Another gop govt shutdown?!

[Danzig]

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/senate-bl...ned-parenthood

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Danzig

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/senate-bl...ned-parenthood

From the article you linked:

Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Lankford, one of the leaders of the defunding effort, replied, “I’m a dad of two daughters. I had something to do with the birth as well.”

Seriously, Senator? F*ck you very f*ck. You had nothing to do with the birth. Conception, sure. But I've got news for you, Senator- that's the fun part. The rest of it, which you had nothing to do with, is not.

[OldDog]

That's nice.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

From the article you linked:



Seriously, Senator? F*ck you very f*ck. You had nothing to do with the birth. Conception, sure. But I've got news for you, Senator- that's the fun part. The rest of it, which you had nothing to do with, is not.

Well I guess the Senator is saying he was involved with the part where life actually begins: conception. Others can take credit for the life ending procedures that they are so proud of.

[Danzig]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngu...ish-galloping/

Not that it matters, joey, but heres an article discussing the subject...and your contention of when life begins doesnt matter anyway

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngu...ish-galloping/

Not that it matters, joey, but heres an article discussing the subject...and your contention of when life begins doesnt matter anyway

Thanks for the article.

I wonder if the author thinks that "climate change" is settled science, even though he won't acknowledge that the idea that life begins at conception is a hell of a lot more settled.

His opinion, yours, and mine are all irrelevant to the truth of whether life begins at conception or not. But an answer to that question must exist. This debate was short-circuited by the Supreme Court in 1973, resulting in the deaths of 50 million human beings and counting.

The reality is that at conception:
1. A DNA series that does not match the mother or father is formed, resulting in the blueprint for a third human being.
2. The cells immediately begin to divide and grow, continually becoming more complex in structure and capability.
3. What was formerly two cells, the sperm and egg, is now one continuous living mass. It is obvious that no one individual exists in two completely different pieces on the macroscopic level, so this is earliest possible beginning of the individual.

The conservative approach is to not interfere with life after conception. Not political conservatism - but just sound judgment, since presumably none of us want to hurt an innocent human being.

Personally, I think most of the pro-abortion people just don't care whether life has begun or not at that point. Why should they question the gift that the inept Supreme Court gave them through their decision? They are interested in defending sexual irresponsibility. They do not wish to accept that there are risks and no form of birth control is 100% effective.

The matter at hand was not centered on the general case of abortion but that "Planned Parenthood", a misnomer if ever there was one, is selling body parts from aborted babies, and even alters their methods to obtain those valuable parts. They are caught red handed in the many videos that have been filmed. The "procedures" discussed are more suitable for comparison to the practices of Nazi "doctor" Joseph Mengele than they are for submission to the New England Medical Journal.

The Democrats are in a panic. And they should be. This has brought to light the macabre day-to-day operation of their slaughterhouse.

So yeah, the bad news for those of us who are pro-life is that currently the law lines up against us. But this event, along with the endless march of science showing the development of babies at earlier and earlier stages with more detail (like in digital ultrasound), the understanding of DNA and what it means, etc., is leading to a gradual change such that our momentum will eventually overturn the legality of in-utero murder.

[OldDog]

Now joey, you know you're not allowed to voice an opinion, not having a vagina and all.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by OldDog

Now joey, you know you're not allowed to voice an opinion, not having a vagina and all.

Well, maybe Donald Trump is showing everybody that this political correctness bullsh*t has gone too far.

And besides, half of those 50 million casualties were female, and half were male, so we should all be able to render an opinion.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Thanks for the article.

I wonder if the author thinks that "climate change" is settled science, even though he won't acknowledge that the idea that life begins at conception is a hell of a lot more settled.
...so, did you read the article? if so...how can you just repeat what you said above?
sperm and egg meeting is just one of many steps involved in what will ultimately, possibly, create a new human being. them doing the tango doesn't mean squat if the new combo doesn't get attached to the uterine wall...and then develop, etc, etc and remain til it gets far enough along to survive delivery.

