Author Topic: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’  (Read 4355 times)

Jazzhead, Hoodat, jafo2010 and 17 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online Hoodat

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 6,899
I love ya man, I really do - But no. It is God that gives you the R2KBA. The Constitution merely protects that right. A very important distinction.

Which is why I used the word "secures" instead of 'grants'.  God-given rights?  Absolutely.  Our Bill of Rights (and Declaration of Independences) acknowledges these God-given rights as a basis for law.
If a political party does not have its foundation in the determination to advance a cause that is right and that is moral, then it is not a political party; it is merely a conspiracy to seize power.

-Dwight Eisenhower-

Online roamer_1

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 17,884
Which is why I used the word "secures" instead of 'grants'.  God-given rights?  Absolutely.  Our Bill of Rights (and Declaration of Independences) acknowledges these God-given rights as a basis for law.

I stand corrected, though happily, having the difference declared distinctly.
 888high58888

Offline bigheadfred

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11,532
  • Personal text
Well, to be fair, some ARE naturally bow-legged...  :whistle:

Don't mean ya gotta bow down.

I ain't no saint. In and for and out of respect for the women, and I have the balls to say this.

Don't stick it to her if ya ain't gonna man up.

I gotta go. The ice cream truck is coming by.


Offline Sanguine

  • TBR Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,412
Don't mean ya gotta bow down.

I ain't no saint. In and for and out of respect for the women, and I have the balls to say this.

Don't stick it to her if ya ain't gonna man up.

I gotta go. The ice cream truck is coming by.

You're a good man, Fred.
"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials." – George Mason, Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 1788

“Do right and risk the consequences.”
– Sam Houston

Offline bigheadfred

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11,532
  • Personal text
You're a good man, Fred.

And the only way that happens is because of you. A good woman.

 :beer:


Online roamer_1

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 17,884

Don't stick it to her if ya ain't gonna man up.

That's right and alright, and the other way around... It takes two to play catch.

Offline Smokin Joe

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 25,466
Got it.   Can't have any of that "individual liberty" nonsense.   The government knows best.
No, I'm just tired of responding to your bullshit trying to justify the murder of human beings, or worse yet standing by and calling that slaughter a "choice" and a "Right" when it was manufactured by a handful of judges who do NOT HAVE THE POWER TO GRANT A NATURAL RIGHT, ANYMORE THAN THE GOVERNMENT DOES.
Just like the Holocaust was a "choice", (kill your neighbors for fun and profit) only it didn't kill 60 million and counting, and we did something to stop it (not to mention strung up some of the chief perpetrators). No one paraded around like there was some Constitutional Right to kill those people, yet they act as if there is a Right to slaughter Americans using methods that the selfsame people wouldn't use against even the most heinous convicted murderer against babies.

How God must weep at humans' folly! Stand fast! God knows what he is doing!
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression


There are no "Socialists", no "Progressives", only Communists, with every negative image that totalitarianism might muster, demanding fealty and conformity to their views, with a legacy of 150,000,000 dead and counting.

Online Jazzhead

  • Radicalized
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,027
No, I'm just tired of responding to your bullshit trying to justify the murder of human beings, or worse yet standing by and calling that slaughter a "choice" and a "Right" when it was manufactured by a handful of judges who do NOT HAVE THE POWER TO GRANT A NATURAL RIGHT, ANYMORE THAN THE GOVERNMENT DOES.
Just like the Holocaust was a "choice", (kill your neighbors for fun and profit) only it didn't kill 60 million and counting, and we did something to stop it (not to mention strung up some of the chief perpetrators). No one paraded around like there was some Constitutional Right to kill those people, yet they act as if there is a Right to slaughter Americans using methods that the selfsame people wouldn't use against even the most heinous convicted murderer against babies.

I know you disagree with my position, but please don't mischaracterize it.    Roe v. Wade didn't "grant" a natural right, it merely extended the Constitution's protection to secure from governmental coercion a woman's right to decide for herself whether and when to reproduce.

