A cautionary glimpse into the social problems abortion can produce

[101A]

For both Bush and Carter, you state conditions of the moment (the economy, how the war is going, etc.), but you left out current polls showing that roughly 80% of Americans don't like the direction this country is headed; a look to the future.

You underestimate Bush's extraordinarily negative effect on people's confidence about this county's future.

Maybe so. Not a lot of cheerful people in the administration; neocons not known for their giddy dispositions, after all.

Again, I suspect the internet has something to do with that pessimism, as well. I certainly thing it is fostering deep schisms in society. , look at the thread en led "Things you don't like about YOUR candidate". People are afraid to post in it; , people are so blinded, they probably ARE in lock step any more.

It wasn't like this before; people say it's Bush; I think that is part of it, but if not him, it is going to be another.

[Supergirl]

80% of woman that get abortions suffer from PTSD.

I'd like to see THAT source. LOL.

[boutons_]

"The British-based medical journal The Lancet published a study yesterday quantifying the phenomenon: The report estimated that Indian women aborted a stunning 10 million girls in the two decades leading up to 1998. The study, analyzing data from a national survey of 1.1 million households, calculated that 500,000 female fetuses were aborted each year in India.


The ''girl deficit," as the study labeled it, was more prevalent among educated women and did not vary according to religion, the study found."


http://www.boston.com/news/world/asi...rows_in_india/


=============


"Bush was MASSIVELY POPULAR."


... so popular he lost the 2000 people's vote by 600,00, and won in 2004 as a bogus war president with the smallest winning margin of any in bent President.

[101A]

"The British-based medical journal The Lancet published a study yesterday quantifying the phenomenon: The report estimated that Indian women aborted a stunning 10 million girls in the two decades leading up to 1998. The study, analyzing data from a national survey of 1.1 million households, calculated that 500,000 female fetuses were aborted each year in India.


The ''girl deficit," as the study labeled it, was more prevalent among educated women and did not vary according to religion, the study found."


http://www.boston.com/news/world/asi...rows_in_india/


=============


"Bush was MASSIVELY POPULAR."


... so popular he lost the 2000 people's vote by 600,00, and won in 2004 as a bogus war president with the smallest winning margin of any in bent President.

Oh holy crap.

Gonna be a bunch of hard up Indian dudes in a few years.

[Tully365]

Both Bush's were "massively popular" after national crisis or war brought us together; they were both less than popular after that.

However, I compare Bush to Carter, and their relative unpopularity


Carter certainly wasn't popular, but his favorability was better than G.W.'s. If you compare unemployment (nearly double), inflation (through the roof), interest rates (QUADRUPLE!!!) - the things that actually affect the average American, throw in the hostage crisis he seemingly didn't, or couldn't, do anything about - , even had his own big old corporate bailout with Chrysler - Carter should have had abysmal numbers -worse than Bush's.

Those economic indicators, relatively, are pretty good for G.w. (jobs, inflation, interest rates), and yet he is pilloried as, quite possibly, the WORST president in history. If you ask the question, "Can you remember a worse economic time?" I'm betting most people would answer "no". The war is even polling "better", but Bush's numbers remain in the toilet. That might have to do with the doulbe whammy of liberals AND conservatives being unhappy with him, and answering the favoribility question from different sides.

But I think it's even more than that.

Now, I am not defending Bush with this post, just pointing out a disconnect between the actual state of things, and his historically low popularity - and drawing a possible correlation to the speed with which information and ideas can spread now, vs. then. I was called three weeks ago and asked if I approved of the job Bush was doing. I answered, "No". Go ahead and flame me for my theory, but we don't need another Bush Bashing thread.

I think that there is a big difference in terms of situations inherited when comparing Bush and Carter. It's true the US had inflation, high interest rates, etc, during the Carter years, but so did the entire globe. Practically everyone was in a recession that was much worse than the USA's. Right now, the US is suffering economically while countries in Europe and Asia watch and hope that they don't get dragged down by these problems. Bush inherited the best economic situation of any president in recent history-- the DJIA had nearly quadrupled in the previous 8 years, and the yearly federal budget had just posted its first surplus in decades. I don't think it can be said that Carter was nearly as fortunate.

[Tully365]

80% of woman that get abortions suffer from PTSD.

What's the percentage for soldiers serving in Iraq currently running?

