Abortion...So here's your thread

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by rudedog40
Yea, talk about a bible state. Rick Perry is so pro choice it's pathetic. Double murder, single, who cares. It's Texas baby. We fry 'em regardless.
Here are the other 35 states... Is gov. Perry really that powerful?
Al
Ak
Az
Ga
Id
Il
Ka
Ky
La
Michigan
Mn
Mi
Ne
ND
Oh
Ok
Pn
SC
SD
Ut
Vi
WV
Wi
(some state abbreviations may not be USPO correct)
along, of course, TO FEDERAL LAW I quoted...

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by rudedog40
Yea, talk about a bible state. Rick Perry is so pro choice it's pathetic. Double murder, single, who cares. It's Texas baby. We fry 'em regardless.
Bible state? Another swipe at christianity in a non-religious topic?

I actually used to work at radioshack in huntsville, and sold them the batteries to the remote control they use to turn on the zapper. Seriously.

 

[rudedog40]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
Yet another "Straw Man".... As this is far, far from the norm in cases of abortion. You're trying to make up an ethical quagmire where one doesn't exist.

Could care less if it's 'far from the norm'. It happens. So when it does, what does the pro choicer do? Can't have it both ways. Do you want to look at a kid every day of it's life knowing it was conceived by some drug dealin lowlife?

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
I'm not picking on your journey, just pointing out some things that just don't make sense. Like how is one organization going to say 1.6 mil and the other one be 50% off? Or someone going to say they aren't leading an inquisition on tobacco users.
The CDC only reports those abortions reported to them.... They don't "fact find" or "estimate" in this particular case. That's why their numbers are low. As technically, abortion is not a disease they are less stringent in keeping up with it.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by jonthefishguy
This year was the 34th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that found a “right to privacy” in the Constitution, and twisted that newfound right into allowing abortion. Roe originally struck down abortion statutes in 46 states, declaring that the right to abort in the first trimester was absolute, restrictions could be made in the second trimester and third-trimester abortions could be banned. In a classic example of a slippery slope, the “right” to abortion has expanded in the decades since Roe. Most states pay for abortions with taxpayer dollars. 13 states plus DC, allow abortion at any point, right up to the day of birth. Ten states plus DC, don’t even require that abortions be done by a doctor. Since 1973, about 43 million abortions have taken place, creating a $400-million-per-year industry. Beginning in 1979, the Centers for Disease Control undertook a new surveillance of
ectopic pregnancy-related mortality, and published its first ectopic regnancy
surveillance report in 1982. As a result all deaths associated with ectopic pregnancy, whatever connection they might have with induced abortion, were excluded from the abortion death totals and the Annual Abortion Surveillance Reports. The CDC's new rule had a most pernicious effect: ectopic pregnancy deaths subsequent to induced abortions would no longer be counted in the abortion death totals but now all such deaths utomatically would be dumped into the pregnancy/childbirth maternal mortality statistics. The relation of such deaths to legal abortion would never be known, it at least by the general public. By the way if you do the math on the amount of abortions 43,000,000 and divide that by 34 years you get an estimated 12,647,705. But that also included all that were thrown in the same catagory.
This is a good piece of information.

 

[rudedog40]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
Bible state? Another swipe at christianity in a non-religious topic?

I actually used to work at radioshack in huntsville, and sold them the batteries to the remote control they use to turn on the zapper. Seriously.

Trust me. You find very few ultra religious individuals who believe in pro choice. Abortion is probably one of the main topics in every sermons speech on Sunday, especially the Catholics.
Remote control for the zapper? They've been using lethal injection in Huntsville for over 20 years now. Don't think they have to zap someone to run fluids into their body.

