Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No one wants their own babies killed--but who cares about other babies. A good leader should not want any helpless baby to die--legal, or not. Maybe one day soon. we will be given the legal right to kill our aged, senile parents, or anyone in our family that has a disability.
I agree. I would feel better having a leader who protects the rights of the LEAST and most vulnerable of us.
Originally Posted by roberta No one wants their own babies killed--but who cares about other babies. A good leader should not want any helpless baby to die--legal, or not. Maybe one day soon. we will be given the legal right to kill our aged, senile parents, or anyone in our family that has a disability.
I agree. I would feel better having a leader who protects the rights of the LEAST and most vulnerable of us.
Interesting idea. Since Obama likes infant abortion so much maybe he would approve of elderly abortion too!
I volunteer at a home for the aged here. There are plenty of elderly there who are in the twilight of life. Some can't get out of bed, some suffer from dementia. Some however are fit and in good mind.
They feel abandoned because their children and grandchildren only rarely visit them. Some however get no visitors. Medicare and health insurance together only pay about 80% of elderly care.
Their care is a financial drain on their families who rarely or never even visit them. I've heard many family members say that "long term care for Mama is eating up our savings" or "We've had to sell nearly everything daddy owned to afford him staying here".
Surely Obama would favor aborting the ones with long term illness or dementia since he favors aborting 3rd trimester fetuses. I'm sure he would favor mercy killings of the elederly. They are going to die soon anyway.
Are your aging parents becoming a financial burden? Are your elderly parents so ornery and disagreeable that they've become a real pain in the azz? If so call Obama and have them aborted along with your third trimester fetus.
Oh yes, put the potential lives of embryos and fetuses over the lives of grown, living women.
Potential lives? Please cut the BS rhetoric already. There is no such thing as a "potential life." Its either alive or dead.....and an unborn child sure isn't dead, so that only leaves one option..... But don't let your coldhearted selfishness get in the way of reality...
Potential lives? Please cut the BS rhetoric already. There is no such thing as a "potential life." Its either alive or dead.....and an unborn child sure isn't dead, so that only leaves one option..... But don't let your coldhearted selfishness get in the way of reality...
No need to resort to personal attacks here. Explain to me how it's a "life" prior to viability.
If a baby is born with a fatal brain defect, and could be kept alive suffering for days on life support, to eventually die, should the government force the mother to keep it on life support? Or let it go naturally?
If a baby is born with a fatal brain defect, and could be kept alive suffering for days on life support, to eventually die, should the government force the mother to keep it on life support? Or let it go naturally?
That's a whole different issue from abortion-on-demand as a convenience. Pro-abortion people like to bring up these fatal birth defect and "life of the mother" arguments as a basis for keeping abortion-on-demand legal. When the fact is, these instances are a microscopic number compared to abortions as a whole. If the only time abortion was ever used was when there was some sort of fatal birth defect or the mother's life was gravely in danger...I don't think abortion would be quite the divisive issue it is today.
That's a whole different issue from abortion-on-demand as a convenience. Pro-abortion people like to bring up these fatal birth defect and "life of the mother" arguments as a basis for keeping abortion-on-demand legal. When the fact is, these instances are a microscopic number compared to abortions as a whole. If the only time abortion was ever used was when there was some sort of fatal birth defect or the mother's life was gravely in danger...I don't think abortion would be quite the divisive issue it is today.
But you think it is a life... so why is it ok to abort for fetal defect rather than for personal reasons? You would still, in your terms, be killing a baby.
I value the life of the living woman, over the potential life of the fetus. Tell me, who is going to take care of all these unwanted children?
It's very, very easy when you are a man, to have a cut and dry view of a situation that can never ever happen to you
Let's get back to the reality of what Obama did and said THAT WAS WRONG instead of arguing when life begins. Everyone has an opinion on that. As a former science teacher I know the answer to that one from the chemical and biological standpoints.
Lets let it lie and get back to Obama's big mistake. The topic of record of this thread
The Supreme Court upheld the ban on partial birth abortion when a living infant is born from the mother's womb despite all efforts to abort it. Before the ban the living baby was left to die of natural causes with no care, no food and no water in a cruel process called Shelving. Alternative methods used by some abortion clinics included drowning, choking and injecting lethal does of chemicals.
Obama had voted against a similar bill in IL when he was in the state senate saying coldheartedly that the ban would take a woman's choice away. We can assume that meant he believed a woman should have the choice to kill her living baby once it emerged from the womb.
Obama is the only US senator who openly spoke out against the Supreme Court decision. All of the others including Democrats, Republicans and the lone Independent spoke in favor of it.
Obama said he was outraged. Then he made a telling remark: he said the court was wrong since "it took away a woman's right to choose to end her infant's life after it is born."
THAT GOES WAY BEYOND ABORTION. NOTICE HE SAID "A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO END HER INFANT'S LIFE AFTER IT IS BORN"
Let's get back to the reality of what Obama did and said THAT WAS WRONG instead of arguing when life begins. Everyone has an opinion on that. As a former science teacher I know the answer to that one from the chemical and biological standpoints.
Lets let it lie and get back to Obama's big mistake. The topic of record of this thread
The Supreme Court upheld the ban on partial birth abortion when a living infant is born from the mother's womb despite all efforts to abort it. Before the ban the living baby was left to die of natural causes with no care, no food and no water in a cruel process called Shelving. Alternative methods used by some abortion clinics included drowning, choking and injecting lethal does of chemicals.
Obama had voted against a similar bill in IL when he was in the state senate saying coldheartedly that the ban would take a woman's choice away. We can assume that meant he believed a woman should have the choice to kill her living baby once it emerged from the womb.
Obama is the only US senator who openly spoke out against the Supreme Court decision. All of the others including Democrats, Republicans and the lone Independent spoke in favor of it.
Obama said he was outraged. Then he made a telling remark: he said the court was wrong since "it took away a woman's right to choose to end her infant's life after it is born."
THAT GOES WAY BEYOND ABORTION. NOTICE HE SAID "A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO END HER INFANT'S LIFE AFTER IT IS BORN"
You do not know what a "partial birth" abortion is. A baby is not pulled out alive and then terminated in a partial birth abortion. The termination is still performed inside the womb, and as I previously stated, this method is most commonly used for fetal defect, so a complete fetus is evacuated, not for elective abortion. In an elective abortion, a different procedure is commonly used which does not result in a complete fetus exiting the womb.
Please show me the backup to where a clinic used drowning, choking, or injection of chemicals after a live baby was born.
Please show where Obama said "it took away a woman's right to choose to end her infant's life after it is born", is that a direct quote? It's not, it's an assumption you made.
Oh yes, put the potential lives of embryos and fetuses over the lives of grown, living women.
Not over. Just valued AS MUCH.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