[101A]

I think that there is a big difference in terms of situations inherited when comparing Bush and Carter. It's true the US had inflation, high interest rates, etc, during the Carter years, but so did the entire globe. Practically everyone was in a recession that was much worse than the USA's. Right now, the US is suffering economically while countries in Europe and Asia watch and hope that they don't get dragged down by these problems. Bush inherited the best economic situation of any president in recent history-- the DJIA had nearly quadrupled in the previous 8 years, and the yearly federal budget had just posted its first surplus in decades. I don't think it can be said that Carter was nearly as fortunate.

He inherited an economy that is now recognized at the time as being in recession. He inherited an economy that had grown amazingly well; driven by the capital infusion of the .com boom. He also inherited a bubble.

If our economy is so bad, why do we have better unemployment numbers, and lower inflation that those countries that hope to not be "dragged down"?

[Tully365]

He inherited an economy that is now recognized at the time as being in recession. He inherited an economy that had grown amazingly well; driven by the capital infusion of the .com boom. He also inherited a bubble.

If our economy is so bad, why do we have better unemployment numbers, and lower inflation that those countries that hope to not be "dragged down"?

I'm not saying the situation of the US is unfixable or all gloom and doom-- just pointing out that it seems to me that Bush inherited a much better economic situation than Carter. I'm not even a big fan of Carter's, just so you know.

For example, if one person works his way up from a poor family situation to become a middle class citizen while another inherits a 10 million dollar trust fund which by age 35 is down to 2 million, is it fair to say the second guy is "better with finances" because he has 2 million while the first guy only has, say, $100,000? Sure, he has more actual money, but only because it was given to him-- not because he managed or invested it well. I just don't think you can favorably compare the US economy of 1976 to the US economy of 2000.

[jochhejaam]

I think it's fair that a bunch of men can decide what a women can do to her body.

Her body? That would mean that you are, uhm...your mother...

There are still more than a few thick-headed people that use this argument, in spite of scientific evidence that a baby is a separate individual at the point of conception.
The woman's body is the incubator for assisting this baby with the nourishment, oxygen, etc., needed to sustain his or her life until they emerge from the birth canal.
Abortion terminates this life.

In other words; abortion equals murder in the womb. Plain and simple.



And regarding selective abortion; for those that support abortion in general, don't feign abhorrence over selective abortion. An unconcionable 1.2 million times a year, in the U.S. alone, people don't give a dam if the baby has blue, green or brown eyes; blonde, brown or black hair; male or female; none of it matters, they just don't want the boy or girl messing up their life, so they go for the "medical execution".


Fact #1 - Abortion = No regard for the sanc y of human life

Fact #2 - The Democratic Party's platform supports the right to terminate life through abortion.

Conclusion from facts - Democrat leaders, and their supporters, do not value human life.


The proposed 2008 abortion plank:
The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v Wade and a woman's right to choose a safe and legal abortion <the safety of the baby be damned, end their life!>, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right <how freakin' proud you must be!>.


Total insanity!

[Tully365]

There are still more than a few thick-headed people that use this argument, in spite of scientific evidence that a baby is a separate individual at the point of conception.
The woman's body is the incubator for assisting this baby with the nourishment, oxygen, etc., needed to sustain his or her life until they emerge from the birth canal.
Abortion terminates this life.

In other words; abortion equals murder in the womb. Plain and simple.

And regarding selective abortion; for those that support abortion in general, don't feign abhorrence over selective abortion. An unconcionable 1.2 million times a year, in the U.S. alone, people don't give a dam if the baby has blue, green or brown eyes; blonde, brown or black hair; male or female; none of it matters, they just don't want the boy or girl messing up their life, so they go for the "medical execution".


Fact #1 - Abortion = No regard for the sanc y of human life

Fact #2 - The Democratic Party's platform supports the right to terminate life through abortion.

Conclusion from facts - Democrat leaders, and their supporters, do not value human life.

[

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the difference between fact and opinion. Someone could easily use your same argument, but subs ute the word "war" for "abortion":

Fact #1- war = no regard for the sanc y of human life.

fact #2- McCain & Palin support the war in Iraq

Conclusion- McCain and his supporters do not value human life.


It's an overly simplistic way of trying to sum up a very complex problem. And it is pure opinion, not fact.

[101A]

Her body? That would mean that you are, uhm...your mother...

