147 replies [Last post]
SoCoKHntr's picture
Offline
Location: Pueblo Colorado
Joined: 12/18/2006
Posts: 1772
McCain said to choose Alaska gov as running mate

Oh, OK, no biggie.

Offline
Moderator
Location: Florida,USA
Joined: 08/21/2003
Posts: 1566
McCain said to choose Alaska gov as running mate
SoCoKHntr wrote:
JTapia wrote:
SoCoKHntr wrote:
CVC wrote:
Voted against banning partial birth abortion
Obama's record in Illinois represents that of a pragmatic progressive, who pushed for moderate reforms and opposed right-wing legislation. In the IL legislature, voting "present" is the equivalent of voting "no" because a majority of "yes" votes are required for passage. Many IL legislators use the "present" vote as an evasion on an unpopular choice, so that they can avoid being targeted for voting "no." During the 2004 Democratic primary, an opponent mocked Obama's "present" vote on abortion bills with flyers portraying a rubber duck and the words, "He ducked!".
In 1997, Obama voted against SB 230, which would have turned doctors into felons by banning so-called partial-birth abortion, & against a 2000 bill banning state funding. Although these bills included an exception to save the life of the mother, they didn't include anything about abortions necessary to protect the health of the mother. The legislation defined a fetus as a person, & could have criminalized virtually all abortion.

Source: The Improbable Quest, by John K. Wilson, p.147-148 Oct 30, 2007

This appears on the non-partisan website http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Barack_Obama_Abortion.htm
There are listed positions on ALL the candidates and I am sorry to say you can find Obama side stepping and contradicting himself on many of his statements.

My personal opinion is that it would be a womans choice if it were a part of her body being removed, DNA test would prove otherwise for a fetus, it is NOT a part of the womans body but rather a separate person.
Why is it only called "pro choice" when the mother decides to kill her baby?

This just shows he favors being pro womans choice it does nothing to support CVC's claim that he and Clinton favored 'MURDERING' babies right before birth.

This is where I stand, I am for sex education to teach kids the consequences of having sex and then supplying them with ample contraceptives so that if as in Sara Palin's case the kids still want to go ahead and get busy they won't be saddled with an unwanted pregnancy that can have far reaching consequences for their and their childs life. I am also pro womans choice up to the first trimester of pregnancy.

Most unwanted pregnancies and cases of children having children happen in the impoverished areas of our country, whether that's the minority entrenched inner citty ghettos or the trailer park white impoverished areas of America. You want to stop the scourge of welfare stop the cycle of unwanted pregnancies in these areas through sex education, contraception, and termination of unwanted pregnancies through things like the morning after pill.

That's the pragmatic approach that can offer real results, but no, the evangelical repubs say NO don't you dare teach sex education, NO don't you dare give them rubbers, NO, don't you dare offer that fifteen year old mother who already has two kids the morning after pill because she's too ignorant to keep her drawers on and will pump out two more kids before she's eighteen ensuring a life lived on gov. assistance passing on her great habits to her kids.

No, let's just act like we care so much about human life until these kids are born and then we'll abandon them because their just poor welfare leeches and are just out for handouts. Yeah, makes heaps of sense to me.

"Voted against banning partial birth abortion"

Clearly states that he voted AGAINST a Ban on Partial Birth Abortion and nothing was stated that he supported a womans choice.

"Most unwanted pregnancies and cases of children having children happen in the impoverished areas of our country, whether that's the minority entrenched inner city ghettos or the trailer park white impoverished areas of America. You want to stop the scourge of welfare stop the cycle of unwanted pregnancies in these areas through sex education, contraception, and termination of unwanted pregnancies through things like the morning after pill. "

How you can support such social programs and not have a clue as to how they work is beyond me. Your conclusion is exactly opposite.
Fact- The more children you have the more benefits and money you get, ie: upgraded housing, more dollars in food stamps etc. This only encourages MORE children, not discourage them.
Fact- When they go to the health dept for their tax-payer paid pregnancy test and prenatal care they hand you hands full of condoms. They are, however, mostly not used as that would disqualify them from Fact # 1 above.

I believe that if you take away the rewards for having unwanted or unplanned pregnancies you will stop the cycle. When these young mothers-to-be grow up in the System, that's all they know and with a mother who knows no other way to live except in the System teaching them all of the ins and outs of manipulating the System to garner maximum benefits then you have the pattern for future failures. It is the scourge of welfare that creates the cycle of unwanted pregnancies, not the other way around.

Offline
Moderator
Location: Florida,USA
Joined: 08/21/2003
Posts: 1566
McCain said to choose Alaska gov as running mate
civetcat wrote:
There's no such thing as partial birth abortions. Fetuses are killed in the womb with drugs. Only two facilities in the US perform them, 100% of the fetuses are birth defects, often much worse than Down's syndrome. Suggest you all discuss such personal things with your respective families, paticularly your wives and daughters.

civetcat, I don't know who gave you your information but you need to go and kick the crap outta them for grossly misleading you.
Partial birth abortions are done with half of the baby delivered outside the vagina, then the baby's skull cut at the base and its brains sucked out there by killing the baby, not instantly either, this causes the skull to collapse allowing the head to pass on thru the birth canal. Shame on you for spreading inaccurate information on something this horrible.
Here is a link showing one. Artist rendition not actual photos but,WARNING GRAPHIC
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/PBA_Images/PBA_Images_Heathers_Place.htm

Offline
Moderator
Location: Florida,USA
Joined: 08/21/2003
Posts: 1566
McCain said to choose Alaska gov as running mate
civetcat wrote:
100% of the fetuses are birth defects, often much worse than Down's syndrome. .

More inacurate information. Heres the truth...

ARE THEY PERFORMED ONLY ON SEVERELY DEFORMED BABIES?

That is what the abortion industry would like you to believe. But Dr. Haskell said in a tape recorded interview with the AMA’s American Medical News: “...and I’ll be quite frank: most of my abortions are elective (not medically necessary) in that 20-24 week range ... In my particular case, probably 20% are for genetic reasons. And the other 80% are purely elective.” An article in the L.A. Times (8/28/96) listed some of the medical reasons for this type of abortion. They included cleft palates, cystic hygroma, (both easily corrected problems) and cystic fibrosis. The medical conditions present in the mother that warranted this type of abortion were, “depression, chicken pox, diabetes, vomiting ...” In other words, even those partial birth abortions that are done for the “health of the mother” or because of a “defective fetus” are often performed for minor, easily correctable conditions. Dr. C. Everett Coop, former U.S. Surgeon General, stated, “... in no way can I twist my mind to see that the late-term abortion as described is a medical necessity for the mother. It certainly can’t be a necessity for the baby.”

Source,
http://www.abortionfacts.com/literature/literature_9313pb.asp

Kudos to Dr. C. Everett Coop, former U.S. Surgeon General.

I say again, shame on you.

expatriate's picture
Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 10/26/2002
Posts: 3207
McCain said to choose Alaska gov as running mate

If I could divert back to the Palin issue, I've got to say I just don't understand the Democrat position on Bristol.

If I understand the position right, Palin should have taught Bristol about the pill -- which is 95 percent effective. But if Bristol failed to use the pills regularly and got pregnant, it would've been bad on her because her mom did the right thing by teaching her about birth control and Bristol was irresponsible.

But instead, Palin taught Bristol a method that's 100 percent effective. The Democrats would have us believe that Bristol's failure to properly use that method is a condemnation of both the method and Sarah Palin -- Bristol is innocent.

I don't buy it. The Democrats' indignation on this issue is hollow, unconvincing, inconsistent and an attempt to exploit someone to advance their social agenda.

They're hoping that the Republicans would be embarrassed by it. But Palin doesn't work that way -- kudos for staring them down and standing by Bristol as they stick to their pro-life beliefs.

BTW, Palin has the Dems shaking in their boots. How do I know? Because they're doing the exact same things they do when they're caught being stupid on a blog:

1) Denigrate the person's intellect
2) Accuse them of being unable to think for themselves
3) Make ad hominem attacks
4) Accuse them of lying while providing no proof
5) Make outlandish, easily disproven claims about where the person supposedly stands

Keep it up, Dems -- the more you do this stuff, the worse you look.

Offline
Joined: 07/29/2008
Posts: 723
McCain said to choose Alaska gov as running mate

I'd suggest other subjects be redirected to a new thread. They are very easy to start.

I had to search my brain to figure out who "Bristol" is. Must be Palin's pregnant daughter. Expat I'd suggest you take a look at a Democratic web site to find the parties veiw on Ms Bristols use of the pill or not. Not many think it a subject worth considering. You might have a long search.

