Franklin Graham peppered Obama about ties to Islam

SheikBen wrote:You can offer to adopt a baby that would otherwise have been aborted.

Otherwise I agree that our options are limited. Anyway, Craig's argument falls flat--just because people who are opposed to abortion don't go around breaking the law en masse does not mean that somehow abortion is morally right.

Hi Michael,

I'm not sure that my adopting a baby would help anything. In this country there are so many people who can't have a child of their own trying to adopt and there just aren't enough babies to adopt. Even with all the advances in fertility treatments, the number of foreign adoptions continues to rise. I have a couple of friends who have adopted special needs children in this country and that wasn't a cake walk either. It isn't that there aren't people who will adopt. That simply isn't the case at all.

Hi Steph,

Get me different from saying that adoption is a prerequisite to being pro-life. I was just indicating another potential for action that is short of blowing up an abortion clinic (and to hear prochoicers talk about it, one would think it were a weekly occurrence).

Abortion is murder whether or not prolifers act responsibly. Down here (or is it up here?) there are crisis centers that provide strollers, blankets, diapers, food, housing, etc. for moms. I think that speaks volumes and I've heard before that you support such places.

Stephanie wrote:First of all, I vehemently disagree that overturning Roe v Wade and Doe v Bolton or even just banning late term abortions would be corrupting the Constitution.

Isn't your anti-abortion stance part of your value system?

Yes. And so is constitutional government.

Stephanie wrote:
Are you suggesting I should start storming abortion clinics and shooting the doctors and nurses? I'm pro-life, I don't kill other people, even those members of society who have sworn to "do no harm" yet acquire wealth by murdering the weakest and most defenseless...

I see nothing else I can do.

Would you stop the murder of your neighbor? I'm not suggesting you do anything, but I'd say if one saw abortion as the gravest injustice one would be more compelled to act than by the ballot.

Slavery was legal and an injustice: Ergo the underground railroad. Voting against what you believe to be murder seems to be an implicit agreement that it is something other than but akin to, in your mind.

Just trying to understand.

There's nothing to understand. Abortion requires someone with extensive education and training ending a human life for profit. That is a fact.

It is also a fact that I can't stop doctors from performing them, short of murdering doctors who perform abortions. I don't kill other human beings. If I were to go around lurking behind bushes waiting to take out abortion doctors, how would I be any better than they are? What would happen to me and my family if I decided to do so? Most of my children are grown, but I have a son who is six who has never been apart from his mother for even as long as 24 straight hours. What kind of consequences do you think he would face if I were to commit such horrific acts?

Or are you suggesting the only action I take to end abortion is casting ballots for pro-life candidates? If so, you would be wrong, which isn't surprising. You don't know me or anything about what I have done and what I'm doing now.

"Other than providing whatever support I can lend to pro-life agencies who assist pregnant women, and trying to elect leaders who will criminalize abortion, I see nothing else I can do."

Well Steph that right there is what Zig and I have been saying.

You cannot "elect leaders who will criminalize abortion".

But you can vote for demagogues who say they will.

Under our Constitution, it is not "criminal".

So what is needed is an amendment to the Constitution.

Which most of your demagogues on the right do not want.

Because they could no longer demagogue people like you.

Bullshit, Sherm.

That's outright bullshit, you and I and everyone here knows it.

The President nominates justices to the Supreme Court. The Senate confirms them.

Our elected officials vote to fund abortions, to require parental notification, to place restrictions on late term abortions.

In order to have any realistic chance of amending the Constitution to ban abortion, we need to elect leaders who oppose abortion.

Now you can tell yourself whatever you need to in order to sleep at night. That's fine. But don't expect to share it with me and have me keep quiet and not call it what it is.

Bullshit.

In order to have any realistic chance of amending the Constitution to ban abortion, we need to elect leaders who oppose abortion.

How many candidates have an agenda of amending the Constitution to allows states to criminalize abortion? Damn few- because there is no demand for such an amendment.

How many candidates (on both "sides") would rather participate in demogoging the issue every election cycle? Many of them would and do- because the voters keep falling for it every time, just like with "gay rights".