 

[jtrzerocool]

Originally Posted by jonthefishguy
This year was the 34th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that found a “right to privacy” in the Constitution, and twisted that newfound right into allowing abortion. Roe originally struck down abortion statutes in 46 states, declaring that the right to abort in the first trimester was absolute, restrictions could be made in the second trimester and third-trimester abortions could be banned. In a classic example of a slippery slope, the “right” to abortion has expanded in the decades since Roe. Most states pay for abortions with taxpayer dollars. 13 states plus DC, allow abortion at any point, right up to the day of birth. Ten states plus DC, don’t even require that abortions be done by a doctor. Since 1973, about 43 million abortions have taken place, creating a $400-million-per-year industry. Beginning in 1979, the Centers for Disease Control undertook a new surveillance of
ectopic pregnancy-related mortality, and published its first ectopic regnancy
surveillance report in 1982. As a result all deaths associated with ectopic pregnancy, whatever connection they might have with induced abortion, were excluded from the abortion death totals and the Annual Abortion Surveillance Reports. The CDC's new rule had a most pernicious effect: ectopic pregnancy deaths subsequent to induced abortions would no longer be counted in the abortion death totals but now all such deaths utomatically would be dumped into the pregnancy/childbirth maternal mortality statistics. The relation of such deaths to legal abortion would never be known, it at least by the general public. By the way if you do the math on the amount of abortions 43,000,000 and divide that by 34 years you get an estimated 12,647,705. But that also included all that were thrown in the same catagory.
GREAT INFO...thanks

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by rudedog40
Could care less if it's 'far from the norm'. It happens. So when it does, what does the pro choicer do? Can't have it both ways. Do you want to look at a kid every day of it's life knowing it was conceived by some drug dealin lowlife?
How often?
Tell ya what; I'll go on record right now saying i'll vote for any law that bans abortion except in the case of r ape, i ncest, or medical emergency. To save the millions i'll vote to sacrifice the few.
You of course won't; because it's not really the issue to you... you don't care about the tiny % of abortions that occur for this reason.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by rudedog40
Trust me. You find very few ultra religious individuals .....
It's funny how religion keeps coming up only by those who are detractors of it. In thread after thread we see "don't bring religion into this" when someone posts their religious beliefs, yet here some of the same folks are trying to bring religion into it.

Are only religious people capable of caring about life? I would say "No".

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by rudedog40
Could care less if it's 'far from the norm'. It happens. So when it does, what does the pro choicer do? Can't have it both ways. Do you want to look at a kid every day of it's life knowing it was conceived by some drug dealin lowlife?
I think this is already addressed, But for lets say absurdity sake my girlfriend is an athiest, and I as a hindu knock her up. I believe all life is sacred, I'm starving and don't eat my pet cow and believed aunt bertha. She wants to abort the child, if she does this, because of karma I just know I'm going to reincarnate as a dung beatle. Is she going to trample on my right for religous freedom by turning harming my unborn children? Remember I'm not christian but hindu, so it isn't ok to discriminate. And by aborting the child you are not allowing me to practice my beliefs. Are we going to let her abort the fetus, remember I'm a minority immagrant hindu wanting to practice my religion in freedom and recieve government handouts. And will fraudulently vote democrat for the better socialist programs.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by rudedog40
Trust me. You find very few ultra religious individuals who believe in pro choice. Abortion is probably one of the main topics in every sermons speech on Sunday, especially the Catholics.
Remote control for the zapper? They've been using lethal injection in Huntsville for over 20 years now. Don't think they have to zap someone to run fluids into their body.
I know it isn't a zapper, but tell someone, that everytime they zap someone down there the lights flicker for a few seconds, you would be suprised how many people believe you.
They used some x-10 system to power whatever they needed for power to do the execution. I'm not sure exactly what it turned on or whathave you. But basically there was some device that started the flow of the toxin into the body, and they used that little thing to start the flow.

 

[jonthefishguy]

I am going to point something out and that will be the last thing I say on this thread. Why is it that only 2 women put input into this. Here we are debating on a topic that ultimately is not in our control. The law states that the woman has the final say so what she does with her body and men dont have any rights to her decision when it pertains to abortion or full term pregnancy. If you dont believe it, call the medical board and ask. So, I am done with this topic because not only is it going nowhere, but we as men cant do anything about it anyways. So the conversation is pointless. End,.....

