If you believe ANY politician you are being lied to... you just aren't able to tell that they are lying when they say stuff you like.

Now I remember why I hated Junior High.

But, the Affordable Care Act subsidizes Viagra, etc., for rapists, pedophiles and sex offenders. The Democrats blocked a Republican effort to remove the subsidy.

Source: Wikipedia

Yeah, and the Republicans want to force women to carry the babies of said rapists...did you scream about that

Suzq,

If anyone thinks that Obama OR Bush had anything to do with the recession, they obviously dont know economics.

Until we have actually done anything to help women and their children who are disadvantaged, no one has any right to remove access to abortions. And not just once, like businesses and bankers and investors, women need a stable future, they need to know that they will be protected for more than four years......in other words, pro-life Dems....shut it.

Julian McPhillips - "I wish they would acknowledge that there is real life in womb."

Julian is an old fart who needs to mind his own business. If you don't have a womb, you get NO SAY in abortion rights.

We have good news about abortion, the number of supporters among woman of this cruel procedure is going down.

Most hispanics are Catholics..... Pro Life... But they get suckered into the dems lies.... Funny isn't it? I guess they are just stupid. Dems have a ton of stupid people in their corner. Baptist Blacks... Yeah we like gay marriage... Even college kids... yeah here's more loans so the cost of college goes up for everyone. Obama, the one-eyed man leading the blind.

In a perfect world, every child would be wanted, every woman would be economically and psychologically fit to be a mother, and there would be plentiful resources for all. That world has never existed. So far, American sentimentality on behalf of the unborn is in no way matched by a system to care for unwanted children once they see the light of day.

Since the GOP, the Greedy Old Pubic Police, would like to reduce women to nothing more than the sum of their reproductive function, why would any self-respecting woman support these tyrannical men and their repressed women, so opposed to personal privacy that they'd use government to crawl right up the wazoos of 50% of the population?

How would the boys feel if somebody took away their guns and Viagra, eh?

Melissa - Taking away viagra pretty much takes away the gun, doesn't it?

I'm shocked that there are pro-lifer's in the "consensual sodomy" party.

Romney Invested in Medical-Waste Firm That Disposed of Aborted Fetuses, Government Documents Show

And these documents challenge Romney's claim that he left Bain Capital in early 1999.

Portia @ 2.8: That is simply not true and I'm sure you either know that or you are totally ignorant.

@american girl

You are a prime example of why the 6 people that I represent will never vote for a democrat. You have made it clear in your comments on other threads and here that you as a representative of your party have zero tolerance for a Christian point of view even to the point where you support anti-christian comments. On top of that you leave no room for disagrement with any of your party's touted views. From your own statements people who have different beliefs than anything Obama states is a racist or a biggot when quite the opposite is true. The reason why the democrats will lose this election, much like they lost congress and loss the racall in Wisconsin is because you exclude most of us who arent rabid raving haters like yourselves.

I voted as a democrat in the first Clinton election because I didnt know any better. Now I do and all I get from your party is pure seething hatred for simply having a difference of opinion. Good luck with creating more democrat voters with that advertising.

Abortion is high in poor African American neighborhood, controlled by Democrats , instead to give them education about pregnancy they open more abortion clinics. Because they use the abortion as another political tool , like welfare. Democrats want to keep poor woman in chains.

You can collapse my comments but you can hide the truth.

I will never understand why abortion is a political issue. A woman’s right to chose what she can or cannot do with her body is very personal and should be left up to the individual woman to decide what is right for her.

No one likes the idea of abortion but as far as the decision to have one or not belongs to the woman that is pregnant....Period.... Lets face it having the government looking over the shoulder of every pregnant woman in America is a really bad idea. Pro life Democrats get this because they know the government should NEVER be allowed into our lives and homes unless invited in. Unfortunately when it comes to a woman’s right to choose the Republican Party is like a pack of rabid dogs. They are so adamant about criminalizing abortion and sticking their noses into every Americans personal life that it’s become more than disturbing it sounds more like dictatorship.

Stated in a broader sense, Democrats cannot regain the House without the election of "blue dog" Democrats...Democrats who are fiscally conservative (they won't spend money they don't have) and are moderates on social issues. Blue Dogs, thanks to the extreme left of the party, have become an endangered species...and so has a Democratic Speaker of the House!

Sadly, I cannot see this changing in the next 20 years...ultra-liberals will continue to hunt down the Blue Dogs of their own party...and the Democrats will continue to be a minority in the House...dooming any chance for the furtherance of Democratic ideals.

For a better understanding of what Blue Dogs believe, google Blue Dog coalition, and you will see why it is that certain parts of the country have been lost to the Republicans.

Against Abortion? Don't have one. I hope none of you rabid pro-lifers ever to face that choice. No one is pro-abortion. That is a horrible decision to have to make but no pink & sweaty old man or religions fanatic is going to tell me that I don't have the right to make that choice for myself. Mind your own business unless you are prepared to fund the unwanted children that you Republicans want to force women to have.

@ Kim

I dont have to "mind my own business" as you state it when my taxes are funding what I believe to be murder. I have the right and yes the will to oppose that murder. You on the other hand have the ability to ignore that murder and talk yourself into believing that it isnt destruction of a living child. In addition, why should I have to fund the "unwanted children" that you call them when you should possibly make adult decisions not to create a child only to have it turned into a ground hamburger or a "burden" as you would call it? You dont have the right to silence my voice or my opinions, but I know you and your kind wish you could.

That is were the Dems and Repubs reall are different. We have Dems who will stand up and vote their conscience while the Rpubs will stick together, up to lying. The Repubs keeps shouting freedom but they will never allow those in their party a voice if it's against their agenda. Remember the Repubs have always stated that they do what is necessary to make sure Obama doesn't have a second term so they have become the puppets of the super rich and corporate America. R & R will flip their beliefs in order to give the 1% what they want and anyone with half a brain would know by now that they are further want to increase the wealthy control of our country so they can lower wages, take away benefits and make us all become modern day surfs. I have to say it, why would working class vote for a party whose intentions are to completely destroy the middle class. Surely those working class Americans can't be that brain dead to believe R & R has their well being at heart. I feel sorry for them and our country if R & R are able to lie and buy their way into the White House.

@Kim: Well said, but you need to answer one question for all those on the fence...for how long after the point of conception do you feel you should have the right to make that decision? Or put another way, just minutes before birth what exists...a human being or a fetus...and if it is a fetus what turns it into a human being minutes later and why?

Said simply, "When does "person hood" begin...and why"?

@ Winker

As I stated earlier one of the reasons why the people I can influence will never vote for your party is because you are the party of exclusion and delusion. Where was your comment that was on the topic of this thread? It wasnt nearly on topic. You did however make claims about some "lordship" desires of the ruling class. Where sir, are any facts to back up that claim? There arent any and never would be from either party because your comment is completely insane (again a rabid seething hatefilled comment with no basis in reality). I believe the topic of this thread is about the lack of inclusion of those of us who believe that abortion is wrong. As I concluded earlier, if anyone has something of a different opinion than that of the party line your party ostricizes those people yet still beg for their vote. This is a delusional way of trying to win.

I think it is up to the mother to decide. This is a country of personal freedoms and they should not be impeded upon in the name of religion, which is not supposed to be linked to government in any way. Common sense would dictate that if a fetus would not survive outside the womb even with every piece of technology available to man-kind to keep them alive then they should be under the abortion cut-off age. I'm no doctor (obviously) but in the first three months of pregnancy I feel that any woman should be able to do what she wants with her body. Once the fetus is further in development to an age that would survive it shouldn't be as easy, but still available as an option.

Kenn - Good question that I don't have the answer to. Abortions have been around since the dawn of man, I would assume, and everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I guess once a fetus can survive outside the womb would be where I personally would be extremely uncomfortable with the choice. VoterWithAwareness above is a perfect example of someone who claims abortion is murder but who probably owns a gun, was in favor of the two wars in the Middle East where thousands of people were killed and is also in favor of capital punishment. I shudder to think what would happen if the pro-lifers gain power. Think how many women will be in prison - perhaps death row - for having an abortion. Reactionary, perhaps but not beyond the realm of possibility. Scary bunch of people.

Abortion is a top issue for some and it is nice that there are some in the Democratic Party who speak their minds even when they are in the minority. You didn't get to hear any opposing views at the RNC did you folks?

@ kim

And where do you have any evidence of my owning a gun or supporting the wars? I happen to be against war and any killing but you see what you just did? You just labled my opinion against abortion as attached to someone who owns guns and supports your party's continued wars in Afghanistan and yes including back door support in Syria. No need to go any further to prove that because I personally dont believe in infanticide you disdain any comment or other beliefs that I have. You are a perfect example of the rabid extreme raidcals on the left side of the party that i once appreciated.

Democrats refusing to listen to anyone who doesn't tow the party line and kneel to the messiah? Gee, what a surprise.

Strickland, who chaired the party's platform committee, read. "In addition, President Obama recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and our party's platform should as well. "

He has spoken.... so shut up and sit down you sheep! you mean nothing!

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/05/just-in-democrats-to-update-platform-with-jerusalem-reference/?hpt=hp_t1

Why do people think they can decide for themselves what is right for themselves; and then try to force that belief on everyone else? Absurd. If you dont like abortion, dont have one. You cant decide for everyone else. Not gonna happen. If you make it illegal, you will only force more misery on women and the unborn than you can possibly imagine, because then women will be having illegal abortions. Hello. That means OUR women. Our daughters, sisters, neighbors, loved ones. For God's sake. Dont women deserve medical care any more?

