nascer com vida significa RESPIRAR, ou seja, o tempo de vida não seria relevante á tutela dos seus direitos, com isso constituí-se legítimo sucessor de direitos hereditários de quem de direito, direitos então pessoalíssimos. Por outro lado, se houve dúvida se a criança nasceu com vida, ou seja, se a criança RESPIROU, deve ser efetuado o exame pericial para que seja comprovada tal circunstância. Portanto, se a criança já tenha nascida morta, nesse caso não adquiriu personalidade jurídica. ”

        http://www.jurisway.org.br/v2/dhall.asp?id_dh=593

        RESPIRAR / RESPIROU is the first breath.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      2. giliardantunes

        @DarrellRoss

        Secular State is not atheist state. It is not possible to build a state that is Atheist. The beginning and end of the personhood status, depends on the prophets of the God of Abraham.

        Look Brazilian laws (use the google translator, portuguese to english):

        “O artigo 2º do Código Civil dita que a personalidade civil da pessoa começa com o nascimento com vida; mas a lei põe a salvo, desde a concepção, os direitos do nascituro (pessoa por nascer, já concebida no útero materno). Onde o nascimento com vida caracteriza-se pelo ato do nascituro RESPIRAR.”

        Junior, N. N.; Nery, R. M. A. Código Civil Anotado e Legislação Extravagante. Editora Revista dos Tribunais. 2 ed. São Paulo. 2003. pp. 8-9.

        http://jus.uol.com.br/revista/texto/6462/inicio-da-vida-humana-e-da-personalidade-juridica

        “Dispõe o artigo 2º do Código Civil Brasileiro: “A personalidade civil da pessoa começa do nascimento com vida; mas a lei põe a salvo, desde a concepção, os direitos do nascituro”. Nascer com vida significa RESPIRAR, ou seja, o tempo de vida não seria relevante á tutela dos seus direitos, com isso constituí-se legítimo sucessor de direitos hereditários de quem de direito, direitos então pessoalíssimos. Por outro lado, se houve dúvida se a criança nasceu com vida, ou seja, se a criança RESPIROU, deve ser efetuado o exame pericial para que seja comprovada tal circunstância. Portanto, se a criança já tenha nascida morta, nesse caso não adquiriu personalidade jurídica. ”

        http://www.jurisway.org.br/v2/dhall.asp?id_dh=593

        RESPIRAR / RESPIROU is the first breath.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        1. giliardantunes

          @DarrellRoss God of Abraham bless Brazil.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        2. DarrellRoss

          @giliardantunes

          You did not answer my question.

          Do you believe a woman should have the right to decide what goes on with her body? Criminalizing abortion removes that right. Criminalizing most things are NOT effective solutions. We need to address the cause of the problem, not punish those who suffer from it.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        3. Borsia

          @giliardantunes@DarrellRoss

          If you ever walked the slums of Brazil you would think god damned Brazil.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. carrie1108

      @giliardantunes All of your posts are concerning a god that billions of people don’t believe in, nor will they tolerate being forced to live under that god’s dogma.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  19. JennieBrooksPetersen

    I don’t understand the thinking behind those of you who say “I am not pro-abortion, I am pro-choice” and think a woman should be able to have one for whatever reason she deems necessary. In my opinion, when you say it like this, sounds like you know that it’s wrong, and you don’t want to admit it. If you think a woman should be able to abort her unborn baby, for whatever reason, then you are pro-abortion. You are for her getting rid of the baby, because she can. How is that not pro-abortion? You can argue that she doesn’t really want to do it, she’s financially strapped…blah blah blah, but either way you look at it, you are for abortion if you agree that she should be able to abort it!

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. DarrellRoss

      @JennieBrooksPetersen

      Good question. It can appear like I am pro-abortion while in fact, I am fighting for women to have the right to choose. If abortion is their decision, then it’s their decision. It’s not mine. It’s not yours. It’s not up to the government. It is up to them.

      So what we should be doing is working together to address the leading cause of abortions which I think is unwanted pregnancies. There are two primary areas we can work to address unwanted pregnancies:

      1. Education of women about contraceptives and how to keep from getting pregnant. We can also work to make contraceptives readily available.

      2. Providing sources for women who do have an unwanted pregnancy. This includes paying their medical bills, making sure they get taken care of, making sure that, whatever THEIR DECISION is, we support them and work to make the experience as easy as possible.

      So, while I do not want to see more abortions, I don’t want them outlawed. If I use your logic and apply it to other issues in our society, here are some examples of the results. The following arguments are *not* my viewpoints. I’m just using them as an example:

      – Talking on the cell phone in a car leads to accidents. Let’s outlaw that. The fact is that distraction is what is dangerous. We should not outlaw distractions but instead educate people on driving safely. Just because I want people to have the option to talk on their cell phone does not mean I want more accidents.

      – Obama is working to outlaw anyone under the age of 18 working on a farm. This is crazy. He is doing it in the name of safety. Instead of criminalizing people, we should work on safety awareness around the farm. Criminalizing it will do nothing to prevent the deaths of those who don’t follow the law and/or are unaware of the hazards.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. jennyv

        @DarrellRoss @JennieBrooksPetersen
        Well said d.Ross…… choosing abortion,adoption or keeping ababy is never easy when its unplanned. Making abortion illegal Is saying women aren’t intelligent enough to decide
        their own futures.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        1. JennieBrooksPetersen

          @jennyv@DarrellRoss I just don’t think women should be able to end the life of a unborn baby! I think it’s a joke that so many women don’t plan it, so they get an abortion. Don’t have sex if you cannot see yourself being pregnant or giving the baby up for adoption. I don’t care that the woman is making the most difficult decision of her life by having the abortion, I care about the life she created when she decided to have sex and then just snuffs out that little life.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        2. saramic

          @JennieBrooksPetersen@jennyv@DarrellRoss It’s not realistic to expect every person who does not want children to simply abstain from sex. This hasn’t worked in any civilization at any time in history. People have a driving need for sex and human intimacy. They will seek it out no matter how badly they may want to avoid it. That’s why there are gay people having sexual relationships with other gay people in countries where being gay is a felony that could get you executed. It’s why there are teenagers getting pregnant, and single devoutly religious women who don’t believe in premarital sex getting pregnant. It’s why Tibetan religious officials, who are prohibited from engaging in penetrative sex, are openly allowed to utilize Drombos (passive male sexual partners who perform non-penetrative sexual acts-for reference, read this fascinating article: http://gaytibet.blogspot.com/2009/08/homosexuality-marriage-and-religion-in.html). The expectation of celibacy was doable when people were married by the age of 18 (or younger) and everyone was expected to have children (and even then there were fairly rampant violations of these expectations). But nowadays, can we really expect a person who wants to finish college, maybe even grad school, and get started in their career before having children supposed to remain celibate this whole time? That person will be in their late 20′s at minimum before they’ve accomplished their goals. What about someone who never wants children? A woman who has a demanding and time consuming career that she’s passionate about, and never wants children, should she be expected to live a life of celibacy? I’m not saying that there aren’t individuals out there who have successfully lived celibate lives, but history and statistics tell us that it’s not an expectation that is possible for the majority of humanity.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        3. DarrellRoss

          @JennieBrooksPetersen@jennyv

          The truth comes out. You don’t care about the woman at all. You don’t care about her situation. I get that now.