There are still more than a few thick-headed people that use this argument, in spite of scientific evidence that a baby is a separate individual at the point of conception.
The woman's body is the incubator for assisting this baby with the nourishment, oxygen, etc., needed to sustain his or her life until they emerge from the birth canal.
Abortion terminates this life.

In other words; abortion equals murder in the womb. Plain and simple.



And regarding selective abortion; for those that support abortion in general, don't feign abhorrence over selective abortion. An unconcionable 1.2 million times a year, in the U.S. alone, people don't give a dam if the baby has blue, green or brown eyes; blonde, brown or black hair; male or female; none of it matters, they just don't want the boy or girl messing up their life, so they go for the "medical execution".


Fact #1 - Abortion = No regard for the sanc y of human life

Fact #2 - The Democratic Party's platform supports the right to terminate life through abortion.

Conclusion from facts - Democrat leaders, and their supporters, do not value human life.


The proposed 2008 abortion plank:
The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v Wade and a woman's right to choose a safe and legal abortion <the safety of the baby be damned, end their life!>, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right <how freakin' proud you must be!>.


Total insanity!

Paglia, who writes in the Huffington Post; is at least honest about this.

She is pro-choice, and readily admits that abortion ends Human life.

She simply says that a person cannot be compelled to have another parasitic life attached to it. It's intellectually honest, but if the Dems, as a whole, were this honest, public sentiment would change. Therefore they use phrases about "when life begins", etc...to muddy the real issue.

Frankly, I think they stand or relatively firm ground with Paglia's view; as abhorrent to the senses it generally is.

[jochhejaam]

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the difference between fact and opinion.

That's opinion, not fact. (See, I do know the difference)



Factoids:
1. Life begins at conception.
2. Abortion is a process that ends that life
3. The Democratic Party Platform unequivocally throws their support behind the process that ends the life of the baby.
4. When voting Democrat, like it or not, you have cast a vote for their entire platform, thereby you have cast a vote that supports abortion. Nothing on the ballot you cast lets you opt out of that support.

Now, show me, as you have stated, where I have this "fundamental misunderstanding" between fact and opinion. If you were honest, you'd agree that your statement is opinion and my statements are fact.
If that's not the case, support your arguement with facts, and prove that what I've stated as fact, is merely opinion.

It's an overly simplistic way of trying to sum up a very complex problem. And it is pure opinion, not fact.

There is no complexity here, simply put, life begins and conception and ends with abortion.
That's fact, not opinion.

[Spurminator]

Fact: If you're voting on the abortion issue you've wasted your vote because Roe v. Wade will not be overturned.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Fact: The le of this thread is misleading.

[DarkReign]

If you were honest, you'd agree that your statement is opinion and my statements are fact.

No, I would completely disagree and Tully's argument for word subsitution is valid.

There is no complexity here, simply put, life begins and conception and ends with abortion.
That's fact, not opinion.

Once again, youre not being honest. There is a complexity here, otherwise it wouldnt be up for debate if everything were as cut and dry as you make it out to be.

Obviously, we all know your position. But just because you find yourself on the one side of an equation does not necessarily make you and your position correct. It makes an opinion, which is worth no more or less than anyone elses.

Sorry if that bothers you.

[DarkReign]

Fact: If you're voting on the abortion issue you've wasted your vote because Roe v. Wade will not be overturned.

....as in will never be overturned.

[jochhejaam]

Once again, youre not being honest.

Compelling argument, no doubt the facts that you have given in support of my dishonesty are persuasive...wait a minute, you didn't present any arguments.
That would put your post in the "opinion" category, also known as a non-factual opinion.

You could have at least attempted to argue the facts that I presented (Until you do we'll have to assume that you did not because you could not).

There is a complexity here, otherwise it wouldnt be up for debate if everything were as cut and dry as you make it out to be.

Life beginning at conception is not up for debate, life ending with abortion is not up for debate.
Nothing complex there, that's a ruse that the supporters of abortion use to hide from the fact that they have taken a human life.

Obviously, we all know your position. But just because you find yourself on the one side of an equation does not necessarily make you and your position correct. It makes an opinion, which is worth no more or less than anyone elses

.
That's not an argument against my position.

Sorry if that bothers you.

You've posted nothing of substance, no arguments, nothing at all, why would that bother me?


Big time fail DR

[jochhejaam]

Fact: If you're voting on the abortion issue you've wasted your vote because Roe v. Wade will not be overturned.