Voter With Awareness - I dont have to "mind my own business" as you state it when my taxes are funding what I believe to be murder. I have the right and yes the will to oppose that murder. You on the other hand have the ability to ignore that murder and talk yourself into believing that it isnt destruction of a living child. In addition, why should I have to fund the "unwanted children" that you call them when you should possibly make adult decisions not to create a child only to have it turned into a ground hamburger or a "burden" as you would call it? You dont have the right to silence my voice or my opinions, but I know you and your kind wish you could.

Yeah, well, we all have to pay for stuff we don't want. I don't want to pay for munitions, bombs, and war, etc., but it's part of living in the USA. Get over it!! Your reference to a " living child", as you put it, is completely INACCURATE in this discussion. Let me give you a little biology lesson: a zygote advances to an EMBRYO, then to a FETUS and only then to a BABY, and ONLY when it exits the womb. You can't change science. Again, GET OVER IT! I'm most certain you are male, and have no right to DISCOURSE AT ALL in this discussion; so why don't you go outside and eat your prunes. It will be better for your digestion! You are living the LIE of the Christian Right.

BTW, you could use a few apostrophes in your vocabulary. . .

Voter with... I don't have any proof that you own a gun or are pro-war (I notice you didn't comment on the capital punishment comment). I said probably because that is usually the case. You are a perfect example of the rabid extreme radicals on the right whom I never appreciated.

@ Mozzie and Kim,

WoW! Mozzie you are just a perfect example, and I do mean perfect, of the "inclusion and acceptance" of the liberal party. I am so ashamed that I thought you and your party were anything other than inclusive and open-minded.

Kim, you do notice that Mozzie is EXTREMELY not inclusive of those of us with a belief in God, right? And you want everyone who has belief to support this chaotic, abusive, downright denigrating (enough punctuation for you Mozzie) behaviour? Sorry sweety I'm also not a righty tighty. I'm an independant, but thank you for both, for you and Mozzie confirming why you are not getting 6 votes in any near future. Your inclusiveness is so overwhelming.

Voter,

No one's told you you can't be Christian. However, we're as free from your Christianity as you are from being FORCED into having an abortion. Kim's points would be logically the same as yours, if and only if, she was attempting to force you to give up your Christian belief, and believe as she does.

Thanks Sarah but I think logic and good sense are lost on her. She is steeped in the Spirit of hate and ignorance.

mozzie- Yeah, well, we all have to pay for stuff we don't want. I don't want to pay for munitions, bombs, and war, etc., but it's part of living in the USA. Get over it!! Your reference to a " living child", as you put it, is completely INACCURATE in this discussion. Let me give you a little biology lesson: a zygote advances to an EMBRYO, then to a FETUS and only then to a BABY, and ONLY when it exits the womb. You can't change science. Again, GET OVER IT! I'm most certain you are male, and have no right to DISCOURSE AT ALL in this discussion; so why don't you go outside and eat your prunes. It will be better for your digestion! You are living the LIE of the Christian Right.

All you did was give different stages of development. It is like saying, an infant becomes a toddler, then a teen, and then an adult. You in no way proved from science that it is a human being only when it exits the womb. In fact, every embryology text book will tell you life begins at conception. All of us didn't come from an embryo, we once were an embryo. We began as human beings (at conception) and we will remain so until death. As you stated, "You can't change science."

Your argument that only women can speak on abortion is logically flawed. If men can't speak on abortion then Roe vs Wade was bad law. Nine men decided it on the Supreme Court. In addition, we should dismiss all the male lawyers for Planned Parenthood.

Second, Lesbians and post-menopausal women cannot natuarally get pregnant. Based on your argument they should have no say in the issue.

Lastly, arguments do not have genders, people do.

Against Abortion? Don't have one.

This is completly confusing the argument. Pro-lifers take science at it word when it says life begins at conception. We believe that taking the life of the innocent unborn human being is murder. Your argument is like saying, "don't like slavery, don't own one" or "don't like spousal abuse, don't beat your wife." To many pro-abortionist assume the unborn are not human.

Mind your own business unless you are prepared to fund the unwanted children that you Republicans want to force women to have.

Again, your argument is assuming the unborn are not human. You would never say unwanted two year old children should be killed because republicans would not take care of them. You must prove the unborn are not human for this argument to have any validity. Science proves the unborn are human, and therefore should not be killed just because they are unwanted.

And lastly, no one is forcing women to have children. If they are pregnant they already have children. We just don't want to see the unjustified killing of a defensless human being.

Legalize abortions, no problem. Let people who have decided to get an abortion pay for it themselves. Just like birth control. When is a person responsible for their actions? Let's get real here, and quit prevaricating. I grew up at a time when abortions were illegal and a woman caught having had an abortion could go to jail. I also grew up in a time when homosexuality was a crime and the races were not allowed to intermingle. All of those attitudes were draconian and wrong. It is also wrong to use taxpayer money to pay for abortions, the exception being the Hyde Amendment.

Extremism and extremists are the one's controlling the narrative. Too much rhetoric and my way or the highway. Late term abortions that are done for convenience rather than medical necessity are wrong as are those who say that a woman, regardless of circumstances, must bear an unwanted child.

Of course, with the current economic malaise infecting our country, arguments about what government pays for may soon be moot, no money, no payment.

“And that is what I have tried to both talk about and reach out about over the last many years, going back, really, at least 15 years, in talking about abortion being safe, legal, and rare. And, by rare, I mean rare. And it's been a challenge, because the pro-life and the pro- choice communities have not really been willing to find much common ground. And I think that is a great failing on all of our parts, because, for me there are many opportunities to assist young people to make responsible decisions.

We have so many young people who are tremendously influenced by the media culture and by the celebrity culture, and who have a very difficult time trying to sort out the right decisions to make. And I personally believe that the adult society has failed those people. I mean, I think that we have failed them in our churches, our schools, our government. And I certainly think the, you know, free market has failed. We have all failed.

We have left too many children to sort of fend for themselves morally." - Hillary Clinton

This is completly confusing the argument. Pro-lifers take science at it word when it says life begins at conception. We believe that taking the life of the innocent unborn human being is murder.

Cancer is alive. Are we allowed to cut it out and kill it?

Parasites are alive. Are we allowed to kill them?

Until a fetus can survive outside the womb under its own bodily functions, its little more than a parasite or a cancer (it provides nothing positive biologically to the carrier, steals nutrients, risks the carrier's life, and is unable to be separated without killing it).

Currently legal abortion affects only one human being: the mother.

I have to laugh at the people who say they are against war but their taxes go to fund war. I pay taxes to the school district which pays for schooling for kids. Why should I be forced to pay taxes to school other peoples' brats.

These unwanted babies that will have to be born will turn into unloved kids-- and I will have to pay to school the brats. Unfair! I paid school taxes when my niece was in school-- why should I have to do it now that she is grown and on her own.

So you are against abortion? Two words-- SPAY and NEUTER.

Cancer is alive. Are we allowed to cut it out and kill it?

Parasites are alive. Are we allowed to kill them?

Until a fetus can survive outside the womb under its own bodily functions, its little more than a parasite or a cancer (it provides nothing positive biologically to the carrier, steals nutrients, risks the carrier's life, and is unable to be separated without killing it).

Currently legal abortion affects only one human being: the mother.

Parasites and human life are two very different things. Comparing the killing of a parasite to a human being is beyond belief. Science proves that human life begins at conception. From conception it is a human being. It was not a parasite and then somehow magically became a human being at the point it is able to live outside the womb. It began as a human (at conception) and will remain a human until death. Human life, especially those who cannot protect themselves, deserves to be protected.

Second, the child is not a parasite or intruder as you state. He is precisely where he naturally belongs at that point in his development. If the child doesn’t belong in the mother’s womb, where does he belong?

Third, just because the unborn cannot survive outside the womb does not mean we can kill them. Infants cannot survive on their own outside the womb either. Can we kill them? Are those who must rely on kidney machines, pace-makers or insulin shots for their survival less deserving of basic human rights than anyone else? Some of us may be less dependent than others, but if it is dependence that strips away a person's right to protection under the law, then we would all be in trouble. Embryos and fetuses who must rely on an umbilical cord in the womb are just as human as those who must rely on a feeding tube outside the womb. You are assuming the unborn are not human.

Not doubt abortion affects the mother. However, saying it only affects the mother is completely false.

Parasites and cancer? Interesting. Perhaps your mother considered you a parasite and a cancer which is why you believe unborn babies are cancers and parasites? Did your mother regard you as a massive tapeworm she had to carry for nine months? Did you cease being a tapeworm once you left the womb?

VOTERWITHOUTACLUE.... NO TAX DOLLARS FUND ABORTION. NEVER HAVE. NEVER WILL. Where do you people come up w/this bull@!$%#. Try reading the HYDE AMENDMENT and get a @!$%#ing CLUE.

Incurable... thing is... no one gives a damn what YOU 'believe'. YOU can BELIEVE whatever the hell you want. You can believe in pink unicorns but you can't make ME or anyone else believe in them. Just because YOU think something is "wrong", "immoral" blah blah blah ... DOES NOT MAKE IT SO. Human life is NO different than ANY form of life. So if you're 'pro-life' ( which is a completely bull s h i t term )... then you must be 'pro' ALL FORMS of life. HYPOCRITE. So quite stuffing your hypocritical, ignorant face with dead flesh of MURDERED animals. Quit eating altogether because PLANTS are 'alive' as well. I'll bet you're 'pro-WAR' and 'pro-DEATH PENALTY'.