Our natural rights as individuals aren't limited to those enumerated in the Constitution (freedom of speech, religion, etc).    Our natural rights also include those of privacy and self-determination, which have been recognized by the SCOTUS as secured by the Constitution.    The Constitution's guarantee of the states' rights to organize and regulate their militias has been interpreted by the SCOTUS to also extend to protection of the natural and individual right of self defense.

So what you offensively term a "Holocaust" is not government-driven genocide but merely the sum total of millions of individual decisions by women to decide their futures for themselves.   If you don't like those decisions,  then persuade and support these women in their time of crisis.    Just leave the State out of it.   So says the Constitution.   
« Last Edit: September 15, 2019, 09:26:33 AM by Jazzhead »
"He was born poor, died rich, and never hurt anyone along the way"

   - Duke Ellington, upon hearing of the death of Louis Armstrong

"Not forever.  Just for now"

    - Jay Farrar

Offline XenaLee

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11,574
  • Pray for peace but train for war.
I know you disagree with my position, but please don't mischaracterize it.    Roe v. Wade didn't "grant" a natural right, it merely extended the Constitution's protection to secure from governmental coercion a woman's right to decide for herself whether and when to reproduce.

Our natural rights as individuals aren't limited to those enumerated in the Constitution (freedom of speech, religion, etc).    Our natural rights also include those of privacy and self-determination, which have been recognized by the SCOTUS as secured by the Constitution.    The Constitution's guarantee of the states' rights to organize and regulate their militias has been interpreted by the SCOTUS to also extend to protection of the natural and individual right of self defense.

So what you offensively term a "Holocaust" is not government-driven genocide but merely the sum total of millions of individual decisions by women to decide their futures for themselves.   If you don't like those decisions,  then persuade and support these women in their time of crisis.    Just leave the State out of it.   So says the Constitution.

I must have missed your response to my question previously on this subject.   How about an answer now?   The question was....

Quote
So.... you're admitting that a woman choosing to have an abortion (vs. using birth control) is not the right thing?  If so, then we're making progress.  (but I doubt it)

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,374700.msg2054362.html#msg2054362

in response to your post saying....

Quote
That's a non-sequitur.  Are you saying that government's role is to enforce sexual ethics?   I'm not suggesting the pro-lifers and persons of faith stop advocating their positions and their moral basis,  and providing support for women to do the right thing.   I'm suggesting only that this is not the role of government. 

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,374700.msg2054358.html#msg2054358
Time for unity in America! (better late than never)


Online Victoria33

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,628
  • Prissy my Yorkie
I haven't read on this thread.  My husband, the Republican County Chair of our county, always said this about abortion:  Once the woman's egg is penetrated by a sperm, it is a tomato or a baby at that moment.

Since it can't be a tomato, it has to be a baby at that moment.

I read, in the past day or so, a university now has free day after pills for girl students.  If she had sex, take this pill the next day and it will kill the embryo if she got pregnant the night before.  Taking that pill either kills a tomato or a child.  I have never heard of a woman giving birth to a tomato so it has to be a child.
I AM SELLING MY BOOK: 
“EMERGENCIES HAPPEN! BE PREPARED NOW!”
IF INTERESTED, WILL SEND YOU TABLE OF CONTENTS, WRITE ME AT:
mards.derrick@aol.com
MY WEBSITE: "THE WRITING OF MARCELLA DERRICK"  https://www.marcelladerrick.com/

Offline austingirl

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 8,197
  • Cruz 2016- a Constitutional Conservative at last!
https://babylonbee.com/news/buttigeig-life-begins-when-you-register-as-a-democrat

Buttigieg: 'Life Begins When A Person Registers As A Democrat'

@PeteS in CA

Excellent work from the bee.

I wonder if Buttdigger will be asked about his support for the abortionist who had over 2000 dead babies found in his home when he died. Saint Pete kept the guy in business.
Principles matter. Words matter.

