PDA

View Full Version : Fetal personhood means abortion is Murder 1



Soflasnapper
10-18-2012, 01:33 PM
The declaration that human life begins at conception, and that fetuses deserve all the rights fundamental to a person, means that an abortion should generally cause the bringing of first degree murder charges against the attending ob/gyn, and accessory to first degree murder charges against the woman. A father who agrees would also be an accessory, and a co-conspirator.

First degree murder carries a potential death penalty in states with a death penalty, or a life in prison sentence in states where the death penalty is not allowed. Accessory or co-conspiracy to commit first degree murder would carry similar penalties.

Now, nobody of much note on the pro-life, pro-personhood amendment side is acknowledging these facts, and if they are confronted with a question as to what should happen to the doctor or the woman (or the man), they mainly mumble and demur and deflect from the question.

Myth somewhat to his credit answered the late Tim Russert a fairly long time ago, and at least said the doctor might face a revocation of his license to practice medicine (from a clip I watched today).

But really? First degree murder means you lose your license? And the accessories and co-conspirators walk free?

I respect the intellectual consistency of those who say there should be no exceptions for abortions for pregnancies due to rape and incest, while at the same time utterly opposing their position. But at least it is consistent.

But how is saying a fetus is a person, entitled to life (and liberty and the pursuit of happiness, which mainly require at a minimum he/she not be killed in utero), is properly protected (or as some people think of murder penalties, avenged by society) by a bureaucratic revocation of a license?

Can anyone think of another wrongful death situation where the result is something so de minimus? Let alone, murder aforethought, the very definition of first degree murder?

Let the pro-lifers state their true beliefs, and let the American people decide with that full information. Don't hide your candle under a bushel basket. Shine that light of belief bravely, if insanely, and let us all see and hear the truth as you see it.

LWW
10-18-2012, 06:45 PM
Very well ... killing an unborn human is homocide.

You may disagree with that position, but I defy you to make a cogent argument that it stands on shakier moral ground than the belief that killing an unborn human should be legally and morally acceptable because the unborn human is:

- Found to be of the undesired gender.

- The product of infidelity within a relationship.

Can anyone else cite another example where homicide is justifiable for a reason where the deceased is so non responsible?

Let the pro-deather's defend such atrocity.

Shine that light of belief bravely, if insanely, and let us all see and hear the truth as you see it.

eg8r
10-19-2012, 06:41 AM
Well you already know llotters view of what should happen. Since I have changed my stance on capital punishment, I think jail time would be sufficient. There are gray areas and I respect that so my feelings are not absolutes in all cases. There are instances like life-threatening cases where the mother will die or instances where the mother and child will die and I don't expect to send them to jail for wanting to stay alive. However, these types of incidences can be monitored to make sure there is no sudden rise in these types of incidences because doctors and mothers think it is a loophole to be exploited.

eg8r

Qtec
10-19-2012, 06:53 AM
Its simple.

A 14 yr old girl gets pregnant. The father is long gone. She is 10 weeks gone.
Can she have an abortion?

ie, is she in control of her own body? Is her body her own or can politicians decide what she does with her life?

If you are against abortion then you must be FOR contraception because it reduces unwanted pregnancies and therefore abortions.

That is logic.


Q.....you are against both...right?

eg8r
10-19-2012, 07:09 AM
I am in no way against contraception. I don't think it should be handed out with candy at halloween or pushed by school teachers. You like to argue but the fact is when practiced abstinence in 100% effective. If they are not having sex then there are no unwanted babies. If a 14 yr old girl gets pregnant then she should not be allowed to abort the baby.

eg8r

Sev
10-19-2012, 07:18 AM
The excuses for human behavior are never ending.

I would prefer a national "Make My Day" law so that I could perform some retroactive abortions. There are a lot of individuals that are desperately in need of it.

Gayle in MD
10-19-2012, 08:32 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its simple.

A 14 yr old girl gets pregnant. The father is long gone. She is 10 weeks gone.
Can she have an abortion?

ie, is she in control of her own body? Is her body her own or can politicians decide what she does with her life?

If you are against abortion then you must be FOR contraception because it reduces unwanted pregnancies and therefore abortions.

That is logic.


Q.....you are against both...right? </div></div>

Trying to dictate how others how they may or may not live their own personal, private lives, is wrong.

