As far as Supreme Court nominees representing “mainstream values,” they do if they support upholding Roe v. Wade, the decision that established abortion rights.
According to a new USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll, a full 68 percent of Americans want the Supreme Court to uphold Roe v. Wade; only 29 percent say the decision should be overturned.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Let immigrants run
- littlejohn on Open thread 11/23
- donndublin on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Let immigrants run
- okobserver on Let immigrants run
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/23
- writerdog on Open thread 11/23
- littlejohn on Let immigrants run
87 Comments
Randy,
Since when did this become a popular vote?
I thought this was about what the Constitution says.
I think a good deal of the debate should be based on modern scientific discoveries and a decision about when Constitutional civil rights take effect.
One disparity that needs to be cleared up is how it is a drunk driver can be charged with murder of an unborn person when it is considered a non-person when it comes to abortion law?
If it’s a real person then let’s give it civil rights. If it isn’t then treat it as a simple medical liability issue when drunk drivers cause pregnant women to lose a cyst.
Randy,Do you have copies of the poll questions. Polling data from news organizations is highly suspect in my mind, because they are trying to create a news story instead of just reporting the news.
Very smart James. If you ask the question, “Do you support abortion on demand for any reason up to the day of delivery” (which is precisely what Roe guarantees) the support drops WAY down. The “do you support Roe” question is just a red herring used to great effect by the MSM.
Nathan -
If we didn’t look at “popular vote” from time to time we wouldn’t have the discrimination amendment. Oh wait, maybe you’re right.
If we are going to discuss Roe and its progeny, let’s at least do so based on the facts. Roe does not “precisely . . . guarantee” an unfettered right to abortion. Secondly, Roe has been drastically modified since 1973. We are no longer upholding or rejecting Roe..we are addressing Roe and Planned Parenthood v. Casey and the other cases that have drastically modified Roe. I challenge anyone to show me language in the Court’s opinion (not some lame dissent) that supports an unqualified right to abortion. Such language does not exist but has been “created” to justify an attack on Roe and its progeny (a phrase I use delibarately, by the way). Let’s talk facts, not fiction here, and judge Mr. Roberts accordingly.
For those who believe women need viable alternatives to abortion, there is a facility right next door to Geroge Tiller’s aborton clinic called “Choices medical Clinic” that offers alternatives to abortion and all the support that a woman facing an unintended pregnancy would need. They can always use volunteers and money to help do their work. Please consider donating time and/or money if you believe in positve alternatives to abortion. They are a wonderful group of people located at 538 S Bleckley and their web site is http://www.choicesmc.org.
Sorry SBP….I know it makes you uncomfortable that a baby could be aborted for any reason at any time, but that is precisely what Roe allows. You might ask yourself….if the “fetus” has as much right to life as your appendix….why are you so uncomfortable?
Damoon,Thanks for the information.
Mister Twister or Jed might twist what you wrote to mean that Christians want to control everyone’s sex lives and that “fundies” are self-righteous, so this is just a warning. :)
Roe vs Wade is the right to privacy. Yes! It has been modified! Aborotion is legal only under the circustances of the states.
1st Trimester cannot be regulated, since fetus at this stage cannot live outside the womb in any circumstances.
2nd and 3rd Trimester can be regulated by the states, even up to banning 3rd trimester abortions.
just last year, it is now illegal to peform ‘partical-birth’ aborition or dilation & extration.
There are also some leeway to the states for aborition procedures with minors and parental consent.
It might be slowly modified, but it will never be fully illegal in this country.
If those who favor abortion on demand really believe such polls, then they should not worry about whether or not Roe is overturned. They would count on the electorate and the legislative process to ensure that abortion remains legal. But the fact is, the pro-abortion lobby does not trust that people left to democratic processes would leave abortion quite so unlimited as the courts have done.
NoJoCo–
Yes, that is my position, and I’ll repeat it here. The die-hard anti-abortion foes are interested in stopping abortion only because they see forcing a woman to have an unwanted child as PUNISHMENT for immorality.
If they really wanted to stop abortion, or drastically reduce it, they would be 100 percent behind thorough, scientific birth control education and make birth control easily available. (This is what European countries have done, and their abortion rates are a tiny percent of ours.)
But Randall Terry and all the other abortion foes are diametrically opposed to birth control or even talking about it in school. Right now, the Bush administration-backed “abstanince only” sex ed program feeds kids misinformation about birth control failure rates and STD’s.
Why? There’s only one logical answer–
They want to discourage people from having any sex outside of their moral proscription–that is, between a man and woman joined together in marriage, for procreation only.
This is still the position of the Catholic Church, so I’m really not saying anything too radical here.
