Quote :

"But with adoption the mother knows she has a child out there growing up, and that creates issues in the future not to mention having to give up your baby once it's born. "

i would imagine if when the mother had the kid, if she decided she wanted it, well then she could keep it

i just dont see how knowing you have a child in the world growing up is somehow worse than knowing your choice prevented a child from ever getting the chance to grow up

6/21/2007 2:03:25 PM

the prolife people, I always hear an interesting arguement out of whether you would allow it if the mother was raped? Just wanted to hear you guys views on that issue.

Why dont we just make the morning after pill over the counter, then the only thing they will be giving each other is STDs if thier too stupid not to wear protection. Seems like the best way to go.

6/21/2007 2:04:17 PM

^i dont have a problem with that either

and though i'm pro life i already admitted i'd probably do a fast 180 if my own teenage daughter was pregnant, whether or not she was raped...i'd essentially give her the choice

i think if a chick is raped then an abortion is ok but i would hope after being raped they would take pregnancy tests so they wouldnt have to wait 5 months into the pregnancy for the abortion

6/21/2007 2:06:34 PM

http://www.capitalism.org/faq/abortion.htm

That's what i believe. I did a quick google and found that.

That site kinda perfectly explains what i'm thinking. It makes sense, and it seems pretty logical. Read the whole thing. It's pretty short. It breaks down the argument and applies logic to it in my opinon.

[Edited on June 21, 2007 at 2:11 PM. Reason : .]

6/21/2007 2:08:13 PM

I dont think anyone is ever FOR abortion. I do think people makes mistakes, and this COULD be an option, but should never be the only form of birth control, which when you hear people having many abortions, should just get thier tubes tied 'accidently".

I posed the above question bc i hear alot of prolifers claim they are strongly against abortion bc its unfair to the child, murder, etc... but then say its ok if the mother is raped. Which always kind of puzzled me. Because if someone was truely advocating for the unborn, abortion shouldnt be an exception. The child has no idea under what means it was conceived under. It then becomes less about the children and more about the parents, which is what,seemingly, they are opposed to from the begining. Do you see the point? Anyway, its an arguement you usually get a good conversation over, when you pose it that way.

Oh and the late term ban, was by far the right thing to do. Hands down, I do consider it murder at that point. If it can survive outside the womb, and some dumbass cant make up her mind before that late in the term...then too bad.

[Edited on June 21, 2007 at 2:16 PM. Reason : .]

6/21/2007 2:14:19 PM

i just think its not cut and dry...you cant say "well if you are against abortion as a form of birth control, you should be against abortion in all cases, even if satan himself rapes your 14 year old daughter"

6/21/2007 2:17:56 PM

^^Yes the late term ban was defin the thing to do. They need to make up their mind right when they find out or soon after.

^oh defin not cut and dry. But to have any argument it has to be legal in the first place, or highly regulated. We couldn't have this argument if it was completely illegal.

6/21/2007 2:24:06 PM

like most complex issues, its not cut and dry. I just wonder where people tend to draw the line. Ive just struggled with the reasoning with some of the prolifers, as well as prochoice. But when you hear them chant "abortion is murder" one second, then say its ok if they were raped. It makes me scratch my head, thats all.

6/21/2007 2:48:43 PM

wow, this thread got sidetracked. good work

6/21/2007 3:16:31 PM

^I don't think so. Partly why Bush did that was because he wants to satisfy his Christian following.

"This is just one example of how the president puts ideology before science, politics before the needs of our families, just one more example of how out of touch with reality he and his party have become,"-HRC

6/21/2007 3:30:08 PM

http://campaignsandelections.com/nh/releases/index.cfm?ID=1333

Quote :

"EDWARDS STATEMENT ON PRESIDENT BUSH VETO OF STEM CELL RESEARCH BILL Manchester, NH – Senator John Edwards released the following statement today criticizing President Bush’s veto of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. “President Bush had a simple choice today: direct the full force of American scientific ingenuity towards responsible, life-saving medical research or pander to a narrow segment of his political base. With his veto, he made the wrong choice, pushing medical breakthroughs that could help millions of Americans further away. We need a president who will embrace science-driven policy, rather than politically-biased science.”"

I think if you'd rather trash or freeze something never to be used that could otherwise save lives in the name of supporting the religious right, then you've missed the point of religion.

6/21/2007 9:21:14 PM

He blocked federal spending, not stem cell research.

6/21/2007 9:34:18 PM

^ well when you think that the government should do almost everything for just about everybody then its only natural to associate the government not doing something with nobody doing something.

6/21/2007 10:13:42 PM

^so true

6/21/2007 10:41:14 PM

^ & ^^ exactly! Stem cell research is still legal folks. If there's the bright future in this kind of research like we're being told, why aren't private firms chomping at the bit to move forward with this and come up with the latest cures for things?

6/21/2007 11:00:06 PM

how do you know they aren't?

this isn't about who's backing stem cell research. it's about president bush being a fucktard

6/22/2007 3:06:23 AM

^Exactly. No matter who does the research or where it gets implemented, it's still fucked up that Bush doesn't support it. Defin where church and state should not be in the same entity.

6/22/2007 8:31:04 AM

Quote :

"I still hate the whole "pro-life" title. It's stupid. Everyone is "pro-life". The issue is CHOICE."

Bullshit. I thought the issue is abortion. These statements are so stupid. To say "pro-life" is misleading, and then claim "pro-choice" is not? You are right, pro-life people hate "choice". "Pro-choice" is just as much spin as "pro-life" is.

It should just be "pro-abortion" and "anti-abortion". Geez.

6/22/2007 4:58:53 PM

it should be "who gives a fuck"

stem cells, people, stem cells

6/22/2007 5:50:10 PM

I think it was a good veto, for the simple fact that our govt doesnt need to be spending anymore fucking money. If they want to cut some programs then use that money, fine.

6/22/2007 8:18:08 PM

^^^

I've always thought it should be pro-death, and anti-choice. With names like that you have to really want the cause to stick with it.

6/22/2007 8:20:40 PM