Offline The Ghost

  • Very Special Agent and
  • TBR Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,219
Buttigieg also made the claim that a person still continues to be a living, breathing person and a valued member of the Democratic party long after they die.
“Here’s the truth. Life begins at conception. Government is too big. Our taxes are too high. And our car insurance is too expensive. President Trump is doing a great job. Facts matter more than feelings. The Second Amendment is self-explanatory. And as a doctor, I can assure you there are only two genders.”

Online Hoodat

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 6,899
Roe v. Wade didn't "grant" a natural right, it merely extended the Constitution's protection  .  .  .

Please show me this Constitutional protection that was extended by Roe.


.  .  . to secure from governmental coercion a woman's right to decide for herself whether and when to reproduce.

No one is trying to deny a woman's right to reproduce.  No one.  But then you knew that already, yet still continue to offer this blatantly false premise again.  A woman's right to reproduce begins with exercising control of her body to allow sperm to enter her womb.  And with the exercise of any right, there come responsibilities and consequences.  In this case, the consequence is the creation of a new singular life that is due protection as the members of that society see fit, as stated specifically in the Bill of Rights.  I can cite it once again, if you so like.  Contrast that with your inability to cite a single word of the Constitution in defense of your "abortion must remain lega" nonsense.


Our natural rights as individuals aren't limited to those enumerated in the Constitution (freedom of speech, religion, etc).    Our natural rights also include those of privacy and self-determination,

It is this right to self-determination which you so eagerly choose to deny.


.  .  .  which have been recognized by the SCOTUS as secured by the Constitution.

The right to self-determination is stated explicitly in Amendment X.  The Supreme Court has nothing to do with it.  Still waiting for you to show me where in the Constitution I can find that right to abortion.
If a political party does not have its foundation in the determination to advance a cause that is right and that is moral, then it is not a political party; it is merely a conspiracy to seize power.

-Dwight Eisenhower-

Online Victoria33

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,628
  • Prissy my Yorkie
@mystery-ak
@musiclady
@Cyber Liberty
@The Ghost

Let's go back to Dallas where this case started:

Roe vs. Wade:  "Roe" was a fake name given to the woman.  "Wade" was the District Attorney in Dallas.

Because this happened in Dallas, I recall in later years, when Norma McCorvey (Jane Doe) regretted this case was filed.  Here is what happened:

"Norma Leah Nelson McCorvey (September 22, 1947 – February 18, 2017), better known by the legal pseudonym "Jane Roe", was the plaintiff in the landmark American lawsuit Roe v. Wade in 1973.  The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that individual state laws banning abortion are unconstitutional. Later, McCorvey's views on abortion changed substantially; she became a Roman Catholic activist in the anti-abortion movement. McCorvey stated that her involvement in Roe was "the biggest mistake of [her] life."

Abortions cannot be stopped.  In past history, there were people who did abortions using coat hangers/other means to go inside the woman to kill the baby and many of the women bled out and died.  Legal abortions came about to save women's lives when the abortions were done.  The reality is, it is her body and she can do whatever she wants with her body. That is a truth no matter what a law says.

What about a law that prevents men from having sex so babies can't be aborted?  What about a law that requires men to have a child?  Would men go along with either of those laws?  No, they would not, their body is theirs to do with as they want. 

My mother, married to my father, was in her early 40s when I was born.  She told me I was an "accident".  They were Christians, went to their Baptist church three times a week. She was a Christian woman, so she had me.  At that time, there was only the non-medical, crude methods of having an abortion and she would not have done that anyway. 

Sixteen years later, I was the pianist at that Baptist Church, three times a week, plus the pastor would pick me up early on Sunday morning, drive to Kilgore, Tx, and I played him onto the radio, and off the radio.