Interestingly, torture doesn't bother the Pro Lifers. Insane people having access to weapons of mass destruction, doesn't bother them. Grown Mormons, torturing their own animals doesn't bother them. But just let a little teenaged girl get pregnant, and they are ready to send her to life in prison if she has an abortion, because it is life in proison for a thirteen year old to bring a fetus to term, in manny ways, and many Repiglican Religious nutjobs, would send a married woman with other needy children at home, to her grave, rather than allow abortion to be legal.

As for asking Ed anything at all ever about the Repiglican stance on abortion, or birth control, his hypocrisy is even more bodacious on this subject than all of the others, if you can imagine that!

He wrote here once that the birth control methods he has used, are the very same methods which under the Personhood, and Repiglican excuse to Bann Planned Parenthood, along with every single current Pro Life position and legislation of the Repiglican Party, eh8tr himself, would be in jail right now.

If the Repiglican ammendments were ever passed, probably over two thirds of the country would have to be jailed. How many can say their birth control methods over their life span, never aborted a fertilized fetus? They can't, of they everr used birth controll pills. They can't if they ever used the IUD. in fact, they can't unless they never had sex, since some women get pregnant by men and have abortions which those men never even know about.

It is absurd to think that unmarried adults, their twenties and thirties, are going to practice abstinence. Even more absurd to think that talking to them about abstinence, will ever be enough to reduce teen pregnancy, absurd and offensive for anyone to think they have the right to dictate what is the best decision for that teen and her family to make, together.


If an aborted fetus, had the rights which Repiglicans are pushing, and there is no statute of limitations for murder, Eh8tr could surely go to jail on murder charges, as well.

The only legal birth control, would be prophilactics, which are not reliable, and surely, abstinence is a joke, on every level.

It is heartless and misogynistic for any man to think he has any right at all, ever, to dictate to any female, what she may or may not do with her own body, regardless of her age.

When it comes to sex, behavior and intention, is not predictable.

I tried to write about this once and explain this simple fact, to my dear friend Sack once, and his response was that first of all, he would never get a woman he was seeing pregnant, certainly not out of wedlock, and additionally he would never date a woman so irresponsible, that she would not be using birth control. I think I might have written back at some point, "If wishes were horses, we could take a nice long ride."

Repiglicans need to get over their misogyny, homophobia, and racsim, and they need to stop trying to dictate to others about personal issues separate from rape and incest, which, IMO should include the death penalty which there is DNA proof that a child has been molested by an adult, or a daughter raped by her father or any man.

The religious should learn to respect the separation of church and state, and stay out of our political business completely unless they are willing to give up their tax exemption.

Just those few changes in laws and attitudes, would end the massive amount of valuable time that is wasted by these narrow minded people, who refuse to mind their own damned business, and leave others alone. We are being poisoned, and crippled with disease by polluters, putting the entire globe at risk, and we are being distracted by the ignorance, and nastiness of those religious nutjobs, annd Repiglican wannabe dictators, and wealthy polluters in nearly everry industry, who are destroying life on a daily basis, annd by those who think we can live resaonbely in today's world, according to gossip annd/or Constitutional laws, which were written hundreds or thousands of years ago, or that they have the right to FROCE, INTIMIDATE&lt; DICTATE&lt; INTRUDE their religious views into the personal, private decisions of others, and think the justification is their personal religious beliefs. That absurd and offensive ideology, is precisely how the Taliban, al Qaeda, and all horrific depots in history, have justified their vicious slaughters and torture...


G.

Sev
10-19-2012, 08:43 AM
The issue of abortion is quite amusing.

People profess the preciousness of human life and then destroy it.

Just proves human life is not precious. It just an agenda.

Gayle in MD
10-19-2012, 09:05 AM
Well, I don't find it at all amusing, friend. I find it all very disturbing, and particularly, as a cancer survivor, so far that is, I am most distressed by the poisons which are causing cancer, and growing costs to all of us from food production, and the resulting obesity which is one of our major costly failures, all of whichI believe only President Obama will address, and do so far more powerfully, after he wins a second term.


Additionally, as you already know, I am fed up with organized religion's intrusion into government and politics, and the on- going hatred which it definitely promotes. I'm very concerned about the Repiglican twist on the actual war on women, and the actual war on the Middle class, which THEY have created, and which THEY WILL continue, unless we remove their power.