Ziggy,

It's bullshit when it comes from you too.

Abortion is murder, on this you and I seem to agree. Yet you vote for pro-abortion candidates and justify it by saying those who oppose abortion don't intend to do anything about it?

Like I said to Sherm, if it helps you sleep at night I suppose it's all good. Just don't try to share that pile of manure with me and expect me to keep quiet.

Again then, what about the Constitution? Is it, as someone quoted GW Bush as saying, "Just a goddamned piece of paper"?

Are you an expert on the US Constitution? Explain to me how it is we had a Constitutional amendment to prohibit liquor, and then another one to decriminalize liquor.....yet our leaders have criminalized marijuana and countless other substances without changing a single word in COTUS.

If you don't have your life, all those other wonderful protections the Constitution attempts to provide don't amount to a hill of beans.

Are you an expert on the US Constitution?

To about the same degree all of us here are, more or less.

OK, so explain to me why it is you believe a Constitutional amendment was required to ban liquor, and then another to allow it again, yet no language was changed in COTUS to criminalize marijuana, cocaine, LSD, etc?

There are very valid reasons for pro-lifers to believe SCOTUS will reverse Roe v Wade and other rulings if pro-life presidents are the ones offering up nominees.

There's nothing to understand. Abortion requires someone with extensive education and training ending a human life for profit. That is a fact.

It is not a fact, Steph.

For centuries, early abortions done with herbs and the advice of a yarbwoman who likely didn't have an "extensive education" or reap much in the way of profit.

It still can be done with drugs.

TerryRC wrote:There's nothing to understand. Abortion requires someone with extensive education and training ending a human life for profit. That is a fact.

It is not a fact, Steph.

For centuries, early abortions done with herbs and the advice of a yarbwoman who likely didn't have an "extensive education" or reap much in the way of profit.

It still can be done with drugs.

This isn't England in 1408. We aren't in 1508 Italy. Nor are we in Germany in 1608. We are in the USA in 2008. Abortions are performed by medical doctors for profit. The drugs used to induce abortion are designed and manufactured by scientists for profit.

This isn't the Middle Ages and women in the USA aren't going to a witch doctor for some herbal remedy.

This isn't England in 1408. We aren't in 1508 Italy. Nor are we in Germany in 1608. We are in the USA in 2008. Abortions are performed by medical doctors for profit. The drugs used to induce abortion are designed and manufactured by scientists for profit.

This isn't the Middle Ages and women in the USA aren't going to a witch doctor for some herbal remedy.

Don't be so sure of that. I know some wiccans with surprising tricks up their sleeves.

Regardless, my point is that it DOESN'T require an extensive education to get your hands on an abortificant and not all abortions are done by surgery.

You are exaggerating to appeal to the emotions of others.

It isn't quite cricket.

TerryRC wrote:
This isn't England in 1408. We aren't in 1508 Italy. Nor are we in Germany in 1608. We are in the USA in 2008. Abortions are performed by medical doctors for profit. The drugs used to induce abortion are designed and manufactured by scientists for profit.

This isn't the Middle Ages and women in the USA aren't going to a witch doctor for some herbal remedy.

Don't be so sure of that. I know some wiccans with surprising tricks up their sleeves.

Regardless, my point is that it DOESN'T require an extensive education to get your hands on an abortificant and not all abortions are done by surgery.

You are exaggerating to appeal to the emotions of others.

It isn't quite cricket.

I'm exaggerating? Tell me, Terry....how many abortions have been performed in this country since Roe v Wade? What percentage of them were induced with herbal remedies created by Wiccans or others?

It doesn't require anything more than internet access or a telephone and a debit or credit card to obtain an abortificant. Abortions have never required extensive knowledge or training.

Only in the past few decades has abortion become an industry generating profit and wealth for highly trained, well educated, so-called professionals. Legalizing abortion in this country has resulted in millions of murdered human beings and wealth and prosperity to a select few willing to take the life of another for profit.

