currently, is there legislation in place which puts my beliefs ahead of any woman's purported right to abort? i don't believe there is.
if anyone could bitch about the lack of balance, it would be someone on my side.
Rep. Michele Bachmann is fvcking insane.
- Thread starter Defenestrated
- Start date
if anyone could bitch about the lack of balance, it would be someone on my side.
Your belifs should have absolutely nothing to do with a completely unconnected womans desire to give birth or not...why are your panties wadded up because Mary Jane Spreadsherlegs wants to get laid on Saturday night, but 3 months later wants to dump the evidence of said humping?
Why do you even care? You arent that important...
Why do you even care? You arent that important...
I never said there was. I said that enacting legislation to do so would constitute the removal of a civil liberty.
Lack of balance my ass. Adding legislation to appease one group (the religious right in this case), legislation that REMOVES rights, is an abomination. I am all for legislation for safety reasons etc, but the moment is REMOVES civil liberties is the moment that those legislators need to be removed from power.
ok, then: what civil liberties have been removed by enacting legislation which kowtows to the religious right?
don't make me get all patriot act up in here
You should be careful here.
The Patriot Act is non-religious but I don't see a lot of Christians at Gitmo.
No American today accepts face value. Everyone knows if you have an unpopular agenda, you better hide it under something that will be acceptable, like under the banner of liberty and security.
Restricting stem cell research...
Restricting distribution of information about birth control...
[not making distinction between rule making and legislation]
FCC nonsense about saying fvck on the air...
Restricting distribution of information about birth control...
[not making distinction between rule making and legislation]
FCC nonsense about saying fvck on the air...
point is, people decry the patriot act b/c of the widely held fear it will usurp our rights, but it hasn't.
not that waiting for something bad to happen is any kind of way to run a country. <cough>
you know better than this: it's about allocating further federal funds toward embryonic stem cell research, you smear merchant marine. private entities can go nuts
so my kindergartner should be reviewing this why?jbp said:
huh?jbp said:
public decency much? why not just relieve myself at the park when playing with my daughter? just b/c there's other kids around (and their parents) doesn't mean i'm making them look - i'm facing a tree!jpb said:
It has indeed. Wiretapping without a warrant, throwing people into Gitmo without charges (see latest case of charges dropped, but we won't release these individuals anyways) et al are removals of civil liberties.
As mentioned by JBP stem cell research fund blockages also kowtow to the right as you put it.
Also as mentioned before, the fact that anyone even thinks it is ok to possibly implement these types of laws is absurd.
"It's ok to do it, but you can't do it with federal money as the religious nutters would be up in arms!" This qualifies as kowtowing to the right.
Last edited:
i thought we were talking about uterine rights as usurped by the religious right, not a bunch of less-than-human browns who were sold into slavery by a rival tribe looking to get paid.
cessation of federal funding for embryonic stem cell research is a victory for the right, i will concede
cessation of federal funding for embryonic stem cell research is a victory for the right, i will concede
No, we were talking about irresponsible legislation that removes citizen's civil liberties in order to pander to your base in middle america.
Also, we were talking about crazy eyes bachmann, the most clueless and crazy of the talking heads.
Also, we were talking about crazy eyes bachmann, the most clueless and crazy of the talking heads.
I would be more than happy to restrict the funding to cure right wing illnesses, but it's not that simple.
Much the way Bush gave public praise to McCain for passing the GI Bill he voted against, it would not surprise me to see a Republican take credit if a major cancer breakthrough came about through stem cell research.
"See, I told you liberals stem cell research was a good idea."
Your logic implies that the majority of Americans have not been spied upon.
You're right.
But I worry about the minority whose civil rights have been usurped because one day I could part of the "minority".
so what rights did he lose? he was never charged, & got cut loose w/ some nice parting gifts, and got to remain both a muslim and a lawyer.
He got to remain Muslim? So now you advocate forced Lutheranization??? Presbyterianization??
