Bush Appoints AntiAbortion Doc to Head Pregnancy Office

"Roe v. Wade is not a birthright. With the overturning of Roe V Wade goes your defining argument about nearly born babies being human beings, at least on the level of the government funding abortion and offering federal protections for abortion."
roe v wade has been overturned? details please. The law reamins as it was in spide of your denial. (btw, there is still no prayer in school either)

dyslexia wrote:

"Roe v. Wade is not a birthright. With the overturning of Roe V Wade goes your defining argument about nearly born babies being human beings, at least on the level of the government funding abortion and offering federal protections for abortion."
roe v wade has been overturned? details please. The law reamins as it was in spide of your denial. (btw, there is still no prayer in school either)

Learn to read. To repeat "With the overturning of Roe v. Wade goes the defining argument about nearly born babies being human beings."

Anything in there about saying that Roe V Wade was overturned?

Now you're fencing with windmills.

Excuse me, LoneStarMadam, I thought we were having a conversation going back to your post regarding "if someone is old enough to have sex they are old enough to accept the consequences" because that is what gave rise to my question.

I thought that was clear but I suppose it wasn't.


I'm still waiting for an answer to this......

boomerang wrote:

How about a situation like this....

What if, at 47, I found myself pregnant. Because of my age I had genetic testing done to determine the fetus' health and learned that it suffered from a serious birth defect.

My insurance company decides that I am no longer a good client and drops me like a hot potato.

While I have the resources to pay for raising a healthy child, I do not have the resources to pay for an uninsured seriously ill child.

What then O Mighty Moralists?

Sincerely, I think we'd all be better off if people thinking of having a child had to go through what adoptive parents go through --

Strict background checks

Health evaluations

Letters of reference

Home inspections and follow up visits

They should also have to post a $10.000 bond since "if you can't afford the attorney you can't afford to raise the kid".

Abstinence and contraception would be a lot more appealing to young people (and to a lot of adults) if they had to account for their lives.

Monte Cargo wrote:

dyslexia wrote:

"Roe v. Wade is not a birthright. With the overturning of Roe V Wade goes your defining argument about nearly born babies being human beings, at least on the level of the government funding abortion and offering federal protections for abortion."
roe v wade has been overturned? details please. The law reamins as it was in spide of your denial. (btw, there is still no prayer in school either)

Learn to read. To repeat "With the overturning of Roe v. Wade goes the defining argument about nearly born babies being human beings."

Anything in there about saying that Roe V Wade was overturned?

Now you're fencing with windmills.

Can you read what you wrote? You have had Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43 and a republican congress yet roe v wade remains the law of the land.

Well boomer, you see in my day we only dated during sunday afternoon picnic socials with water mellon and fried chicken which is why we had real honest values. We sent away girls that got "in the family way" to distant adoption farms or abortionists but we never ever talked about it. Negros knew their place and Mexicans didn't cross the river. We had good christian values in the good old days (then the women got the vote)

dyslexia wrote:

Monte Cargo wrote:

dyslexia wrote:

"Roe v. Wade is not a birthright. With the overturning of Roe V Wade goes your defining argument about nearly born babies being human beings, at least on the level of the government funding abortion and offering federal protections for abortion."
roe v wade has been overturned? details please. The law reamins as it was in spide of your denial. (btw, there is still no prayer in school either)

Learn to read. To repeat "With the overturning of Roe v. Wade goes the defining argument about nearly born babies being human beings."

Anything in there about saying that Roe V Wade was overturned?

Now you're fencing with windmills.

Can you read what you wrote? You have had Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43 and a republican congress yet roe v wade remains the law of the land.

Roe v Wade was a Supreme Court decision, not an executive decision, or a legislative bill that became a law. Up until recently, we had a very liberal supreme court. Even with the appointments of Roberts and Alito, we basicially still have a 5-4, liberal to conservative ratio of judges. Sandra Day O'Connor was appointed as a moderate conservative, but became more liberal during her career as a justice.

One more conservative justice means that if the issue comes before the Supreme Court again, Roe v Wade could go the way of the Edsel.