Nevermind that conservative REPUBLICANS are the biggest hypocrites in adhering to this standard, since Ken Mehlmen and Dan Gurley were chose to be two top dogs in the Republican National Committee and are also practising “sodomites”, among many, many others.
You seem to be able to ridicule this position, NoJoCo. Now why don’t you try to refute it . . .
This is a very interesting poll. I’m wondering how the members of the Supreme Court would respon if we could get a poll on them.
In 1992, Planed parenthood v Casey the court couldn’t come to a majority to affirm that R v W was in fact “good law”. The refused to overturn it because abortion had become such a big part of our culture.
Another proud moment for our Supreme Court and our “living constitution”!
They might as well consult a Ouija Board to decide cases before them!
Hank
Hi Damoon, NoJoCo,It all boils down to this; do you trust a woman, in consutation with her doctor, to make the decisions that are right for her?Our nation and our constitution were founded on the principle of self-determination, that insofar as possible, decisions be made by the people that have to live with them. Sure, we may make mistakes in the process, but they’re our mistakes, and we live with them too.If you don’t trust people to make their own decisions, who do you trust to make them? Someone who doesn’t have to live with to consequences? If that’s the case, there’s a wide selection of countries out there where everybody has to do exactly what they’re told. Admittedly, that’s a lot simpler, but it’s never been as successful!As someone once said, our form of government is the worst possible, except for all the others.
Jed,
Do you trust people to not murder wach other?
Why should we have laws that say it is illegal to murder when it really comes down to trusting each other to make the right decision…
If the unborn child is a human life worthy of protection (which I and many others think it is) then it doesn’t matter if we should trust the mother to make the right choice.
Trusting the mother to make the right choice for her has led to over 1 million abortions a year.
I believe it is wrong. Has nothing to do with trust.
Hey Twister,As an addition, back a few decades ago, there were a lot of preachers demanding that penicillin be banned, since it cured venereal disease, and thus undid God’s chosen punishment for fornication. I suppose there may still be a few of those kooks left, but most of the christian community has come around on that issue, so there’s still hope they may on reproductive and gay rights too. They just need a bit of nudging.
You give too much credit to the kooky Christians, Jed. They’re running the country, my friend, and the only “coming around” they’re doing is voting out moderates and voting in Tiahrts and Brownbacks.
Penicillin cured “vd” for men. So of course preachers weren’t going to inveigh against it for long.
Abortion is one solution for a women’s unwanted pregnancy. It is one way women can overcome their female biology and reach goals that have nothing to do with being a housewife and mother.
Thus the powers that want to maintain women in their traditional role (the Catholic patriarchy comes to mind) know that abortion allows women to move beyond the allotted “place,” and so they oppose it, as do the right-wing women like Phyllis Schafly and Dr. Laura (who you notice tell women to stay at home but they work in the marketplace and make lots of money).
The old double standard–alive and well in the mind of conservatives.
“A man is a bee and a woman is the flower . . . ”
Men can fool around because . . .well, they’re so much man . . . but a woman must be modest and in the kitchen.
Dear Nathan,Do I trust people not to murder each other? I don’t trust you not to, but I do trust the vast majority of people with my life every day. So do you, whether you want to or not! Our murder laws are enforcible only because a vast majority of people agree with them. That same vast majority obviously doesn’t agree with your viewpoint, given the abortion statistics you guys like to sling around. That’s what makes outlawing abortion unenforcible, and unenforcible laws always do great damage to our respect for rule of law, respect that is the only reason our society functions. You seem willing to demolish the house because you don’t like the sink, but maybe the rest of us prefer to live with the sink rather than end up houseless.
Jed,
Is something only right or wrong depending on how many people agree with it?
Nathan,We weren’t talking right or wrong, we were discussing legal or illegal. There’s a distinction. You have the right to try to change the law, but there’s a right and a wrong way to do it. You do it wrong, and you destroy everything for everybody.Thoreau said that “A man more right than his neighbors constitutes a majority of one,” but how are the rest of us to know he’s more right unless he rationally convinces us? So, in a very practical sense, right and wrong are a matter of consensus.Your side in this particular issue has thrown everything but rationality into your fight, leading the rest of us to conclude you don’t have a rational reason, just dogma. You’ve been doing that on a lot of issues lately, so eventually you’ll lose. But in the meantime, you’re causing an immense amount of grief to a lot of people. You need to get rational or get gone. For starters, you need to learn what a rational argument is. I haven’t seen one yet!
You are dead wrong, Bisoni. Read the cases..or read Joe Williams’ post. States can regulate abortion after the first trimester. And they do.