Their legislative record proves beyond a shadow of a doubt, that they are determined to overturn not only Roe V. Wade, but that they will continue to remove all other women's rights, and continue to destroy regulations and oversight which could save many lives, and protect our planet.

Mitt Romney would be the absolute worst thing that could happen at this time.

In fact, I said that very same thing here before Bush crashed his way into the White House, and I was surely on target with that prediction.

One would think that the obvious Repiglican efforts to disenfranchise American voters, would be quite enough to remove any possibility of a Romney win, but alas, we have few truly educated patriotic voters on the right, annd hence, the struggle for what is reasonable, patriotic, and life enforcing, will continue until our educational priority, replaces the greed which has destroyed our country on many levels.

I still have great hope that just such a revolution in high intention will emerge in time to save lives, reduce the growing threat of disease, preserve the glory of equal rights under the law, and promote America's intellectual awareness, possiblly saving the planet as well.

In the meantime, I, and other Liberals, will continue to try to protect those in need, obstruct those who destroy and attack, condemn destructive greed and corruption, and commit to a brighter future for our children and grandchildren, as well all life and beauty on this planet.

G.

Sev
10-21-2012, 06:15 AM
Gayle I am with you all the way on GMO foods, pesticides, pharmaceuticals in the water and additives that are legal and have been shown to cause disease and other disorders.
These problems have been caused by both sides of the aisle under different administrations with different parties in charge of congress.
Whether its through good intention or they have be bought, bribed or coerced matters not. The government is doing more harm than good for this country. Its by far much to large, over reaching and to intrusive in our lives.
The country is supposed to be owned by us. Instead we through laws, rules, regulations and taxation are owned by the government. That is not the definition of liberty and a free people.

I however do not see a war on woman. I only see differing view points to which there are woman on both sides arguing. Do I agree with all the points on both sides no. I think both are disingenuous at best and are fighting for an agenda and dont give a damn about human health, males or females.

LWW
10-21-2012, 07:38 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The issue of abortion is quite amusing.

People profess the preciousness of human life and then destroy it.

Just proves human life is not precious. It just an agenda. </div></div>

They are merely items to be used on the stage of agit-prop theater.

Soflasnapper
10-21-2012, 12:34 PM
You like to argue but the fact is when practiced abstinence in 100% effective.

Even previously virginic women or girls may be the subject of rape, where their OWN abstinence is trumped by another's predation.

How common is rape? I seem to remember at least a 10% lifetime incidence for women in this country, and maybe more like 1 in 4.

This source (http://www.resurrectionafterrape.org/media/Just%20how%20many%20women%20are%20raped.pdf) argues for the 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 statistic, of how many women will be raped sometime in their lifetime.

Soflasnapper
10-21-2012, 12:40 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Very well ... killing an unborn human is homocide.

You may disagree with that position, but I defy you to make a cogent argument that it stands on shakier moral ground than the belief that killing an unborn human should be legally and morally acceptable because the unborn human is:

- Found to be of the undesired gender.

- The product of infidelity within a relationship.

Can anyone else cite another example where homicide is justifiable for a reason where the deceased is so non responsible?

Let the pro-deather's defend such atrocity.

Shine that light of belief bravely, if insanely, and let us all see and hear the truth as you see it. </div></div>

Please answer my question directly.

As the homicide you admit it is, do you favor the death penalty or life imprisonment for the doctor, the woman, or the man who may be paying for this procedure?

A simple yes or no will suffice, or a compound answer variously for the 3 kinds of those who would be involved.

Thank you for an actually pertinent response, should you deign to provide it, rather than your talking points.

Please also now extend your answer to what should be done at IVF clinics where the same living (although not breathing yet) wholly legal persons have been created as a backup plan, to remain frozen (thus deprived of full life, liberty and their pursuit of happiness), and often simply discarded (or 'murdered' as you would claim).

As you may remember, Myth's own business model included co-conspiracy with such murderous IVF clinics to discard the 'medical waste' (of dead persons), and his own family created and either held hostage forever or had killed several completely whole persons (the unneeded ones).

LWW
10-21-2012, 12:45 PM
I did, why won't you.

Soflasnapper
10-21-2012, 12:54 PM
You said it was homicide.

