As a Virginian, I have to ask who is going to pay for the ultrasound. I hope my money is not going to this dog and pony show. If the woman is expected to pay that could double the. Cost of the abortion. This could result in more poor people having babies they did not want in the first place. That could lead to child abuse. That could lead to my money going to this dog and pony show and an even worse way and probably more expensive way than the original scenario. Let’s call it a “pregnancy termination tax”. Republicans cannot vote for tax, money saved.
How come no one in the corporate media has mentioned that Texas already has a state rape law in effect? I am in the district of the quack that wrote it. Yet when I contacted NARAL and Planned Parenthood asking if I ran against him, would they inform their members of the fact, they wouldn’t even answer my letter. As a Green, we don’t take money from corporations and no more than $1,000 from real live human beings, so I wasn’t asking for money, just a way around the corporate media censorship that denies we exist.
Hey, Stephen Runnels – and ALL of you baby haters that want to protect abortion: Since abortion was declared law in 1973 millions upon millions of babys have died. And now, Stephen, the inevitable conclusion of this slippery slope has reached the next level. I challenge ANY of you to read this article and see if you have a problem with this as well! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9113394/Killing-babies-no-different-from-abortion-experts-say.htmlWhen does it stop? When will it be good enough for you? This is NOT a joke and it’s only going to get worse! You people make me sick!
Need some help understanding this. “Pro Life” means “Anti Abortion.” I get that. Then why are “Pro Life” people also Pro War, Pro Death Penalty, and Anti Health care reform. Seems they are only in favor of protecting the life of somthing that hasn’t been born yet. Interesting.
I LOVED Colbert’s take on “probing” all the GUYS! before they can have sex!! PROBE BABY PROBE!
But, to the “religious”, be aware: roughly 50% of all “fertilized eggs” or “fetus”, never attach to the uterus in the first place, and are flushed from the body, which makes “GOD”, the world’s most active: ABORTIONIST!
Funny, no one has taken my challenge to read the article I had a link on earlier in this comment thread. No comments to it at all. Heads in sand so that you can further your agenda to abortion…
Stephen – The link I posted is NOT an opinion, it’s an article on what some idiots are recommending to do to babies AFTER they’re born. Your comment just proved to me that you did in fact NOT read what I posted and tried to disprove it without even knowing what it is. Your credibility took quite a nose-dive there. What you say to me after this means squat until you’ve read the article.
Stephen – There’s nothing imaginary about what they want to do. And I would have more respect for you if you just admitted that you don’t have a problem with either scenerio of destroying babies either inside or outside the womb based on “viability”. But you just cannot address the situation and instead just keep ducking a dialogue with pulling new things into the discussion such as cannibalism. You can’t be taken seriously. You bore me.
@greshboth the bible and the constitution are very clear. read the first 3 words of the 14th amenedment. you have to be born to be a citizen. and the bible says when god breathes breathh into your nostrils you become alive. you don’t take your first breath before you are born.
there are some things that are inalienable that can not be voted away by the majority of the electorate. That’s why civil rights are not voted by the electorate – they are inalienable.
the woman, while carrying a fetus has the same inalienable rights she had, before carrying a fetus. If you want to make an amendment to the constitution conveying those rights to a fetus, or embryo, or to sperm and egg, then go ahead and try.
my opinion is that you are trying to legislate your religious beliefs.
if you succeeded you would then find a constitutional tension between the rights of the fetus/embryo/sperm/egg, and those of the woman/doctor/healthcare provider.
how would we solve those constitutional tensions.
and of course how would you stop the myriad of woman who would die from botched back alley abortions, while the wealthy would still find a doctor to perform the procedure?
lontooni about 12 years ago
woman need to be REALLY load
lontooni about 12 years ago
As a Virginian, I have to ask who is going to pay for the ultrasound. I hope my money is not going to this dog and pony show. If the woman is expected to pay that could double the. Cost of the abortion. This could result in more poor people having babies they did not want in the first place. That could lead to child abuse. That could lead to my money going to this dog and pony show and an even worse way and probably more expensive way than the original scenario. Let’s call it a “pregnancy termination tax”. Republicans cannot vote for tax, money saved.
walruscarver2000 about 12 years ago
It’s as close as he’ll come to actual sex.
d_legendary1 about 12 years ago
The GOP fetish never ceases to amaze me. Next they’ll be going after the civil rights act.