There’s the deeper political aspect of abortion. You’ll note that conservative politicians devote a great deal of time talking about abortion, but they don’t really do anything about it. Oh sure, they pass laws against late-term abortion, but from what I’ve read, that was never real common. Pay attention during the next election cycle. As we get closer to the next elections, the volume will go way up about abortion. The GOP uses the issue to turn out it’s base. “It’s your duty to God to turn out and vote against killing babies and oh, while you’re at it, vote for the GOP so we can stop the Godless Democrats from killing babies.” The GOP doesn’t want to see a total ban on abortion. That and gay issues keep the religious right stirred up and turns them out to vote. Imagine what would happen to the GOP if they didn’t have abortion issues to mobilize “the troops”.
Jed,
Oh. You want to have a rational discussion?
No problem.
When does human life begin or when is it worthy of protection in your eyes?
When you are capable of one, I’d enjoy it. Until then, may I recommend any of several good classes on rational discourse in the Philosophy Dept. at WSU?Pass one, and you might even understand my answer to your questions.
Hey Twister,Given where they started from, the churches have come a long ways on women’s rights. At least they’ve mostly admitted that women aren’t chattel! In another century or so, they might even get it right! Hope springs eternal….
I was elected as pro-life Republican committeeperson and got to meet many pro-lifers.
There is one way I very much disagree with the strategy of pro-lifers. That is there “all or nothing” mentality where their conscience supposedly won’t let them vote for insufficient measures. All the while liberalism is winning because liberals are more crafty regarding gradualism and get stuff by us over many years we never would have believed.
Pro-lifers shot themselves in the foot by passing a bill against late term (or was it partial birth) which the governor clearly would veto. They predicted, and perhaps accurately, that a “women’s health” excuse would be exploited. So what do we have for their purity in voting? Nothing, and not a chance with a Hillary-loving governor now.
The only chance pro-lifers have to deal with the likes of Tiller is to quit bickering about whether life begins at conception or at the first brain waves or whatever, and let’s agree that by third term medical science now confirms it is an autonomous baby. If we cut back to this, we can get a large majority and maybe even restrict Tiller’s operation if we can get enough public support to counteract his own lobbying effort$ and tho$e of Planned Parenthood.
Who knows? If we get widespread agreement on third trimester, that could make a big difference. It may even allow the SCOTUS to finally accept modern scientific evidence and afford civil rights to pre-natural delivery babies. Sure it isn’t All We Want, but it would be the first significant dent we’ve made in decades.
Alan
Alan–if you want to reduce or stop abortions, why do you also oppose birth control education in public schools and easy availibility of birth control to anyone who wants it?
(Watch for the “tortured logic” answer . . . this should be “good.”)
Good grief: the arguments for and against abortion.What it boils down to is this:Some people think the “fetus” is a human being from conception, and thus subject to equal protection via the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights. Anything wrong with that? Opps, Roe v Wade changed the govenrments interpretation of that. Some people think there is a higher authority than the government. For thinking such thoughts, their called religious fanitics, the christian right, yadda, yadda, yadda, words, words, words.Others think that it is just a “fetus”, hence, it has no more rights than the appendix. Flush it down. Chop it up and use it for stem cell research. For this, their called liberals, murderers…yadda, yadda…see above.Me? I happen to think that at the moment of conception, we got a human being growing. But I’m not going to be the worlds watcher. I will, however, mourn the loss of the child. I think it is a sad time indeed when a mother has to, or is forced to, choose abortion. Thankfully, I’ve never walked in her shoes, and wouldn’t want to.
JM,Yes, it’s a sad day when a woman has to choose abortion, and I’ve seen a lot of those sad days. Fortunately, nearly all have the support of family or friends to get them through such times. Forced? Yes, the circumstances of their lives force them to, but I’ve also seen the doctor refuse to do abortions when he suspects they’ve been coerced into coming. And I’ve seen women who have been told by their physicians to either end a wanted pregnancy or get their affairs in order. And I’ve seen a nine-year old girl, molested by a trusted Church School teacher, who would have been severely damaged for life if she tried to carry to term. I’ve seen couples who lost medical coverage due to layoffs, who were given a choice between abortion and bankruptcy. And I’ve seen women who were brutally raped, who weren’t about to bring another one of “him” into the world. There are as many stories as their are women, so I could go on all day, but I think you get the picture.Yes, it’s a sad day, and the howls of protesters just make it sadder. But until the circumstances that make it necessary are changed, you have no right to demand an end to abortion!
I hope everyone reads your post, Jed. It was very, very intelligently written.
You are right Jed.
I can’t form a rational argument.
Who am I kidding by actually wanting to protect life…
This is why this issue is seen through complete opposite view points.
So…if a woman is a victim of a rape by Dennis Rader and survives and gets pregnant by virtue of his attack, you are saying that she should be required to bear his child? No exceptions?Or pregnant by her father as a result of incest?
