Who is the real extremist on abortion?

FactsRStubborn said:
standing up for the rights of unborn babies is the right thing to do. Just because you don't know the joy of having a baby doesn't justify murder. It isn't everyone elses fault your ovaries are all dried up
Click to expand...

Unborn babies. What a strange term. Is that like undead corpses?
 
apple0154 said:
at the time it was considered unconstitutional and it was struck down.
Click to expand...
it was never struck down....that puts a serious hole in your logic....though he voted against the amendment, before it went to the floor it was amended to include EXACTLY the same language as the 2002 federal law which WAS upheld by the court......
 
apple0154 said:
Finaly, the Hitler reference. What took you so long?

I have two grown children. As a matter of fact I'm going to be a grandfather before the year is out.

A child will be brought into a home where it's wanted. A child that will be supported now and in the future. That's how children are supposed to be brought into the world.
Click to expand...

Actually you are not going to be a grandfather because it is only a fetus. Is your family having a Fetus Shower? If the baby is lost will you be sad? Will you console your child? If you are truly consistent and not a hypocrite, the answer will be no. You will just say "Hey, it was only a fetus and it wasn't really alive so fuck it"

You don't see what a sick fuck you actually are do you? You confer life on something simply on the basis that it is wanted? Do you know how sick and disgusting that is? What you are saying is no different than what Hitler did. First he had to dehumanize the Jews. Once he did that, it made it easier to kill them.

You don't see the problem with what you are saying because you have so thoroughly dehumanized the unborn child that it means absolutely nothing to you. But, oddly enough you are able to compartmentalize this. I bet you never refer to your unborn grandchild as a fetus do you?
 
apple0154 said:
Check out the video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUkbuhXzbvI&feature=player_embedded#

8:26: SB 1663 Failed to pass constitutional requirements. That was the video presented by the original poster. As for the bill later passing, after Obama had left, has nothing to do with what was currently going on.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant bullshit......Obama voted AGAINST the bill.... because he didn't see anything wrong with
killing a baby born alive by a botched abortion....

reported last week the the transcript of Barack Obama’s 2002 floor speech in opposition to the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (“BAIPA”). The transcript makes clear Barack Obama opposed the BAIPA not because, as he claimed, it would encroach on abortion rights, but because the law would “burden the original decision of the woman and the physician.” It was too much of a burden, according to Obama, to ensure that a child, born alive, get medical care to sustain the child’s life.

Understanding both the timeline of Obama’s votes against the BAIPA and the language of the legislation makes it very clear that, regardless of what Obama and his defenders say, he did, in fact, support infanticide. Those are the facts, however unpleasant they may be.


The bill defined a child who is breathing, has a beating heart, or shows voluntary muscle movement and who is fully outside the mother shall be considered a “born alive” child.

That was too much for Barack Obama. He did not think that a child who was alive and outside the mother’s womb should be considered a child for purposes of giving the child equal protection rights if it was the mother and doctor’s intention that the child be killed.

Despite the BAIPA having passed the United States Congress with the support of Hillary Clinton, Ted Kenedy, Jerrold Nadler, and Barbara Boxer, and despite abortion groups likes Planned Parenthood and NARAL no longer opposing the legislation, Barack Obama still opposed it.
The law, contrary to Obama’s assertions, included abortion rights protections. Barack Obama himself voted in his committee to include those protections. But after voting to include abortion rights protections, Obama voted against the legislation in his committee. The BAIPA died in Obama’s committee in 2003, by a vote of 6-4.
.
 
Last edited:
FactsRStubborn said:
Actually you are not going to be a grandfather because it is only a fetus. Is your family having a Fetus Shower? If the baby is lost will you be sad? Will you console your child? If you are truly consistent and not a hypocrite, the answer will be no. You will just say "Hey, it was only a fetus and it wasn't really alive so fuck it"

You don't see what a sick fuck you actually are do you? You confer life on something simply on the basis that it is wanted? Do you know how sick and disgusting that is? What you are saying is no different than what Hitler did. First he had to dehumanize the Jews. Once he did that, it made it easier to kill them.

You don't see the problem with what you are saying because you have so thoroughly dehumanized the unborn child that it means absolutely nothing to you. But, oddly enough you are able to compartmentalize this. I bet you never refer to your unborn grandchild as a fetus do you?
Click to expand...

I am going to be a grandfather assuming the pregnancy continues. No, I am not a grandfather now because there is no child. Is that so difficult for you to understand? If there was a child then I would already be a grandfather but I am not a grandfather because there is no child.

I am not conferring anything on anyone. I said I was "going to be" a grandfather. In the English language "going to be" signifies the future. Assuming events unfold the way I foresee them then I will be a grandfather. Again, "will be" signifies the future.

Do you conduct regular conversations interchanging the present and future? If your boss asks if a report is ready do you tell him it is just because you started on it? When you're leaving on vacation do you tell people you've already gone on vacation? How do you function when the present and future are the same to you?
 
apple0154 said:
I am going to be a grandfather assuming the pregnancy continues. No, I am not a grandfather now because there is no child. Is that so difficult for you to understand? If there was a child then I would already be a grandfather but I am not a grandfather because there is no child.