Now, here I am, an "accident", on this forum.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2019, 10:58:10 AM by Victoria33 »
I AM SELLING MY BOOK: 
“EMERGENCIES HAPPEN! BE PREPARED NOW!”
IF INTERESTED, WILL SEND YOU TABLE OF CONTENTS, WRITE ME AT:
mards.derrick@aol.com
MY WEBSITE: "THE WRITING OF MARCELLA DERRICK"  https://www.marcelladerrick.com/

Online Jazzhead

  • Radicalized
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,027
Quite a few of us, no doubt, were "accidents" (my youngest sibling, for example).   "Accidents" don't get aborted when the family unit is intact.   Abortion is a bad choice,  usually where circumstances present no good choice.
"He was born poor, died rich, and never hurt anyone along the way"

   - Duke Ellington, upon hearing of the death of Louis Armstrong

"Not forever.  Just for now"

    - Jay Farrar

Online PeteS in CA

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,410
Please show me this Constitutional protection that was extended by Roe.
...

And maybe explain how the writers of the Bill of Rights coded into it a "right" they would have found abhorrent.
Journalism is about covering important stories. With a pillow, until they stop moving. - David Burge, Iowahawkblog

Think of the Press as Democratic Operatives with Bylines and it All Makes Sense - Glenn Reynolds, Instapundit blog

Modern journalism is all about deciding which facts the public shouldn't know because they might reflect badly on Democrats. - Jim Treacher

Offline XenaLee

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11,574
  • Pray for peace but train for war.
And maybe explain how the writers of the Bill of Rights coded into it a "right" they would have found abhorrent.

Exactly.
Time for unity in America! (better late than never)


Online txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • ****
  • Posts: 18,303
  • Rule #39
Quite a few of us, no doubt, were "accidents" (my youngest sibling, for example).   "Accidents" don't get aborted when the family unit is intact.   Abortion is a bad choice,  usually where circumstances present no good choice.

Every heard of the concept of adoption?  I ask because you never ever bring that up as a choice in a pregnancy.  It's first last and always abortion.
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Online roamer_1

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 17,884
Quite a few of us, no doubt, were "accidents" (my youngest sibling, for example).   "Accidents" don't get aborted when the family unit is intact.   Abortion is a bad choice,  usually where circumstances present no good choice.

Historically in the US, there are plenty of 'premature deliveries' 7 or 8 months after marriage. But abortion was rare.

And circumstances that present no good choice are often created. They are called consequences.

Online Jazzhead

  • Radicalized
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,027
Every heard of the concept of adoption?  I ask because you never ever bring that up as a choice in a pregnancy.  It's first last and always abortion.

Adoption is of course a better choice than abortion.   

This isn't about the wisdom of the choice.  I think the choice stinks. This is about who gets to make the choice.   Your daughter or the government. 
"He was born poor, died rich, and never hurt anyone along the way"

   - Duke Ellington, upon hearing of the death of Louis Armstrong

"Not forever.  Just for now"

    - Jay Farrar

Online txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • ****
  • Posts: 18,303
  • Rule #39
Adoption is of course a better choice than abortion.   

This isn't about the wisdom of the choice.  I think the choice stinks. This is about who gets to make the choice.   Your daughter or the government.

And yet it's a choice you never mention in this discussion.  You purposely leave it out in favor of murdering a human life.

Not just my daughters decision...her boyfriend/husband as well.  You always insist on leaving 50% of what it takes to create a human life out of the decision making process.  And that is just wrong.


Clearly you've sided with the government on this one.
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Offline berdie

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,540
Historically in the US, there are plenty of 'premature deliveries' 7 or 8 months after marriage. But abortion was rare.

And circumstances that present no good choice are often created. They are called consequences.





Yep...I was born 6 months after my parents marriage. So I was premature I guess, lol. My Mom chased down my Dad from Illinois to Virginia. He did the right thing when he found out what the deal was.  Good thing for him...out of 4 kids I was the only one he had a relationship with.

Online Hoodat

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 6,899
Adoption is of course a better choice than abortion.   