Uh, excuse me, Jed, but where did I say that I demanded a stop to abortion? What I did was state an opinion. The same thing you are doing here.Protest is a form of opinion. Where would the African Americans be today if they didn’t protest the way they have been treated here?When protest takes the form of violence, then it’s a problem. How can one call for the end of taking lives, then take lives themselves? Answer: They can’t.But let so-called christians protest (peacefully) something you believe in, and you call it howling. Interesting.I stated my feelings about abortion, and I will mourn the loss of a child…as I stated earlier.Please get your facts in order.
JM,When I called it howling, believe me, I was being charitable. It amounts to abuse, pure and simple! Some time ago, I had spent an afternoon talking to a young couple with two boys who had been told by her physician that with her medical condition, she would be dead before the end of her second trimester if she continued her pregnancy. They had both wanted that baby, and were very distraught, but went ahead with the abortion. Afterward, as I helped her into the car, one of the anti’s ran up and shouted “Tell your dead baby ‘Happy Birthday!’”Such tactics go way beyond what I was taught about peaceful protest back during the civil rights movement. Sure, it’s peaceful, compared to shooting patients( which has been discussed on anti-abortion sites as a possible next step, since shooting doctors has proved ineffective)but it speaks to a hateful attitude toward people doing the best they can in a bad situation. And when they present badly photoshopped pictures and so-called patient accounts written by people who have never seen the inside of a clinic as their “evidence,” we have to conclude that they are as dishonest as any other propagandists. If that’s the face you wish to put on christianity, can you blame people for not wanting any part of it?
Jed,Ya did it again. Go back and reread what I wrote. I believe I wrote “so-called Christians”. There is a major difference between what I wrote and what you inferred: “If that’s the face you wish to put on christianity, can you blame people for not wanting any part of it?”If you can’t get that right, I have to question your examples. Are they fiction? Taken off the net? It makes me wonder if you’re not a propagandist yourself.”D” in reading.Protesters, no matter the cause, are going to say things that are hurtful and spiteful. That’s why they call it protesting.More to your point: If her physician told her that having the baby would kill her, why wasn’t the procedure done in a hospital? It is a legal procedure. Are you going to tell me that the couple was so naïve, they didn’t notice a protest going on at this clinic? Or did it just so happen that the protesters gathered while the procedure was taking place?If you’re going to give examples, at least make them believable.Abortion is, and always will be, a major point of contention in this country. And you are correct in your assertion that until the circumstances that make many abortions necessary change, there will be many sad days.The medical field is getting closer to ensuring the viability of premature infants. Given that abortion may be the only answer to the death of the mother if the infant is carried to term (she could opt for early forced delivery: see above), or in circumstances of rape, where does that leave the unborn child? If it’s medically viable for the fetus to survive the abortion procedure, does the fetus then fall under the protection of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights? If not, why not?
The best we could do with this issue is compromise. Abortion will never be illegal, nor unrestricted. If a fetus is unable to live outside the womb under any circumstances, that makes it a parasite, part of the woman’s body and therefore, her domain. If the fetus is viable, able to live with proper life support outside of the womb, it should be considered a separate entity. I think that this is the best we can do.
All the philisophiocal/religious questions of “When life begins” will never resolve anything, because we’ll never agree. The devout Christians believe life begins at birth, the athetists think it begins at delivery…we can’t make laws based on religion, so I think medical science is a good guage.
I call it the “viable” solution.
JMUnfortunately no, none of those accounts were fictional, or taken from sources other than my own experience. I’ve been a volunteer escort at clinics for about five years now, and believe me, those are only the barest few of the stories I’ve seen and heard. The only one that didn’t occur within that time-frame was the rape victim; that was my daughter.I’m sorry if “so-called christians” cuts no ice with me; it’s simply a distancing tactic used by christians to avoid responsibility when their teachings lead to abuse!Do you think the protests are an occasional thing? There’s a small hard-core of protesters that show up every day that abortions are scheduled, and several of them have been involved in clinic bombings or other violence. There’s no way to avoid them. A few shout threats, a very few have tried to grab the patients and drag them away, and have been repeatedly arrested in their attempts to make payments on their stairway to heaven. Several escorts have been assaulted- fortunately, they knew how to handle it. I haven’t been, other than from one old fart who liked to come up behind escorts and kick their ankles, but that’s really minor, and he no longer shows up.The reason the couple didn’t have the abortion at a hospital is that hospitalization wasn’t medically necessary, and is much more expensive. Usually, people in that situation are sent to a clinic rather than a hospital.Every case we get is different. That’s the nature of the beast. When legislators try to regulate it, any laws they can write fall short enough that disasters can, and do occur. Many involve intent, which is legally full of problems, others demand a solid medical diagnosis where there are only probabilities. There are some things law is not good at!I have never seen a case of abortion where the fetus was viable in any practical sense. The clinic where I work now does no late-term abortions. Tiller does a very few, and those involve severe birth defects. Late-term abortions are not a problem; they’re a propaganda tool, plain and simple!Does that answer your questions?
