Well, that was a pure and unadulterated example of Jefferson blatantly lying...

But then again, I guess both sides typically abstain from gross hyperbole...
Just like I don't believe in sarcasm...

How about some real conversation on the issue discussing real perspectives for a change. Speak up on the issues.

For or Against...
(And feel free to point out / differentiate on whether or not you feel that your opinion should not be expressed in law.)

1) Birth Control? For or Against?
2) Day after Pill?
3) Abortion before fetal heart-beat?
4) Abortion before the end of the first trimester?
5) Abortion before the end of the second trimester?

6) Abortion in case of mother's life at risk?
7) Abortion in case of rape/incest?
Abortion for minors without parental consent?
9) Abortion for minors without parental knowledge?


Feel free to add on anything that you want that I missed.
My opinion is For 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8.
Against 5, 9.

I agree with Jefferson. Anyone who thinks this is not a human being is either stupid or has a seared conscience.

Some honesty would do you well:
#1: EVERYBODY uses one form or another of birth control.
#2: The Day After Pill is not safe - or at least there are some VERY serious side-effects beginning to come to light. It needs more testing and refining.
#3: In many/most cases, there is a fetal heart-beat before the woman knows she's pregnant - therefore, no. This is not acceptable.
#4: You cannot have an abortion before the first trimester.
#5: No. FACTUALLY, this ends a pre-born life. It is murder.
#s 6&7 account for less than 1% of all abortions. Why not talk about the 99% that are basically for convenience only - post conception birth control. Until you ultra-liberals are willing to acknowledge that, there's really nothing to discuss.
#s 8&9: How stupidly insance can somebody be? School nurses have to get parental consent before they can give a kid an aspirin! But it's okay to take a kid to have an abortion without the parents knowing or consenting? This is nothing more than a bald-faced attempt - by the government - to further control families, parents and children. It is nothing short of communistic thinking.


The Ultra-Libs need to accept the FACT that if people want/decide to have sex, there are MANY ways to keep from getting pregnant. They are effective. They are almost 100% fail-safe. You CAN keep from getting pregnant. You DO NOT NEED an abortion.

You are pro-abortion, which means you are FOR THE KILLING OF PRE-BORN BABIES.

You can LIE all you want, you can call others liars, but the fact still remains: YOU ARE FOR THE KILLING OF PRE-BORN BABIES.

I'm not "lying" about anything.
The point is that the vast majority is for some form of abortion. A majority is for abortion during the first trimester.

You blindly alleged a strawman argument about the "120-week fetus", ignoring the fact that most people are for some form of abortion DURING the pregnancy. Most people are in favor of SOME time during the pregnancy being legal for pregnancy, and ANOTHER time being illegal.

As is typical with your posts, you fail to reflect reality.

Okay, I fail to reflect reality...

But once again, YOU OFFER ABSOLUTELY NO ANSWER TO THE QUESTIONS/STATEMENTS POSED.


You are a baby killer, you sick bastard.

Coming from you, that's hilarious. I don't even think you realize when you've told a lie...


Hey Alias...
You want to school Jefferson on the policy of Catholics? Or should I?


Side-stepping my issue. And for the record, who the f#%@ are you to decide whether or not somebody else gets the choice of choosing some "side-effects"? If they are informed, that's their call.
Back to the issue, if the "Day after Pill" were completely safe, would you be in favor of it or not?


You're dodging the issue. In those cases where a woman wants to abort before a fetal heart-beat is present, what is your opinion?


A logical (and honest) person would have realized/admitted I meant before the END of the first trimester...


*Murder* eh? Referencing the law...
Understood.
So what do you do when the law says it's not "murder" in the first trimester?


Actually, I was trying to cover ALL the basis, including the rarities.

Why won't you answer my question?

And for the record, why can't we talk about BOTH the "less than 1%" and the "99%"?


What age? All ages?

I think we would both agree that is stupid to require parental consent before a 17-year old could be given an aspirin...

So why are you hiding behind "stupid"?


Wow. Talk about completely out to lunch.

The government is FURTHER controlling families, parents, and children by allowing a 17-year old to get an abortion without the parents knowledge or without the parents permission.

Does that just sound incredibly stupid to everybody else too?

HOW is that "further control" by the government???


Okay. People CAN keep from getting pregnant.

But if they DO get pregnant, then what? Just tell them that they shouldn't have gotten pregnant, and that's all the pseudo-intelligence we need to apply to the issue?

Admitting it is the first step...


1) What "no answer" have I given to what "question/statement" posed?
2) You'll have to excuse me if somebody who often doesn't respond to "questions/statements" deriding me over supposedly not doing the same doesn't bore me to tears...


I have killed no baby. I'm a gay man for Pete's sake!
Quit frothing at the mouth and THINK...

If the majority choose to jump off a bridge, are you gonna jump also?