I say yes, you say no, OR People are Strange

Alpal

Deal with?? Why not just shoot them like they do in Kansas?

Alpal

Deleted prior post because I spoke out of anger. Sorry

floralgal

delete

Anonymous

Edited because there is no need to respond to a post that has been deleted. 

Alpal

But - according to our laws, it's' not murder. So, PatMom, how do you propose to "deal" with it? Surely not the way it was dealt with in Kansas?

Alpal

Cross posted. Obviously I'm not so quick on the delete button. No need to answer, PatMom, as you've already done that.

AnnNYC

PatMom, that Gosnell case in Philadelphia is so different from legal, first-trimester abortion.  The guy sounds like a ghoul and the case totally deserves to be prosecuted. Actually, in my opinion, this is the kind of ghoul people will turn to if places like Planned Parenthood are not available.

Enjoyful

PatMom,

By your statements you seem to believe that women who seek abortion are somehow coerced into it by the abortion services providers.  Do the women in your scenario have no responsibility in this at all?

The "clinic" you mention is no better than a slaughterhouse.  There's no comparison between that and a well-run, well-managed clinic.

I'll say one more thing about the whole abortion debate since it's obvious we'll never reach common ground here.  If you outlaw abortion, you're heading down a slippery slope.  Think of the ramifications - if you can tell a female what to do with her body, how far behind are fetal police and outlawing birth control?  If you place the rights of the unborn ahead of the mother's these things aren't as ridiculous as they sound.

E

Anonymous

AnnNYCwrote: PatMom, that Gosnell case in Philadelphia is so different from legal, first-trimester abortion.  The guy sounds like a ghoul and the case totally deserves to be prosecuted.

Please explain the differences.  That clinic was LEGAL right up until the day it was shut down.  That butcher would not be prosecuted now other than cleanliness issues, turning a blind eye to due dates, a few of the babies being allowed to move too far down the birth canal before being dismembered, and the feet he kept as souvenirs. 

molly52

rosemary-b

Decaf and chocolate donut for breakfast and a day in the recliner as penance.

Edited to add: frostng and sprinkles on the donut.

Medigal

Any one who wants to "ban" abortion needs to be reborn into the era years ago where desperate women took the matter into their own hands and risked their lives to find ways to end an unwanted pregnancy!  I, personally, could never abort a baby and I proved it by being tested in my own life.  However, I would prefer to see a woman get it done by a "qualified" doctor at the "right" time than to see them risk their lives and their bodies to end a pregnancy.  Maybe many of you are too young to know what I am referring to but any older ladies on here may be well aware of those horrible days which I hope will never return to our country.  The preferred option is to use good contraception and not have to consider whether you can bring an innocent baby into your life.  However, years ago, women did not have all the options we have now even with contraception.  Just my opinion.

AnnNYC

PatMom, I think you explained the differences: "cleanliness issues, turning a blind eye to due dates, a few of the babies being allowed to move too far down the birth canal before being dismembered, and the feet he kept as souvenirs."

Those are some extreme "differences."  Plus the fact that his "anesthesiology assistant" was an untrained teenager, and that a 41-year-old woman consequently died in his office from receiving too much anesthesia.  To say "his clinic was legal until the day it was shut down" -- is like saying Bernie Madoff ran a perfectly legitimate investment firm until the day he was arrested. 

ananda8

Every year the US get 400,000 new LEGAL immigrants and 600,000 have their green cards renewed.  Since there is very high unemployment in the US at all education and occupation levels, why are we still accepting immigration?

Why don't we close our borders to all new immigrants and require those with green cards to become citizens or go home?

Why don't we fully enforce our existing immigration laws by hiring more INS agents and taking the burden off the States, thereby ending sanctuary cities?

1Athena1

Congratulations L! I thoughtt my exercise regimen was tough. On another subject: life is so easy when you have no depth or empathy. Policies and rules come as easily as 1 2 3 when a person sees life in black and white. I'm not sure whether to feel envy, compassion or contempt.

otter

I meant I'd eaten lots of broccoli, not Brussel sprouts, on Friday evening.  I much prefer Brussel sprouts when they're available.

This is how I'm planning to spend my afternoon:  lounging.   And staying out of trouble.

(Photo borrowed from "The Daily Otter":  http://dailyotter.org/post/3403130320/i-has-a-log)

otter

1Athena1

OTTER - Too sweet! Notself, my post was not directed at you - sorry for the timing. This Lioness is working (not that it shows - lol!)

Anonymous

enjoyful wrote:

If you outlaw abortion, you're heading down a slippery slope.  Think of the ramifications - if you can tell a female what to do with her body, how far behind are fetal police and outlawing birth control? 

I can't imagine that birth control could be outlawed under the current Constitution with the separation of church and state. 