Face it... you are nothing more than 'pro-FORCED BIRTH' and a massive hypocrite. YOUR beliefs/opinons are YOURS.... KEEP THEM TO YOURSELF because you have absolutely ZERO right to demand them of or force them on ANYONE else. PERIOD. And even though NO tax dollars have EVER been used to fund abortion... why shouldn't they be ? I am forced to fund IMMORAL WARS that I don't believe in !!!

It was not a parasite and then somehow magically became a human being at the point it is able to live outside the womb.

You are arguing a matter of definition. What defines a parasite: an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.

What defines a human: any individual of the genus Homo, especially a member of the species Homo sapiens.

Homo sapiens: the species of bipedal primates to which modern humans belong, characterized by a brain capacity averaging 1400 cc (85 cubic in.) and by dependence upon language and the creation and utilization of complex tools.

Classically, can we consider a collective of cells with no provable capacity for thought or language as human (zygote, fetus)? It is more than a question of biology. It is a matter of psychology. Humans are more than capable of being parasites, of being cancers. Without even the capacity to breathe, pump blood, digest food, or resolve waste, can you really consider a zygote or fetus as human yet? It may be aborted by nature at any moment. It may even be rejected by the mother's body as an invading organism (particularly in cases where blood types mismatch).

You take a stance of absolute righteousness, but I am willing to bet you will have no problem with a woman aborting a child of incest, rape, one who will not survive birth, or one who will kill the mother upon birth. You have no moral high ground to stand on, all you want to do is interfere in the ability of the one forced by nature to carry the entity that may become a child to make their own decisions.

Because the entity is literally unable to survive separated from its host, it can and should be considered part and parcel of the host itself until it gains that capacity. Once that capacity is acquired, then it can be considered a distinctly separate entity. You try to muddy the waters with your claim that born infants can't survive on their own, but this is patently false. They do not need someone to breathe for them. Their digestive system works on its own. Their heartbeat, bloodflow, and immuno-response is entirely their own.

Parasites and cancer? Interesting. Perhaps your mother considered you a parasite and a cancer which is why you believe unborn babies are cancers and parasites? Did your mother regard you as a massive tapeworm she had to carry for nine months? Did you cease being a tapeworm once you left the womb?

Obviously she did not, since she bore to term. However, that does not change the fact that I was, under the very definition of it, a parasite during that time. You are throwing emotion into something that has zero influence on you. You are free to chose not to have an abortion (if you are female). You are not free to interfere in the ability of another to chose that path for themselves.

American Girl-724855: "Mitt Robme is a snake oil salesman."

Weren't you just chastising a conservative for name-calling? Can you spell HYPOCRITE?

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012!!

Allswell said: Because the entity is literally unable to survive separated from its host, it can and should be considered part and parcel of the host itself until it gains that capacity. Once that capacity is acquired, then it can be considered a distinctly separate entity.

Question: An infant, most children, and even some adults, can't survive on their own. Please explain when you believe they qualify as "able to survive".

Question: An infant, most children, and even some adults, can't survive on their own. Please explain when you believe they qualify as "able to survive".

As stated further down, an infant can indeed survive on its own; it has that capacity in its biological functions. The capability to survive is qualified by whether or not they need assistance for natural biological functions as a result of a lack of development in their own biology.

I realize there are adults (and children/infants) who are hampered by outside forces (virii, mutation, injury) in their ability to perform basic biological functions. These outside interferences do not change their original capability; that said, someone who by virtue of birth mutation is unable to survive outside the womb is generally considered a candidate for abortion under even pro-life stances.

If a baby that has not been "BORN" yet is not a person; Why is it that if someone murders a pregnant woman, they are charged with. 2.. counts of murder??!!!

Allswell said: As stated further down, an infant can indeed survive on its own; it has that capacity in its biological functions. The capability to survive is qualified by whether or not they need assistance for natural biological functions as a result of a lack of development in their own biology.

Follow-up question: Premature babies are regularly born who are able to survive on their own. A baby as premature as 5 months has all the "biological functions" to survive once they are separated umbilically.

So you're against late-term abortions, correct?

If a baby that has not been "BORN" yet is not a person; Why is it that if someone murders a pregnant woman, they are charged with. 2.. counts of murder??!!!

Faulty legal application...or redefinition of murder to include 3rd party killing of a fetus (I do not believe the law applies in the case of a zygote, but could be wrong).

System failed to permit me to edit my comment even in the time allotted...

So you're against late-term abortions, correct?

Except in cases of rape, threat to the mother's life, or cases where it will not be born whole (mutations, defects that drastically reduce quality of life). Regardless of my personal opinion, I will also not force this on any woman.

"Right to Lifers" (for want of a better term)... I am a Commie Pinko Liberal Atheist and I sometimes get called up for jury duty. My question is, if you have your way and the Republican Person-hood plank becomes enshrined into law and your daughter, or grand-daughter or niece is charged with murder for having an abortion, or using an IUD, or hormonal birth control, would you want me as a jurist or some Christian fundamentalist whose world view believes God has a warehouse of souls to be implanted in a zygote making its way down a fallopian tube. I can't speak about the soul part very much as that is a religious concept, but I think the persona, the trait that define an individual is something that develops throughout the pregnancy and through childhood. I certainly don't think it is defined at conception. Overturning Row vs Wade, enacting person-hood legislation, De-funding Planned Parent hood is all part of some ill conceived morality driven agenda that would be at least as harmful to this country as prohibition was nearly a century ago.

Except in cases of rape, threat to the mother's life, or cases where it will not be born whole (mutations, defects that drastically reduce quality of life). Regardless of my personal opinion, I will also not force this on any woman.

Allswell, why is the baby's life not worth anything in the case of rape? It must pay for the rapist's crimes? I don't understand how you believe it's life is worth saving in one instance and not in another - seeing as how both are out of its control.

Is the baby or the criminal guilty or rape?

Incurable2212 - [Mozzie] All you did was give different stages of development. It is like saying, an infant becomes a toddler, then a teen, and then an adult. You in no way proved from science that it is a human being only when it exits the womb. In fact, every embryology text book will tell you life begins at conception. All of us didn't come from an embryo, we once were an embryo. We began as human beings (at conception) and we will remain so until death. As you stated, "You can't change science."

I'm saying that as much as you would LIKE it to be different, the human embryo is NOT a human being. It has the POTENTIAL to become a human being, however. It IS NOT a human being in utero. A similar situation to what you are saying is that a fertilized chicken egg is a chicken. It Is NOT A CHICKEN. It is an EGG, suitable for frying for my breakfast. You cannot argue - successfully - with my statement, or with any biology book.

border joe - If a baby that has not been "BORN" yet is not a person; Why is it that if someone murders a pregnant woman, they are charged with. 2.. counts of murder??!!!

Check your sources, buddy - you are wrong. Much as the nonsensical "personhood" folks would like it to be so, nowhere in the U.S. is a murderer of a pregnant woman charged with two counts of murder.

Mozzie-600: Check your sources, buddy - you are wrong. Much as the nonsensical "personhood" folks would like it to be so, nowhere in the U.S. is a murderer of a pregnant woman charged with two counts of murder.

Oops...http://www.lifenews.com/2009/06/05/state-4210/

Mozzie-600: A similar situation to what you are saying is that a fertilized chicken egg is a chicken. It Is NOT A CHICKEN. It is an EGG, suitable for frying for my breakfast. You cannot argue - successfully - with my statement, or with any biology book.

I just looked at my biology book and I can't find the Egg species anywhere. Can you point that out to me?

I will have time to place my arguments into this discussion tomorrow. I will reason why a fertilized zygote is not a human at the moment of conception, why abortion is a legal and sometimes medically necessary procedure, and how we define a human being.

Is the baby or the criminal guilty or rape?

So you'd condemn the mother to endure the physical and psychological damage of carrying their attacker's child?

Did you not know that rapists will combine rape with imprisonment just to force the woman to bear the child as a further form of torture?

Can you answer the question, allswell?

So you'd condemn the mother to endure the physical and psychological damage of carrying their attacker's child?

Yes. An innocent life is more important than 9 months of physical pain and potential psychological damage. That was easy.

The youngest recorded pregnant "woman" was five years old, a victim of rape. Now how easy is it?

Yes. An innocent life is more important than 9 months of physical pain and potential psychological damage. That was easy.

The criminal is guilty.

But simply put: who the @!$%# cares? That you'd force someone into physical and psychological torture just because you want another unwanted child to be born and most likely neglected tells us everything about your mental state and priorities, as well as either your gender or hatred of your gender.

it is SOOOO sad that clinton's talk was not as SHORT and to the point as EASTWOOD's....
WE hired you to do a job, you failed, now it is time to replace you!!!
blame stupid Bush.. Clinton supported the 1999 repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, a law dating back to the Great Depression that separated banking from high-risk financial speculation. Robert Rubin, who had been Clinton's first treasury secretary, helped broker the final deal on Capitol Hill that enabled the repeal legislation to pass. Some financial historians say the repeal of the law paved the way for banks to invest in risky investments like mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations that played a role in the 2008 financial meltdown.

I'm waiting Casey. Please answer my question.

Uh, Jeff.

You do realize slavery-era "democrats" and slavery-era "republicans" have completely flipped sides, correct?