I am not conferring anything on anyone. I said I was "going to be" a grandfather. In the English language "going to be" signifies the future. Assuming events unfold the way I foresee them then I will be a grandfather. Again, "will be" signifies the future.

Do you conduct regular conversations interchanging the present and future? If your boss asks if a report is ready do you tell him it is just because you started on it? When you're leaving on vacation do you tell people you've already gone on vacation? How do you function when the present and future are the same to you?
Click to expand...


And if the women miscarries, she won't lose a baby, she'll only lose a mass of gook, right Apple.....LMAO

And do you say 'a little vacation' or 'a little pregnant'......

You're a real mess ..... and a fool.
 
bravo said:
Irrelevant bullshit......Obama voted AGAINST the bill.... because he didn't see anything wrong with
killing a baby born alive by a botched abortion....

reported last week the the transcript of Barack Obama’s 2002 floor speech in opposition to the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (“BAIPA”). The transcript makes clear Barack Obama opposed the BAIPA not because, as he claimed, it would encroach on abortion rights, but because the law would “burden the original decision of the woman and the physician.” It was too much of a burden, according to Obama, to ensure that a child, born alive, get medical care to sustain the child’s life.

Understanding both the timeline of Obama’s votes against the BAIPA and the language of the legislation makes it very clear that, regardless of what Obama and his defenders say, he did, in fact, support infanticide. Those are the facts, however unpleasant they may be.


The bill defined a child who is breathing, has a beating heart, or shows voluntary muscle movement and who is fully outside the mother shall be considered a “born alive” child.

That was too much for Barack Obama. He did not think that a child who was alive and outside the mother’s womb should be considered a child for purposes of giving the child equal protection rights if it was the mother and doctor’s intention that the child be killed.

Despite the BAIPA having passed the United States Congress with the support of Hillary Clinton, Ted Kenedy, Jerrold Nadler, and Barbara Boxer, and despite abortion groups likes Planned Parenthood and NARAL no longer opposing the legislation, Barack Obama still opposed it.
The law, contrary to Obama’s assertions, included abortion rights protections. Barack Obama himself voted in his committee to include those protections. But after voting to include abortion rights protections, Obama voted against the legislation in his committee. The BAIPA died in Obama’s committee in 2003, by a vote of 6-4.
.
Click to expand...

I don't know why you're going on and on with this. Did you watch the video? At the end of the video it says exactly what I wrote so argue with the video.
 
bravo said:
And if the women miscarries, she won't lose a baby, she'll only lose a mass of gook, right Apple.....LMAO

And do you say 'a little vacation' or 'a little pregnant'......

You're a real mess ..... and a fool.
Click to expand...

The only fool here is you trying to interchange the present with the future. There is no baby. Pregnancy is a process that usually, but not always, results in a baby. Try watching one of those child-oriented videos that explain "time" by using fun characters.

And, yes, I do say "a little vacation" which is exactly what I'm going on next week. I'm taking a little vacation for one week going to....can you guess? Disney World! One week. A little vacation. After conversing with some folks here I'm looking forward to intelligent conversation with Mickey and Minnie and Donald and Pluto and .......
 
apple0154 said:
The only fool here is you trying to interchange the present with the future. There is no baby. Pregnancy is a process that usually, but not always, results in a baby. Try watching one of those child-oriented videos that explain "time" by using fun characters.


Really ?....What post was that ?

And, yes, I do say "a little vacation" which is exactly what I'm going on next week. I'm taking a little vacation for one week going to....can you guess? Disney World! One week. A little vacation. After conversing with some folks here I'm looking forward to intelligent conversation with Mickey and Minnie and Donald and Pluto and .......
Click to expand...
.

And the unlucky girl is a little pregnant I would guess you'd say.....because you're a fool
 
apple0154 said:
I am going to be a grandfather assuming the pregnancy continues. No, I am not a grandfather now because there is no child. Is that so difficult for you to understand? If there was a child then I would already be a grandfather but I am not a grandfather because there is no child.

I am not conferring anything on anyone. I said I was "going to be" a grandfather. In the English language "going to be" signifies the future. Assuming events unfold the way I foresee them then I will be a grandfather. Again, "will be" signifies the future.

Do you conduct regular conversations interchanging the present and future? If your boss asks if a report is ready do you tell him it is just because you started on it? When you're leaving on vacation do you tell people you've already gone on vacation? How do you function when the present and future are the same to you?
Click to expand...

Why is a soon to be mother murdered, and it's called a double murder?

Even if she was on her way to have an abortion.
 
apple0154 said:
I don't know why you're going on and on with this. Did you watch the video? At the end of the video it says exactly what I wrote so argue with the video.
Click to expand...


I don't know why you're going on about it.....Obama's words from his own mouth are clear.....and thats the issue, the reason Obama stated for voting the way he did....

A living, breathing, moving baby OUTSIDE the womb and he treats it like a pile of shit......????.....Thats Obama....
 
