(01-26-2010 11:44 AM)BleedsHuskieRed Wrote:  

(01-26-2010 11:25 AM)Rebel Wrote:  

(01-26-2010 11:22 AM)BleedsHuskieRed Wrote:  Whats wrong with being irresponsible and laying all sorts of pipe then realizing I screwed up and going to get an abobo?

Take an RU-482. Don't wait for the child to have a developed heart and brain before you suck it out with a vacuum cleaner.

Interesting that you support RU-482.

Why?

(01-26-2010 11:22 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I think it starts when there is brain waves in the fetus. I could see offering protection then, but both sides get so damned caught up in their tug of war neither side will concede an inch.

The creator of Life says it starts at conception, as does basic science which he gave us.


but keep arbitrarily deciding when life starts based on nothing more than a desire to be God ultimately.

Had Tim Tebows mom taken RU-482 or had an abortion at any stage of Pregnancy, there would be no Tim Tebow. Hello, basic science.

(01-26-2010 12:09 PM)GGniner Wrote:  The creator of Life says it starts at conception,

Who is that?

(01-26-2010 10:59 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  This decision has absolutely no place in govt. State, Federal, Municipal, it's just shouldn't be in that realm.

Couldn't agree more. How can the government legislate what a woman does with her body? Abortion is a deeply personal thing that no generic law can control. The decision to abort should be made based upon personal and religious considerations.

Its not the womans body in question, its the other person's body(i.e. innoncent baby) inside the womans womb... is the point.

again, if you want it legal just admit you agree that some Humans have Property Rights over other Humans and its okay for them to murder them if they so choose.

I'd rather they not play the ad. Super Bowl ads should be reserved for funny beer comercials, amazing movie trailers, and the like. No serious ads, whatever the topic (and I'm including Viagra & other drugs), during the Super Bowl. But it's their money and there time, so they probably aren't going to ask me.

(01-26-2010 12:45 PM)GGniner Wrote:  Its not the womans body in question, its the other person's body(i.e. innoncent baby) inside the womans womb... is the point.

again, if you want it legal just admit you agree that some Humans have Property Rights over other Humans and its okay for them to murder them if they so choose.

How is it different if you want it illegal? Aren't you saying that the fetus has property rights over the mother in that case?

(01-26-2010 12:54 PM)jh Wrote:  
Super Bowl ads should be reserved for whomever pays the money to run the ad.

Hate to burst your bubble, but the NFL and the station airing the Superbowl are businesses for profit.

We don't get to determine what ads they play....unless we're willing to pony up the millions it takes for a 30 second time slot. If there are negative effects of the ad, it won't be repeated. What do you guys have to fear?

(01-26-2010 12:56 PM)jh Wrote:  

(01-26-2010 12:45 PM)GGniner Wrote:  Its not the womans body in question, its the other person's body(i.e. innoncent baby) inside the womans womb... is the point.

again, if you want it legal just admit you agree that some Humans have Property Rights over other Humans and its okay for them to murder them if they so choose.

How is it different if you want it illegal? Aren't you saying that the fetus has property rights over the mother in that case?

That logic is quite illogical.

(01-26-2010 01:00 PM)Rebel Wrote:  

(01-26-2010 12:54 PM)jh Wrote:  
Super Bowl ads should be reserved for whomever pays the money to run the ad.

Hate to burst your bubble, but the NFL and the station airing the Superbowl are businesses for profit.

We don't get to determine what ads they play....unless we're willing to pony up the millions it takes for a 30 second time slot. If there are negative effects of the ad, it won't be repeated. What do you guys have to fear?

It's like you didn't even read my post. What, exactly, do you think it's their money and their time means if not that?

(01-26-2010 01:01 PM)Rebel Wrote:  

(01-26-2010 12:56 PM)jh Wrote:  

(01-26-2010 12:45 PM)GGniner Wrote:  Its not the womans body in question, its the other person's body(i.e. innoncent baby) inside the womans womb... is the point.

again, if you want it legal just admit you agree that some Humans have Property Rights over other Humans and its okay for them to murder them if they so choose.

How is it different if you want it illegal? Aren't you saying that the fetus has property rights over the mother in that case?

That logic is quite illogical.

How so?

Abortion is a deeply personal thing that no generic law can control.



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

(01-26-2010 01:04 PM)jh Wrote:  

(01-26-2010 01:01 PM)Rebel Wrote:  

(01-26-2010 12:56 PM)jh Wrote:  

(01-26-2010 12:45 PM)GGniner Wrote:  Its not the womans body in question, its the other person's body(i.e. innoncent baby) inside the womans womb... is the point.

again, if you want it legal just admit you agree that some Humans have Property Rights over other Humans and its okay for them to murder them if they so choose.

How is it different if you want it illegal? Aren't you saying that the fetus has property rights over the mother in that case?

That logic is quite illogical.

How so?

Mother carries viable child to term, it's born and lives as a separate human being. Mother decides to abort, the child's life is ended.

No, they are not even remotely equal.

What's bull**** about this is the party of Goldwater has triangulated into this morphed philosphy. R's can't win elections without the social conservatives so they twist their logic to fit a square peg into a round hole. This is EXHIBIT freakin A of something you don't want the govt. involved in.

(01-26-2010 01:21 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  What's bull**** about this is the party of Goldwater has triangulated into this morphed philosphy. R's can't win elections without the social conservatives so they twist their logic to fit a square peg into a round hole. This is EXHIBIT freakin A of something you don't want the govt. involved in.

The fact that this seemingly non-partisan topic is now a Republican vs. Democrat argument is a fault of the Dems, IMO. I don't give a damn about either party. I'm also not one of these guys that says the day after conception, the woman must carry to birth. What I AM saying is that killing a child in utero that's a viable human being with a heartbeat and brain waves if f-ing wrong and damn a political party.

80% of chrmosomal mutations are aborted. Just for the record. I would bet the 20% who don't abort are your die hard social conservatives.

(01-26-2010 01:21 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  What's bull**** about this is the party of Goldwater has triangulated into this morphed philosphy. R's can't win elections without the social conservatives so they twist their logic to fit a square peg into a round hole. This is EXHIBIT freakin A of something you don't want the govt. involved in.

That's why I'm not an R.
Obama's socialist/communist agenda is why I'm not a D.
Why do I have to hate gay people and women who have abortions in order to get the size of the government reduced?
What's worse, even the R's don't actually do it--they just promise.
I don't want the government in my bank account or my bedroom.
There's no party for me.

(01-26-2010 01:23 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  80% of chrmosomal mutations are aborted. Just for the record. I would bet the 20% who don't abort are your die hard social conservatives.

...and you probably think black people are predisposed to play sports, Asians predisposed to engineering, and Indians predisposed to medicine as well, don't you?

I'm not following that last bit, but if I had a child with chromosomal mutations, knowing what I know I would try to talk my wife into an abortion. No doubt about it.

We had friends of the family who were convinced that God was going to cure the baby in the womb. The baby had trisomy 18 I think. I think the girl wanted to abort but the father's family were devout Catholics. It was tragic for everyone. Now how can you put a law into that? Can you see how some may want to abort? I fully understand people who want to take it to term for that miracle, but give people a choice.