TerryRC wrote:There's nothing to understand. Abortion requires someone with extensive education and training ending a human life for profit. That is a fact.

It is not a fact, Steph.

For centuries, early abortions done with herbs and the advice of a yarbwoman who likely didn't have an "extensive education" or reap much in the way of profit.

It still can be done with drugs.

For profit? How can you say that Doctors don't sincerely believe in what they're doing? Although not routine nowadays, how can you say it's not a medically appropriate method for saving the life of a woman in danger? Ever?

I guess you're saying that an Epidemiologist is just giving drugs for the money. I guess they're all in it for profit?

There's nothing to understand. Abortion requires someone with extensive education and training ending a human life for profit. That is a fact.

You will have difficulty reconciling your words above with your words below...

It doesn't require anything more than internet access or a telephone and a debit or credit card to obtain an abortificant. Abortions have never required extensive knowledge or training.

Terry,

Committing an abortion, or manufacturing an abortifacient (sp?), requires extensive training most all of the time. I don't see the relevance of it, though, so if you want that Wiccans perform abortions every second day by chanting Hecate Akbar or something that's fine.

I disagree with Stephanie that it's done for economic motives. I think people like abortion because they like the idea of fewer people in the world, particularly those they would classify as undesirable. What Stephanie sees as an economic motive I, far less charitably, see as a genocidal one.

Committing an abortion, or manufacturing an abortifacient (sp?), requires extensive training most all of the time. I don't see the relevance of it, though, so if you want that Wiccans perform abortions every second day by chanting Hecate Akbar or something that's fine.

Like I said, even now herbal abortificants surround us.

My argument was to counter the following statement which I know to be false, or misleading, at the least:

There's nothing to understand. Abortion requires someone with extensive education and training ending a human life for profit. That is a fact.

The guy that beats his pregnant girlfriend until she miscarries need no training at all.

TerryRC wrote:There's nothing to understand. Abortion requires someone with extensive education and training ending a human life for profit. That is a fact.

You will have difficulty reconciling your words above with your words below...

It doesn't require anything more than internet access or a telephone and a debit or credit card to obtain an abortificant. Abortions have never required extensive knowledge or training.

It isn't difficult to reconcile at all. In this country, for nearly 40 years, abortions have been legally obtained only by utilizing the services or products of someone with extensive education and training and those people providing those services and products are making a tidy profit for ending another human being's life.

[quote="TerryRC"]Committing an abortion, or manufacturing an abortifacient (sp?), requires extensive training most all of the time. I don't see the relevance of it, though, so if you want that Wiccans perform abortions every second day by chanting Hecate Akbar or something that's fine.

Like I said, even now herbal abortificants surround us.

My argument was to counter the following statement which I know to be false, or misleading, at the least:

There's nothing to understand. Abortion requires someone with extensive education and training ending a human life for profit. That is a fact.

The guy that beats his pregnant girlfriend until she miscarries need no training at all.[/quote]

In your mind even that isn't a crime? To you, that's an abortion procedure? Come on, Terry, try at least a somewhat valid argument.

In your mind even that isn't a crime? To you, that's an abortion procedure? Come on, Terry, try at least a somewhat valid argument.

We were talking about abortions. It doesn't take a degree to cause one, crime or not.

I don't see where this line of the argument is going. Not to trivialize the matter, but whether one could get an abortion with an oil change at Jiffy Lube or if it cost 50,000 dollars, it is still the destruction of a human life. For those who believe it is not this destruction, the question of "provider" hardly matters beyond perhaps the "quality" of such. If getting an abortion is no different than getting an appendectomy, I suppose the cheapest and fastest way would be the preferred method.

For those of us who are convinced that it is murder, it does not matter whether that murder is of the Joseph Mengele variety or the average street thug variety. Murder is not dependent upon a PhD. I am convinced that abortion is a means by which people who think themselves doing well are in fact ridding the country of millions of poor people. "Overpopulation" very rarely means "we have to have an abortion" but rather that other people should. I have a cousin who writes legal briefs for NARAL and she would never, ever have an abortion. She'll fight to great lengths to make sure that other people have them.