TO: Jeff-498218 who wrote:

"...Democrats were on the wrong side of the abortion 'peculiar institution'..."

If you don't like abortions, don't get one, and please stop trying to politicize your personal problems!

Only Republicans are interested in getting into the American People's personal lives.

Obama/Biden 2012

Dreams

I'm confused here?

Jeff was talking about slavery, you seem to now be talking about the civil rights movement. Is it your position that this movement was politically championed by 1960's Republicans?

Here's a hint for those of you who just don't like history.

Republicans AND Democrats (present day) are quite different than Republicans AND Democrats of past generations. To put it more simply, their platforms have basically swapped.

TO: dreams of my father who wrote:

"Doctor Martin Luther King was a PRO-LIFE Republican. Murdered by a Democrat."

I swear Republicans have GOT to be the biggest liars on the planet!

Obama/Biden 2012

A higher percentage of Republicans voted for the civil rights amendment than Democrats.

Kill your baby or don't Kill your baby, I really don't care

I can see that American Girl has no knowledge of Black American HISTORY.....Dr. MLK was a Pro-Life REPUBLICAN..... MOST AFRICAN AMERICANS are Pro-Life and ANTI-HOMOSEXUAL OR SAME SEX marriage.

democrats robert byrd and al gore sr filibustered against the civil rights act of 1964

TO: Diamond60 who wrote:

"A higher percentage of Republicans voted for the civil rights amendment than Democrats."

I think if you repeat that enough times, you may get us some extra Republican Votes for Obama!

Obama/Biden 2012

TO: keck who wrote:

"democrats robert byrd and al gore sr filibustered against the civil rights act of 1964"

What's your point?

We've got 2012 Democrats here voting, and there's NO WAY you can sell that kind of B.S. on a Democrat to vote against the 1st Black President, in favor of voting for a racist Republican like Mitt Robme.

Obama/Biden 2012

TO: spdockery who wrote:

"Kill your baby or don't Kill your baby, I really don't care."

So STFU and mind your own business!

TO: BK-3328579 who wrote:

"I can see that American Girl has no knowledge of Black American HISTORY.....Dr. MLK was a Pro-Life REPUBLICAN..."

So what? I don't know if that's true or not but you do realize he's been dead for 40 years, don't you?

40 years ago they did NOT have "pro-life" or "pro-choice" so I think you're lying to me again.

Nevertheless, I'm free to have my own opinion and it doesn't matter what anyone else "believes."

Only Republicans are "followers" who must do as others tell them to.

Obama/Biden 2012

American Girl,

It becomes everyone's business as soon as federal dollars are used to fund it.

Gfgfgf

American Girl,

It becomes everyone's business as soon as federal dollars are used to fund it.

Lame argument and here's why.....who's business is it when your tax dollars are used to feed, cloth, and school the child once it is born??? Because that's what happens to most unwanted babies after they are born....Each year more than 20,000 children age out of the foster care without being adopted. Today there are 104,000 children in foster care waiting to be adopted ranging in age from less than a year old to 21 and this doesn't count the kids on welfare on YOUR dime....so yea your argument holds NO water!!

gfgfgf - You are absolutely right but if you look at the breakdown of where your tax dollars go, we're talking the teeniest tiniest amount of money going to reproductive health. Like a dollar for every hundred that you pay in taxes at the most. And let's be real for a second- we spend more money on defense costs than education or anything else. I didn't agree to fund a war on Iraq or Afghanistan but I pay my taxes because that's what it means to be apart of a larger society. Do you agree with everything your tax dollars go towards? Probably not. Neither do i but that doesn't excuse me from paying for the greater good. If any part of the population needs these services (whether it may be to cut down on foster care costs or because the woman is a victim of sexual assault) then it is our responsibility to help pay for it. It's part of being a grown up boo boo.

TO: Gfgfgf who wrote:

"American Girl,

It becomes everyone's business as soon as federal dollars are used to fund it."

No, I'm fairly positive that medical records are private and are never "everyone's business".

I guess that's why they pass all these laws, so that there's no confusion!

Obama/Biden 2012

Lame argument and here's why.....who's business is it when your tax dollars are used to feed, cloth, and school the child once it is born??? Because that's what happens to most unwanted babies after they are born....Each year more than 20,000 children age out of the foster care without being adopted. Today there are 104,000 children in foster care waiting to be adopted ranging in age from less than a year old to 21 and this doesn't count the kids on welfare on YOUR dime....so yea your argument holds NO water!!

I agree that abortion should be an option in the rape/incest situation. No arguement. But I do not believe it should be allowed as birth control.

So, are you arguing that those ageing out of foster care are results of rape or incest or are you arguing that abortion should be used as birth control?

Why is it so unreasonable for people to be asked to be responsible for the children they create when they have sex?

Kill your baby or don't Kill your baby, I really don't care.

And THAT is what is wrong with society...Kill your baby, I don't care. The lack of respect for life is quite astonishing. And, if you are allowed to kill your baby, please don't force me to pay for it.

gfgfgf Don't be dumb - nobody is going to start using abortion as birth control if you provide them with other alternatives. Think about it logically- abortion takes you out for a few days. Get an IUD and you can have all the sex you want and never need recovery time. An IUD is a lot cheaper too. People are not being educated about sexual education with real facts and it is ridiculous to let those people decide in the upcoming election how we handle these things.

No, I'm fairly positive that medical records are private and are never "everyone's business".

I guess that's why they pass all these laws, so that there's no confusion!

Obama/Biden 2012

I'm not arguing that the medical records should be public. But I am saying that anyone that you are incorrect when you tell people to mind their own business regarding abortion. It is funded by everyone and so everyone is allowed to be part of the debate.

It is amazing to me how people follow their party like sheep. Open your mind. ALL of the politicians are lying to you.

It Makes No/Difference 2012

gfgfgf Don't be dumb - nobody is going to start using abortion as birth control if you provide them with other alternatives. Think about it logically- abortion takes you out for a few days. Get an IUD and you can have all the sex you want and never need recovery time. An IUD is a lot cheaper too. People are not being educated about sexual education with real facts and it is ridiculous to let those people decide in the upcoming election how we handle these things

If you are done with the name calling then we can have a discussion.

People DO use abortion as birth control. How many abortions were there last year in the US? How many rapes resulted in pregnancy last year? Subtract the two then try to convince me that people aren't using abortion as birth control.

People on this board are even arguing to use abortion to control the number of kids in foster care!

Gfgfgf - Public funding would mean that everyone should be part of the debate about funding, not about the procedure itself.

Civil Rights act of 1964 Votes By party

Yea/Nay

The original House version:^[16]

• Democratic Party: 152–96 (61–39%)
• Republican Party: 138–34 (80–20%)

Cloture in the Senate:^[17]

• Democratic Party: 44–23 (66–34%)
• Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)

The Senate version:^[16]

• Democratic Party: 46–21 (69–31%)
• Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)

The Senate version, voted on by the House:^[16]

• Democratic Party: 153–91 (63–37%)
• Republican Party: 136–35 (80–20%

Time to dems to own their history.

jock59801
Gfgfgf - Public funding would mean that everyone should be part of the debate about funding, not about the procedure itself.

I'm just arguing that since it is publicly funded it needs to be open to debate for everyone. I would also like to debate if it should be publicly funded at all.

omg dumb peeps as usual on here today talking about federal funding for abortions....here are the FACTS if anyone wants to read them:

Passed by Congress in 1976, the Hyde Amendment excludes abortion from the comprehensive health care services provided to low-income people by the federal government through Medicaid. Congress has made some exceptions to the funding ban, which have varied over the years. At present, the federal Medicaid program mandates abortion funding in cases of rape or incest, as well as when a pregnant woman's life is endangered by a physical disorder, illness, or injury.

Most states have followed the federal government's lead in restricting public funding for abortion. Currently only seventeen states fund abortions for low-income women on the same or similar terms as other pregnancy-related and general health services. Four of these states provide funding voluntarily (HI, MD, NY, and WA); in thirteen, courts interpreting their state constitutions have declared broad and independent protection for reproductive choice and have ordered nondiscriminatory public funding of abortion (AK, AZ, CA, CT, IL, MA, MN, MT, NJ, NM, OR, VT, and WV).² Thirty-two of the remaining states pay for abortions for low-income women in cases of life-endangering circumstances, rape, or incest, as mandated by federal Medicaid law.³ (A handful of these states pay as well in cases of fetal impairment or when the pregnancy threatens "severe" health problems, but none provides reimbursement for all medically necessary abortions for low-income women.) Finally, one state (SD) fails even to comply with the Hyde Amendment, instead providing coverage only for lifesaving abortions.

Additional provisions adopted by Congress may further burden access to abortion services for Medicaid recipients, even those in states with nondiscriminatory funding. The Balanced Budget Act of 1997, for example, permits health maintenance organizations (HMOs) serving Medicaid recipients to refuse to cover counseling or referral for services, such as abortion, to which the HMO objects on moral or religious grounds. As a result, even in states with nondiscriminatory funding, women seeking abortions may face obstacles in even finding a provider.

BK-3328579 - "I can see that American Girl has no knowledge of Black American HISTORY.....Dr. MLK was a Pro-Life REPUBLICAN..."

you LIE: just like Romney and Ryan.

www.politifact.com/tennessee/statements/2012/jan/23/charlotte-bergmann/another-republican-claims-martin-luther-king-jr-wa/

However, in a 2008 Associated Press story, King’s son and namesake Martin Luther King III said:"It is disingenuous to imply that my father was a Republican. He never endorsed any presidential candidate, and there is certainly no evidence that he ever even voted for a Republican. It is even more outrageous to suggest he would support the Republican Party of today, which has spent so much time and effort trying to suppress African American votes in Florida and many other states."

