The Briefing Room

General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: mystery-ak on September 07, 2019, 03:45:04 pm

Title: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: mystery-ak on September 07, 2019, 03:45:04 pm
   Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
By Alexandra DeSanctis

September 6, 2019 4:33 PM

In an interview this morning on The Breakfast Club radio show, South Bend mayor and Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg attempted to rationalize his support for legal abortion until birth by suggesting that perhaps human life begins at the moment of a child’s first breath. Here’s what he said:

Quote
[Pro-life people] hold everybody in line with this one piece of doctrine about abortion, which is obviously a tough issue for a lot of people to think through morally. Then again, there’s a lot of parts of the Bible that talk about how life begins with breath. Even that is something that we can interpret differently. . . . No matter what you think about the cosmic question of how life begins, most Americans can get on board with the idea of, ‘I might draw the here. You might draw the line there.’ The most important thing is the person who should be drawing the line is the woman making the decision.

It’s the latest salvo in a long string of attempts by Buttigieg to paint his entire progressive agenda as the only acceptable set of policies for a moral Christian, insisting that a proper interpretation of Christianity will “point you in a progressive direction.” Time and again, the mayor — who considers himself a faithful Episcopalian — has derided Republicans and conservative Christians for their supposed hypocrisy and immorality, while proclaiming the objective moral correctness of his own policy prescriptions.

more
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/pete-buttigieg-defends-abortion-suggests-bible-says-life-begins-with-breath/ (https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/pete-buttigieg-defends-abortion-suggests-bible-says-life-begins-with-breath/)
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: PeteS in CA on September 07, 2019, 04:36:36 pm
My understanding is that the basis for this claim - Mayor B is not original in making this claim - is Genesis 2:7. Here it is, in context:

Quote
2:4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created – when the Lord God made the earth and heavens.

2:5 Now no shrub of the field had yet grown on the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprouted, for the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the earth, and there was no man to cultivate the ground. 2:6 Springs would well up from the earth and water the whole surface of the ground. 2:7 The Lord God formed the man from the soil of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

I think even folks not especially familiar with the Bible could spot the problems in these verse for Mayor B's claim. Mayor B found a nominally Christian "church" that tells him what he wants to hear and then repeats that as if it had something to do with Christianity.

More generally, it never ceases to amaze me the way pols who know little or nothing of the Bible publicly display their ignorance through very public foolish comments. Like this one.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: EdJames on September 07, 2019, 05:12:22 pm
My understanding is that the basis for this claim - Mayor B is not original in making this claim - is Genesis 2:7. Here it is, in context:

I think even folks not especially familiar with the Bible could spot the problems in these verse for Mayor B's claim. Mayor B found a nominally Christian "church" that tells him what he wants to hear and then repeats that as if it had something to do with Christianity.

More generally, it never ceases to amaze me the way pols who know little or nothing of the Bible publicly display their ignorance through very public foolish comments. Like this one.

I saw it from the onset, this clown's "I represent real Christianity" meme is just a campaign strategy....  it was designed to offset the "but he is a fag" objections....

All of what these actors display in 21st century campaigns are nothing but carefully curated images and roles, schemed out in advance as vote collection tools....
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 07, 2019, 05:21:12 pm
Buttigieg is right.  Abortion is a moral question upon which reasonable, moral minds will differ.   The question is who has the right to make that decision.

And the answer should be:  every woman must have the right to decide for herself, on the basis of her own conscience informed by her experience,  her faith and those who love and support her.

It is not a decision to be compelled by government.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: The_Reader_David on September 07, 2019, 05:32:57 pm
There is a reason that Christian hermeneutics, from the earliest days of the Church always followed the principle eventually neatly summarized by the Anglicans (back when they all took Christian faith and morals as seriously as they still do in Africa) as "neither may it [the Church] so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another."

Buttigieg ignores multiple passages in the Psalms, Isaiah and the Gospels (regarding John the Baptist in the womb of Elizabeth) making clear not merely the material life, but even the spiritual life, of a child in the womb, and expounds the creation account in a way repugnant to them.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: PeteS in CA on September 07, 2019, 05:33:37 pm
Government forbids murder, along with other forms of violence against human beings. The not yet born baby is human, distinct from the the mother, alive, and growing in a continuous process that starts with fertilization, and if not ended prematurely by violence or disease, ends in old age. Killing a not yet born baby is homicide.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: truth_seeker on September 07, 2019, 05:34:34 pm
I saw it from the onset, this clown's "I represent real Christianity" meme is just a campaign strategy....  it was designed to offset the "but he is a fag" objections....

All of what these actors display in 21st century campaigns are nothing but carefully curated images and roles, schemed out in advance as vote collection tools....

