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.
You're absolutely right about the flaws with the justice system. As I said, I think that the death penalty should exist but should be reserved for very extreme cases (I'm sorry, but I think that Manson should have gotten it.) IMHO, it is used too frequently.
Let them live a good long life stewing in their own insanity.
OMG, this made me laugh so much! Although, if they are technically insane, they don't go to prison (do they?) However, prisons--and prisoners--seem to sort things out themselves. Honestly, I would probably prefer death to prison in this country. And I can't even imagine what prisons are like in a third-world country.
And re: abortion, yeah, they would continue, which is why RvW was passed in the first place--so that women would undergo safe abortions rather than the unsafe kind. However, even with RvW, there is still an inordinate number of young women birthing children then leaving them to die (or even worse, killing them.) How is that preferable to an abortion, and what is compelling these women to choose this alternative rather than an abortion? Do they--and the communities in which they grow up and live--actually believe this to be a preferable alternative to an abortion? How do you consider an abortion so evil that you would avoid having one but then turn around, birth and leave a child to die? Seriously, it's as if [in some areas] RvW were never passed and thus these women are feeling as if they must resort to these desparate measures. It's very sad. However, it does reveal why RvW was passed in the first place.[/quote]
If they are insane, removing them from society benefits society.
If they were sane going in, after some tenty years of a small cell and an hour of sunlight a day WILL make the go insane.
I don't support the death penality, but I've no compassion for killers and rapists.
As for your last paragraph, we can thank the bible-thumpers for that. They tend to hang out in front of clinics, not to protest I think, but to see WHO'S going inside. I'd bet money (if I had any) that in those areas you reference above, you'll find the highest percentage of clinic protesting.
Thanks for your polite reply. Seems we'll just have to agree to disagree. I'd say there's a stronger case for the special 'human' quality of the fetus, at whatever stage it's at, than there's a case against it. Beyond that, there are so many 'fine points' that I'd be at a loss to offer 'proof'. Admittedly, the fact that the fetus is in 'somebody else's' womb puts it in a category all its own. However, I remind you that there are a NUMBER of people whose lives, and their very continued existence, is entirely in the hands of others. So far, we're reluctant to 'euthanize' them. I see this as a perfectly logical extension of the status of the fetus...you, apparently, do not.
No need to not be civil
The distinction to me is that a fetus requires the womb and thus the mother for continued existence. The lives of a child, disabled person, elderly, whoever, is not reliant on a specific person but rather that their basic needs for life be met by someone. Those who provide for people in these circumstances do so by choice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by macmeal
I'll conclude by reminding everyone that virtually ALL 'pro-choice' people conclude their remarks by stating that, while it should be a mother's option to abort her fetus at will, and that NO ONE has the right to 'pressure' her or intimidate her, or invoke a 'guilt trip', at the same time, these folks almost all agree that "Abortion is not the best option; it's a profound decision, and it IS NOT SOMETHING to be ENTERED INTO LIGHTLY". I can only wonder, if abortion is 'perfectly OK', in the manner of an appendectomy or removing a wart, why then is it 'not to be taken lightly'? If, on the other hand, it's not the "best" option, then why NOT? That's my problem here...it seems that for many people, abortion both "IS" a moral decision, and "IS NOT" one, at the same time.
So, is there any 'moral' dimension to the abortion process, beyond that of a tummy-tuck, or an outpatient hernia repair.....or is there not? Anyone have any comments on this?
Any life altering decision which can't be reversed should not be taken lightly, regardless of the subject. It's not just the option to have an abortion that shouldn't be taken lightly but also the option to have a child or to carry to term and place the child for adoption.
Any life altering decision which can't be reversed should not be taken lightly, regardless of the subject. It's not just the option to have an abortion that shouldn't be taken lightly but also the option to have a child or to carry to term and place the child for adoption.
Although I am pro-life, this is the type of argument I respect from pro-choice. I have seen so many posts of this site that make it sound like your going to a salon or something. That is terrifying, let's be honest, you don't really know. Never forget the 'if'.
Thanks for the tip. I did some enlightening reading. I suppose it makes sense that the system would protect itself from litigtion, but the numbers certainly seemed skewed in the wrong direction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi
Time to catch up to the times.
What does that mean? I am supposed to have pity on those potentially wrongfully arrested because they were hanging out with people who carry weapons illegally, regularly get into confrontations, and don't have the sense to attempt a productive, legitimate life? I won't do it.
I understand that many crimes begin with the lack of parental guidance many years prior, and that certain socio-economic conditions and lack of education can lead to a higher incidence of crime, but that only supports the availability of abortions. I don't think it's up to schools to teach social morality, that is a parent's domain. The school should support that mentality with examples while History, Social Studies and other pertinent subjects are taught.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi
I advocate a supermax style prison across the board. Combined with legalizing pot, which would empty out over half of the non-violent prison population, plus returning to the idea of punishment over the failed rehabilitation model, in the long run it would be cheaper to run and should be more effective at detering crime, not to mention providing an actual punishment to help ease the victimes mind.
I can agree with you here because I would imagine that pot smokers are not in themselves criminally minded. Those that smuggle and distribute will move on to other mediums that will eventually satisfy their criminal mentality. And I also don't agree with the idea that marijuana is a "gateway" drug, but that is a subject for another thread.