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by rudedog40
Could care less if it's 'far from the norm'. It happens. So when it does, what does the pro choicer do? Can't have it both ways. Do you want to look at a kid every day of it's life knowing it was conceived by some drug dealin lowlife?
umm, there are less that 100,000 people raped annually in the united states. According to planned parenthood there are 1.6 million abortions each year. Even if every ---- resulted in conception and every conception due to ---- was aborted then you are talking less than 8% of abortions. So you tell me how relavant your "situation" is the the discussion of this topic.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by jonthefishguy
I am going to point something out and that will be the last thing I say on this thread. Why is it that only 2 women put input into this. Here we are debating on a topic that ultimately is not in our control. The law states that the woman has the final say so what she does with her body and men dont have any rights to her decision when it pertains to abortion or full term pregnancy. If you dont believe it, call the medical board and ask. So, I am done with this topic because not only is it going nowhere, but we as men cant do anything about it anyways. So the conversation is pointless. End,.....
And isn't it interesting that these woman both were pro-life.

 

[1journeyman]

Laws can be changed by men or women...
If nothing else I'll continue to contribute to threads like this to make sure accurate info is posted.

 

[jonthefishguy]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
Laws can be changed by men or women...
If nothing else I'll continue to contribute to threads like this to make sure accurate info is posted.

I know I said I wouldnt say anything else but journey realize this, NO WOMAN, NOT ONE...is going to let a man tell her much less make a law telling her what she can and cant do with her body. There are more women in this country that would rather hear it from a woman than a man. Men have no idea what they go through and women will be the first to tell you that and therefor have no say so in what they can and cant do. So when it comes to man making laws, they make law pertain to everyone, not just one ---. If that happens, all hell brakes loose. And dont say your going to post accurate info because unless you actually work in that field and are not bias, it is all just your thoughts.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by jonthefishguy
I know I said I wouldnt say anything else but journey realize this, NO WOMAN, NOT ONE...is going to let a man tell her much less make a law telling her what she can and cant do with her body. There are more women in this country that would rather hear it from a woman than a man. Men have no idea what they go through and women will be the first to tell you that and therefor have no say so in what they can and cant do. So when it comes to man making laws, they make law pertain to everyone, not just one ---. If that happens, all hell brakes loose. And dont say your going to post accurate info because unless you actually work in that field and are not bias, it is all just your thoughts.
The "accurate" info I referred to involves statistics, laws already established, etc. Unfortunately in heated debates like this the "truth" dies farely quickly.
jon, In my mind this isn't a "man" or "woman" thing. There are already plenty of laws that tell both men and women what they can or can't do with their bodies. The "my body my choice" mantra is a smokescreen. I can't legally punch someone in the face. My body my choice though, right? Laws say we have to wear seatbelts, that you have to be a certain age to get a tattoo, drink, get a piercing, etc.

 

[darknes]

Originally Posted by jonthefishguy
I know I said I wouldnt say anything else but journey realize this, NO WOMAN, NOT ONE...is going to let a man tell her much less make a law telling her what she can and cant do with her body. There are more women in this country that would rather hear it from a woman than a man. Men have no idea what they go through and women will be the first to tell you that and therefor have no say so in what they can and cant do. So when it comes to man making laws, they make law pertain to everyone, not just one ---. If that happens, all hell brakes loose. And dont say your going to post accurate info because unless you actually work in that field and are not bias, it is all just your thoughts.
I could care less what a woman does with her body, it's when she decides to harm another person where it should no longer be her choice. If they made the right decisions in the first place, they wouldn't have to choose abortion. And no, I don't preach abstinence because that would make me a hypocrite.

 

[ruaround]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
Laws can be changed by men or women...
If nothing else I'll continue to contribute to threads like this to make sure accurate info is posted.
or accurate opinions...

 

[darknes]

Originally Posted by rudedog40
Trust me. You find very few ultra religious individuals who believe in pro choice. Abortion is probably one of the main topics in every sermons speech on Sunday, especially the Catholics.
Abortion is not a religious topic; It's a moral topic. Because religions are based on morals, yes, most religious people are going to be pro-life.
If your mother told you that she was almost going to abort you, got all the way to the clinic, but changed her mind at the last moment, how would you feel? Would you thank her for giving you the chance to live life, and enjoy the good moments you have had? Unborn children cannot speak for themselves, but I'm sure they would rather have a chance at life, even if it wasn't the best life possible.