Very well. Which KIND of homicide, leading to what kind of punishment, then, is the question.

We do not execute 2nd degree murderers, even when duly convicted, and even in jurisdictions that have the death penalty. Same with negligent vehicular homicide perpetrators.

So, to repeat, do you favor the death penalty in such cases, as to the doctor performing what you call a homicide (not clarifying what level of homicide it is or should be in your view), the pregnant woman that co-conspires, or the inseminator man who either encourages the woman to have this done, and/or pays for it?

As for my answer to your question, I find the personhood amendment idea fundamentally flawed, and wish to reserve the protections designed for a human being to a fetus only as of viability, as perhaps tragically abridged by the life of the mother at stake. Why? Because as the Bible explains, the unborn are not yet people or persons or human beings until they are born or have achieved live birth capability.

eg8r
10-22-2012, 10:36 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Even previously virginic women or girls may be the subject of rape, where their OWN abstinence is trumped by another's predation.</div></div>Why change the subject of my sentence? You are surely able to figure out the subject wasn't about rape. You know abstinence is 100% effective when practiced and you have no argument. I would not allow an abortion for rape.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-22-2012, 10:58 AM
Because, plainly, and please speak up if you disagree with this fact, an abstinent female is not 100% protected against conception by that abstinence if she is raped.

That is, she could do 100% what you say is 100% certain to prevent pregnancy, and if she's one of the 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 females who are raped over their lifetime, she may end up pregnant.

Frankly, it's fairly clear that there is a role males play in pregnancies, and yet they skate away from that responsibility all too often. If you want to get off the half the problem analysis you use, maybe the fathers should be sterilized as well as forced to pay for their offspring, given their irresponsibility and part in these events.

It's rarely recognized that males want and need abortions nearly as much as the females they impregnate, or if it is, people still look at the females as if they routinely become pregnant by parthenogenesis (asexually, by themselves, no man involved).

You have partially answered the question I first raised. You do not support capital punishment in this case (or any other), and you do support some prison time in some, but not all, cases.

So, life in prison? That's what murder routinely gets if not the death penalty. Life in prison without chance of parole? For the doctor only, or the woman, and how about the man if he's involved?

5 to 10 years? What would be suitable for what is fully murder in some degree, if the personhood concept passes? For all three involved?

eg8r
10-22-2012, 11:12 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Because, plainly, and please speak up if you disagree with this fact, an abstinent female is not 100% protected against conception by that abstinence if she is raped. </div></div>LOL, I am sorry I guess you don't understand what happens during a rape...sex. Hello McFly, just because the sex happened during rape does not mean it did not happen. The girl was doing everything she could then she was raped. At that point, like it or not, there is no more abstinence. She didn't ask for it or enjoy it but it most definitely was still sex and a definite void of abstinence.

Again, nothing you have said proves abstinence has ever caused an unwanted pregnancy. It has never happened, EVER.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-22-2012, 11:27 AM
Your ridiculous claim that abstinence forcibly ended shows abstinence will always work is duly noted.

But you continue to duck on the prison sentence you called for, and to whom it would apply. For good reason, as that is the breaking point for all reasonable people on this issue. Call for the kinds of lengthy prison sentences appropriate to homicide, and you'd lose even some pro-life people on that one.

eg8r
10-22-2012, 11:50 AM
Call it ridiculous all you want but a person practicing abstinence that never got pregant before sex is proof. It is no different than a person that was practicing it and decided eventually to stop practicing it and has sex and gets pregnant. Rape is the presence of sex, obviously there is no abstinence at that point.

Show me an example, besides Mary, where a person got pregnant from not having sex (ignoring the medical ways). We are talking about unwanted babies you know.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But you continue to duck on the prison sentence you called for, and to whom it would apply.</div></div>I haven't ducked anything. I think I was overwhelmed with your stupid proposition that a person being raped could still be abstinent. I am sorry your foolery threw me off. If there was going to be a prison sentence by law then everyone involved should be dealt with no differently than any normal murder.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-22-2012, 12:10 PM
OK, finally an answer.

No less than 10 years, up to life imprisonment, for the doctor, the woman, and sometimes the man, then.