If they are insane, removing them from society benefits society.
If they were sane going in, after some tenty years of a small cell and an hour of sunlight a day WILL make the go insane.
I don't support the death penality, but I've no compassion for killers and rapists.
As for your last paragraph, we can thank the bible-thumpers for that. They tend to hang out in front of clinics, not to protest I think, but to see WHO'S going inside. I'd bet money (if I had any) that in those areas you reference above, you'll find the highest percentage of clinic protesting.[/quote]
It amazes me that the protestors who hang out in front of the clinics think that embarrassing women into not having abortions and thereby compelling them to have (and to abandon/kill) their newborn babes is somehow preferable to an anonymous abortion. As far as I'm concerned, those protestors are just as culpable for the deaths of those newborns. And the horrific deaths of those newborns is so much more revolting/evil than any abortion could ever be.
But I guess that you are right--the Bible thumpers don't exactly respond to reason. It really is all about them and their beliefs. How anyone could not see the error in this judgment is beyond me. And how anyone who behaves that way could call themselves a Christian is totally incomprehensible.
........I understand that many crimes begin with the lack of parental guidance many years prior, and that certain socio-economic conditions and lack of education can lead to a higher incidence of crime, but that only supports the availability of abortions. I don't think it's up to schools to teach social morality, that is a parent's domain. The school should support that mentality with examples while History, Social Studies and other pertinent subjects are taught.
You'll find I have little sympathy for people who committ crimes, regardless of their personal history. People face chioces every days of their lives, and people who make poor choices shouldn't be coddled IMHO.
But I do agree that morality, along with religion, should be taught at home. Both subject vary widely at times due to cultural and religious differences.
However, keeping on topic, many parents, especially the more devout religious I've noticed, are either reluctant to talk to their kids about sex or feed them propeganda and outright lies.
This is why I support SexEd in schools that not only suggests abstinence, but includes subjects like condoms and other protections, STD's, and especially proper education on HIV/AIDs.
It never fails to amaze me exactly HOW ignorant so many people are on the subject of HIV/AIDs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by manquaman
I can agree with you here because I would imagine that pot smokers are not in themselves criminally minded. Those that smuggle and distribute will move on to other mediums that will eventually satisfy their criminal mentality. And I also don't agree with the idea that marijuana is a "gateway" drug, but that is a subject for another thread.
Most of the people in prisons for pot, according to the Justice Department website, are not dealers but users. As for criminally minded types, prison-as-punishment would act as a deterent, IMHO, for all but the most hardcore, who would probrably end up staying there for life eventually anyways. I woudl support a "Three Strikes" as well.
But yes, perhaps we should move on as it is off topic.
I side with the SCOTUS on this. Murder is the deliberate and intended killing of another human being, however a fetus is not a human life until it is able to sustain itself outside of the womb.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reads2MUCH
PS. There would of course be concessions made for women with extenuating circumstances such as rape. Or if carrying a child is a direct threat to the women's life. I don't believe in abortion, but I also don't believe in suicide or rape. If carrying a child is going to be to much for your body, you should have the right to stop the process. And if the child you are carrying came from a monster who raped you against your will, you should not have to carry that person's child.
I'm still amazed and the hypocrisy in the pro-lifers stance like this. I don't understand why the life of a fetus conceived through natural means, failure of BC...etc, is anymore valuable than a fetus conceived by rape, incest...etc.
It simply fails on all logic. You're either pro-life or pro-choice. There really isn't any middle ground here.
Neer hear a peep out of the anti-choice crowd about China's state spondered Euthenasia program, or the socially accepted practice of leaving newborn girls to die from exposure.
YES ABORTION IS MURDER!!
Third trimester abortions are generally accomplished with the same basic procedures used in the second trimester. However, because the babies being killed are larger and more likely to survive the procedures, modifications are made. For example, because her child is larger, the mom's cervix must be dilated more than it would be in a second trimester abortion. Additionally, chemicals that are used to soften the baby and make it easier to pull apart and remove are administered in larger a quantity. They are also given earlier so they have a longer time to soak into the baby's tissue and bone. As for avoiding "The Dreaded Complication" (live birth), babies killed during the third trimester are more likely to be given feticidal drugs and they are given them in greater dosages.
Sometimes, the procedure itself is modified. For example, one of the most common third trimester abortion procedures is the intact D&E described earlier. This method is also known as D&X (dilation and extraction) or partial-birth abortion. When this procedure is used in the third trimester, the abortionist maneuvers the baby into a breech position (feet first) and then pulls the baby out of the uterus up to its head – leaving the baby’s head just inside of the uterus. It is not at all uncommon for the baby to still be alive at this point. Now the abortionist pushes a long pair of scissors into the base of the baby's skull and creates a hole. He then inserts a suction tube into the hole and sucks out the baby's brain. This modification to the intact D&E procedure insures that the baby is not born alive, and it helps make the head smaller so that it is easier to pull out of the uterus.
Before killing an unborn child, the abortionist must first determine how long the baby's mom has been pregnant. Only by determining how long the baby has been alive can the abortionist choose the most effective method to kill it. Pregnancy is divided into three trimesters. The first trimester lasts through the 12th week. The second trimester begins at week 13 and continues through week 24. The third trimester is the remaining time until the baby is delivered. For each trimester specific methods of abortion are used.
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.