Liberty said:
Why is a soon to be mother murdered, and it's called a double murder?

Even if she was on her way to have an abortion.
Click to expand...

Why? Because it's just one more sneaky, underhanded way the anti-abortionists are trying to strip women of their rights. Remember the California case where the guy killed the pregnant woman? An horrendous crime and the prosecution played on that sentiment and included the fetus as a "person". The jury, rightly outraged over the crime, wanted to throw all they could at the defendant. Their anger at the defendant clouded their better judgement. All they succeeded in doing was taking one more step towards denying a woman the right to abort. They could have convicted him on the woman's murder alone.
 
bravo said:
I don't know why you're going on about it.....Obama's words from his own mouth are clear.....and thats the issue, the reason Obama stated for voting the way he did....

A living, breathing, moving baby OUTSIDE the womb and he treats it like a pile of shit......????.....Thats Obama....
Click to expand...

And sedating/euthanizing the fetus before an abortion takes place would remove any chance of that happening in the future. There would be no more live birth abortions. There would be no more silent screams. Of course, once that discussion came up instead of people working together to craft a policy the whole can of worms would be reopened. There would be no consensus and the problems would remain.

The exact same thing as what occurred when discussing ObamaCare. Some people had no intention of ensuring everyone had medical coverage so they had no beneficial input.

One doesn't have to be psychic to know what would happen if sedating/euthanizing the fetus came up for discussion. Some folks would prefer the problems persist rather than eliminate one of their arguments against abortion hoping they will eventually get their way. Same old Repub tactic of which Obama is well aware.
 
apple0154 said:
I am going to be a grandfather assuming the pregnancy continues. No, I am not a grandfather now because there is no child. Is that so difficult for you to understand? If there was a child then I would already be a grandfather but I am not a grandfather because there is no child.

I am not conferring anything on anyone. I said I was "going to be" a grandfather. In the English language "going to be" signifies the future. Assuming events unfold the way I foresee them then I will be a grandfather. Again, "will be" signifies the future.

Do you conduct regular conversations interchanging the present and future? If your boss asks if a report is ready do you tell him it is just because you started on it? When you're leaving on vacation do you tell people you've already gone on vacation? How do you function when the present and future are the same to you?
Click to expand...

You still duck the question. If your daughter in law loses the baby will you be upset about it? Will you be sad? Will you console your son? Or have you so thoroughly descended into your sickness and so wedded yourself to your ideology that you won't budge regardless of what a sick fuck it makes you sound like even with your own grandchild.

I for one pray for your unborn grandchild and that your child will raise him/her outside of your obviously sick values
 
apple0154 said:
I am going to be a grandfather assuming the pregnancy continues. No, I am not a grandfather now because there is no child. Is that so difficult for you to understand? If there was a child then I would already be a grandfather but I am not a grandfather because there is no child.

I am not conferring anything on anyone. I said I was "going to be" a grandfather. In the English language "going to be" signifies the future. Assuming events unfold the way I foresee them then I will be a grandfather. Again, "will be" signifies the future.

Do you conduct regular conversations interchanging the present and future? If your boss asks if a report is ready do you tell him it is just because you started on it? When you're leaving on vacation do you tell people you've already gone on vacation? How do you function when the present and future are the same to you?
Click to expand...

You still duck the question. If your daughter in law loses the baby will you be upset about it? Will you be sad? Will you console your son? Or have you so thoroughly descended into your sickness and so wedded yourself to your ideology that you won't budge regardless of what a sick fuck it makes you sound like even with your own grandchild.

I for one pray for your unborn grandchild and that your child will raise him/her outside of your obviously sick values
 
FactsRStubborn said:
You still duck the question. If your daughter in law loses the baby will you be upset about it? Will you be sad? Will you console your son? Or have you so thoroughly descended into your sickness and so wedded yourself to your ideology that you won't budge regardless of what a sick fuck it makes you sound like even with your own grandchild.

I for one pray for your unborn grandchild and that your child will raise him/her outside of your obviously sick values
Click to expand...


Of course I will be unhappy if she loses the fetus BUT my sadness would not mean I lost a grandchild. There was no grandchild. The process involved in the making of a grandchild would have been stopped.

If I was starting to build a house and had the foundation put in and a box of tools I left there were stolen I wouldn't say my home was robbed because there wasn't any home. There was a hole in the ground made of concrete. That's it. The construction site where my home is being built was robbed. The construction site. Not my home because there wasn't any home.

The same applies to a grandchild. If there is no birth there is no grandchild. My daughter-in-law had an ultrasound. The doctor said that while everything looks good they can not determine the sex with 100% accuracy due to the position of the fetus. While it looks like a boy they can't be 100% sure so should someone ask if I have a grandchild and after I reply in the affirmative they ask if it's a boy or girl I'd have to say no one knows. :rofl2: Yep, that conversation would certainly win friends and influence people.

Babies have to be born just as corpses have had to die before they were considered a corpse. A person on their death bed is not a corpse even thought they will be in a matter of hours. Why do you insist on perverting logic?

And as for praying thank God my son and daughter-in-law are not religious wackos!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top