Walt Handelsman for December 02, 2021

  1. Photo
    FrankErnesto  6 months ago

    Barrett asked why the woman couldn’t just go the whole nine months and then give the baby up. Such a sensitive, caring person, this Barrett.

     •  Reply
  2. Dovewoodgrinch2013
    huachuma  6 months ago

    I thought it said “Choke” on the woman’s shirt at first…

     •  Reply
  3. Missing large
    Jim Kerner Premium Member 6 months ago

    I guess that this is how the CONservatives and some religions get rid of poor women who can’t afford to go to a state or country that offers abortions. I have a cartoon in which the boss says that she shouldn’t take birth control pills. She replied that he shouldn’t use viagra. He said that was blasphemous!

     •  Reply
  4. Missing large
    wellis1947 Premium Member 6 months ago

    Conservatives say that nothing should “interfere” with a fetus within a female from coming to term – it’s “God’s Will”!

    Interestingly enough, that’s the SAME ARGUMENT that they used in early colonial America to argue against people using umbrellas to block God’s rain – seriously!

    And, yes, it is THE SAME – it’s just a matter of degree, that’s all.

    And, no, we’re NOT talking about a “human life” here – a fetus does not become a “human” until it can survive outside the womb, unassisted.

    If you’re going to insist that a fetus is a human, then that opens a whole new can of “worms”, in the case of a woman wanting an abortion. She wishes to “evict” a “human” from her structure – does she have that right? Does any "owner of any “structure” have a right to determine who resides within that “structure”? Where is the line drawn over government interference?

    As a human being, in America, a fetus also would have a “right” to food, shelter and a certain level of physical and medical care, which it obviously can’t provide for itself and obviously the “owner” of the “structure” in which it lives does not want to provide.

    So, does the government force the “owner” of the fetal housing structure to provide such nourishment and shelter, and here’s the important part – does the government then owe every OTHER living entity within its purview and residing within another’s “structure” the same nourishment and shelter? If a “fetus” is defined as “human”, then aren’t other humans entitled to the same care and treatment from the government?

     •  Reply
Sign in to comment

More From Walt Handelsman