          See, many pro-life people like to claim that they want to outlaw abortion because they care about the unborn babies. But their strategies belie a different reason. Check out this article: http://www.amptoons.com/blog/2006/03/21/why-its-difficult-to-believe-that-anti-choicers-mean-what-they-say/.

          If you want to reduce abortions, by all means:

          1. Promote education of young women and push contraceptives hard.

          2. Provide all the support that a woman could possibly need so that she would not want to abort.

          Instead, pro-lifers want to:

          1. Tell women what to do with their own bodies.

          2. Defund Planned Parenthood.

          3. Bomb clinics.

          4. Criminalize people.

          Now do you understand why pro-choice folks often find pro-lifer to be insincere? You just stated that women should be punished for having sex. What is wrong with sex? That is sexist by the way. The women are forced to have babies while the men get to have all the sex they want? No way! Everyone should simply be aware of the possibilities, use contraceptives, and have all the sex they want.

          Or we could throw them in prison?! Great idea! /sarcasm

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        4. JennieBrooksPetersen

          Well believe me, pro-lifers find pro-choicers insincere as well. Nothing is wrong with having sex. Killing what you created, a human life, from that act is what is wrong. I don’t care if you think I am sexist. You act like the womans life is over and she is doomed over it, and the only way for her to have her life go on is to have an abortion. And as for men not having any responsibility. Didn’t you just respond to a post where the person asked you about men’s rights with the unborn baby? You just brushed it off and said “mens rights? That’s rich”. You act like the poor woman is all alone in it. Men do mourn the loss of babies too,ya know? And I do care about women, but I care equally for the baby in her womb that she is going to rip out! Women have options, that baby doesn’t have any say! I don’t care to read your recommended article. I know why I am pro-choice, because I am for life!

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        5. WendyDavis

          @JennieBrooksPetersen @jennyv @DarrellRoss Statistics out there will show that 20% of conceived pregnancies spontaneously miscarry (spontaneous abortion) within the first 8 weeks. Another point I want to make is the reason abortion became legal was because, whether you like it or not, when there is a market, you will have the service. The back alley will mutilate and sometimes kill sisters, daughters, nieces, friends and loved ones. These will be the sacrifices until abortion is made legal again. Abortion has been around since man has been on earth, infanticide as well. It’s not a beautiful world, we are not perfect people. But I do think that rather than focusing on birth control for women, that men should take over the responsibility, create a form of temporary vascectomy. It would be the answer in 3rd world countries; women in that condition are not looking for night time rendevouses as much as men would like to think. Our great grandparent’s day used the bark of slippery elm, it was an extract apparently. The damage done of course was severe. Women of every walk of life are faced with this and it is time to allow the women to decide what it is their life should be. Happy unwanted children are rare, in fact, getting out of the house alive is sometimes the only goal. You don’t understand that not everyone’s life is celebrated, its the drug addicts, the alcoholics. You just disappoint until you can’t stand it anymore. that is no life.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        6. JennieBrooksPetersen

          @WendyDavis There is a huge market for crack cocaine, do you think that should be legalized? I do understand that life is hard, and some people go through more struggles then others. But isn’t that like saying “this kids gonna have a long, crappy life, let’s just get rid of it now?”

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        7. Borsia

          @JennieBrooksPetersen@WendyDavis

          Actually the answer to the drug problem is to legalize it and deal with it as a health issue rather than wasting trillions of dollars on the failed war on drugs, Dr. Paul recognizes this and agrees.

          To your second point yes again; if the child is unwanted and the mother doesn’t want to sacrifice her well being or limit her goals for a better life or just to keep her life from getting worse. It is, and should remain, legal for her to terminate the pregnancy.

          The answer in both cases is more education and available birth control.

          All of these grandiose posts about how the children will be adopted is pretty much BS. True if the child happens to be white and the mother healthy but not if the child is a minority or the mother is a druggie or alcoholic.

          This debate should be framed in reality “abortion should be illegal for the poor”.

          The well off have always and will always have the option it is the poor who would be forced to deal with the unwanted children. Statistics show a direct line between the availability of abortion and the crime rates. They are the ones who, for the most part, are filling the prisons beyond capacity.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        8. Borsia

          @saramic@JennieBrooksPetersen@jennyv@DarrellRoss

          A huge percent of “proper Christians” only get married because of a pregnancy. The divorce rates prove just how good that is as a method of selecting a spouse.

          I won’t even get into what happens at the churches of every religion.

          There are very few who graduate high school as virgins let alone college. Of all of my friends I only know of 1 male who was still virgin at graduation. The numbers were about the same for the girls. BTW I graduated in 1972.

          We all came from middle class neighborhoods and almost all of us used birth control of at least 1 type, many used 2. (the pill & condoms) 1 girl from my class that I personally knew had an abortion.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        9. Borsia

          @DarrellRoss@JennieBrooksPetersen@jennyv

          They don’t care about the children after they are born they only care about their wacko religions and their mythical gods.

          They aren’t any wanting to fund, educate and raise these unwanted kids any more than pro-choicers.

          Tell them you have a deformed, retarded of other ill child and you need $300,000+ per year to keep it alive for the length of its life and they will hide behind locked doors.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        10. Borsia

          @WendyDavis@JennieBrooksPetersen@jennyv@DarrellRoss

          There has been a market since ancient times. Abortion has been around as long as civilization. For most of that time it has been legal.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. AlejandroAlonso

      @JennieBrooksPetersen

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  20. DarrellRoss

    Well stated!

    Pro-Lifers!

    Like many pro-life people, Ron Paul chooses to make the issue about abortion. If you are at all interested in working together with others, you NEED to understand that pro-choice people are mostly anti-abortion. But you cannot criminalize abortion as it is still necessary.

