I'm neither pro-life nor pro-choice, and seeing dead bodies doesn't move me, because I know that when pictures of the dead are released to the public, it's usually either to fascinate or incite, and I find both uses repugnant. If you have any respect for those babies, you wouldn't post pictures of their mutilated remains for everyone to see. I know I wouldn't want my butchered body released for public display.

I can't believe I'm even bothering to respond to such stupidity.

1. Yes, there absolutely IS a baby involved in abortions. It is simply a pre-born, or un-born baby. Period. It has a heart-beat before most women know they're pregnant.

2. 10-12 year old victims of rape or molestation make up less than one-tenth of one percent of pregnancies that end in abortion. That's a stupid and irrelevant argument.


You need to bring something better than the Planned Parenthood hype to the debate.

No baby is involved in an abortion. That you insist on pretending there is one is your privilege, as is believing the earth is flat. I think killing actual babies is pretty vile but I also think telling lies is pretty bad. I think utter ignorance of reproductive facts is pretty bad, and I think the arrogance of deciding for other is really, really bad.

I've never had an abortion myself, and in fact took pretty big risks to have children because I have systemic lupus. Had I chosen to end a pregnancy, it would have been because I decided that at that time it would have been the best choice for myself and my family, not because of what you or any other uninvolved party chooses to believe.

No one should force anyone to abort, either. Yet where is the outrage that Bush and his misadministration gives Most Favored Nation status to China where forced abortion is a state policy.

1. Frogs have a heartbeat-so what? It's not a "baby" because you say it is. Neither legal precedent nor the Judeo-Christian scriptures consider a fetus or embryo a baby. That's an appeal to emotionalism and I can;t believe proliars continue to use something that stupid!
2. It's not irrelevent to the children who were impregnated by rape though. But once past the birth canal, your side seems to have little interest in actual children.

Have a nice day, now. I'm sure it's always pleasant in lala land.

Our 2nd son was born nearly 2-months pre-maturely. He was born on a Wednesday morning.

The day before, on a Tuesday, we could have gone in and had an abortion - and LIED TO OURSELVES THAT WE WEREN'T ABORTING A BABY.

But anybody with eyes, a brain, and a conscience knows better.

Save the rhetoric. Babies are being butchered, by the hundreds of thousands, in America today.

Answer me this, Jeff: do you believe in more sex ed?

Yes.

Are you deliberately dense? You child was born alive, however premature. What is aborted is not born alive and it is not a baby, what ever you may wish to pretend.

If you know where actual babies are being butchered and aren't going to the police, that makes you a real creep. Abortion, however, does not involve babies. I'm pretty sure from what you post that you and your spouse often lie to each other about a variety of things, but it's irrelevent to why your belief system should be imposed on anyone else. If it's not your womb, it's not your call.

Me dense? I think not!

Answer the question! Would we have aborted a FETUS or a BABY?

You WON'T answer the question because you KNOW the CORRECT answer - and the CORRECT answer PROVES that your rhetoric is shallow, wrong and utterly stupid.

Again, answer the question: WOULD MY WIFE AND I HAVE ABORTED A FETUS OR A BABY?

This from newcomer, foxfrog:
First, welcome...

Now, this is an absurd conclusion. After a child is born, he or she is not my kid either, but it surely is my call how that child is treated. If that child is abused or murdered. It is a strange thing, cos in one way, I would consider that the pro-choice folk are more caring for the woman who is pregnant. But then again, if you say it's "not your call" I would say that you are also including yourself in that, so it's not your call either. You're not your brother's (or sister's) keeper, right?

Maybe it is easier to remedy the burden of a social conscience by giving the mother the option to abort rather than to take the time, the energies, the practical and financial provisions and extend them to women who are having a crisis pregnancies?

So before you say it is not someone else's womb, you must make a certain conclusion that the "life" in that womb is not "living." I think Jefferson is making a compelling argument that the fact is Today's fetus is tomorrow's child. Is a fetus really not living, really not human? What then substantially is it?

...and do make sure that the womb, that is surrounded by a woman, is surrounded by a community willing to go the distance with her, should she have the baby.

OD