His opinion, yours, and mine are all irrelevant to the truth of whether life begins at conception or not. But an answer to that question must exist. This debate was short-circuited by the Supreme Court in 1973, resulting in the deaths of 50 million human beings and counting. it didn't 'short circuit' anything. abortion had been legal in part of the united states from the time even before it was united..or anything was a 'state'

The reality is that at conception:
1. A DNA series that does not match the mother or father is formed, resulting in the blueprint for a third human being.
2. The cells immediately begin to divide and grow, continually becoming more complex in structure and capability.
3. What was formerly two cells, the sperm and egg, is now one continuous living mass. It is obvious that no one individual exists in two completely different pieces on the macroscopic level, so this is earliest possible beginning of the individual.

The conservative approach is to not interfere with life after conception. Not political conservatism - but just sound judgment, since presumably none of us want to hurt an innocent human being.

Personally, I think most of the pro-abortion people just don't care whether life has begun or not at that point. Why should they question the gift that the inept Supreme Court gave them through their decision? They are interested in defending sexual irresponsibility. They do not wish to accept that there are risks and no form of birth control is 100% effective.
way more involved than 'irresponsibility'. but, like the post above, and what i'm writing here...it probably won't matter. i suggest you get all the facts about who gets abortions and why, and how many were on bc when they got pregnant. or circumstances changed, etc. and there's the pesky biological thing to begin with. i'm 48 now. guess what, i still haven't hit menopause. so, were tony and i to do all to prevent, and something failed, i'm to be forced to maintain a risky pregnancy with risks for the fetus as well? were it not for bc, god knows how many kids i'd have. three we had came along pretty damn easy.
i'm to take risks, for you to sleep well? we have overloaded this planet, and you think we should keep doing so? to what end?

The matter at hand was not centered on the general case of abortion but that "Planned Parenthood", a misnomer if ever there was one, is selling body parts from aborted babies, and even alters their methods to obtain those valuable parts. They are caught red handed in the many videos that have been filmed. The "procedures" discussed are more suitable for comparison to the practices of Nazi "doctor" Joseph Mengele than they are for submission to the New England Medical Journal.

The Democrats are in a panic. And they should be. This has brought to light the macabre day-to-day operation of their slaughterhouse.

So yeah, the bad news for those of us who are pro-life is that currently the law lines up against us. But this event, along with the endless march of science showing the development of babies at earlier and earlier stages with more detail (like in digital ultrasound), the understanding of DNA and what it means, etc., is leading to a gradual change such that our momentum will eventually overturn the legality of in-utero murder.

try again on the last, regarding 'selling' body parts. and just where do you suppose the various labs, scientists, colleges, universities, etc, etc, get all the various and sundry cures for various and sundry diseases? how they glean info about the human body? how they know how long a body has been dead? how they know how they'll go about fixing my herniated disc i just found out i have? trial and error? operating on folks and saying 'ooops, that didn't work. bring in the next and we'll try plan c'?

as for earlier and earlier detail, ultrasound...that doesn't mean much, since the line of viability remains 24 weeks. when it does, or they come up with artificial wombs, abortion will remain-it's been around as long as women have gotten pregnant.
but, at least for people like you, you can rest easier knowing that pregnancy rates are down across all segments of the populace, as are births, as are abortion rates.
so, thank goodness for getting more and better bc available to a lot more people-because that is why the above paragraph is true. not because of people saying don't have sex, but if you do, you have to 'pay' the consequences. always liked that, pay. my kids aren't punishment to us, they were wanted and are loved.
my two grandmothers had 21 kids between them. would be more, but my grandfather died shortly after my maternal grand had her 7th. left her alone with seven to raise.
so, yeah, in utopia, all kids would be wanted, all pregnancies happy and healthy.
but we live in the real world.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

try again on the last, regarding 'selling' body parts. and just where do you suppose the various labs, scientists, colleges, universities, etc, etc, get all the various and sundry cures for various and sundry diseases? how they glean info about the human body? how they know how long a body has been dead? how they know how they'll go about fixing my herniated disc i just found out i have? trial and error? operating on folks and saying 'ooops, that didn't work. bring in the next and we'll try plan c'?

as for earlier and earlier detail, ultrasound...that doesn't mean much, since the line of viability remains 24 weeks. when it does, or they come up with artificial wombs, abortion will remain-it's been around as long as women have gotten pregnant.
but, at least for people like you, you can rest easier knowing that pregnancy rates are down across all segments of the populace, as are births, as are abortion rates.
so, thank goodness for getting more and better bc available to a lot more people-because that is why the above paragraph is true. not because of people saying don't have sex, but if you do, you have to 'pay' the consequences. always liked that, pay. my kids aren't punishment to us, they were wanted and are loved.
my two grandmothers had 21 kids between them. would be more, but my grandfather died shortly after my maternal grand had her 7th. left her alone with seven to raise.
so, yeah, in utopia, all kids would be wanted, all pregnancies happy and healthy.
but we live in the real world.