    In general I think that pro-life people accuse pro-choice people of being pro-abortion which they are not. The folks who are pro-life though like to claim they are not anti-choice but you can’t have it both ways. If you want to outlaw abortion, then you will be outlawing a woman’s RIGHT. Do you understand this? You will be telling women that the government has control over what goes on in their bodies. It is of no surprise that feminists (those in favor of women’s rights) are pro-choice.

    I would like to hear from a pro-life woman who is also skeptic and atheist about why they are pro-life. I am guessing that someone like that will not exist but they might and if they do, it could be interesting to hear what they have to say. My hunch is that most pro-life women are so based on religious grounds.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  21. eIIe

    @milkmaid88 No, a fetus is not a baby, it’s a fetus. And so the hell what if it’s a “baby”. Label it “the Son of God” for all I care. You want to tell a woman who’s pregnant who’s fetus was diagnosed with trisomy 18 that she has no choice but to carry it to term because it’s a “BABY”? I thought I turned these livefyre responses off to my e-mail. I don’t know how yours got through.

    You’re free to say what you want and think what you want about it. However I disagree. You can pretend that you care, but, if science ever figures out fetal transplants, are you going to welcome that fetus into your womb? Are you going to raise that kid and send it through school? Are you going to spend your money if the baby happens to be born unable to care for it’self with no chance of recovery and a projected 5 year life span? A woman has the right to end a pregnancy if she wishes. It’s not always a bad thing and not every woman “secretly regrets it.” Many are actually relieved with the decision including one that I know personally (who’s decision was also influenced by me). So, go preach to your quire.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Barton

      @eIIe@milkmaid88 Wait, don’t we support people like this anyway?

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. Barton

      @eIIe@milkmaid88 Wait, don’t we have welfare to support those that cannot support themselves? What I got from this page is that Ron Paul is morally against abortion, however, he’s not going to be the one to make it illegal in your state. That’s up to your state to decide. You can always move to a state that supports abortion, and likewise, those against abortion, can move to a state that is against abortion.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. DarrellRoss

        @Barton@eIIe@milkmaid88

        Barton – a newborn baby is not covered by welfare. Besides, Welfare represents “big government” which is something Ron Paul is against. His feeling on medical care for the uninsured is that doctors should simply do it for free out of the goodness of their hearts. He seems to think that it will “just work like it used to”. Feel free to read in his own words at http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/health-care/.

        —————————–

        As for the poor and the severely ill who can neither obtain insurance nor pay for the medical care they need, Ron Paul offers the following solution in his book “The Revolution: A Manifesto“:

        In the days before Medicare and Medicaid, the poor and elderly were admitted to hospitals at the same rate they are now, and received good care. Before those programs came into existence, every physician understood that he or she had a responsibility towards the less fortunate and free medical care was the norm. Hardly anyone is aware of this today, since it doesn’t fit into the typical, by the script story of government rescuing us from a predatory private sector.

        —————————–

        Good thing all doctors are billionaires so they can handle the millions of uninsured eh? /sarcasm.

        Should we also split up gay marriage by state? How about if one state decided it wanted to reinstate segregation? Hey just move to another state if you don’t like it. There are some issues that should not be done in a state-by-state basis. Abortion is one of them. Criminalizing abortion is a direct strike against women’s rights.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        1. Barton

          @DarrellRoss@Barton@eIIe@milkmaid88 Nice link, good point about health care. Take away the government intervention that has been messing things up for years and you leave a problem for entrepreneurs to solve and make a ton of money on. But that’s another topic.

          Gay marriage? Another topic, but I’ll bite. Sure, let gay people live where they want to live. Give them the choice. Change the wording to civil unions and you have a better shot of it passing. Marriage is just an old fashion word used by religions. Let’s take the religious part out of there and let people have civil unions. You’ll probably have to police those, right? Because what’s going to stop a couple of dudes from being immature and getting a civil union to save a buck or two? Okay, maybe I can’t answer this question without a joke, but obviously if you want two guys or two girls to get married, you need to change the wording to not offend religions, since they’re the ones that started using that word “marriage”. Anyway, got a link on that one? I’m curious what Ron Paul’s stance is on gay marriage. Segregation, look around when you’re at a subway station, and let’s not be absurd here. I’m not suggesting you move because you’re racist. Although, if you’re racist I’m sure you would. Come on, let’s not bring the race card out for once. It’s been talked about and that’s another blog post.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        2. Barton

          @DarrellRoss@eIIe@milkmaid88

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        3. Barton

          @DarrellRoss@eIIe@milkmaid88 What about men’s rights? What if a guy gets a girl pregnant and the girl goes ahead and aborts. Wasn’t the baby half his, and what about his rights? How sad is that guy going to be after losing his kid because his gf or wife was an evil Bianca? Don’t you think the guy has a right in there? Look, most of the time people get abortions because they make mistakes. Should we really allow for someone to kill another person because they made a mistake? Hey Steve, I’m sorry I didn’t wear a condom. Now I’m going to kill you Steve. Boom, dead. Joe, same problem, now I’m going to kill you. Listen, if someone breaks into your home and tries to kill you, you have the right to kill them (depending on your state). And just like with abortion, if you’re raped or you’re going to die, I’m sure you can think of other reasons, you’ll be allow to abort. Let’s not be absurd here. Picking and choosing which baby you want to bring to life is like shopping for the perfect outfit. You try on a whole bunch of clothes and pick the one that makes your butt look great. It’s not the same with babies. Sometimes you’re stuck with the ugly one that may or may not look like your best friend. Choosing to abort based on whether or not you made a mistake or if you don’t think the baby is going to be the best baby in the world…does that really qualify as the women’s right to choose? Or is it something else entirely? I’m all for the women’s right to choose. I just don’t think she has the right to murder anyone.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        4. milkmaid88

          @DarrellRoss@Barton@eIIe@milkmaid88 Darrell, actually you’re wrong. A newborn baby *IS* covered by welfare. If the mother is on medicaid, not a hard thing to do if she’s a single mom, then her medical bills are ENTIRELY covered, including the newborn’s care in the hospital. Usually the mom will get the baby on medicaid soon after birth, and they make it retroactive so that all bills incurred in the first month or so of life are also covered.

          I’m not a huge fan of welfare, but it does serve a good purpose to those who really need it. What I don’t like is when people abuse it, and lots of people do that. I also don’t like how they make it hard to get off of welfare by cutting you off as soon as you get a job, no matter if you are making below minimum wage and walking to work.