This isn't about the wisdom of the choice.  I think the choice stinks.

The choice here is whether or not a woman chooses to grant someone access to her womb that can lead to the creation of a singular life.  And in that regard, no government is standing in her way.  None.


This is about who gets to make the choice.   Your daughter or the government.

Who gets to make the choice about whether there is a law against shoplifting?  Assault?  Trespassing?  Fraud?  Driving without insurance?  Pumping your own gas?  Medical procedures?  According to the Constitution, the right to make those choices defaults to the States.  But it has been crystal clear from the beginning that you really don't give a damn what the Constitution says.  All you seem to care about is when the Supreme Court (or any other court) does what you want them to do, and then declaring that decision "constitutional" even if there is no basis in the Constitution for it.

Was segregation constitutional?  Using the reasoning of your Roe (and Heller) arguments, it was definitely constitutional because the Supreme Court deemed it so.  And employing the same argument you employ with Roe, you would make the case that the Constitution itself protected the right to segregation.  But I don't believe this to be the case with you since you have never uttered the phrase 'segregation must remain legal' as you have with abortion.

So looking back to Roe, imagine if that Court had reached a completely different decision.  Let's say they had ruled that there was an inherent right to life, and that no State had the right to legalize abortion at all for any reason.  Would we still be hearing you defend that decision and declaring it as "constitutional" because the Constitution says so?  I think not considering your penchant for abortion remaining legal by any means necessary.

So while we marvel at your inconsistency as well as utter hypocrisy on the issue, you will find my position unchanged.  Because any court that denies that right to each State in the absence of Federal law is dead wrong and an affront to the very Constitution I hold dear.

If a political party does not have its foundation in the determination to advance a cause that is right and that is moral, then it is not a political party; it is merely a conspiracy to seize power.

-Dwight Eisenhower-

Online txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • ****
  • Posts: 18,303
  • Rule #39
The choice here is whether or not a woman chooses to grant someone access to her womb that can lead to the creation of a singular life.  And in that regard, no government is standing in her way.  None.


Who gets to make the choice about whether there is a law against shoplifting?  Assault?  Trespassing?  Fraud?  Driving without insurance?  Pumping your own gas?  Medical procedures?  According to the Constitution, the right to make those choices defaults to the States.  But it has been crystal clear from the beginning that you really don't give a damn what the Constitution says.  All you seem to care about is when the Supreme Court (or any other court) does what you want them to do, and then declaring that decision "constitutional" even if there is no basis in the Constitution for it.

Was segregation constitutional?  Using the reasoning of your Roe (and Heller) arguments, it was definitely constitutional because the Supreme Court deemed it so.  And employing the same argument you employ with Roe, you would make the case that the Constitution itself protected the right to segregation.  But I don't believe this to be the case with you since you have never uttered the phrase 'segregation must remain legal' as you have with abortion.

So looking back to Roe, imagine if that Court had reached a completely different decision.  Let's say they had ruled that there was an inherent right to life, and that no State had the right to legalize abortion at all for any reason.  Would we still be hearing you defend that decision and declaring it as "constitutional" because the Constitution says so?  I think not considering your penchant for abortion remaining legal by any means necessary.

So while we marvel at your inconsistency as well as utter hypocrisy on the issue, you will find my position unchanged.  Because any court that denies that right to each State in the absence of Federal law is dead wrong and an affront to the very Constitution I hold dear.

 :2popcorn:
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Online roamer_1

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 17,884
Yep...I was born 6 months after my parents marriage. So I was premature I guess, lol. My Mom chased down my Dad from Illinois to Virginia. He did the right thing when he found out what the deal was.  Good thing for him...out of 4 kids I was the only one he had a relationship with.

That whole scenario was not uncommon.
The point being a systemic solution that worked well, and did not require runaway abortion rates, and produced fewer (by orders of magnitude) single parent homes and bastard children to become wards of the state.



Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf