On this 35th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision, I would like to share my views on the issue of abortion.

Life begins at the point of conception. No one can deny that after a human being is conceived it will develop into the very same being as those debating this issue. What astounds me is that those who favor abortion went through an identical development stage as the being they are condemning to death. Would these very same people agree that a similiar choice should have been made about their own existence? Abortion today is used primarily as a birth control of convenience because people are too self-centered to take precautions. They prefer their own pleasurable self-indulgence over the care and sanctity of the life they created. What ever happened to taking responsibility for one's actions in this country? Is it too much to ask a woman who has conceived to place the child into adoption? Nine months of discomfort is nothing compared to life in prison for voluntary manslaughter! Does the father of the child have a say in this? And what about the constitution of the United States? Are not all people conceived in this country deserving of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? I believe abortion is a crime against humanity and should be outlawed. We need to overturn the Roe v. Wade decision and get back to cherishing life in this country. For a country that murders it's children cannot be far from self destruction.

Wow, dude. Look what I found after doing a search for your username...
http://www.google.com/search?num=50&...ed&btnG=Search
You've been banned from a lot of forums for posting hateful crap like this.

Dude, go find a blog forum sympathetic to your little platform, there. This is not it. I strongly hope this thread gets deleted, and that you at the least get reprimanded for posting it.

First...

BE VERY CAREFUL IN THIS THREAD - FLAMING IS NOT TOLERATED. We can have a constructive conversation, but if it gets out of hand I will close it and issue an infraction to anyone who earns it.

Now...

Joe, you put yourself in someone else's shoes. While I personally do not believe in abortion I do believe in a woman's right to an abortion.

If a woman is raped she should not be forced to carry the product of that rape for the duration of the pregnancy. That compounds the trauma. Adoption is not a viable option for a woman in that situation. I have carried two children to term and had miscarriages along the way. I can tell you that carrying a child is much, much more than any man, no matter how empathic can understand. You are connected to that child and if it was a traumatic event that conceived that child every movement, every kick or jab is a re-enactment of that trauma.

If continuing a pregnancy to term will cause the death of the child and the mother, terminating the pregnancy is a medical necessity.

If a married couple has 6 children, they want more children but the prenatal tests show conclusively that the embryo will have severe, life debilitating disabilities - they should have the right to terminate that pregnancy.

I could give you more instances where a woman would have to decide whether or not to continue a pregnancy. Abortion should not be used as a form of birth control and every child is a gift. However, there are instances that a pregnancy should, in the best interests of the fetus and/or the mother should be terminated. It is not a decision that should be made lightly or quickly, but it is a decision that should be safely available.

Outlawing abortion did not stop abortion. The only result of outlawing abortion was women dying from abortions performed in back rooms by unqualified people in non-sterile environments.

I do believe that (other than in the instance of rape) a father should have a say in the decision, but the final decision has to rest with the woman. She is the one that will carry this life, give it nurture, be prodded and beaten as the child develops, it is her body that will be run down as the growing fetus takes what it needs first.

Well, the only thing I got left to say is to look at this guy's past posting history.
He has started 22 threads on this forum...15 of those were locked and 1 was
deleted by vangogh for "Reason: comes across as an anti-semitic post."

So it's pretty clear he's not here to have a "constructive conversation".
I'm just pointing out my observation.

Wow Moxxnixx, good dig on the Google search. What a freak. BTW, Grats on your Packers. Being from California, and as most Californian's are from other places, most California teams have rather pathetic followings. I adopted Greenbay, so I'm probably nearly as stoked as you are.

Abortion is a mortal sin here in my country. But as for me, it's alway a matter of choice and no one has the right to condemn people for doing such thing.

Originally Posted by Moxxnixx

You've been banned from a lot of forums for posting hateful crap like this.

He has not said anything hateful yet in this thread so leave it alone.

Originally Posted by serandfae

Dude, go find a blog forum sympathetic to your little platform, there. This is not it. I strongly hope this thread gets deleted, and that you at the least get reprimanded for posting it.

How is this thread different than any of the other endless debates that go on in this forum?

Here is my biggest problem with abortion in this county and it has nothing to do with personal morals (all though I do not think it is any different than killing someone). If the liberals want to make an amendment that’s fine, then do it the right way. But they know they will never get 3/4ths of the state votes in favor of abortion, so they did the only thing they could do take it to the Judicial Branch and get 5 of Clinton’s guys to vote in favor of it with some preposterous notion that abortion has something to do with “search and seizure”. That is were I see fault in our government.

Originally Posted by Cheshire_cat

Here is my biggest problem with abortion in this county and it has nothing to do with personal morals (all though I do not think it is any different than killing someone). If the liberals want to make an amendment that’s fine, then do it the right way. But they know they will never get 3/4ths of the state votes in favor of abortion, so they did the only thing they could do take it to the Judicial Branch and get 5 of Clinton’s guys to vote in favor of it with some preposterous notion that abortion has something to do with “search and seizure”. That is were I see fault in our government.