          On the other hand, if welfare went away, some people argue that more people would be more charitable again, like they used to be before they thought the government took care of everybody.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        5. DarrellRoss

          @Barton@eIIe@milkmaid88

          Barton.

          Men’s rights? That’s rich. Don’t bother bringing up all the what-if’s about killing people. We are talking about a woman’s right to choose what goes on with her own body. Of course she can and likely will be influenced by those around her. Someone breaking into my home? WTF does that have to do with a woman controlling what goes on in her body? Reductio ad absurdum eh? If the woman doesn’t want to carry the baby but the guy wants her to, do you think he has any right to force her? He can try to convince her with money or words but if he’s allowed to use the law, then just rape someone if you want a kid right?

          Ah so you think the government should get to decide when it is ok for the woman to abort? “I’m sorry mam, it looks like you will be able to survive this so you’ll just have to tough it out. Have a nice day!” What if she can’t afford it financially? milkmaid88. indicates that the baby is covered once out of the womb but it seems like a single working mother would not be covered. Birth is not cheap especially if there are complications. The point is there are *tons* of considerations that must be taken into account and folks want the government to decide while at the same time the same folks, Ron Paul for example, cry all day long about how the government screws everything up. You can’t have it both ways. It’s pretty clear hypocrisy.

          No the way I see it is people just don’t trust women to make their own decisions. That’s why many pro-life folks are also against teaching young women about their bodies and how sex works; because they don’t trust women to make the decisions.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        6. milkmaid88

          @DarrellRoss@Barton@eIIe No, a single working woman can still qualify for medicaid if she has a low income. She’s more likely to lose the other programs: the monthly check, which she won’t get if she doesn’t have any children yet anyway or if she gets child support; the day care assistance; and possible lose most, if not all, food stamps. The medicaid is usually the last thing she’ll lose when working. And even then, her child will often qualify even if she doesn’t.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        7. DarrellRoss

          @milkmaid88

          Well that’s good. So if she did not want the child and got pregnant accidentally, the government will completely take care of her for the last few months of pregnancy while she can’t work and the first couple months after while she recovers?

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        8. milkmaid88

          @DarrellRoss I’m not advocating abuse of welfare programs. It’s just that I keep hearing financial burden as a reason for abortion. Abortion isn’t the only solution when you are financially strapped. There are other options. Another option is private adoption. Many childless couples would be happy to pay the doctor bills. There are charitable programs that help single mothers in need, by giving them baby items and helping with doctor bills. There’s not a single poor woman in this country that should feel she has to abort her child. There are just too many options for her. That’s the truth.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        9. milkmaid88

          @DarrellRoss@Barton@eIIe Birth isn’t cheap, but it’s possible to do it even as a poor person. My dad never had insurance. We were a one income family with four children, and he paid for all the births out of pocket.

          Also, there are home births. It’s not something that is for everyone, but it is a very good option for many. Licensed midwives charge much less for births.

          Even if a hospital birth is chosen, avoiding the hospital in early labor will help avoid unnecessary intervention which leads to more expensive medical bills.

          There are always options. Most women have abortions because they are scared and in shock and don’t know what to do. But 9 months is a long time, and they don’t realize how much will change during their pregnancy. Doors will open, people will help them. If they would just have the courage to wait, they would see that there are other options available to them…options that they can feel good about.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        10. milkmaid88

          @DarrellRoss@Barton@eIIe Darrell, I admire your respect for women’s rights. However, men do mourn the loss of their baby. I believe they should have a right. I know of one man who was heartbroken over his girlfriend’s choice. He went to the clinic to try to stop her, but they wouldn’t let him in. But he pleaded with her through the door. His sobbing finally touched her heart and she changed her mind. It’s not even that she really wanted an abortion…she just had never given any other option a second thought. 9 months is a long time. A lot changes. Women who think they can’t stand the thought of caring for a child, get all maternal and stuff. I know because I was like that. When I got pregnant, it was when my boyfriend had just scared the hell out of me. I thought he was satan himself. I couldn’t sleep in my own house for a month, and even when I finally did, I couldn’t sleep in my bed. I hid, usually between the wall and the bed. I couldn’t even mention his name without trembling. That’s why I almost had an abortion. I changed my mind while in the waiting room because I realized that I wouldnt be able to pretend this never happened. I knew I would go home and feel empty and scraped out.

          So then I was convinced I’d put him up for adoption. I carried him for 6 months with that plan. I even had the adoption paperwork filled out. But then something happened. He started to move inside me. And I found out he was a boy. I was torn. Part of me didn’t want a boy that might look like his evil father. But the other part of me knew I couldn’t give him up. I knew I’d miss him too terribly. So I kept him. And I’m so glad I did! He is such a great kid, makes me laugh.

          Women just need more time to think things through. Adoption is an option that allows them to do that. It’s one that isn’t easy, but nothing is. Abortion is the least easy of all.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        11. DarrellRoss

          @milkmaid88@Barton@eIIe

          milkmaid88. Barton. eIIe.

          Your examples are furthering the cause for pro-choice. You are providing excellent examples of the options that expectant mothers should be aware of and good examples of when they changed their minds and how it worked out. You are also arguing for better education of women in terms of knowledge of their available options. Very nice.

          Now. Why do you want to criminalize those who feel it is their decision? Why do you want to write the rules on when they get to choose? Why do you want government to decide? Do you not trust women to make their own decisions? What makes you think government will make more moral decisions than the woman who is pregnant?

          I have not said abortion is easy. I’m sure it’s not an easy way out for many women but a very hard decision. I cannot claim to understand I sure as hell do not think any government bureaucrat is going to be able to legislate it. Why do you want to take this right away from women? You have not really answered this question. You keep returning to stories. Both sides have stories. I choose to leave them out of it.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        12. milkmaid88

          @DarrellRoss@Barton@eIIe Women will always have a choice. I’m not anti-choice. You can’t be. Even if abortions were illegal, some women would still abort their babies.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        13. DarrellRoss

          @milkmaid88

          It’s not possible to be anti-choice? You mean it is not possible to stop someone from attempting to make a choice. It certainly is possible and I think you are anti-choice.

          You claim to want to criminalize abortion but also claim you are not against a woman’s right to choose to have that abortion. These are mutually exclusive positions.

          You can either not criminalize abortion thus supporting a woman’s right to choose OR you can criminalize abortion thus showing you are not interested in the woman’s choice.

