Gov. Jeb Bush Ignites National Abortion Controversy



  • I agree with the above, yet accuse that the civilian “collateral damages” are accepted as something that just “has to be”.

    That’s wrong. They’re not accepted as “has to be.” In actuality, if we were as apathetic as you’d like to portray us, then we would not spend so much time and effort trying NOT TO hit civilians and civilian targets. We wouldn’t go the extra mile to draw up plans which clearly define every specific target, we’d just carpet bomb the entire city. If we were accepting of civilian casualties why would we let people get so close to us as to risk the lives of our own soldiers? However, I digress. I was actually speaking of the military there, so my mistake.

    However, I assume you are directing your comments toward the American public in general. I don’t think it’s so much “accepting” civilian losses as it is “looking at the bigger picture.” You have to weigh the risks, and realize that the potential outcome of Saddam unleashing anthrax on a major city would cost a bigger price in lives than the civilian casualties that we caused in Iraq.

    Killing a child is killing a child. When it dies in an accident, it is not murder. When it dies on the reasons that make murder, it is murdered just as any other person that dies on the same reasons. Killing a child does not equate murder.

    Ok, fine, you’re right. But abortion isn’t an accident! So isn’t it murder? (Ignore what the supreme court said for a moment.)

    But how is she compensated for this prolonged suffering from the crime?

    She’s compensated by seeing the rapist brought to justice. There’s nothing more you can do for her. You would have us believe that killing her baby is some sort of compensation? Like it’s a entitlement as a result of being raped? Umm….

    Anyways, we’ve heard your argument about rape, and about how you don’t think that a rape victim should have to give birth to that child, but how do you explain the other million aborted babies out there?



  • D:S there. 😉





  • Im not adding to the aurgument, just posting my opinion

    I’m for abortion completely



  • @GeZe:

    Im not adding to the aurgument, just posting my opinion

    I’m for abortion completely

    well, in your case i might be too . . . .
    😎


  • 2019 Moderator

    @cystic:

    Finally!

    http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/05/politics/05ABOR.html?th

    I can’t access this link. Is it in reference to the law on partial birth abortions being voted on?


  • 2019 Moderator

    I guess I should say the law that has just been passed by congress.



  • @dezrtfish:

    @cystic:

    Finally!

    http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/05/politics/05ABOR.html?th

    I can’t access this link. Is it in reference to the law on partial birth abortions being voted on?

    yup



  • @cystic:

    Finally!
    http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/05/politics/05ABOR.html?th

    Danm gay!

    Just trying to agree while being politically sensitive.



  • @D:S:

    I agree with the above, yet accuse that the civilian “collateral damages” are accepted as something that just “has to be”.

    That’s wrong. They’re not accepted as “has to be.” In actuality, if we were as apathetic as you’d like to portray us, then we would not spend so much time and effort trying NOT TO hit civilians and civilian targets.

    However, I assume you are directing your comments toward the American public in general. I don’t think it’s so much “accepting” civilian losses as it is “looking at the bigger picture.” You have to weigh the risks, and realize that the potential outcome of Saddam unleashing anthrax on a major city would cost a bigger price in lives than the civilian casualties that we caused in Iraq.

    Ok, for the Anthrax threat… no comment.
    For the rest: Ok, i agree that it is tried to minimize the number of civilian deaths. The perfect way to minimize it would be not to allow wars.
    Now take this into the abortion debate: The way to minimze abortions is to make them illegal. That is your point of view. My point of view differs, but is not at all allowing every abortion.

    So, if you compare these two different causes of deaths, can you please explain me why one live is worth more than others? Is it ok for you to kill one person to save 10 others? Where is the threshold that makes a killing acceptable?

    Killing a child does not equate murder.

    Ok, fine, you’re right. But abortion isn’t an accident! So isn’t it murder? (Ignore what the supreme court said for a moment.)

    It could be manslaughter etc. i don’t know all the legal terms that are possible when someone/thing dies.

    She’s compensated by seeing the rapist brought to justice. There’s nothing more you can do for her. You would have us believe that killing her baby is some sort of compensation? Like it’s a entitlement as a result of being raped? Umm….