As someone recently messaged me
"he/she conjurs up this image of Norman Bates /Tony Perkins dressed as his mother in Pyscho muttering at the keyboard."

Monte Cargo wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

How about the war in Iraq? Costing US taxpayers about five billion every month.

It is encouraging to see some of you folks working on ending the state sponsored practice of infant genocide in this country.

It's interesting to note that you use "infant genocide" since the law of the land is an embryo remains an enbryo until there is a live birth' is this simply a matter of your lack of vocabulary or are you and "activist" judge of such matters?

I wish everyone would keep in mind that there is no such thing as an unborn child or baby. Before birth, there is a fetus.

Basically, a fetus has no rights. There is no dependent tax deduction for a fetus and, should there be an abortion, the woman is not charged with anything, much less murder.

dyslexia wrote:

Monte Cargo wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

How about the war in Iraq? Costing US taxpayers about five billion every month.

It is encouraging to see some of you folks working on ending the state sponsored practice of infant genocide in this country.

It's interesting to note that you use "infant genocide" since the law of the land is an embryo remains an enbryo until there is a live birth' is this simply a matter of your lack of vocabulary or are you and "activist" judge of such matters?

How do you explain when a pregnent mother is murdered that the perp is cahrged with two murders? Ever hear of Scott Peterson?

Raising the BS flag here, that's a bunch of hooey dyslexia.

dyslexia wrote:

Well boomer, you see in my day we only dated during sunday afternoon picnic socials with water mellon and fried chicken which is why we had real honest values. We sent away girls that got "in the family way" to distant adoption farms or abortionists but we never ever talked about it. Negros knew their place and Mexicans didn't cross the river. We had good christian values in the good old days (then the women got the vote)

Didn't have no welfare state, everybody pulled his weight, gee, our old LaSalle ran great.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Insurance compaines probaby can't drop a pregnant woman but they sure as hell can refuse to insure her child after it is born.

Or, they can raise your premium to the stratusphere so that you can no longer afford insurance for anyone in your family.

Monte Cargo wrote:

dyslexia wrote:

Monte Cargo wrote:

dyslexia wrote:

"Roe v. Wade is not a birthright. With the overturning of Roe V Wade goes your defining argument about nearly born babies being human beings, at least on the level of the government funding abortion and offering federal protections for abortion."
roe v wade has been overturned? details please. The law reamins as it was in spide of your denial. (btw, there is still no prayer in school either)

Learn to read. To repeat "With the overturning of Roe v. Wade goes the defining argument about nearly born babies being human beings."

Anything in there about saying that Roe V Wade was overturned?

Now you're fencing with windmills.

Can you read what you wrote? You have had Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43 and a republican congress yet roe v wade remains the law of the land.

Roe v Wade was a Supreme Court decision, not an executive decision, or a legislative bill that became a law. Up until recently, we had a very liberal supreme court. Even with the appointments of Roberts and Alito, we basicially still have a 5-4, liberal to conservative ratio of judges. Sandra Day O'Connor was appointed as a moderate conservative, but became more liberal during her career as a justice.

One more conservative justice means that if the issue comes before the Supreme Court again, Roe v Wade could go the way of the Edsel.

evasion, Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 42 and the republican congress always had the opportuinty to rewrite the law including amendment and have consistently declined to do so.

"Child Custody Protection Act" Makes It a Federal Crime to Help Teens Cross State Lines for Abortion

The provision may be an early indication of the growing political muscle of social conservatives who provided crucial support for Republican candidates, including President Bush, in the election.

The Senate will also likely consider the "Unborn Victims of Violence Act," which makes knowingly or unknowingly harming or killing a zygote, embryo or fetus while attacking a pregnant woman, during the commission of a federal crime, a separate and punishable crime. The "Child Custody Protection Act," which makes it a federal crime for any person other than a parent to transport a minor across state lines to have an abortion, is another issue the Senate will most likely face this year, according to Salon. In addition, the Senate will face the "Abortion Non-Discrimination Act," allowing hospitals to opt out of complying with existing abortion-related laws.

In my country hooey refers to basic lies, you calling me a liar?