"sperm and egg meeting is just one of many steps involved in what will ultimately, possibly, create a new human being. them doing the tango doesn't mean squat if the new combo doesn't get attached to the uterine wall...and then develop, etc, etc and remain til it gets far enough along to survive delivery."

OK, fine, but the whole pro-life stance of many is anchored on finding the point at which nothing should be done to baby, so while you are correct of course on the mechanics you describe above, that is all the more reason to NOT interfere with the well-being of the baby. And as a practical matter, no one is pursuing an abortion for a non-attached zygote, as there is no need, and the levels of hormones in the blood that indicate pregnancy are not detectable until the attachment occurs.

The development of a human being - no surprise - is extremely complex and complicated. Some of the concepts are not - like the DNA blueprint, but even that is so huge that it was only recently decoded to an extent by the Human Genome Project. Picking an arbitrary point for "yes before this point, and no thereafter" is almost impossible - as the 1973 Supreme Court themselves grappled with until they themselves defined viability as a legal device.

And no one would dispute that this is an emotionally charged issue for both sides.

The Supreme Court decision did indeed short circuit official debate, since Congress knows that even though they are free to pass whatever bill they want, up to and including a ban, that if they do so the debate alone will shut down Congress. The three coequal branches of government are free to act - the Supreme Court is not "boss" of the other two, no matter how far you take Marbury vs. Madison and the Constitutionally unsupported concept of "judicial review".

Abortion is easily shown to be the horrible act that it is, not just by videotaped observation of the reality as has come to light, and not just by the scientific facts regarding conception being the point where all the DNA is fused and the organism growing constantly, but also philosphically.

What is the purpose for pursuing an abortion? It is an acknowledgement that if an abortion is not committed, -gasp-, a baby is coming.

And unlike birth control which will prevent the process from starting, and which very few people have an issue with, the fact that it has started and must be stopped, must mean that something that is living will be rendered non-living.

When something is transitioned from living to dead through the actions of another, that's killing.

When that something is a human being, that's murder.

If there is a process and a strategy for doing all of that, that's called premeditation, and is the worst form of murder recognized by the law.

People rallying around Planned Parenthood are calling this an assault on women's health.

They do not address the central question: When a healthy woman goes to a clinic to abort a healthy baby, is that a women's health issue?

If one or the other is not healthy, if the mother's life is in danger and there is no other way to save her life, that's a different story.

But let's be clear: the hand wringing from the pro-abortion crowd is not about the small percentage of extraordinary circumstances like rape or a legitimate life-threatening condition. It's about the other 99% of the 340,000 abortions per year that are not in that category.

And guess what? I do agree about better birth control, thereby PREVENTING this situation. And I further agree that kids are not punishments but blessings, but I'm not the one you need to convince: more like the parents of the 340,000+ that will die in the next year.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

From the article you linked:



Seriously, Senator? F*ck you very f*ck. You had nothing to do with the birth. Conception, sure. But I've got news for you, Senator- that's the fun part. The rest of it, which you had nothing to do with, is not.

speaking of ful< yous...

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/arkansas-...ned-parenthood

Arkansas is ending its Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood, Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson said Friday, despite warnings federal officials have given other states that such a move could violate the law.

Hutchinson ordered the Arkansas Department of Human Services to terminate its Medicaid provider contract in 30 days. The move came in response to secretly recorded videos released by an anti-abortion group showing Planned Parenthood officials describing how they provide fetal tissue from abortions for medical research.

“It is apparent that after the recent revelations on the actions of Planned Parenthood, that this organization does not represent the values of the people of our state and Arkansas is better served by terminating any and all existing contracts with them,” Hutchinson said in a statement.

oh, way to go you *******. but hey, we don't need to spend half a billion on womens health...so it's a start.
yeah, it doesn't represent arkansas values that we have women get mammograms, bc, etc. good job, jerk.
can't wait to have my tax dollars pay to fight this out in court.