1. Submit your proof that Roe v Wade will not be overturned.

2. God has created human life (you're a Christian, so I don't think you'll argue this point), He says that we are beautifully woven in our mothers womb, furthermore He states that He "hates the shedding of innocent blood", says that it "would be better for a millstone to hung around someone's neck and for them to be cast into the sea" for those that would harm his "little ones".

I will state without reservation that God most assuredly hates abortion, and yet you contend that for me to cast a vote that lines up with His view on the sanc y and sacredness of human life is a waste?
Between you and God, whose opinion do you think I'm more interested in? Whose opinion are you more interested in?


If you feel it's a waste, so be it, but don't tell me, with God as our audience, that it's a waste for me to vote along scriptural lines.

[Spurminator]

All I'm saying is you're being duped if you think either administration is going to overturn Roe (I'd never say "never" because things change, but we're nowhere near that point.) It's a wedge issue designed to keep the masses firmly entrenched on either of the two sides. You're free to do whatever you want, but if abortion is the one issue that's keeping you from voting for one side or the other, I think it's a waste. If you support the Republicans on a number of issues, including abortion, then it's not a waste because you probably would have voted for them anyway.

And God hates adultery and divorce too but I would not support criminalizing it. Frankly, God hates a lot of the things both parties stand for (in word and in practice).

[101A]

All I'm saying is you're being duped if you think either administration is going to overturn Roe (I'd never say "never" because things change, but we're nowhere near that point.) It's a wedge issue designed to keep the masses firmly entrenched on either of the two sides. You're free to do whatever you want, but if abortion is the one issue that's keeping you from voting for one side or the other, I think it's a waste.

And God hates adultery and divorce too but I would not support criminalizing it. Frankly, God hates a lot of the things both parties stand for (in word and in practice).

The relatively conservative court THIS year had a chance to review Roe; they passed.

The administration is irrelevant, and the Supreme Court ain't biting.

[jochhejaam]

Paglia, who writes in the Huffington Post; is at least honest about this.

She is pro-choice, and readily admits that abortion ends Human life.

She simply says that a person cannot be compelled to have another parasitic life attached to it. It's intellectually honest, but if the Dems, as a whole, were this honest, public sentiment would change. Therefore they use phrases about "when life begins", etc...to muddy the real issue.

Frankly, I think they stand or relatively firm ground with Paglia's view; as abhorrent to the senses it generally is.

Honesty goes a long way with me, take a stand and have the intestinal for ude to proclaim with clarity what that stand is.

Don't be the weasel that hides behind the "oh, it's such a complex issue" or the politician that claims that "I'm personally against taking the life in the womb, but I support a woman's right to take that life".
Screw that you hypocrites, you have no regard for the sanc y of human life!

[jochhejaam]

All I'm saying is you're being duped if you think either administration is going to overturn Roe (I'd never say "never" because things change, but we're nowhere near that point.)

I'm not being duped, my opinion is that abortion law is established and accepted to the point that it is virtually irreversible.

You're free to do whatever you want, but if abortion is the one issue that's keeping you from voting for one side or the other, I think it's a waste. If you support the Republicans on a number of issues, including abortion, then it's not a waste because you probably would have voted for them anyway.

I respect your opinion but I don't ascribe to your thought that voting one's conscience is a waste. And I do support the Republicans on far more than one issue.

And God hates adultery and divorce too but I would not support criminalizing it.

Are you equating the sin of taking an innocent life (abortion) to adultery and divorce?

[101A]

And God hates adultery and divorce too but I would not support criminalizing it. Frankly, God hates a lot of the things both parties stand for (in word and in practice).

Got a ex-buddy whose wife worked two jobs to put him through medical school - then kept working through his residency WHILE popping out 4 kids. Now the a-hole's landed a $450,000 salary with a Dr. Corp - got himself a girlfriend and wants a divorce. They are in Texas - no alimony.

if I don't support criminalizing (or severely punishing) that.

[Oh, Gee!!]

ur just mad cuz you didn't think of doing it first

[Shastafarian]

Individual sperm are living cells. They are a probability. That probability is that they will fertilize an egg. How can all you guys who are saying "life begins at conception" claim that sperm don't matter? I would wager that by your logic, life would begin at the point of ejaculation. So maybe you guys should be worried about getting arrested for busting into tissues for all these years. Assuming you get what you want and outlaw abortion all together.