The lawyer thing, well, yeah. If we can fix that we should.
The lawyer thing, well, yeah. If we can fix that we should.
So we should be able to snatch anyone up at any time because they aren't Christian? What ever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? Is it now "innocent (unless Muslim, then you are guilty regardless) until proven non-Christian, then we might consider you still guilty"?
I would say his being captured and held were a removal of his rights.
And the trolling has begun.
So a bundle of X^2 cells that is less complex than a moo cow is human life to be protected at all costs?
I'm gonna solve all this right here and now
You're wrong.
if i'm wrong, i'd like to err on the side of life, not break out the water crackers & beluga caviar knife:So a bundle of X^2 cells that is less complex than a moo cow is human life to be protected at all costs?
I'm gonna solve all this right here and now
You're wrong.
you lot are harvesters of sorrow, making the baby jebbush cry
Stinkle, if your wife or daughter was raped, and impregnated, would you want her to bear the child of her rapist?
What if delivering the baby would put the mother at a serious health risk? Which life would you choose, the unborn baby or the wife/daughter that you love? These would be illegal also under a ban...
What if delivering the baby would put the mother at a serious health risk? Which life would you choose, the unborn baby or the wife/daughter that you love? These would be illegal also under a ban...
How did you know I grew up in florida?
This discussion usually goes like this but I'm curious..... I see a flatout ban on third trimesters as perfectly reasonable. One should damn well have a decision made by then on the impacts of each path.
But you genuinely believe that the complexity of a human becomes what it is at the first cell split?
So when my daughter was conceived, there were actually twins. At the first ultrasound the doctor pointed out one was developed and the othe had stopped. Shortly afterwards, the second was reabsorbed into my wifes body.
If life begins at conception, then my wifes womb could be considered a murderer.
Spiritually, life "begins" well before conception. But humanity begins when a fetus could be considered self sustaining based on the development of organs and a brain.
If life begins at conception, then my wifes womb could be considered a murderer.
Spiritually, life "begins" well before conception. But humanity begins when a fetus could be considered self sustaining based on the development of organs and a brain.
an individual being and a congregate of cells are two different things
i expressed this last month or so
wait, here it is: http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3044152&postcount=8
yes, but the case of human life, you can't have one w/o the otherDefenstrated said:
So does life end at death? If so, why would I worry about hell?
Gee, sorry if I dont hang on your every word, waiting breathlessly by the nerd box for your next missive...
As you say, WHO AM I TO JUDGE...
"to be as realistic as possible, people like me have to understand others don't hold the same value system, and one of the worst things we can do is attempt to foist it upon others."
Your views are typical right wing male. You have no idea how traumatic a sexual assault is, yet you have no trouble advocating that a woman carry the child to full term that may be produced by the assault. Nice.
Your views are typical right wing male. You have no idea how traumatic a sexual assault is, yet you have no trouble advocating that a woman carry the child to full term that may be produced by the assault. Nice.
correct. as it turns out, neither of us has a fertile uterus and so it must follow from your logic than any opinion can only be shades of wrong. i don't suppose you'd even consider the opinions from the countless number of women who regret having an abortion, now would you?
i try to express one moderate opinion, & you dig in deeper to your unwavering extremism
All I am saying is that if the technology is available, it should be legal for women to take advantage of it. I have never been party to an abortion (I have 3 kids...) but it should be available if needed.
I am not an extremist by any stretch of the imagination.
I am not an extremist by any stretch of the imagination.
I don't suppose you'd even consider the opinions from the countless number of women who don't regret having an abortion, now would you?
'round n' 'round the ol' mulberry bush...
I was hoping he was paler. But I was wrong.
I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.
It's been enlightening though.
thread.reOpen()
looks like marcus has been acting out:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/10/michele-bachmann-gay-bullying_n_4937510.html
looks like marcus has been acting out:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/10/michele-bachmann-gay-bullying_n_4937510.html
The only way to keep something stupid from coming out of her mouth is to keep a dick in it.