Jtapia I'd suggest you do a little looking, paticularly in this millenium. The clinics who perform 3d trimester abortions in the US are in Witchita KS and Boulder CO. You have an interest in the subject, I don't. My daughter is ten years away from the slightest possiblity of being pregnant and I have zero chance of having more children. Beat yourself up over what is a personal matter but please leave me out. Perhaps you could start an abortion thread, or an abstinence only thread.

SoCoKHntr's picture
Offline
Location: Pueblo Colorado
Joined: 12/18/2006
Posts: 1772
McCain said to choose Alaska gov as running mate
JTapia wrote:
[
How you can support such social programs and not have a clue as to how they work is beyond me. Your conclusion is exactly opposite.
Fact- The more children you have the more benefits and money you get, ie: upgraded housing, more dollars in food stamps etc. This only encourages MORE children, not discourage them.
Fact- When they go to the health dept for their tax-payer paid pregnancy test and prenatal care they hand you hands full of condoms. They are, however, mostly not used as that would disqualify them from Fact # 1 above.

I believe that if you take away the rewards for having unwanted or unplanned pregnancies you will stop the cycle. When these young mothers-to-be grow up in the System, that's all they know and with a mother who knows no other way to live except in the System teaching them all of the ins and outs of manipulating the System to garner maximum benefits then you have the pattern for future failures. It is the scourge of welfare that creates the cycle of unwanted pregnancies, not the other way around.

I realize your hatred of the poor leads you to believe their only goal in life is to get pregnant as many times as possible to upgrade their housing in the projects (what a wonderful upgrade go to three bedroom rat and roach infested apt. from a one bedroom).

But, the reality again is different from your conservative mentality that they all want nothing more then to steal your precious money.

As with most everything in life the real situation is far more complicated filled with good and bad and negatives and positives.

Let me ask you Jtapia are you a religious man? Do you believe in the teachings of Jesus in the Bible? Do you think that man would be against helping the poor and underprivileged?

I very much understand the concept of not wanting to 'GIVE' money to people who don't deserve it, but what about the children who made no other mistake then to be born into poverty and have ignorant parents that don't know how to raise a child or provide for it. I will tell you it's ok for me for some of my tax dollars going to pay for a program that feeds children at school or feeds the elderly or provides them health care they don't have access to otherwise for education.

I'm not for unregulated handouts to no accounts, but I'm not a greedy SOB either when it comes to helping my fellow man. I see more goodness and value there then my money going into a sinkhole while helping to fatten the bank accounts of the top dogs of Halliburton, Blackwater, KBR, and others.

But, I guess it is apparent what your priorities are.

As civetcat said this has gone off topic and I won't post on this topic welfare/abortion in this thread any longer.

expatriate's picture
Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 10/26/2002
Posts: 3207
McCain said to choose Alaska gov as running mate

On the subject of Bristol, I'm curious just what the Democrats think would've been the correct way for Sarah Palin to handle it.

Anyone can throw rocks -- but do they have solutions?

SoCoKHntr's picture
Offline
Location: Pueblo Colorado
Joined: 12/18/2006
Posts: 1772
McCain said to choose Alaska gov as running mate
expatriate wrote:
On the subject of Bristol, I'm curious just what the Democrats think would've been the correct way for Sarah Palin to handle it.

Anyone can throw rocks -- but do they have solutions?

She's handling it just fine by supporting her daughter. What has been pointed out isn't her handling of it but her stance on abstinence and how it didn't quite work, you know the abstinence part, so close to home.

I've went over my proposed solution ad nauseum and won't rehash it.

Offline
Location: Eatonville, Wa
Joined: 08/26/2007
Posts: 610
McCain said to choose Alaska gov as running mate
SoCoKHntr wrote:
What has been pointed out isn't her handling of it but her stance on abstinence and how it didn't quite work, you know the abstinence part, so close to home.

Last I checked no form of birth control is 100% except absinance, I would hate to think that you would be naive enough to believe that though educated in absinance she doesnt know how a condom works. I think she is doing a great job supporting her daughter. It would do wonders for our national budget if more parents took responsiblity for their actions. And in turn taught their children to do the same.

Related Forum Threads You Might Like

ThreadThread StarterRepliesLast Updated
The Right Is Wrong on McCainbitmasher1402/15/2008 08:45 am
NRA Interviews McCainbitmasher605/30/2008 21:07 pm
An interview with John McCainbitmasher107/31/2009 23:05 pm
Paris Hilton's mom wants her money backcivetcat508/06/2008 17:54 pm
Will vote for McCain but....CVC2610/15/2008 18:20 pm