Sorry, typo in the above post. I meant, the devout Christians believe life begins at conception. Silly me.
Jed,”I’m sorry if “so-called christians” cuts no ice with me; it’s simply a distancing tactic used by christians to avoid responsibility when their teachings lead to abuse!”Quite a statement there. Seems to me you’re accusing me of being a Christian with the ingrained capacity to distance myself from any responsibility simply because you think I am a Christian. O yeah: the abuse thing. What abuses are Christians teaching?Abusers of what exactly? Your opinion? A woman’s right to abortion? A person’s right to protest? Or just the fact that they are Christians! I think the last is closer to the truth as you see it.For the record, I have never stated in any of my comments that I was, am or ever will be a Christian. That is no ones business but mine. Again, you have misread my writing.As for answering my questions: not even close. Go back and reread my last paragraph and tune your answers to the questions asked there as stated in context with the whole paragraph (You’d make an excellent politician). What you wrote as the so-called answers to my questions are obfuscations, pure and simple. More party propaganda, in my view. Next thing, you’ll be accusing me of being a Christian AND a Republican.Shoot…they’ll be taking my magic wand away from me.
JMI didn’t answer that because I’m not an expert on constitutional law. My reading of the bill of rights doesn’t find much relating to the rights of children. Children don’t have a right to keep their rooms secure from parental search and seizure, for instance. Much of the constitution is very fuzzy in that area, and traditionally deferred to the parents. The courts are going to have to decide such things.Forgive me for the so-called christian remark. I hear that phrase used so often by christians to mean “that’s not us, that’s those other christians,” that I’m sick to death of it! Most of us non-christians can’t tell the difference until someone starts shooting.As for christian abuses, the christians have held political power for about 1700 years. I dare you to find me a space of 17 years in a row, a mere 1% of that time, when no christians were slaughtering each other, or anyone else they could get their hands on, over matters of religion.You might, while you’re looking that up, also find and read a translation of the “Malleus Malificarum,” a root doctrine from which the continuing christian discrimination against women derives, as well as the persecution of pagans. These are just a few; the full list takes up volumes.Or are they just those other christians?Now I have known many decent people who are christian, as well as decent Buddhists, Muslims, Ba’Hais, Hindus and Atheists. Their religion didn’t make them decent, they would have been just as decent in any other religion. I just find it disturbing that any religion with that much blood on it’s hands has the gall to claim any moral high ground.As for politics, no thanks, to any party!
Jed,All religions have blood on their handsm but that’s not the point we were discussing, was it?You seem to be an expert in various religions, but claim to know little about constitutional law, even though you have taken the constitutional high ground on abortion. Selective indeed.The viability of the fetus, and science’s ability to ensure that viability at earlier and earlier stages goes part and parcel with the abortion argument as to when the fetus can be granted rights under the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.My questions asked for your opinion, not a cop-out.I’m glad you have friends in various religions. I am sure many of them are decent human beings.Another question: Does the blood on your hands from the support you give to abortion wash off easily? I find not a whole lot different from the blood spilled by religious nuts. Only in this case, it consists entirely of childrens blood.
Looks like “cat’s got the tongue” of Alan.
He declined to answer the question of why if one is really against abortion, one would also be against birth control and sex ed so people know how to use it.
Any of you other anti-abortion folks want to clear up this seemingly huge contradiction?
*****
I think I know the answer–anti-abortion leaders at least really aren’t that interested in reducing or eliminating abortion. What they are interested in is punishing women who have sex outside their proscribed definition of “morality.” It’s all about the punishment–it’s not about the “baby.”
The pro-abortion diatribe is very reminiscent of the vitriolic speech and writings I remember when I was a child. A child living in Germany in 1933 to be exact.
Not to value human life in any form is not to value life.The rationalization and hate posted by pro-abortion individuals and groups such as NRAL and Planned Parenthood are replays of the same ideas I heard against Jews, Slavs, Gypsies etc.
I never thought after becoming an American that I would hear such hate again. I was wrong.
Right, Schempel. You’re gonna tell me you lived through the holocaust and abortion is just like it.
Ja, dat ist un bigga pile of horse schizen.
An 80 year old German immigrant who can post on the internet and knows who NARAL is . . . wow, that’s staying pretty politically savvy.
Don’t Bush me, dude . . .
