Originally Posted By barboy I am talking about your assumption that Chief should execute the "law of the land" irrespective of issue at hand. [And on a side note abortion, at its key issue, has nothing to do with equal gender rights.]
Originally Posted By FaMulan [And on a side note abortion, at its key issue, has nothing to do with equal gender rights.]<< I completely beg to differ barBOY. In my mind, your screenname and presumed gender are enough to recuse you from the abortion debate. Being male, you have no idea what it means to have the sovereingty over your own body compromised by the wishes and whims of others. In fact, as a male, you enjoy being pandared to and given access to lovely perks like viagra because male virility is all and women are there for your use. For there to be complete equality between the genders, women need complete sovereingty over thier bodies and the final say over medical decisions affecting every aspect of those bodies. If a woman chooses to carry a pregnancy to term, it's her choice. If she is the victim of rape or incest or she finds that the pregnancy will result in a child who will be severely, and I do mean severely, disabled, she along with her spouse, or parents and doctor are the ones who should make the decision to abort. Not any law at any level of government. Back to the two-year-olds and their belief that our current President is the Anti-Christ, there is no such thing. They're just afraid of him because he's a highly educated man of mixed race.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Pro-choice is the law of the land. Why should it trouble you that political leaders would uphold it?<< Because I believe it is immoral. I know that not everyone agrees with me and if I am to live in a pluralistic society that I will have to make compromises. One of them being that I have to respect that it is the law of the land, even though I personally find it to be repugnant and reprehensible. >>If it bothers you so much, you're really barking up the wrong tree because it's the Republicans who keep the abortion issue alive and well...they've had plenty of opportunity over the decades to craft a Constitutional Amendment outlawing the practice, and they've chosen not to.<< I know, why do you think I've left the Republicans behind? The reason being, they WANT abortion to remain legal so they can make political hay over it.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>The reason being, they WANT abortion to remain legal so they can make political hay over it.<< I know, they will never do anything about it.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Thank you, fkurucz, for being a sane conservative.<< And thanks for recognizing that we can agree to disagree.
Originally Posted By barboy ///your screenname and presumed gender are enough to recuse you from the abortion debate./// LOL!!!! bizarre, very bizarre So only females may comment on abortion? Hey Mr. X, DAR, Dabob, SPP, Kar2oon, davewasbaloo, RT, ecdc, FaMulan believes males have no voice in the abortion debate...........please refrain from posting on abortion. Hey Famulan if I go get a gender change may I then comment? Or does your edict only apply to those born female? even more bizarre ""Being male you have no idea what it means to have sovereinty over your body compromised by the wishes and whims of others"" especially when you get to the viagra part.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***I am talking about your assumption that Chief should execute the "law of the land" irrespective of issue at hand.*** He should. All politicians should. If they want to work towards CHANGING the law of the land, that's an entirely different matter (one the Republicans, for the third time, have not bothered to try to do during the many years they were entirely in charge). But so long as it IS the law, it's their job to uphold it, not undermine it.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***>>Pro-choice is the law of the land. Why should it trouble you that political leaders would uphold it?<< Because I believe it is immoral.*** Like I wrote, if you feel that way you are welcome to support candidates who feel likewise and will work on the issue to your satisfaction (let me know if you find any...I think you've got a few staunch allies on the SCOTUS at the moment, anyway, that's probably your best option for a win). In the meantime, why would it trouble you that lawmakers respect and uphold the law?
Originally Posted By barboy FaMulan as a female(you are female, right) your gender is enough to recuse you from the viagra deabate. LOL!!!!
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Obama can't be the anti-Christ. How silly. We all know Lady Gaga is.
Originally Posted By Labuda "LOL!!!! bizarre, very bizarre So only females may comment on abortion? " Any male may comment on abortion all he wants. But he has NO right to tell any woman what she can or cannot do with her body. Nobody except that woman should be the one making the decision to have that procedure performed on her body.
Originally Posted By barboy ///He should. All politicains should(execute the "law of the land")/// OK we are getting somewhere, good. But let's go back in time. Would it have bothered you if Pres. Buchanon or the very early Lincoln admin. carried out the Taney Court's decision of 1857? (It would bother me)
Originally Posted By barboy ///Nobody except that woman should be the one making the decision to have that procedure performed on her body./// I disagree entirely since others, aside from the would be mom, are directly affected by abortion.
Originally Posted By fkurucz "Being male you have no idea what it means to have sovereinty over your body compromised by the wishes and whims of others" Have you ever heard of the Draft?
Originally Posted By Labuda barboy - please go crawl back under the rock from when you have come. I know you're not one of the sock puppets we've seen here this week, but you're wrong. What a woman does with her body is her business and no one else's. Since I assume you're a conservative who's against health care reform, tell me this - who's going to pay for the raising of this unwanted child? Are you volunteering to feed and clothe an unwanted baby, plus love it, raise it, and pay for it to go to college?
Originally Posted By Mr X ***But let's go back in time. Would it have bothered you if Pres. Buchanon or the very early Lincoln admin. carried out the Taney Court's decision of 1857? (It would bother me)*** I don't know. And neither do you. Because neither of us lived in that era. I can tell you what disturbs me about government TODAY, and I can also tell you that abortion is WAY down on my priority list (like, once we eliminate all crime and poverty in America, then let's talk about ways to reduce abortion to nearly zero).
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Here's a novel idea: If you don't think you can care for a child...don't have sex. I know, I know...my expectations are far too high.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>In the meantime, why would it trouble you that lawmakers respect and uphold the law?<< Just to be clear, I believe that our elected officials should UPHOLD the law, even if they don't believe it is a just or fair law. What troubles me is that they support abortion rights in the first place. And yes, I know that many of you think I'm either evil or clueless for not supporting abortion. But I am entitled to be troubled that it is the law of our land and that our President is pro-choice. Just as you would be entitled to be troubled if wasn't the law of the land.
Originally Posted By Labuda Yeah, sadly that's very unrealistic, wahoo. Personally, I do wish there was a way to end abortion, BUT I realize it's none of my business what another woman does with her body. And, by all means, let's keep abortion legal so it remains safe for the women who undergo one.