          Do not claim to support something you want to make illegal.

          [On a side note, I think RonPaul.com is not designed to handle this load of posts... it's becoming difficult to get it to work. I have tried to post this comment 15 times so far. I will have to refrain after this one... if I even get it to post.]

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        14. milkmaid88

          @DarrellRoss I believe I have shown support for multiple choices. However, the pro-abortion folks have shown support for only one choice.

          Have you ever heard of unalienable rights? Those you are born with? Life is one of them. The right to kill isn’t.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        15. DarrellRoss

          @milkmaid88

          I have stated many times how I am not pro-abortion. You have yet to describe how you can criminalize abortion and be pro-choice.

          Yes I am aware of the “inalienable rights” argument. This stems originally from the Natural Rights argument from philosopher John Locke. Murray Rothbard relies heavily on Natural Rights in his argument in “For A New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto”. I believe the Natural Rights argument is that everyone has the right to “life, liberty, and property”. You will note though, that Thomas Jefferson shifted this to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” for the purposes of our republic.

          The missing key of course is that our rights are not actually based on Natural Rights but instead on Legal Rights which are accorded to us based on the laws of our government.

          Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness:

          I would say that telling a woman that she cannot choose what happens to her own body breaks the second two. If you argue that the fetus is her property, then it would even break the Natural Rights version of “property”. If it is not hers, then at what point did she lose control over it and who decides when that is? This is a slippery slope.

          The “pro-abortion folks” as you term it, have shown support for choice. The pro-life folks, in contrast, want to reduce choice. Pro-choice folks are in favor of the same number of choices as pro-life except we insist that you not remove the right to choose one additional option – abortion.

          And just a fun comment on the semantics of your post:

          “Those you are born with?”

          If you don’t get them until you are born, then why are you arguing that the fetus has these rights prior to being born?

          Again I ask:

          Why do you want to criminalize those who feel it is their decision? Why do you want to write the rules on when they get to choose? Why do you want government to decide? Do you not trust women to make their own decisions? What makes you think government will make more moral decisions than the woman who is pregnant?

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        16. milkmaid88

          @DarrellRoss As I’ve said before, the most important thing is not what the government does; it’s what the women do. They are the ones that have to live with the choices that they make. You keep going on and on about criminalizing it. That’s not the issue here. It is all about women’s choice, and will they make the one they can live with…and that their baby can live with.

          I did want to say that babies do sometimes survive abortions. Most often they are left to die sometimes laying there for a couple of days. Why? I mean if the BORN has a right to life….why not give medical treatment.

          Well, it’s been fun chatting with you.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        17. saramic

          @Barton@DarrellRoss@eIIe@milkmaid88 Unfortunately this issue is too complex to permit men the equal say that they would otherwise deserve. More weight has to be given to the women’s rights because women are the ones who carry the baby. It’s women’s bodies and health that are put on the line. It’s the women’s lives that are affected most by this decision, because fathers are free to leave. There are many good men who will step up and help raise the child, but the fact is that there will always be a large number of men who will not and then the full responsibility falls to the woman. On the whole, making abortion illegal impacts women’s lives far more than it impacts men’s. It impacts women’s lives so much that it effectively impairs their lives in a way that men’s are not. You could argue that a woman who does not have the father’s support could put the baby up for adoption. However, there are SO MANY unwanted children sitting in the foster care system who are not getting adopted, I can’t imagine what would happen if we added to that most of the babies that otherwise would have been aborted. In addition, a pregnant woman has to take time off of work or school (sometimes significant time as many women have difficult pregnancies with a lot of nausea and vomiting). A single woman with no support from the father often cannot afford to take time off of work, and many businesses do not offer benefits like maternity leave. Many businesses will fire pregnant women. This happened to a friend of mine. She is lucky in that she is still with the baby’s father, and his family is supporting them. But there are so many women who are not that lucky. These are problems that men are simply not faced with unless they choose to be, and biology dictates that banning abortion forces these problems on women alone.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        18. JennieBrooksPetersen

          @DarrellRoss Note the order of those rights. Life, then liberty. A baby’s right to life comes before someone’s liberty to abort it. You cannot have liberty, or pursue happiness without life.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        19. saramic

          @milkmaid88@DarrellRoss@Barton@eIIe People keep bringing up welfare, but welfare just isn’t enough money to raise a child on, or really even to support one person on. My mom was on welfare for awhile when I was a teenager, and it wasn’t even enough to cover rent. She only got like $400-$500 a month, and granted that was like 15 years ago, but it wasn’t even enough to cover rent then. She managed to make ends meet (most of the time…) by working under the table cleaning houses and helping elderly people. The crappy thing about welfare is as soon as she was able to find a “real” job where her wages were reported, they deducted the equivalent amount from her welfare and food stamp allotment so even by working she couldn’t get ahead and she still had to do the under the table work in addition. My mom was actually a social worker who worked with welfare recipients before she had to go out on disability (which eventually ran out, after they let her go for being out too long, and that led to the need for welfare…), and all of her clients were having the same problems. Most of them would make ends meet by finding ways of getting money under the table, or getting into (often bad/abusive) relationships so that the man could help to support them. While welfare is certainly a step above destitution, it’s not the safety net that people make it out to be, and it’s not a viable alternative to abortion.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        20. saramic

          @milkmaid88@DarrellRoss@Barton@eIIe Not all women become maternal during the course of the pregnancy. My cousin got his ex wife pregnant when she was 19. She was/is very immature, but she decided to keep the pregnancy due to religious beliefs and pressure from my pro-life cousin. She all but completely ignored the baby when he arrived. My cousin did almost all of the parenting and all the working. She wouldn’t bathe the baby for days and when he’d come home from work, he’d find her in one room and the baby in another, even when the baby was a toddler. They finally moved in with an older couple they were friends with, so that the older couple could help take care of the baby. She got pregnant with a second baby a couple years later and treated him the same way. The boys are school aged now and she’s up and left them several times, and rarely even calls them when she leaves. The older child had a breakdown one of the times she left. She is of course an extreme example of someone who not only possesses no maternal instinct, but is also rather thoughtless and, arguably, heartless. But there are plenty of other women out there who do not and never will want a child. So many children are neglected and abused because they were born to resentful mothers who never wanted them, but kept their pregnancies due to a lack of information, religious beliefs, lack of money for an abortion, guilt, family pressure, whatever-but not because of any sense of maternal love.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        21. DarrellRoss

          @JennieBrooksPetersen

          Very amusing. Try reading about Natural Rights and then respond. The order is not important. It’s a list of three “inalienable” rights. Not a ordered list where you don’t get one without the other. It says that you have full ownership of your own life, your own liberty, and your own property. The order doesn’t matter.

          Besides the fact that you are sidestepping the argument altogether. I take it you also do not trust women to make their own decision about their bodies?

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        22. JennieBrooksPetersen

          @DarrellRoss What I find amusing is your comment “it’s not a list where you don’t get one without the other”. It doesn’t take a nuclear physicist to explain that you cannot have happiness without liberty, and you cannot have liberty without LIFE.

          I am not sidestepping the argument. I do not think women should be able to go in and get an abortion because the timing is not right for them, period. If that means I do not trust women to make decisions about there own bodies, then be it. They should have done the decision making before they had sex! I am a woman, and I know for darn sure I am not the only woman who feels this way. They need to take responsibility. When you are talking about destroying the creation of a life, I could care less about the woman’s rights.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        23. DarrellRoss

          @JennieBrooksPetersen

          I like the comment about nuclear physicists. Nice touch.

          I disagree that you cannot have happiness without liberty. You must believe that it is possible; otherwise you would not have stated that you “could care less about the woman’s rights” in the face of certain situations. You must believe that it is possible to be happy without the liberty of choosing how to control your own pregnancy.

          So you don’t trust women to make decisions about their own bodies. Are you saying that the government will be able to better judge the situation? How about if the baby has a fatal disease that puts survival at less than a year and the woman does not want to abort? Do you seriously think a government which dictates who gets to have an abortion will let her carry this to term at her own peril?

          Take responsibility for having sex? What about men? Do they need to take responsibility for having sex? You are pushing your own value system on others. Women should be able to have as much sex as they want and share equal responsibility to what men have. I agree abortion shouldn’t be used as birth control but I do not claim to understand all women and all their specific circumstances.

          “When you are talking about destroying the creation of a life, I could care less about the woman’s rights.”

          Well at least we know where you stand. Outlawing abortion is about women’s rights, not about the protection of life. If you want to protect life, then:

          1. work towards education and provide contraceptives.

          2. Contribute towards providing healthy homes for all the unwanted children who are not aborted.

          3. Work towards providing honest non-judgmental services to women who have unwanted pregnancies.

          Outlawing the symptom of the problem solves nothing. All it does is criminalize people without treating the cause of the problem.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        24. WendyDavis

          @DarrellRoss @Barton @eIIe @milkmaid88 at this point, just saving the country is all I care about. I am as prochoice as they come. And I remember when poor people came in to see the doctor, he’d give them a break, sometimes big breaks like “insurance only.” That was 20 years ago. Where that has gone, I do not know. He’d charge the top income patients full price of course – he played golf with them and knew them. It’s just the way it was. Media is tainted by propaganda, insurance and pharmaceuticals are monoplized and conglomerants as is every other industry. I am telling you, you will have no country at all if this keeps up. there is not much time left. I am a sincere believer in the NWO and it is unfolding as planned. I believe their mission is nearly accomplished, just one more world war, and the wealth will be theirs. Nations will be a source of vital elements and slave labor. There will be no health care at all. I see it this way because we are not being told anything at all, so it must be pretty godam bad. It’s global. canada is undergoing the same transformation; they’ve allowed goldman sachs to open up a dark market, another ponzi scheme. It’s like they’ve been drugged, the politicians, possibly with the shine of diamonds and gold.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        25. micka

          @DarrellRoss@milkmaid88

          What are you talking about? Absolute baloney! I worked until 6 hours before my last child was born and was back at work 4 days later. Only the wealthy or women with really good employers could do what you suggest.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        26. micka

          @saramic@milkmaid88@DarrellRoss@Barton@eIIe

          You have this right, Saramic. At least in the states where I have lived welfare is totally inadequate as is disability.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    3. milkmaid88

      @eIIeMy sister had a potters baby. That’s where there’s not enough amniotic fluid and the organs don’t develop properly. The baby is either born dead or dies shortly after. My sister found out when she was 5mos pregnant. Yet, she didn’t abort him. Think about it, if someone has a terminal illness, you don’t kill them! You love them and help them as long as possible. Her baby may not survive, but he wasn’t dead yet. She could feel him moving inside her. So she got to cherish the time she did have with him, and she got to hold it when it was born. And she has no regrets because she knows that she wasn’t responsible for his death. There are lots of woman who are doing this, and they have beautiful stories. They are sad because they lost a baby, but they are grateful for the time they had together. Also, tests can be inaccurate. Doctors can be wrong. Never abort a baby because of a test! I know another woman who had a Down’s baby. She kept it despite her doctor’s recommendation to abort. Now she says that baby is her most precious gift, the most sweet soul that God could have blessed her with. She acts as if that little girl helped her!

      Would I adopt a baby that someone wanted to abort? IN A HEARTBEAT! And so would lots of women. I almost died refusing treatment for a risky pregnancy because the “treatment” was abortion! Yes, my baby died, but I wasn’t responsible. I know there was nothing I did. So my grief is not compounded by guilt.

      I wish science *WOULD* get on the ball with that kind of advance. But, alas, I think they wouldn’t waste their time when so many people are willing to just abort. They certainly wouldn’t transfer my baby from my tubes to my uterus.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. DarrellRoss

        @milkmaid88@eIIe

        milkmaid88.

        milkmaid88. You are wrong about science. Scientists are working towards solutions. IUI, IVF? Do you take any antibiotics? I assume you benefit from scientific improvements daily but then lash out at them because they are being scientific… *shrug*.

        I am infertile. We looked into adopting a baby. It is super expensive. I mean like way expensive ~ $20k. If going through the right channels, we learned that the government will subsidize $14k of that.

        Your anecdotal evidence is a great reason why women should be allowed to choose! If the government got to decide when a woman was allowed to abort – say in the event of a rape or if it was unsafe to carry the child to term, what makes you think that they would not also choose to abort if you were carrying an unhealthy child which would put undue strain on the government? Not only would the government be legislating when it is ok for a woman to abort her pregnancy, they would likely be legislating when it is not ok for a woman to carry to term. Do we really want that in LAW?

        You should get to decide. Period.

        Your description of a mother wanting to carry a child to term even though the child is going to die at birth or shortly after sounds terrible from my perspective. What if the baby was in pain? Is it still super cool? If so, then why do you think that other women should not get to decide to end the pain? What makes you trust the government’s decision over that of the mother? The simplest conclusion is you trust bureaucrats more than mothers.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        1. milkmaid88

          @DarrellRoss@eIIe Hi Darrell, I admire many medical advances. But they weren’t too interested in saving my baby is all.

          I’m also infertile now. I’ve tried IVF to no avail. I know of people who have done private adoptions for just the legal fees. It was a mutual adoption between friends. They happen all the time. That might be an option for you. I think about it myself sometimes. In fact, when my baby sister’s friend was thinking about an abortion, I told her that I would adopt her baby. She said she’d think about it, and did stay pregnant, but she lost the baby.

          I’m not in favor of big government. But I am in favor of laws that protect the lives of innocent people. I don’t think this is any different. As I’ve said in a previous post, there are over 1,000,000 abortions every year in this country. Less than 1% are due to rape. I think less than 5% are due to mother’s healthy and rape combined. So even if allowances were made for those instances, there are still almost a million abortions that are done for the sake of convenience. A mother always has a choice, regardless of what the law says. As they say, you can’t legislate morality. Besides abortion policy would change as soon as people change their minds about it.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        2. micka

          @milkmaid88@DarrellRoss@eIIe

          Are you sure of your staistics? I worked in women’s health for years, and found “convenience” abortions to be very rare if counseling was provided. Almost all of the abortions handled by my colleagues were due to rape, incest, and maternal health issues. This was a big center, too. One that has been bombed in the past.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      2. micka

        @milkmaid88@eIIe

        You are an unusually kind and generous person! I have confronted people at anti-abortion rallies and asked if they would adopt, and almost all of them…especially the men… have had some excuse. I am not an abortion supporter as a means of birth control, but have seen some horrendous consequences due to the lack of available abortion. Maybe if rape were always treated as a crime, and biologic fathers were always held responsible for supporting their children,we would have less need for these discussions.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    4. Borsia

      @eIIe@milkmaid88

      MM; I know 4 women who had abortions. None of them were happy about it but none of them regret it either. All 4 were very young and now, as adults, they still believe they did the right thing. 2 had planed children in later life and 2 didn’t.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  22. Borsia

    Put that way I would have to say that I’m certainly not the one who should make such a decision.

    Abortion should be legal period as it is now.

    Were I to put some arbitrary time I would set it around the time that a woman first knows she is pregnant.

    Unlike most here I have no emotional reason for saying that “all life is precious”.

    Perhaps you will consider my cold hearted but the fact is there are over 7 Billion people on a planet that can support ½ of that.

    I also am not willing to pay for someone else’s children, especially unwanted children. A nation that is on the brink of financial collapse can’t afford it any more than the woman you would force it upon.

    Add the direct relationship between crime rates and unwanted children and I will say that a child that isn’t coming into a loving home able to support it is a bad plan.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  23. JENBIO

    DarrellRoss and All– to anyone who thinks they are justified in supporting abortion…I beg you to do this… search online for in utero photos of babies growing only at 4 weeks–not 6 as most of you cling to–and then can you say that what you see is not a living person? a valuable life? I think not! And remember that was once how you were! Never forget that!

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. DarrellRoss

      @JENBIO

      Hmm. I am not sure you understand my point of view. I am very focused on the freedom of the mother to control what goes on with her own body. It is this freedom which I want protected.

      I am not pro-abortion. The direct cause of abortions is unwanted pregnancies. I fully support strategies which have been shown to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies – like teaching women everything about pregnancy and sex before they start having it instead of teaching them abstinence-only. And like providing extra support for women who do have an unplanned pregnancy instead of closing down support.

      But you continue to return to this idea that the fetus should be protected. What about the mother? Do you not think the mother should be protected? You think she should be criminalized for wanting to get out from under an unwanted pregnancy? Where do *you* draw the line on the abortion-is-murder scale? I think abortion is unfortunate but also necessary. I am ok with this. Sure, the fetus is alive. But I don’t believe there is a soul or something in there, it’s an undeveloped fetus. I have to mention again here that I am not pro-abortion but pro-choice. It seems folks forget that bit and bring up these ideas of bloody fetuses. I do want fewer abortions! But criminalizing people who are stuck in a bad situation is NOT the answer.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  24. JENBIO

    The book is called Unplanned by former PP leader Abby Johnson. Do not know why link is not active–sorry it isn’t. But the book is available through Amazon.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  25. JENBIO

    I am not attempting to emotionally charge this discussion…generally when people talk of life and death issues it is full of emotion;0). Nothing that I have stated is false. I have larned all that I know after years of research….years…and Planned Parenthood does not really care for young adults and fmailies they care about making money. A wonderful source is a book written by a former leader of PP and why she walked away. Would it be worth it to read the words of someone who actually nows how PP is ran? Oh! I have every right to bring up your life! I will say again you were once at the early stages of development and you were alive and you were and are valid–a person!

    http://www.amazon.com/Unplanned-Dramatic-Planned-Parenthood-Eye-Opening/dp/1414339399

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. DarrellRoss

      @JENBIO

      Yeah I had a lot of trouble posting the last time. The link was active in the e-mail. I had to go read about Abby Johnson. When I google her I find pages about her as a Pro-life activist. There is a lot of fishiness around her resignation. According to various news sources, she was unable to produce *any* evidence showing that what she said was true. There wasn’t even an abortion the day she claims to have performed the abortion. She was apparently put on a restraining order from PP for stealing from them. Have you interacted with PP personally? I would recommend interacting with them yourself prior to judging them based on the book of a disgruntled former employee.

      I interacted with PP when a woman I was dating in college had trouble getting birth control through her insurance. She was able to get care at PP. They were certainly not gung-ho for abortion. They were focused on caring for their patients. I believe the going number is that 3% of their money is spent on abortions.

      Not sure what you mean about your right to bring up my life. Did I say you did not have that right? What I thought I said was that my I do not consider my life a valid question for my parents to consider. I did not mean your question was invalid. :) I meant that the question for my parents was if they wanted me and could afford to raise me, etc, not whether or not they owed it to me to carry me to term although if they wanted to use that justification on their own terms, that would be fine too. My point is it was their decision. The what-if-I-was-aborted scenarios seem strange to me. If you are alive, then you were not aborted. I don’t have a problem with that either way.

      So, in the event that abortion becomes illegal, who is at fault? Is it the mother, the father, the doctor, or all of the above? Are pro-life no matter what or are there extenuating circumstances (eg: rape, danger to mother of carrying to term, etc) under which you would support abortion?