Simon_Jester about 12 years ago
The Oklahoma Senate just passed a bill, saying saying someone’s a person from the moment of conception.
Nice going GOP, nothing like alienating the biggest voting bloc in an election year.
hippogriff about 12 years ago
How come no one in the corporate media has mentioned that Texas already has a state rape law in effect? I am in the district of the quack that wrote it. Yet when I contacted NARAL and Planned Parenthood asking if I ran against him, would they inform their members of the fact, they wouldn’t even answer my letter. As a Green, we don’t take money from corporations and no more than $1,000 from real live human beings, so I wasn’t asking for money, just a way around the corporate media censorship that denies we exist.
Don Winchester Premium Member about 12 years ago
Hey, Stephen Runnels – and ALL of you baby haters that want to protect abortion: Since abortion was declared law in 1973 millions upon millions of babys have died. And now, Stephen, the inevitable conclusion of this slippery slope has reached the next level. I challenge ANY of you to read this article and see if you have a problem with this as well! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9113394/Killing-babies-no-different-from-abortion-experts-say.htmlWhen does it stop? When will it be good enough for you? This is NOT a joke and it’s only going to get worse! You people make me sick!
dshepard about 12 years ago
Since when is it one person’s right to kill another?
Justice22 about 12 years ago
Better watch her left too.
Yammo Premium Member about 12 years ago
What are your rights? To kill an unborn baby? Get some morals.
oneoldhat about 12 years ago
kill babies kill
Heavy B about 12 years ago
Need some help understanding this. “Pro Life” means “Anti Abortion.” I get that. Then why are “Pro Life” people also Pro War, Pro Death Penalty, and Anti Health care reform. Seems they are only in favor of protecting the life of somthing that hasn’t been born yet. Interesting.
redbaron1966 about 12 years ago
Hey Santorum…get the message??
Dtroutma about 12 years ago
I LOVED Colbert’s take on “probing” all the GUYS! before they can have sex!! PROBE BABY PROBE!
But, to the “religious”, be aware: roughly 50% of all “fertilized eggs” or “fetus”, never attach to the uterus in the first place, and are flushed from the body, which makes “GOD”, the world’s most active: ABORTIONIST!
Don Winchester Premium Member about 12 years ago
Funny, no one has taken my challenge to read the article I had a link on earlier in this comment thread. No comments to it at all. Heads in sand so that you can further your agenda to abortion…
Heavy B about 12 years ago
“If a lady is making collages in bed, then her partner is doing it wrong.”Rule 36: If it exists, someone has a fetish for it. No exceptions
Don Winchester Premium Member about 12 years ago
Stephen – The link I posted is NOT an opinion, it’s an article on what some idiots are recommending to do to babies AFTER they’re born. Your comment just proved to me that you did in fact NOT read what I posted and tried to disprove it without even knowing what it is. Your credibility took quite a nose-dive there. What you say to me after this means squat until you’ve read the article.
Don Winchester Premium Member about 12 years ago
Stephen – There’s nothing imaginary about what they want to do. And I would have more respect for you if you just admitted that you don’t have a problem with either scenerio of destroying babies either inside or outside the womb based on “viability”. But you just cannot address the situation and instead just keep ducking a dialogue with pulling new things into the discussion such as cannibalism. You can’t be taken seriously. You bore me.
dannysixpack about 12 years ago
@greshboth the bible and the constitution are very clear. read the first 3 words of the 14th amenedment. you have to be born to be a citizen. and the bible says when god breathes breathh into your nostrils you become alive. you don’t take your first breath before you are born.
dannysixpack about 12 years ago
@gresh,i’m not clear how you amend the bible.
dannysixpack about 12 years ago
@gresch,
there are some things that are inalienable that can not be voted away by the majority of the electorate. That’s why civil rights are not voted by the electorate – they are inalienable.
the woman, while carrying a fetus has the same inalienable rights she had, before carrying a fetus. If you want to make an amendment to the constitution conveying those rights to a fetus, or embryo, or to sperm and egg, then go ahead and try.
my opinion is that you are trying to legislate your religious beliefs.
if you succeeded you would then find a constitutional tension between the rights of the fetus/embryo/sperm/egg, and those of the woman/doctor/healthcare provider.
how would we solve those constitutional tensions.
and of course how would you stop the myriad of woman who would die from botched back alley abortions, while the wealthy would still find a doctor to perform the procedure?