If you think that the fetal police don't exist already, just try going out wearing a fake pregnancy belly and watch the reactions when you light up a cigarette or order a drink.  There are already plenty of people who are more than willing to tell you what you can and cannot do.  There is even a whole TV show on ABC called "What would you do?" that not so subtly encourages  people to get involved in other people's lives. 

Bren-2007

Otter .. I think I'll do that today and maybe catch the race.  Good day for lounging.

Bren

Anonymous

notself - WHAT A GREAT CONCEPT! Unfortunately, your idea about immigration makes waaaay too much sense.

1Athena1 - You posted: I have to edit practically all of my posts again and again becuase I have bad eyes and have trouble spotting typos in the small print (something about a rolling astagmus

Have you tried enlarging the print on your screen? If not, all you do is press the CTRL key and the + key at the same time. The print should automatically enlarge. If you want to go back down to the standard size print, press the CTRL key and the _ key at the same time (  _ key is the key left of the + key). However, if you do enlarge the print on your screen, you will not be allowed to have ANY typos!

E - I totally understand the problem pertaining to who will care for all the babies who aren't aborted. It's a horrible dilemma. Honestly, I waver at times. It hurts to admit that, but it is a sad problem that creates a difficult solution.

1Athena1

Thanks for the tip Laura. Yikes - no excuses now!

ananda8

If abortion can be outlawed, so can most forms of birth control.  Most pills and all IUD's stop the embryo from being implanted in the uterus.  Many of those who are anti-abortion also believe that life begins at conception.  These people want to ban "the morning after pill" and all other forms that prevent implantation of the embryo because of this belief.  And yes, they do want to impose their religious belief on others.

Alpal

Why would one go out wearing a fake pregnancy belly?

Enjoyful

Laura -

Yes, a horrible dilemma.  I don't think I'd ever choose abortion myself, but I don't want to impose my beliefs and feelings on others.  Having said that, anyone who aborts a third-trimester pregnancy is an ANIMAL.

E

Anonymous

Gracie, my SIL is studying for his teaching certificate.  I am sure if he did not intend to get the certificate he would not be allowed to teach.  I don't know if the school system keeps up with is grades or where he is in the process.  I'll have to ask him that.

kadeeb

Just been thinking (thats a process where you use your mind before you open your mouth or keyboard and I've been seriously guilty of not engaging my brain before kicking my mouth in gear many times), but what are our "rights". Is the term universal? Are rights something everyone should have without regard to race, economic status, employment status, religeous beliefs, political parties, citizenship status or any number of things that make us different. You know, intrepret the "Life, Liberty and persuit of Happiness" thing. It sounds good but what does it mean? I doubt we would ever get an agreement on even that question. Do we use the words "benefit" and "entitlement" to describe a multitude of things that aren't necessarily a "right".  Is the government required to provide those "rights"? Are we willing to pay for them? Can we afford to? I wish our government could do and be all the things that would make this country the answer to the world's problems but we need to decide what it's worth and if we're willing to pay that price.

It would be much easier if we as individuals took more responsibility for ourselves and our actions. We somethimes sound like children in a toy store.

ananda8

Politifact has posted about the situation in Wisconsin and there are some interesting facts presented.  Politifact rates the truth of a political statement by the "Truth-O-Meter".  It rates statements as true, mostly true, half true, barely true, false and PANTS ON FIRE.  http://www.politifact.com/personalities/scott-walker/statements/

One can click on the name of the person or organization and see more ratings of their previous statements.  For example, here is the link for Scott Walkers statements by ruling. Out of 17 statements analyzed, 12 are rated "Barely True" or lower. That's 70%.   http://www.politifact.com/personalities/scott-walker/

The statements by Rachel Maddow have been analyzed with 5 out of 11 rated "Barely True" or lower.  That's 45%.    http://www.politifact.com/personalities/rachel-maddow/

The statements by Glen Beck have been analyzed with 14 out of 21 rated "Barely True" or lower. That's 66%.

Yes, it pays to do the research before defending something you hear from an elected official, a political organization or a pundit.

Anonymous

rosemary-b wrote:

My son just walked by and told me not to feed the trolls. I think he wants me to feed him.

I would like further explanation about who decides who the trolls are.  Is it when someone has an opposing view than yours?  Some of us were told we could go to a different website to post our views.  The same goes for the "non-troll" people.  Bullying is certainly not attractive.  And don't tell me that I'm wrong when it comes to my thoughts about trolls. 

A quote from Otter:

So, we are fortunate that Blue created this safe place where we can voice opinions on things even if we probably don't know as much about them as we ought to.

ananda8

I answered your question before.  Did you miss my response or do you disagree with it?

Claire82

to me a troll is someone who makes up numerous names to delete posts

they also bait people and scream in capital letters when everyone ignores them