    Well, you surely would accept that you don’t get any compensation when someone breaks your arm, crashes into your car or maybe even when you are spilling hot coffee over yourself.
    Well, being sarcastic, i would think that soon some males wear a T-shirt saying “Danger, i am male and not evading me can result in being raped” and that they would be proclaimed innocent in a trial.

    Anyways, we’ve heard your argument about rape, and about how you don’t think that a rape victim should have to give birth to that child, but how do you explain the other million aborted babies out there?

    That is a different story. We came here to discuss about an austistic woman who was raped while being “protected” by the state.
    Other reasons for abortions need to be discussed seperatedly.



  • @F_alk:

    Killing a child does not equate murder.

    Ok, fine, you’re right. But abortion isn’t an accident! So isn’t it murder? (Ignore what the supreme court said for a moment.)

    It could be manslaughter etc. i don’t know all the legal terms that are possible when someone/thing dies.

    Manslaughter would be if a woman tried to wound her baby and accidently killed it. Shaken Baby Syndrome would fall into that category.
    And how did legality become an issue?
    Intentional killing, murder, even execution - it’s all the same when you intentionally kill someone.



  • Not really, intention is only one of the qualifiers for murder.
    And i think it became a legal question here, because D:S said to his knowledge “killing a child is murder”.
    In Germany, abortion is a “crime against life”, but not “murder”.
    What i just stumbled upon, during this, is the view of other philosophies and religions on abortion. Did you know that it was 1869 that the catholic church banned abortion, because it was then that they decided that the old greeks (and Thomas of Acquin) were right in that the soul start iwth the fertilization. Before that, the catholics had a stance more like the Brahmans: here the first movement (felt by the mother)of the child is the starting point for a soul, and up to then (say 5th month) abortion was legal. This was common in many eastern countries, while animistic believes say that it is the mothers choice only: with the soul being reborn anyway, the body and time of birth are secondary for the soul.

    Interesting ideas.



  • @F_alk:

    Not really, intention is only one of the qualifiers for murder.
    And i think it became a legal question here, because D:S said to his knowledge “killing a child is murder”.
    In Germany, abortion is a “crime against life”, but not “murder”.
    What i just stumbled upon, during this, is the view of other philosophies and religions on abortion. Did you know that it was 1869 that the catholic church banned abortion, because it was then that they decided that the old greeks (and Thomas of Acquin) were right in that the soul start iwth the fertilization. Before that, the catholics had a stance more like the Brahmans: here the first movement (felt by the mother)of the child is the starting point for a soul, and up to then (say 5th month) abortion was legal. This was common in many eastern countries, while animistic believes say that it is the mothers choice only: with the soul being reborn anyway, the body and time of birth are secondary for the soul.

    Interesting ideas.

    interesting points.
    and i do not take seriously the stance of the Catholic Church on many issues. Much of what has arisen from there has been the result of councils wgere economics and politics determined the interpretation of the bible as opposed to the actual words of the scriptures.
    “crime against life” eh? Is that worse than murder, or not-quite-as-bad?



  • It is not quite as bad, but i am no lawyer, and translated quite hand-wavingly.



  • @F_alk:

    It is not quite as bad, but i am no lawyer, and translated quite hand-wavingly.

    hand-wavingly?
    and you’re ESL?
    Man, you can butcher English even better than an American!!



  • Ohmmm……

    what is ESL ? … and is it a compliment or insult to be compared to americans in that way ;)?



  • @F_alk:

    Ohmmm……

    what is ESL ? … and is it a compliment or insult to be compared to americans in that way ;)?

    English as a Second Language
    and your choice.


Log in to reply
 

20th Anniversary Give Away

In January 2000 this site came to life and now we're celebrating our 20th Anniversary with a prize giveaway of 30+ prizes. See this link for the list of prizes and winners.
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys
T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 12
  • 18
  • 5
  • 13
  • 51
  • 111
  • 41
  • 15
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

73
Online

14.9k
Users

35.7k
Topics

1.5m
Posts