Gosh why doesn't Romney take up this winning position more fulsomely?

eg8r
10-22-2012, 12:19 PM
Gosh who knows? I wonder why you choose to attach Romney to a statement I make considering I don't associate with him or will vote for him. LOL, the more you talk on this subject the dumber you "sound".


eg8r

Sev
10-22-2012, 04:29 PM
Do you support dead babies?

Its a pretty simple thing.

I dont want to hear about the circumstance. No buts. No if's

LWW
10-22-2012, 04:32 PM
You still have not answered.

I wonder why?

Soflasnapper
10-22-2012, 04:39 PM
Do I eat dead babies? No, why would you ask it that way?

LOL, might as well ask if I'm pro abortion. It's a highly tendentious framing.

I don't take first trimester fetuses to be babies at all. I agree with the historical teachings of the church, that in development they are not ensouled yet, and are not people (babies), but proto-people, future people, possible people, but not yet people, children, or babies.

I do not take fertilized eggs, zygotes, or blastocysts prior to implantation to be babies, either. I am fine with hormonal birth control being used to prevent them from implantation, or with the day after emergency 'contraception.' The personhood amendment, life begins at conception, means both hormonal birth control and day after remedies are another form of homicide. I don't believe that for a second.

The personhood amendment would make every miscarriage a homicide investigation. We would need womb police. It's been done before in communist Eastern Europe. It's nonsense, and rips personal freedoms away from people.

Sev
10-22-2012, 04:41 PM
And I was thinking on this the other night.

I am not against a woman's right to do what they wish with their bodies. Nor a mans with his .

However. And this is not directed at you personally but we are discussing this.
I have no vested interest in your existence or your prodigy. Nor do you in mine. Whether either us lives or dies late or early depending on circumstance matters not either.

However when you support legislation that implements policy and is funded by theft of a portion of my life via taxation forced upon me against my will by the government I would suggest you lose the high ground of laissez faire on your body.
You have forced me though the use of government force to have a vested interest in your body.
By taking a portion of my life and transferring it to yours against my will, you give me a voice in how you are going to live your life.

cushioncrawler
10-22-2012, 05:16 PM
A turd of course haz enuff good dna etc to potentially make a baby.
But i dont know if there iz any scienstiffik faktoids relating to the moment a sperm enters a turd.

There probly iznt much point in determining the sex of a turd prior to uzing it to make a baby.
Alltho it iz pretty certain that nomatter what the sex of the baby it iz likely to grow up to be a lawyer.
mac.

Soflasnapper
10-22-2012, 05:36 PM
You have forced me though the use of government force to have a vested interest in your body.

Also known as taxation. Nobody forces you to be taxed, and certainly I do not. You don't care for the societal arrangements here as to taxation? Then leave for where it's different (I suggest Somalia, a noted tax free haven! LOL!), and/or of course, exercise your citizen's rights of free assembly, free association, and your right to petition the government for grievances. Absent some showing you are doing some or more of such actions, sitting around and belly-aching is bad faith with our system, which I repeat you do not have to be part of. You have volunteered to be here, or at least can voluntarily leave.

Now, just as taxation is subject to the political process, so too is how the money gathered from taxation is spent. Political. No great philosophical purpose. It's political.

Convince enough people who elect enough officials and you get part of what you think is best. Don't get involved, and others will use the system for what they think is best.

I don't see the issue, except the pro-lifers have not cemented the deal with enough of the populace, even as they continue to make progress on outlawing abortions anyway.

For instance, ed and I have a rare agreement against capital punishment. Yet, even though that's based on firm principle, I am taxed in Florida to help support the death penalty costs. What to do? Get a lot more politically active here, or leave to another state without capital punishment, or pipe down because I'm unwilling to do the slightest thing, or whine a lot because although I am unwilling to take the slightest step, I find it unfair.

In my case, I pipe down, but look for anti-capital punishment positioned candidates to eventually change it over time.

Soflasnapper
10-22-2012, 05:39 PM
That's wickedly funny stuff there, mac. LOL!

Sev
10-22-2012, 06:24 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You have forced me though the use of government force to have a vested interest in your body.

Also known as taxation. Nobody forces you to be taxed, and certainly I do not. You don't care for the societal arrangements here as to taxation? Then leave for where it's different (I suggest Somalia, a noted tax free haven! LOL!), and/or of course, exercise your citizen's rights of free assembly, free association, and your right to petition the government for grievances. Absent some showing you are doing some or more of such actions, sitting around and belly-aching is bad faith with our system, which I repeat you do not have to be part of. You have volunteered to be here, or at least can voluntarily leave.