I’m a little suspicous. Notice how the guy doesn’t have an accent?
This was an internet hoax that was going around awhile back, holocaust survivor “shocked by abortion.”
Planned parenthood = Nazi genocide.
Yeah, you betcha.
Oh JM,You cut me to the quick!My opinion is that the 4th amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure extend all the way through a person’s body, giving us a right to privacy concerning whatever medical procedures we wish to have our doctors inflict upon us. That’s my opinion, although the courts may see it differently.As far as being an expert in comparative history of religion, it’s a subject my mother did much reading on, and which we discussed on many occasions. I inherited her books, and have done a fair amount of reading on the subject since, but I’m hardly an expert, just someone who’s read more about it than the average christian.And yes, just as human beings, we all have plenty of blood to go around, which makes us all pretty equal on that score, so when you religious kooks (yes, your rhetoric makes that pretty plain)start demanding that everybody follow your superior moral guidance, we tend to get out the salt trucks.
“so when you religious kooks (yes, your rhetoric makes that pretty plain)start demanding that everybody follow your superior moral guidance, we tend to get out the salt trucks.”O goody, now I’m a religious kook for voicing an opinion. I won’t even go there.”Medical procedure we wish our doctors to inflict on us”Interesting way of looking at it. Sounds to me like you have a basic disrespect for doctors as a whole, being as how they “inflict” their procedures on us. How in the world can you even trust them to perform an abortion under those beliefs?Your last paragragh makes no sense at all. Who has blood on their hands? Everybody? According to you we all do. And that makes us equal? I would beg to differ, but then I’m labeled a “religious kook” so what do I know?I quess answering my original question is something you have a problem dealing with. That’s okay: I fully understand. Keep them salt trucks full.
Fortunately this 78 year old has more intelligence than these mindless kids blogging this board. It is obvious you never heard of the Kindertransport, have you.
It was once thought that each subsequent generation would advance society, but since the baby boomer generation, the morality of society and society as a whole has decayed. The “computer smart” idiots of today’s youth are a prime example of de-evolution. Most are incapble of intelligent discussion, rationale thought and with few exceptions, all have adopted moral relativism as their means to judge values.
Tom Brokaw was correct in name the generation of the 30s and 40s as the greatest generation. The 70s through today are without question the worst generations this country has produced and these generations will be the reason America fails as a country and will lead it into third world chaos. What is unfortunate is that many of the same people that are pro-abortion and posters to this board have already polluted the gene-pool.
No value of life is no values at all.
Hey W,Tell Brokaw thanks for placing me in that “Greatest Generation,” but I don’t believe it for a minute!Close on to two millenia ago, the Roman writer Juvenal made a similar diatribe against his younger generation. So have people in every generation since then. If all that’s true, then those Romans must’ve been gods, for us to still be walking on two legs. No, the truth of the matter is that each generation is rotten at first, but it comes around, improves, finds it’s own way and place, and has selective enough memory that it can complain about how rotten the next one is! No, the gene pool isn’t any more polluted now than it’s ever been.By the way, I’ve never said that I was “pro-abortion;” that genie has been out for a long time now, and will never go back in the bottle. I’ve just lived long enough to have seen the results of it’s being illegal, and believe me, legal is better!
JM,Please re-read the sentence that you quoted back to me, with particular emphasis on the “we wish” part.I have great respect for doctors; they’ve done miracles for me. Just some weren’t all that pleasant while they were doing them.What I was pointing out ( and please don’t tell me you hadn’t figured this out already)is that all life, with the exception of a few bacteria, is dependent on the death of other life for it’s survival. Your rationalization that the deaths other people cause are somehow worse than the ones you cause is just plain insulting!
If I might interject here…my first basic thought is that a man has about as much right to determine whether abortion should or should not take place as a woman has to determine whether prostate surgery is necessary. Its really easy to say what should be done about a problem if you are not likely to have it! It’s unfortunate that the woman bears the brunt of this problem as it did require a man for conception to take place. Where did they go, do we think? Would anyone care to address the issue of what happens to the many unwanted children we’re discussing here if they are brought into this world? If the child is tortured, murdered, starves to death, etc., that’s the better choice? If that pregnancy brings about the downfall of an entire family, that’s a better choice? If the folks who have the loudest voices against abortion would step right up to adopt said babies, I might listen to what they have to say. If they aren’t prepared to be as “helpful” after the outcome of the birth, they need to sit down and shut up. Another case of “I don’t like this, and I don’t like that, but I don’t actually want to be bothered with DOING anything about it.” In that, people become another part of the problem rather than a part of the solution.I venture to think that if all men could become pregnant their opinions here would be a whole lot different. Methinks abortion would suddenly become a much needed proceedure. On another note, anyone who professes to be against abortion who also is against birth control education and methods is a hypocrite.