We know that his father, the Rev. Martin Luther King Sr., a longtime Republican when most Southern Democrats were segregationists, endorsed John F. Kennedy publicly in the 1960 presidential race over Republican Richard M. Nixon. Throughout the (Civil Rights) movement he worked with the northern Dem. Party.

Another academic authority on King was not as generous in his assessment of the motivation for suggesting King was a Republican. Michael K. Honey, a professor at the University of Washington-Tacoma and author of "Going Down Jericho Road: The Memphis Strike, Martin Luther King’s Last Campaign" (2007), said in an email: "Do they now make things up out of whole cloth or do they fabricate based on assumptions with no actual knowledge. In either case, not very good qualifications for office."

Honey, who edited a collection of King’s speeches released last year as "All Labor Has Dignity," said the idea that King was a Republican is "laughable...His interest was in getting both parties to do the right thing on issues. The Democrats certainly disappointed him on the (Vietnam) war, and the Republicans had an orthodox conservatism opposed to most of the changes he wanted to see."

People on this board are even arguing to use abortion to control the number of kids in foster care!

no they are NOT....please stop twisting BS to suit your agenda....what was said is that if u are TRULY pro life why not adopt the UNWANTED kids in foster care who have already been born.....sheesh really!!!

gfgfgfgf My bad for calling you dumb. Let us proceed.....

Your calculation does not incorporate the amount of rapes that go unreported due to shame and embarassment- which is more than you'd think. Some women aren't comfortable reporting it so your calculation using the two variables of # of pregnants and # of rapes is not reliable.

And is that argument about foster care so bad? Foster care is no walk in the park. Care givers often abuse the children, neglect them, etc. Many have untreated disorders that are costly and the tax payers end up paying for them anyway. Why offer that as a better solution than just aborting the fetus and saving the costs and turmoil for the child? Fewer kids in foster care = better care.

@Morgs7

Own YOUR history, republican. Look at the Democrat No votes...where did they come from? Oh, that's right, Southern Democrats. Wait...what happened to those Southern Democrats immediately after the Civil Rights Act? Oh that's right, they left the party, became Dixiecrats, and then were absorbed into the REPUBLICAN PARTY.

How's that for a history lesson, friend?

Americangirl. Your wasting your time. The Truth is the Rep's under Honest Abe. Ended Slavery and He was killed for his trouble. JFK did civil rights and he was killed for his trouble. One was Rep and one was Dem. The parties have flipped. As to those that are against Abortion rights for women, and don't want tax dollars to pay for them are the same ones that don't want these same children to get welfare. They want to force woman to have these unwanted children and then they want to watch these children starve to death. It is a long life if one don't have enough to eat. Good Christians that they are, they wouldn't offer any help for these children. Jesus would be sick to see what passes for a Christian these days.

dayum but u are spot on chuck-2111043!!!

Morgs74, we know the history, and we know that Republicans are trying to use American History in order to tell another great big fat lie to the American People.

We still remember the last big lie Republicans told us too (MWDs in Iraq).

Obama/Biden 2012

TO: chuck-2111043 who wrote:

"Americangirl. Your wasting your time. The Truth is the Rep's under Honest Abe...blah blah blah... yada yada yada"

Wait.

First remind me why I care.

Of course, it's the racists, read morons, that are always on the wrong side of history.

"Doctor Martin Luther King was a PRO-LIFE Republican. Murdered by a Democrat."

This quote was called a lie.... It's 100% true and MLK's grand daughter still sticks up for the GOP.

What's the matter you liberal babies? Can't stick up for yourself? Can't make it on your own? Need a federal Mommy? Sink or swim but don't take down the able with your lazy butts.

Since the Hyde Act, no federal dollars go to Abortion. End of Story. That isn't the argument or the article. The argument is if abortion will remain legal, as it is today. The fact is that pregnancy is a medical condition and yould remain between doctors and patients, not patients and Churches and Governments. There are no Women's Rights without Reproductive Rights.

Abortion is a wedge issue that the right wing uses to grab headlines. The actual "Pro Life" movement itself is a group of thugs that feel they have to right to murder doctors and intimidate pregnant women.

I have a few things to say to these "Pro Life" Nazis............ No one is telling you that you MUST have an abortion, so what gives you the right to dictate to others your personal beliefs. I would like to close with a friendly piece of advice: If you fascist jerks don't get the hell out of peoples personal lives, eventually the wrath of those people will catch up with you and it won't be pretty.............

@AmericanGirl: In post # 3.6 you say,

TO: dreams of my father who wrote:

"Doctor Martin Luther King was a PRO-LIFE Republican. Murdered by a Democrat."

I swear Republicans have GOT to be the biggest liars on the planet!

Then in post # 3.14 you say,

TO: BK-3328579 who wrote:

"I can see that American Girl has no knowledge of Black American HISTORY.....Dr. MLK was a Pro-Life REPUBLICAN..."

So what? I don't know if that's true or not but you do realize he's been dead for 40 years, don't you?

In 3.6 you say it's a lie and in 3:14 you say you don't know if it's true or not...ponder the meaning of the phrase "ready, fire, aim", and next time research before commenting (BTW we still like you anyway)!

American Girl-724855: "TO: dreams of my father who wrote:

"Doctor Martin Luther King was a PRO-LIFE Republican. Murdered by a Democrat."

I swear Republicans have GOT to be the biggest liars on the planet!"

Please, show me the lie and remember, President Clinton, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman."

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012!!

it is SOOOO sad that clinton's talk was not as SHORT and to the point as EASTWOOD's....
WE hired you to do a job, you failed, now it is time to replace you!!!
blame stupid Bush.. Clinton supported the 1999 repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, a law dating back to the Great Depression that separated banking from high-risk financial speculation. Robert Rubin, who had been Clinton's first treasury secretary, helped broker the final deal on Capitol Hill that enabled the repeal legislation to pass. Some financial historians say the repeal of the law paved the way for banks to invest in risky investments like mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations that played a role in the 2008 financial meltdown.

Unlike the DNC, the RNC was smart enough not to bring the loser on stage to speak!!---Bush & Clinton were poor Prezs. however they were much better than BozoHussan....that was the main point of clinton's never-ending-story!!

Dr. Martin Luther King was NOT a Republican and that IS a BOLD FACED LIE.

"In a 2008 Associated Press story, King’s son and namesake Martin Luther King III said:"It is disingenuous to imply that my father was a Republican. He never endorsed any presidential candidate, and there is certainly no evidence that he ever even voted for a Republican. It is even more outrageous to suggest he would support the Republican Party of today, which has spent so much time and effort trying to suppress African American votes in Florida and many other states."

http://www.politifact.com/tennessee/statements/2012/jan/23/charlotte-bergmann/another-republican-claims-martin-luther-king-jr-wa/

James Earl Ray was said to be interested in the campaign of George Wallace.. who at the time was a SOUTHERN DEMOCRAT RACIST backed by the KuKluxKlan. ( who by the way are now ALL hard rightwing REPUBLICANS ).

.Obama the promise BREAKER!! Equals a LIAR!!! BIG EMBARRASSMENT to the USA!!!

Obama’s promise that his healthcare proposals would “never be purchased with [a] tax increase on middle-class families.” The SUPREME COURT & JUSTICE DEPT say it is a TAX!!! .Attack on the middle Class! Taxation by misrepresentation---the LARGEST TAX in World History!!! Does he remove the tax part????....NO!!!

…….…NOW Obama wants to invade Syria and Iran!!!

..mr. American businessman..YOU DID NOT MAKE THAT!! It was stolen from the back of the worker---PURE MARXISM!!...this is PURE

…ANTI-American…tell it to Ford or Steve Jobs or the Mom& POP store on the corner>>>How is it that NON taxpayers built an Infrastructure??

Remember these?
THE OBAMA CHRONICLES:
“I promise 100% transparency in my administration.”.
“I promise NO NEW TAXES on a family making less than $250K a year.”.
“I will allow 5 days of public comment before I sign any bills.”.
“I will remove earmarks from PORK projects before I sign any bill.”.
“I will end Income Tax for seniors making less than $50K a year.”.
"I will bring ALL of our troops home within ONE year."
“I’ll put the Health Care negotiations on CSPAN so everyone can see who is at the table!”.
“I’ll have no lobbyists in my administration."
"I'll close Guantanamo."
"I'll resign if I don't cut the deficit in half by the end of four years."
"I'll unite the people of this great country."

“The TROOPS will be home for CHRISTMAS.” WHY ARE MORE LEAVING EVERYDAY???? AND DYING every day…

NOW Obama invokes Executive Privilege( as a Sen. called it’s use a RUSE!) for Holder on GUN SMUGGLING and killing US Agent Brain Terry!!! That only applies if Obama was part of it!! Obama & Holder should be on trial for giving Machine Guns to the Mexican Drug cartels!!
BETTER KNOWN AS LIES.
Fool me once shame on YOU!
Fool me twice shame on ME!

Even Joe BIDEN has endorsed ROMNEY for Prez!!!!

BozoHussan=Chicago MOB politics=NBC=GE= no taxes from the bought and paid for cronies ==twist every crises toward Pravda PressPROPAGANDA!!