Now, just as taxation is subject to the political process, so too is how the money gathered from taxation is spent. Political. No great philosophical purpose. It's political.

Convince enough people who elect enough officials and you get part of what you think is best. Don't get involved, and others will use the system for what they think is best.

I don't see the issue, except the pro-lifers have not cemented the deal with enough of the populace, even as they continue to make progress on outlawing abortions anyway.

For instance, ed and I have a rare agreement against capital punishment. Yet, even though that's based on firm principle, I am taxed in Florida to help support the death penalty costs. What to do? Get a lot more politically active here, or leave to another state without capital punishment, or pipe down because I'm unwilling to do the slightest thing, or whine a lot because although I am unwilling to take the slightest step, I find it unfair.

In my case, I pipe down, but look for anti-capital punishment positioned candidates to eventually change it over time. </div></div>

Actually that is inaccurate. A child does not volunteer to be born.
I can volunteer to leave. However the arrival had nothing to do with my free will.

Well I did incorporate. So... .

My point is clear. When you take from the general population for your personal benefit you are not entitled to do as you see fit.

Its an oxymoron in that people will support dead babies while at the same time deny an individual the right to use deadly force to protect themselves or another human being.
In NY you have to run and hide unless trapped or you go to jail.
A child in a womb has nowhere to run even if it wanted to.
Both are a form of abortion.

The hypocrisy is spectacular.

Soflasnapper
10-22-2012, 06:35 PM
My point is clear. When you take from the general population for your personal benefit you are not entitled to do as you see fit.

I agree with that, and obey the laws even when I disagree with them. We have a system to work within, usually some benefits from the system, and some harm or duties they lay upon us in return.

The classical liberal argument is that governments are legitimated by the consent of the governed. (John Locke, etc.) I grew up reading them, I agreed with them then, and continue to agree with them. There is a societal contract or compact, implied as much as explicit. I agree no baby has agreed to anything of the sort, but as of reaching the age of majority and reason, anyone has a remedy in the system, or by leaving the system. A simple choice, although one that requires mature patience or considerable courage, or both.

Sev
10-22-2012, 06:48 PM
You assume that the governed have consented to the way the government has been governing.

The founders once showed their discontent with the way King George governed.

Gayle in MD
10-23-2012, 12:02 PM
Yes, and as I stated, under such ridiculous laws, EH8tr would be considered by his party to be a murderer, both him, and his wife!

Hypocrisy extraordinaire, given he defends the current Repiglican War On Women, and is against women's rights, while calling others murderers for simply stating that they believe in a woman's right to choose.

G.

Gayle in MD
10-23-2012, 12:11 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And I was thinking on this the other night.

I am not against a woman's right to do what they wish with their bodies. Nor a mans with his .

However. And this is not directed at you personally but we are discussing this.
I have no vested interest in your existence or your prodigy. Nor do you in mine. Whether either us lives or dies late or early depending on circumstance matters not either.

However when you support legislation that implements policy and is funded by theft of a portion of my life via taxation forced upon me against my will by the government I would suggest you lose the high ground of laissez faire on your body.
You have forced me though the use of government force to have a vested interest in your body.
By taking a portion of my life and transferring it to yours against my will, you give me a voice in how you are going to live your life. </div></div>

LOL, that is one convoluted ideology.

Hey, if you want smaller government, and less intrusion, then you should vote for Democrats.

It is a fact that the Repiglican Party of today, has by far the most prolific intrusion into personal lives, and they are top in creating debt, and growing government.

The charts prove it.

Liberals believe in live, and let live, and mind your own business, not trying to dictate by using religion, to force our opinions upon others.

I believe in a woman's right to equal pay, that Gays have every right to marry, that forcing this ountry into war in lies is treason, and I believe that no person has the right to violate another person's decisions about what they do with their own body. That's what Repiglicans are trying to do, and it's wrong.

The crux of the entire issue of personal freedom, encompasses the right to control ones own body. That is paramount.

Men have no right to have any opinions on the subject of abortion, IMO. If they want to have a say, then let them ONLY have sex with their wives.

A lot of men are going to be paying some high prices if Repigloicans continue with this WOW.

G.