Well said Nola!
Hi Nola,Thanks for that post! I pretty much agree with everything you said, except: “If the folks who have the loudest voices against abortion would step right up to adopt said babies, I might listen to what they have to say.”Those people tend to bring their kids down to the clinic. I’ve seen a few of them send their kids to stand in the street in front of incoming cars to try to stop them. Others appear to be dressed from the dumpster behind the Salvation Army store, while their fathers wear high-dollar suits and gold watches. A few appear starved and abused.No, those people are not adoptive parent material!
Nora,There are some of us men who do try to do the right thing, but are thwarted by the very laws that make abortion possible. Example:When I got divorced, my ex-wife was pregnant with our child. I tried to keep her from aborting it. I offered to pay all the bills, raise the child myself (I raised our other child myself) and tried to get the courts to stop the abortion, all to no avail. How many times has that happened, Nora. You won’t hear of those instances. I still ache for that child.It seems that you and Jed have a very sad outlook on the human race as a whole. That in itself is sad: there are many more fine and caring people in the world than there are the outcasts you describe.The male figure not having any say in the birth or abortion of a child? I have a son who never had a chance to say hi to the world. How sad is that?
Schemple–what’s this talk of “polluting the gene pool?”
I’d have to say it looks like the Nazis got to you after all, if I believed you had even set foot in Germany in 1933, which I don’t.
Nola–that’s about the fifth time someone has asked the antis why if they’re against abortion, they’re also against birth control and the education to properly use it.
You notice we haven’t gotten one response to that question.
We have been called Nazis though . . . real nice . . .
Okay, Antares, I’ll answer your question:I am for sex education, I am for birth control.I have never called anyone who supports abortion nazis. Never would.
JM, I am sincerely sorry for your loss of a child that you both wanted and would have apparently been a wonderful father to. I don’t believe that your particular situation is the norm in the abortion arena, however. By the same token, most women are not going through this proceedure because they are whores who use it as a form of birth control. The trauma, both mentally and physically, from an abortion is nothing to be sneezed at. Most women who have endured this have no desire to ever go through it again. It isn’t typically a decision made lightly, and these women are haunted by the loss of the child for the rest of their lives. For anyone who is not involved to question this decision is, at best, assinine. To interfere is despicable. No, I do not believe abortion should be performed after the first trimester, although sometimes there are circumstances making it necessary. I also do not believe I, or anyone else, am competent to make someone else’s decision on this issue.
Well said, Nora. All we can really do is offer support and alternatives to women in those circumstances. I’ve honestly never met a woman who was sorry she gave birth, but I’ve met many who regret that they choose to abort. In the long run, the easiest choice is often the hardest one to live with.
Good for you, J.M. However, you don’t represent either the leadership or the rank-and-file of the right to life groups out there.
Randall Terry seems to hate birth control and sex ed as much as he hates abortion.
The choice was made when the woman spread her legs and the man stuck it in.
Damoon–I know of two women who terminated their unwanted pregnancies and neither one of them regretted their decision.
This is another myth of the “right to lifers,” that women who have abortions suffer horrible guilt for the rest of their lives.
Not true, in a lot of cases.
Thanks for the profound insight there, Jed.
Of course the woman might be drunk. She might be emotionally disturbed, needy, or mentally impaired in any way. She might have been a victim of sexual child abuse (something like 25 percent of all girls are).
You Puritans can’t burn women at the stake anymore, but that doesn’t mean you don’t want to . . .
The same arguments JM Walker uses in his support of murder are probably very similar to those whom supported slavery. And you see where that ended up?
One can only hope the pro-abortion proponents will end up like the slave holders.
Hey All,We got somebody playing games here- That last post supposedly signed by me is a forgery! Whoever you are, if you can’t be honest here, go away!
Jed, I think everybody figured that one out pretty quick (well, most of us ;=)
Damoon,My experience has been pretty much opposite yours, in that nearly every woman I’ve known for any lenghth of time who’s had an abortion has expressed no, or few, regrets. It was necessary, they did it, and got on with their lives. One woman was 90 when she told me about it, had had her abortion in 1930, and went ahead to raise two sons who are among the most decent, intelligent, wonderful people I know!I guess we travel in different social circles.
Hey Hammer,Thanks! I hope they did- I have never, and would never say anything like that! My apologies and sympathy to anyone who’s feelings were hurt by our little joker.Jed
JM,My “outlook on the human race” isn’t sad; I’ve never had any expectation for us to be anything except thoroughly human, something, that for the most part, is worth celebrating! What makes me sad are the people who create as much misery in this life as they can, in hopes of bliss in the next! Somehow, I think they got it wrong.