Xantax does wonders, border joe.

These Blue Dogs need to just become Republicans and quit pretending to be Democrats.

.

Blue Dog Democrats have decreased in number significantly and are much less influential. That should make the intolerant party of tolerance and diversity less diverse.

I'm an Indy and guess what....I'm also PRO CHOICE.....if u consider that killing babies then so be it.....guilty as charged and frankly it's none of yours or anybody else's BUSINESS what I decide to do with MY womb......Obama/Biden 2012!!!!!

why on earth would I expect u to pay for anything having to do with my womb...if I wanted the gov in my womb I would have sex with a congressman u silly rabbit....

Queenie,

I am a pro choice Republican up to the third trimester because at that time it can be a life outside the womb and you have had time to decide. When my wife was pregnant they could not do aminos until the 20th week and the results took some time and then you had to make a decision. I do not understand how anybody though can be in favor of partial birth abortion.

jerry l-1335133 u need to research this "partial birth abortion" BS and stop listening to Fox News....thank u and have a good day:)

queenie,

Your little stop listening to Fox is one of the dumbest things liberals spew around here. Look at any study done on bias in media and you will see fox leans right, but way less than 95% of the other sources lean left.

If you want one done in the first trimester, and dont use tax money to pay for it, cool.

For those of you who are against late term abortions... LOOK AT THESE PHOTOS and then come back and tell us again how you are AGAINST aborting these fetuses. Because if Republicans have their way... women will be FORCED to carry these "monsters" to term. Do you even have a CLUE how traumatic that would be ? And then what ? They cannot be taken care of... they won't survive and will die anyways. But you"pro-lifers" don't give a damned about the mother and families.... you just want to see a fetus BORN... PERIOD.

https://www.google.com/search?q=severely+deformed+fetuses&hl=en&tbo=d&prmd=imvns&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=tPZJUOqQG9Cb1AWP0YHAAw&ved=0CAQQ_AUoAA&biw=1033&bih=544

How many of you have actually held a DEAD, WARM, Aborted BABY????

I HAVE....IT IS HEART BREAKING!!!

Until you have, you do NOT know what you are talking about!!!

I am all for a woman's choice...that is NOT the point with ABORTION!!

I HAVE....IT IS HEART BREAKING!!!

Appeal to emotion is a sad last resort in this. Just because it was heartbreaking to you doesn't mean it will be to another. For them, being forced to birth an unwanted child who will grow up unloved can be just as heartbreaking.

I HAVE....IT IS HEART BREAKING!!!

Cry me a river! But I don't fall for such tactics.

Until you have, you do NOT know what you are talking about!!!

Then you presume too much!

I am all for a woman's choice...that is NOT the point with ABORTION!!

Correct me if I'm worng, but isn't an abortion a woman's legally protected right to choose? In other words, the woman has the right to choose an abortion or not!

and dont use tax money to pay for it, cool.

Tax money is not used for abortions, per the Hyde Amendment.

Fine, but don't expect me to pay for your womb either. Pay for it yourself!

See my previous statement.

I do not understand how anybody though can be in favor of partial birth abortion.

Who's in favor? Partial birth, or late term abortions, is only performed when there is health threats to the mother or in cases of imminent or confirmed fetal demise. Women don't suddenly change their mind late in pregnancy and say "I think I'll get an abortion after all."

Too bad their blinded by their ideology

I'm a social liberal, white, male, atheist ... and I don't think abortion is right.

There ya go ... I'm your walking contradiction.

I am a social liberal, white, female, atheist . . . and I wouldn't have an abortion, but some women may NEED to choose to have one. Walk you walk a mile in an unwed pregnant girls shoes, then tell me about it!

I'm curious Suzq... what does the experience of the unwed pregnant girl have to do with killing the child?

I am a social liberal, white, female, atheist . . . and I wouldn't have an abortion, but some women may NEED to choose to have one.

I agree with that, probably should have been clearer.

I think abortions are wrong, personally, I don't see how anyone could want to do that to their own child. But there are obvious exceptions (mother's health, rape, etc) and that should go without saying.

I actually never said I was a Democrat. That's the problem with this country. Your two parties (and the minions that blindly follow) think parties are more important than ideas, reason and logic.

Abortions are actually legal. The Supreme Court decided it a long time ago. Democrats have room in the party for anti-abortion people, but that doesn't mean they will run the platform on it. Most liberals believe in choice, and the party is run on the majority. It is pretty simple. If the extreme anti-choice people want the dems to outlaw abortion just because they are in the party they will be disappointed. They can vote accordingly.

I disagree actually. Abortion is tough topic but instead of just banning it like republicans, this will force Democrats to think more indepth about how to approach the topic. I hope they keep challenging Democrats and I am very excited to hear more about what they have to say.

TOP: chad-1841583 who wrote:

I'm a social liberal, white, male, atheist ... and I don't think abortion is right.

Chad, that's the whole point here; who cares what you "think"?

Republicans "think" the American people need to get their permission before we exercise our own personal Constitutional Rights, and I am NOT one of them, but if you are, again, who cares!

Obama/Biden 2012

Cheryl, most people welcome others even if they do not agree on all issues. Maybe you can't envision that, but it happens.

Obama has always said that Democrats should be more sensitive on the abortion issue, recognizing that others have legitimate concerns that are important to them.

Chad, that's the whole point here; who cares what you "think"?

What are you talking about?

If someone goes out and murders someone (and we "think" that's wrong) it doesn't matter?

Our whole of society is based upon what other's "think" ... it's why we enact laws in the first place.

I can't go around and do whatever the hell I want, naked, wearing only a "@!$%# you" hat, and not expect other's (who "think" it's inappropriate to not take action).

When does an unborn child become a human being? And, if "child" is to mean anything in this society, why the hell doesn't "unborn child"?

That's the issue here ... not the pseudo-argument that other people's thoughts have no barring on our actions.

Suzq,

Why dont you walk a mile in the unborn child's shoes? Oh thats right you cant, it was killed by its mom.

I don't want them to leave the Dem. party. I'm pro - choice because no third part should get to make a decision for you. That is between you and your doctor. If you are pro - life, then you choose life and that is YOUR choice. Leave my choice up to me. If you want these otherwise unwanted children born, then don't abandon them to the mothers who don't want them. If you are going to save them, then take responsibility for their welfare.

I would like to see pro-life democrats bring the voice of reason to pro-life republicans. There has to be a middle-ground somewhere.

What is wrong with the government- all of them- staying out of such decisions? I don't care whether it is local, state or federal, the government has no business telling a woman what her decisions about her body and her reproductive rights are. It is not a government decision, as Roe v Wade proclaimed. It is a privacy issue that needs to stay private between a woman, her doctor and any family that she may share medical decisions with. I don't care if a person has an abortion or not, it is not my business. If you don't like abortion it is simple- don't have one. But don't get in the way of other peoples rights or try to insert your opinions in someone else womb. Supporting birth control availability for those who want birth control will go a long way towards reducing the need for abortions too.

I can give anyone who is concerned about abortion some names of children in foster care HOW MANY OF YOU WILL STEP UP AND ADOPT ONE OF THESE CHILDREN

its lunchtime or what she calls the 5th meal of the day

LOL dreams!!!

Easy... none of the things you listed that men do, kill a human life.

Many times the babies are beaten or abused to death by under-aged, ill-equipped, under-educated men who deal with crying by hitting. Is that better?

Suzq,

That's really the best argument you can make? By your logic, it would be better for everyone if every child was aborted. Then none would be abused, or killed.

Your posts make you appear very "man-hating". I don't know if that's the case, but I would like to point out that the majority of the cases I've seen lately are women killing their children.

Of course, the woman could always "choose" to use birth control. Or not have sex with a dirtbag who will leave her when she is pregnant. Aren't liberals smart enough to figure out how to do that?

Suzq- be careful the numbers don't support you accusations, reality is that most men pay child support, choose to be a part of their childs life, choose to be a positive influence, you just don't hear any of that from the pro-choice groups. And please don't marginalize a child by calling it reproductive rights it's a lot more than that.

We need a national government that supports life not one that decides who lives and who dies. A greater value placed on life will benefit our society in the long run, ending unwanted preganancies devalues life and leads to a society with less apprecation for it.

I compare your argument of killing unborn babies to "I have cancer, so why take cancer meds"? If we don't protect life at it's first conception we have no respect after either.

The issue is not a woman’s freedom to make choices about her reproductive system. The issue is whether the law should allow an unborn child to be killed.

TO: milidad who wrote:

"Easy... none of the things you listed that men do, kill a human life."

They don't "promote" human life either.

TO: TexasArmadillo who wrote:

"The issue is not a woman’s freedom to make choices about her reproductive system. The issue is whether the law should allow an unborn child to be killed."

Since there is only ONE place you can find an "unborn child" I'd have to say those issues are one and the same.

And, by the way, the United States Supreme Court has already ruled on this matter in Roe v. Wade.

Now that the law has spoken and Republicans have lost, Republicans want to make it a political issue, but no matter what you call it, Republicans STILL do NOT have the right to force their own personal beliefs on any other person!

American Girl,

Is there anytime during a pregnancy that you would say there should not be an abortion?

Suzq,

How crazy can you be? Are you a troll, or really this ignorant?

Why is it that men get to choose whether they'll take off on their pregnant girlfriend (and many times do that),

This is illegal and prosecuted heavily.

or choose that they won't pay child support(many don't),

This is alo illegal

or choose that they won't be part of the babies life,

Women do this as well

or choose not to be a positive influence in that child's life.