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  26. DarrellRoss

    @JENBIO

    You are attempting to emotionally charge the discussion. Making abortion illegal is impractical. It is like trying to eliminate parts of free speech. The recent attempts to legislate personhood laws are a good example of this problem. What we are talking about is the right to choose, not whether or not we are killing something. That’s a given.

    You can either say that women do not have the right to choose what happens to their own body or that they do have that right. *That* is the discussion here.

    Killing the fetus is not murder. It is not recognized as a human being at that time. I agree that it is killing it but it is still the mother’s choice. In an emotionally charged discussion, one might respond to this with some form of a straw-man argument about killing the child after it is born. Let me be clear – I am talking about before the child is born. There is the task of coming up with how late into a pregnancy that is allowed and I think that’s a valid discussion to have.

    And in response to your question, the validity of my life was not the question when I was 6 weeks along in the womb. Me living a life was still at the mercy of the decision of my parents. If they had decided that it was not the time, then that would have been ok. It was their decision to make, not the government’s decision.

    Making some states havens for control and theocracy is not a good solution to the problem. Let me straight when I say I am *not* pro-abortion. I am pro-choice. It is a hard choice but it must be up to the pregnant woman.

    Regarding your statements about Planned Parenthood, please cite sources. Also, the reasons for defunding them have had nothing to do with the reasons you state and everything to do with false claims that [insert random high percentage]% of what they do are abortions. If you know otherwise, please tell me how you know and where you got your information. Thanks.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  27. JENBIO

    DarrellRoss you need to do your homework! Planned Parenthood has had many leaders that have walked away and stepped down due to how corrupt and evil their system really is. Planned Parenthood is all about making money. They have been known to help girls, without their parents permission, across state borders as young as 13 and 14 to help them get abortions! Abortion is killing no matter how you look at it. It is murder! You know …you were once in the very early stages of development as a PERSON…were you less valid during that time?

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  28. DarrellRoss

    @Borsia Yes to birth control and better education. Too often the anti-choicers are also anti-birth control and want to teach abstinence only education while defunding programs like Planned Parenthood at the same time removing the support for new mothers.

    @Natasha25 The limit should not really be a hard-and-fast number. It should be based on physical characteristics which are measurable. I am sure an agreement could be reached somewhere but I think perhaps before the heart beat? Or maybe before brain growth? The reason women often don’t realize they are pregnant is because they are not watching their cycles. If you miss a cycle, it’s usually pretty obvious. Immediate concern should be to test for pregnancy.

    Bottom line – criminalizing people who are simply trying to get rid of an unwanted pregnancy because they are aware of what a strain it will put on them is simply wrong.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  29. usapride

    @Gavin Hadaller Under the constitution, illegal immigrants have no rights either, so is it ok to kill illegal immigrants? And don’t forget that all you really are is a wad of tissue yourself

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. jax.uzpen

      @usapride@Gavin Good point usapride. Try sneaking into Russia. The point is not that we should kill every non-US citizen. The point is the government has no right to legislate concerning the life of the unborn. That abortion should not be a legal issue at all. The government should have nothing to do with it.

      Funny, though, some food for thought…but I think the immigrants are citizens in another nearby country and that might make some bad mojo in international relations. That’s probably the only reason we don’t kill ‘em. Just sayin’ (

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. Borsia

      The difference is that he is the wad of tissue that you are saying should be financially responsible for the unborn tissue.

      Why should he, or anyone else, take responsibility for a child they have no relation to? I don’t?

      Actually the Constitution doesn’t say that any child born in America is a citizen, it has been accepted to say that by some.

      What it says is that a child born to parents of no nation. Almost every illegal who has an anchor baby is the citizen of another nation and their offspring should be considered citizens of the parents homeland if they are illegally in the US.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  30. Borsia

    Abortion is the only subject on which I don’t agree with Dr. Paul. Nobody is “pro-abortion” but there are times when it is the best answer.

    It is fine to say that every conceived embryo should be born but there are a lot more problems with this in practice than in ideals.

    For one there is the simple fact that the mother doesn’t want to have the child. She might be too young, a victim of rape, incest or some other force against her will, whatever.

    It is great to say “just put it up for adoption”. That might work if you happen to be white and in good health but the sad fact is that for pretty much all minorities there isn’t anyone wanting to adopt. I don’t say this to sound racist, I am not at all, it is just true and statistics prove my point.

    There is a great cost to a society with little left to pay in the state raising children through the foster home system, which is often abused.

    There is also a direct link to the availability of abortions and the crime rate. (read “Freakenomics”)

    I agree that there should be limits on just how far into a pregnancy abortion on demand should go. With the exception of deformed fetuses and need to save the other’s life late term abortions shouldn’t be allowed.

    But the bottom line is that all medical decisions should be made per case by the person and their doctors, not by politicians or societies.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  31. 1prophetspeaks

    HE DOES SAY to leave it to the states. He obviously believes GOd says it is wrong to abort, not that the federal government says it. the declaration of independence says that ‘we belive it is self evident that our rights are given by our creator – the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. he also said if you don’t defend life, you can’t defend liberty

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  32. martykreifels

    To all that say that abortion is wrong and unjust to the mother, ask yourself this: is it wrong to have a woman bear a child for nine months and if she does not want it after those nine months give it up for adoption, than to say “if you don’t want this baby we can have it killed inside of you no big deal”? If we can consider yeast, a single celled organism that creates the airiness in our bread a life form, why can we not consider a human zygote(fertilized egg) a life form? And if a woman about to get an abortion were in a car accident and her and the baby were killed, would it be double vehicular manslaughter or just manslaughter, as the baby would of have died within the hour anyway? Would it be more wrong to let a baby have a chance at life than to kill it and let the mother live her days away with blood on her hands?

    Just some food for thought.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  33. julieshila

    I do realize I am late in this comment but, I am so glad the men here, such as Michael, so understands the feelings of a pregnant woman that he feels he can speak for them. I saved a life once that was set for an abortion. The mother had one previously and it so happened that my baby was born the morning of the mother’s appointment to kill hers. I asked her to visit me and my new baby. Asked her to hold my baby. She did. End of story. She had a beautiful baby girl that is a lovely addition to this world to this day. Thank God, He is smarter than we are. Women often have abortions to satisfy the man she thinks loves her. Sickening.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  34. nauga

    Hear, Hear, Michael!

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  35. JENBIO

    Every person, JJ, has a right to defend life. Life does begin at conception, your own life began then…did you ever think of that?

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

1 41 42 43 44 45 70

Leave a Reply