Why would there need to be a constitutional ammendment to allow a choice that is fine by the constitution?

As far as the judicial branch, it has servered us well. Brown vs. the Board of Education is one example. Conservative have a very selective short-term memory.

Originally Posted by joder

Why would there need to be a constitutional ammendment to allow a choice that is fine by the constitution?

As far as the judicial branch, it has servered us well. Brown vs. the Board of Education is one example. Conservative have a very selective short-term memory.

First, show me where it says its fine.

Second, I never said that the judicial branch does not serve a purpose, but that purpose is not to amend the constitution or find illogical reasons for passing a law.

The constitution has nothing against abortion. People have a right to make their lawful choices without the governments intrusion.

EDIT:
Does the court only serve it's purpose when it agrees with the conservative agenda? The judiciary determines what is allowable by the Constitution. When that disagrees with conservatives "values" they cry foul.

Well to be fair the constitution says nothing about internet child pornography either, so is that constitutional?

Hey James,

How dare you to defend Constitutional right of American Citizens to be free of moronic attacks on their rights by bibleheads? Don’t you understand they **** women’s rights as much as towelheads do regardless what Constitution says and the only right they are recognizing is their Constitutional right to deny women’s rights?



fastreplies

Originally Posted by Cheshire_cat

Well to be fair the constitution says nothing about internet child pornography either, so is that constitutional?

Change the issue when it is convenient

Laws against child pornography are for protecting living breathing people.

My position on abortion is it's the mothers choice until the brain is developed at the beginning of the third trimester. Until then, it is tissue.

Originally Posted by fastreplies

Hey James,

How dare you to defend Constitutional right of American Citizens to be free of moronic attacks on their rights by bibleheads? Don’t you understand they f*** women’s rights as much as towelheads do regardless what Constitution says and the only right they are recognizing is their Constitutional right to deny women’s rights?



fastreplies

If it is called women’s right to abort a baby in her body, that’s fine, but let’s make it fair across the board if a women can do that because it’s her body I want to smoke weed. That should be legal it’s my body.

Originally Posted by JOEBIALEK

No one can deny that after a human being is conceived it will develop into the very same being as those debating this issue.

You already lost track of the facts and big picture and lost me with it. Under the right circumstances a zygote will develop into a human. Under the right circumstances, a skin cell can be turned into a fully developed human. By this logic you're promoting, every time you scratch an itch, you're killing millions and millions of potential human beings. No one can deny that many pregnancies don't make it through to term for perfectly natural reasons, and that this has been the case ever since there have been human beings.

Until conservatives make a concerted effort to prevent wars of choice, the death penalty, poverty, and other issues, "pro life" is a bumper sticker friendly way to describe taking a very important choice out of women's hands.

Originally Posted by joder

Change the issue when it is convenient

Laws against child pornography are for protecting living breathing people.

My position on abortion is it's the mothers choice until the brain is developed at the beginning of the third trimester. Until then, it is tissue.

Just so you know I am not going to say when a baby is actually alive, I’ll give that to you, I’m not a scientist I don’t know. However, your missing my point, If the country want’s to make a law that makes abortion legal, that’s fine, but do it the right way not by trying to interpret something that is not there from the existing constitution.

Originally Posted by Cheshire_cat

Just so you know I am not going to say when a baby is actually alive, I’ll give that to you, I’m not a scientist I don’t know. However, your missing my point, If the country want’s to make a law that makes abortion legal, that’s fine, but do it the right way not by trying to interpret something that is not there from the existing constitution.

My disagreement with you is that there has to be a constitutional ammendment for it to be legal. Any legislative body can pass all the laws they want, that doesn't make them constitutional. When laws are passed in states that disagree with the conservative agenda, they go to court instead of changing the law. You are following the double standard and is what you can hear on any conservative talk show.

Originally Posted by joder

My disagreement with you is that there has to be a constitutional ammendment for it to be legal. Any legislative body can pass all the laws they want, that doesn't make them constitutional. When laws are passed in states that disagree with the conservative agenda, they go to court instead of changing the law. You are following the double standard and is what you can hear on any conservative talk show.

Yes. But it’s not constitutional yet, there is nothing in the constitution about abortion, and until it is I think it is wrong to make states say its constitutional (I don’t care what law it is or by which party).

Originally Posted by Cheshire_cat

If it is called women’s right to abort a baby in her body, that’s fine, but let’s make it fair across the board if a women can do that because it’s her body I want to smoke weed. That should be legal it’s my body.

No, it’s called American Citizens right to exercise their rights to remove unwanted stuff from their bodies at any time they feel it’s need to be done.

As to smoking weeds… It just one example when morons made the law that make no sense just to please small group of idiots


fastreplies