This is exactly the same as before.

BUT a woman cannot choose how to make choices about her reproductive system without men telling her she can't/shouldn't do that!

Because they are against the killing of babies. Does this get through to you?

When you guys have vaginas and give birth then you can choose what you'll do - until then shut up and leave us alone (as many times you do!)

When you have a life in you, its no longer just about you.

Few small points to make. Women get the children in almost all cases where both parents are capable and willing to raise the child. The men are then forced to pay child support and go to jail if they cant afford it, but women do not have to work to support the child. So why is it you are ok with killing the child, but then take full custody of the children and force the men to pay for it? This is kind of why guys get to have some say. You can either kill his child, or force him to pay for it after to gain custody.

Mr Burns -

When did something being illegal totally prevent it. I have known many women who didn't get ANY child support, who didn't have a positive male influence in their children's lives or emotional support by the father.

My point is choice! IF a young women feels abortion is HER best option based on HER circumstances, then she should have that CHOICE. I wouldn't choose it, neither would my daughters (yes dude, I'm hapopily married).

The other point you weren't smart enough to understand was: Walk a mile in a young, unmarried women's shoes - you have NO idea that feeling of helplessness - no money, no support, little education etc.

You, Mr. Burns, are dumber than dirt!

Suzq,

Your ignorant little list was to show how society is towards women right? You wanted to say that our system is so unfair towards women when it comes to kids, yet it couldnt be further from the truth.

Again, you completly disregard the child in this circumstance, along with the wishes of the father.

Walk a mile in the unborn child's shoes. Oh you cant, because you support its death.

Im sorry you have children. Well, actually, Im sorry for your children.

MrBurns, grow up. All you desire is the ability to take control of another's life choices, choices that do not affect you in any way, shape, or form.

What's funny is that you anti-choice nuts seem unaware that most of the women who need a late-term abortion were trying to have a baby, but something went horribly wrong during the pregnancy.

There's NOTHING that goes wrong with a pregnancy that you have to deliver the baby 3/4th of the way (just to be legal) and then ram scissors in the kids head. At that point, you could deliver the baby and compassionately deliver "end of life" care for a truely doomed child.

No. These are elective abortions, pure and simple.

TO: MaximumBob who wrote:

"There's NOTHING that goes wrong with a pregnancy..."

Well that's sort of like "blanket ignorance" isn't it?

MaximumBob - There's NOTHING that goes wrong with a pregnancy that you have to deliver the baby 3/4th of the way

That's just plain ignorant. Cancer treatment for the mother and many prenatal conditions like anencephaly often make late term abortion the best option. Many such conditions aren't discovered until the 3rd trimester.

And that's not even to mention the children who were raped by a relative, and who hid the pregnancy until they were well past the first trimester.

What is a human being? That's a scientific question that really boils down to DNA. a zygote is human life. Scientifically, there is no other option.

Now, when does it become a human "person". That's a philosophical question, not a scientific question. We will never agree on that question, no matter how long we argue it.

However, as a non-religious person, it seems horrible to me that we kill our unborn young out of convenience.

I'm a Democrat and cannot label myself pro-life or pro-choice. Those labels point to extremes. One side blindly ignores the mother, and the other side blindly ignores the baby. In reality, once the issue of abortion comes up, it's too late. The real focus should be on reducing unwanted pregnancies.

Pro-Lifers are usually against sex education, and many are against birth control other than abstinence. So they are really not addressing the problem, and certainly are not doing anything useful to prevent the pregnancies that would lead to an abortion.

Pro-Choicers seem to be a little lax in sexual responsibility. They recognize that people are human and make mistakes, but have trouble teaching the morality and responsibility that goes with the choice to have sex.

If everyone who is really anti-abortion would be come Pro-Solution, all but the extremes on both sides would work together to reduce unwanted pregnancies. No unwanted pregnancies, no abortions. But that has to happen by teaching sex education in the schools, as well as sexual responsibility, and the value of human life - both the baby's and the mother's lives.

Your post as well as that by milidad are the first I have read that reflect a better understanding of the issues being discussed, the others have reflected the two extreme views ( for the most part ).

What I can not reconcile myself with is how someone who claims to be pro-life is willing to murder a doctor who may support pro-choice. These doctors do not preform abortions out of hand, there are so many variants that need to be considered. Not only the health of the zygote or fetus, but the health of the mother or the dangers bearing the child may pose to her life. These matter are seldom taken lightly and in truth only affect the mother and her doctor. Arguing this as a tax issue is just plain ridiculous. The amount of federal money that actually goes towards abortions in the USA is such an insignificant amount when compared to the whole that at the worst it might mean that someone may have given up the cost of a snickers bar. It is obvious that this issue is being overblown as a tool to divide people and cause fractures. I hold the party of the GOP as the responsible party which insist on promoting the issues to the point that Pro-life zealots commit murder, now if that doesn't say it all I don't know what does.

Birth control is the personal responsibility we are talking about. Women making their own decision is a responsilbity they want to have. So why are the GOP taking it away?

How are the GOP taking it away exactly ? Give me some facts here.

When was the last time you stepped foot in a ghetto?

Linda,

It is also their responsibility to pay for it. I dont care what birth control women take, as long as I dont have to pay for it. If I do, then ya, its my business.

Mr Burns -

And I don't want to have to pay for your Viagra either, but probably do!

Suzq---good point. If that TAX funded viagra and cialis was not being consumed like candy to enable impotent perverts to maintain a four hour hard-on, maybe we would see the incidence of rape drop by about 75%...just a thought. I personally am not ruled, nor my life dictated by the head in my pants, I use the head on my shoulders. I can not say that for 75% of the population I know, they tend on the most part to be degenerates obsessed with their nether-parts.

You do realize that women get pregnant at times of their lives when it is inconvenient....like cancer, rape, financially broke, homeless. This is a personal decisions and since we can't walk in the shoes of that woman or that couple, let them make that decision themselves. After all that baby and child was their making and their responsibility.

Perhaps Linda, if it is "inconvenient" for them to have a baby, they should rethink their decision to have unprotected sex or contraceptive free sex.

You know, if I forget to bring my purse with me and I get pulled over, it is "inconvenient" for me to have to go to the municiple office and pay the fine. Somehow, "inconvenient" doesn't seem to be a very good excuse when choosing abortion. Mother's health -yes. Rape, incest, yes. But inconvenience? Ridiculous

I agree. "Inconvenient" is a mighty light term for such an important decision. I would not call being homeless or having cancer an "inconvenience, though. If a woman has cancer, her life is at stake, and abortion is an act of self defense. If a woman is homeless, that's not an inconvenience, either. That's a true hardship, which will be exponentially harder if she has the baby. She is putting the baby's life in danger anyway, because she's not going to eat right or get the care she needs. And once the baby is born, she will not be able to care for it properly. In this case, an abortion may be considered an act of mercy.

Some people also do not have the finances and time to care of babies and children with birth defects. I can understand an abortion in that case because it is possibly destroying many lives

It's not ok for the government to dictate choices to women? They do that all the time, especially when it comes to the lives of their children. Women cannot drive children around without a child safety seat. No matter what choice they want to make. I could go on. To protect the child, the government takes away a great many choices from both parents. If you are protecting the life of the child, isn't that the right thing to do?

I'm from the deep south (really deep south). I've never heard any man complain that women need to be pregnant.

From the rest of your post, it definitely appears you are angry at men.

So, go ahead. Kill your child. That'll show them there men...

"women are in control of their bodies and their lives and men don't like it"????

What about that BABY Linda? What control does it have over it's life or body? People like you RIP IT OUT of your body like it's a tumor to be flushed down the toilet instead of treating it like the HUMAN BEING that it is.

Too bad that women can't "control their bodies" enough to simply say NO! Too bad that women can't "control their bodies" enough to use some form of birth control. Too bad that women can't "control their bodies" enough to simply NOT GET PREGNANT in the first place.

You think that Democrats care about babies and children? They don't even WANT you to have babies or children or they wouldn't support abortion on demand.

Remember Linda, according to the DNC, you "belong to the government" anyway, so they don't care about YOU except for what you can provide THEM.

Then you don't know the story of Henry the VIII. And sorry to tell you, but this story is true even today.

wtf is up with these peeps calling a bunch of cells a "baby"???

Is a seed a plant.....that would be NO....can it grow into a plant...well yes it can....give me a break....a bunch of cells is NOT life...it is potential life.....my god please don't let science get in the way of your BS......KMSL at these lame EXCUSES u all use to control another human being.....seriously go out and adopt unwanted kids because that's what happens to UNWANTED babies....they become UNWANTED children......

http://www.adoptuskids.org/

The baby can develop enough to the point where it is much, much more than just a "bunch of cells" before a woman can even find out if she is pregnant.

That said, I'm really not sure where I stand on this issue. I feel that abortion is definitely wrong (unless the mother's life is in danger), but I am also a libertarian, so I feel that the government should not interfere in people's lives.

You obviously have not gone to Planned Parenthood for care. PP has helped many women and these women are grateful.

Yeah, and just recently a PP office was caught on tao\pe instructing a woman how to go about getting an abortion if it turned out the fetus wasn't the sex the woman and her husband were hoping for. Yean, THAT'S a real womans health issue

If you don't like murder, don't make it illegal. Simply do your part and don't kill innocent people.