Hi R Richardsen,I don’t recall any such arguments from JM, but the christian conservatives live primarily on recycled discredited arguments. I haven’t seen this so much on the abortion front as I have on gay rights, where almost everything they’ve said is straight from what they were telling us during the civil-rights era ( remove “nigger,” insert “faggot”). Maybe they didn’t count on some of us to have such long memories, but I was there, listening to those jokers cite scripture and wave bibles at us to justify segregation, and now their kids use the same old, tired rhetoric on other people! I would be so relieved just to sense one spark of creativity there, but the only thing they’ve created is a horde of little bigots. Glory be!
Well put, Jed. My memory goes back that far, too. People need to stop trying to tell other people what to do and how to live. If God has a problem with what they’re doing, He/She will deal with them in the appropriate time, I’m just sure. I’m not certain how appreciative God might be of folks doing His/Her job for Her/Him. I do not recall the chapter “Holier Than Thou” in my Bible. The guidelines as I understand them are how each of us should strive to live, not about browbeating others into submission pertaining to our idea of how “they” are supposed to live.
Antares and Jed, I’m speaking from ecperience, I have met MANY women in my life who regret having aborted, I’ve never met one who was sorry she choose to give birth. I worked in women’s treatment for years, so yes, we probably do have different “social” circles. I’ll bet you’re both a lot younger than me, too.
Hey Damoon,I’ll tell you my age if you’ll tell me yours!
Jed,Thanks for the back up on Richardsen’s rant. I think both of us know that I don’t call women who get abortions murderers.One of the first things I said was that I have not walked in their shoes, and would not want to. That is a decision I would not want to make.I will always, if asked, give my opinion that to me abortion is wrong. That is MY opinion. I’m not going to rant and rave about it, nor am I going to try to change someones opinion, unless they ask. That is my right.Writing in blogs, such as this, is an interesting way to find out just how much someone can and will turn your words around to make it seem like you said what some of these individuals WANT you to say. That tells me something about those individuals. I can discount their rants post quick.
Hey Damoon,Don’t you suppose it’s BECAUSE you worked in women’s treatment that you met these women? Most of the women I’ve known didn’t seem to need it, and wouldn’t have been around such facilities for you to meet!As for sorry they chose to give birth, maybe not in so many words, but I’ve known women who gave up children for adoption who seemed to have considerably more problems with that than the women who chose abortion. That’s hardly an easy row to hoe either!And I think often about a 15 year-old girl I met about 25 years ago, who was alone and trying to raise twin boys fathered by her mother’s boyfriend. Due probably to her total lack of parenting skills and education, her year-and-a-half old sons were already so damaged that their BEST hope was to live in some institution for the rest of their lives. We did what we could to help, but it was way too late. She disappeared a year later, and I have no idea what’s happened since, but I can’t help but think if she’d had a chance to finish her education before she started her family, she’d probably be much better off today.
Hey JM,My rule of thumb has always been that you have the right to express your opinion to someone in trouble ONCE; after that, it’s interference. People have the right to make their own decisions, and I generally trust them to make the one that’s right for them.The problems occur when control freaks, religious or otherwise, take it upon themselves to decide what’s right for their neighbors. These people also tend to be the game-players you mentioned.
Jed,How true. It works for ALL sides. There are fanatics for and against.
Yeah, JM,Don’t you know it! I’d like to think there’s some way to negotiate a lot of these issues, but the fanatics tend to be, well, fanatical about it, which, due to my contrary nature, tends to push me farther the other way. When push comes to shove, and it will, because fanatics are involved, I suppose I’ll have to side with the pros, because they make me a bit less uncomfortable than the antis, but it still leaves me stuck with being uncomfortable.
Jed, of course it’s because of my work that I got to know many women in all sorts of circumstances up close and personal. My point is that just because someone has never met a woman who regretted having an abotion doesn’t mean that it’s all a myth and they don’t exist. The women I’ve known (and there have been a lot)regretted having aborted more than not. I agree with you, there are somethings worse than abortion and I can tell you lots of stories about that, too. Nothing is black or white. I’m still personally opposed to abortion, and I’ll try to help a women find an alternative to it every time I have the opportunity to do so. But, I don’t believe that outlawing abortion would put an end to it.
PS I’m 52, but don’t tell anyone!
My God, Damoon! You’re old enough to be…… My younger sister, LOL.
Damoon,OK, as per our agreement,I’m 60. You’re practically a teenager!Yes, and it’s just as much a myth that all women suffer tremendous guilt over it. That’s why it needs to be a personal decision, with no coercion either way.
Holy poop! no wonder everyone sounds like they got a brain. They been around long enough to grow one!
You got that right!!!!
57. Let the geriatrics unite.