While you may not agree that it's murder, I'm sure you can understand why that argument doesn't fly with those who do.

This is the problem....people are trying to be God by defining when life begins and just how murder applies. Sorry, for a country who wants to carry guns into bars and restaurants and go to war in order to kill people in every country that has a conflict, you don't have the right to say who can live and die. Having children is a personal decision, let people take the responsibility of being parents or not being parents. The government doesn't need to get involved.

No, Gov't should not fund abortions - it's her CHOICE, let HER pay for it!!!

If I could waste a few more minutes, I'd like to comment on DoneBendingOver's post. Sir, anytime anyone passes any law, like the Affordable Care Act, they are FORCING their beliefs/opinions on others. See, I don't believe the Gov't has the right to FORCE me to buy health insurance; it should be an individual's decision. However, there are others who believe that, since we all live in the same society, that MY decisions affect them, and in some way they do. I don't know whether you support ACA or not, but let's pretend you're one of those that believes everyone should have health insurance. I could use your same argument here, what gives you the right to force me to buy this product? The LAW, of course! So of all the arguments supporting a woman's right to choose ABORTION, that one is the LAMEST, sorry dude.

JFC do u peeps even know the stats on "federally funded abortions"....give me an effing break with that BS and u know what I bet if u have a car u have car insurance don't u....yea talk about a lame argument....SMFH!!!

This issue shows the difference between republicans and democrats and why even having a super majority doesn't mean filibuster proof. Democrats vote their conscience and beliefs and those of their constituents and don't follow a pledge to a lobbyist like Norquist.

Being Pro-Life means you make your own decisions and try to convince people of your correctness.

Being Anti-Choice means shoving your ideas down others' throats based on your beliefs and using the force of government. Sorry if you find it repulsive to be Anti-Choice, but at least that is one thing I agree with you on.

This country was built on Liberty and that means you don't get to make decisions for me. That's the view of a true anti-government conservative. You'll have to tear THAT freedom from my cold, dead hands.

Sorry but however you word it supporting forcing women to have a baby even if raped or a victim of incest or unintended pregnancy she can't afford and trying to impose laws to force women to submit to vaginal probes before having an abortion is imposing your beliefs on others. Even to the extreme position of Ryan which would charge women using a spermicide or morning after pill as murderers for killing a fertile egg. Your right to swing your fist ends at anothers nose the same applies to your rights when they conflict with others beliefs/needs.

Well said. And I'm pretty sure Planned Parenthood has prevented tens of thousands of abortions by providing sex education and birth control to women who need it. I think they've prevented far more pregnancies than they've terminated. If you're Pro-Life, you should applaud PP for its effort to reduce unwanted pregnancies.

Hummingbird, you are not pro-life, you are clearly pro-choice.

Alabama delegate Julian McPhillips, an attorney on Montgomery, Ala., said he’d like the Democratic platform to go further than simply acknowledging that anti-abortion Democrats exist: “I wish they would acknowledge that there is real life in womb. This is my biggest problem with being a Democrat, no doubt.”

And it's precisely why I am NOT a Democrat. There is a human life in that womb, oh if only the pro-choicers cared about THAT for a change! I cannot be okay with someone else destroying a human life, born or not born, makes no difference to me. And to suggest that I should be happy with not getting one myself (AS IF!) and not worry about what other people do is the same as saying, "Gee, I'd never kill MY child, but if my neighbor wants to kill hers, well, that's her CHOICE! It's none of MY business!" See, I just can't say that.

I agree with you that women should have the right to decide when to become mothers without Gov't interference - but that CAN be accomplished WITHOUT abortion ever entering the picture. You think everyone who calls themselves "pro-life" is some monster that wants to ban the pill (NO ONE is talking about that) and letting women die from ectopic pregnancies (only a few idiots would suggest such a thing), but that is NOT the truth! Sure, I HATE Planned Parenthood (Planned Abortion, really) and will NEVER support them, but I'd give the Pill away for FREE to cut the abortion rate. Forget ACA, give grants to State & County health depts to provide birth control to women at little or no cost; bypass insurance all together.

I realize I'm wasting my time here - you won't change YOUR mind, and I'm sure the hell not gonna change MINE, so the question now is, what to do about it? The article is asking if there's room for both sides in the same party. It's a big problem when the two sides aren't even trying to talk, but instead hosting their own events and going their separate ways. The article is NOT GOP vs Dem, it's Pro-Life Dem vs Pro-Choice Dem. Think about it.

oh for freak's sake....just because YOU say there is a human life in that womb doesn't make it so and frankly even if it was it is still NONE of ur business....

T Bourlon- I am defiantly pro-life, being raised Catholic. I think my post explained my beliefs very well, sorry if you can't grasp simple English!

You are just like people that don't believe you can live a Conservative life, but be a LIBERAL!

I have my personal beliefs, I live them, my value's my morals, unlike you I believe in Women, and refuse to judge or tell another Women what to do with their bodies, their health care choices, and their reproductive rights!

This Pro-Life Democrat will always believe in CHOICE!

"Pro-life for myself, pro-choice for everyone else" - that what you're saying, hummbird? You're pro-Choice, quit playing word games & just admit it already. If you think you're right, just say it. And THAT is the reason I can't be a Liberal - liberals never seem to say what they really mean.

Science & medicine are on MY side, queenie - a fetus in a woman's womb is both ALIVE and HUMAN. What, you think she's gonna give birth to a DOG or something??? Next time some pro-choicer complains about pro-lifers owning guns and/or supporting the death penalty, I'm gonna remind them that queenie says its NONE OF UR BUSINESS!!!

Science & medicine are on MY side, queenie - a fetus in a woman's womb is both ALIVE and HUMAN.

The definition of human life is up for grabs. Can a parasitic organism be considered human? Does being alive mean to be living via our own biological functions and not another's? Can a cancer growing on a human be also considered human itself?

Is an egg or spermatozoa human? Is a fertilized egg human, even when it fails to implant via natural or medicinal means?

To be pro-choice is not necessarily to be pro-abortion. It is to be for the ability of every pregnant woman to make the choice for herself and the collection of cells (zygote, fetus, etc) she carries. It is her choice and her cost.

Ryan believes a fertilized egg is a living human and using a spermicide or morning after pill is murder.

I believe in Choice also, but not as liberials deem it. I believe that parents should have the right to choose schools, the right to choose doctors, should have the right to opt out of Social Security, and enter a privite plan. I believe women can also be free to choose thier birthcontrol as long as they pay for it and it is not paid for by money taken from others. If they want the free option let them buy insurance for it. The government should stay out of all our lives, except to protect life. Women have the freedom to do with thier bodies as they choose, up until the moment that they want to kill another life. Then there actions affect another person, and yes the baby is another live at conception. Ask any sientist or biologiest.

allswell, the sperm and the egg are not a human, until they are joined together. life happens when the cells start to multiply, and go. The Genetic information for life is present

life happens when the cells start to multiply, and go.

Cancer cells have full DNA chains (albeit mutated on the multiplication strain) and multiple. Are they alive then?

You are defining life in a literal sense, which opens you into a world of issues regarding treatment of all bodies. What's more, once joined there is no guarantee at any point that it will go anywhere, it may not even plant itself.

If you still think "life" starts at the moment the egg and sperm are joined, then you must consider Plan B an abortion medication.

Cancers are lesians and have the dna of the person with cancer.

Fetuses (babies) are whole, living, individual human beings, scientifically speaking. How far have we come to consider our children parasites or lesions! What you are saying is not scientific at all. When have you heard a pregnant woman saying they have a lesion or a parasite growing in them? No, not rationally. They say they have a new person growing there.

Individual human beings have rights, which is what these are, and these fetuses in the US are citizens of the US. To say it is their mother's right to take their life is the same as doing away with every law against child abuse we have. Nobody wants to admit that because they want to engage in irresponsible behavior and not be responsible for the result. People are offended with the pictures of babies in the womb in pro-life materials, and avoid showing the mother what is in them. Why?

When have you heard a pregnant woman saying they have a lesion or a parasite growing in them?

Have you ever listened to someone who didn't want to be pregnant? Rape victims who got pregnant? Can you really be this self-absorbed?

Individual human beings have rights, which is what these are, and these fetuses in the US are citizens of the US.

People are only citizens as a result of their birth.

People are offended with the pictures of babies in the womb in pro-life materials, and avoid showing the mother what is in them. Why?

Because appeal to blind emotion is considered an underhanded attack on one's ability to think rationally.

Fetuses (babies) are whole, living, individual human beings, scientifically speaking.

And they are attached to, and living off of, the mother.

How far have we come to consider our children parasites or lesions!

It's an apt description.

When have you heard a pregnant woman saying they have a lesion or a parasite growing in them? No, not rationally. They say they have a new person growing there.

That's their perogative.

Individual human beings have rights, which is what these are, and these fetuses in the US are citizens of the US.

Only after they're born!

To say it is their mother's right to take their life is the same as doing away with every law against child abuse we have

Child abuse laws apply to already living, BORN children. Not to the unborn. And yes, it IS a mother's RIGHT to CHOOSE!

Nobody wants to admit that because they want to engage in irresponsible behavior and not be responsible for the result.

Electing an abortion is taking responsibility.

People are offended with the pictures of babies in the womb in pro-life materials, and avoid showing the mother what is in them. Why?

Because it's an obvious and shallow tactic and attempt to intrude in another's personal business!

Since at least half the country supports a woman's right to choose, I would hardly call that "extreme."