Very well stated. Bill Clinton was often photographed in public, Bible in hand.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjbltD7nr_kAhVXnp4KHdf_BlYQjRx6BAgBEAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftammybruce.com%2F2015%2F09%2Fhillary-we-are-not-the-first-family-while-at-church.html&psig=AOvVaw3Muk7Kwh_uSrb5wscNMyn-&ust=1567963913789672 (https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjbltD7nr_kAhVXnp4KHdf_BlYQjRx6BAgBEAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftammybruce.com%2F2015%2F09%2Fhillary-we-are-not-the-first-family-while-at-church.html&psig=AOvVaw3Muk7Kwh_uSrb5wscNMyn-&ust=1567963913789672)
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: PeteS in CA on September 07, 2019, 05:35:46 pm
There is a reason that Christian hermeneutics, from the earliest days of the Church always followed the principle eventually neatly summarized by the Anglicans (back when they all took Christian faith and morals as seriously as they still do in Africa) as "neither may it [the Church] so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another."

Buttigieg ignores multiple passages in the Psalms, Isaiah and the Gospels (regarding John the Baptist in the womb of Elizabeth) making clear not merely the material life, but even the spiritual life, of a child in the womb, and expounds the creation account in a way repugnant to them.

Mayor B practices Cafeterianity, of the Buffeterian variety.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: PeteS in CA on September 07, 2019, 05:43:08 pm
I saw it from the onset, this clown's "I represent real Christianity" meme is just a campaign strategy....  it was designed to offset the "but he is a fag" objections....
....

Actually, I think he's trying to build on the MSM's decades-long demonizing of "Fundamentalists", not realizing that it's vulnerable to people simply meeting and getting to know their next door neighbors and coworkers. Bigotry like that needs isolation and ignorance to thrive. Theologically conservative Christians are not in an isolated corner of society and getting to know them (us!) is too easy for Mayor B's Fundy Card to work.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: jafo2010 on September 07, 2019, 09:38:29 pm
The aberrant minded mayor with his twisted sense of right is far from what most Americans subscribe to, even in 2019.

And all the supporters of Planned Parenthood are fools to believe that Margaret Sanger had anything in mind that was noble or in the best interests of women.  Her whole focus was the control of the undesirables, the people of color, the poor, Jews, Catholics, etc.  Nothing that woman did should be woven as a part of the fabric of this country.  She should be held in the same contempt as Hitler himself, who she supposedly inspired in regard to the Final Solution of the Jews.  But then again, most people walking the land are clueless of history.

Heck, I grew up believing Lindbergh was a hero of sorts, but the things they never told you, like he worked with Sanger to find means to control the undesirables.  Lindbergh and his wife were planning to leave the USA and move to Germany they loved the Nazi form of governance, etc so much.  Hitler attacked Poland, and he just did not make it there in time.

Scott Peterson, a genuinely deplorable man who murdered his wife and unborn child was indicted, convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of his unborn child, besides receiving the same outcome for his wife.  How can we sentence him to death and rationalize it is perfectly ok for a woman to kill her unborn child.  It makes no sense.

Abortion is mass genocide, and our country has not been right since 1972.

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Chosen Daughter on September 08, 2019, 04:03:34 am
Buttigieg is right.  Abortion is a moral question upon which reasonable, moral minds will differ.   The question is who has the right to make that decision.

And the answer should be:  every woman must have the right to decide for herself, on the basis of her own conscience informed by her experience,  her faith and those who love and support her.

It is not a decision to be compelled by government.

Wrong.  Every woman should not be able to have their child murdered.  Abortion right up to the time of birth.  That is murder.  The baby is a living human being that feels pain.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: EdJames on September 08, 2019, 04:07:50 am
Wrong.  Every woman should not be able to have their child murdered.  Abortion right up to the time of birth.  That is murder.  The baby is a living human being that feels pain.

He comes here to support murder almost every day....
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Chosen Daughter on September 08, 2019, 04:12:30 am
He comes here to support murder almost every day....

I know, I've noticed.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 08, 2019, 03:00:14 pm
I don't recall ever having read in the bible that life begins at breath or that life begins at conception either.

I see what @PeteS in CA posted, it's interesting, but I don't think it says what Mayor Pete wants it to say.

Abortion should just be up the the person to decide, imo.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sanguine on September 08, 2019, 03:07:55 pm
I don't recall ever having read in the bible that life begins at breath or that life begins at conception either.

I see what @PeteS in CA posted, it's interesting, but I don't think it says what Mayor Pete wants it to say.

Abortion should just be up the the person to decide, imo.

Which person?  The one being aborted or the one doing the abortion?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Chosen Daughter on September 08, 2019, 04:17:20 pm
Buttigieg is right.  Abortion is a moral question upon which reasonable, moral minds will differ.   The question is who has the right to make that decision.

And the answer should be:  every woman must have the right to decide for herself, on the basis of her own conscience informed by her experience,  her faith and those who love and support her.

It is not a decision to be compelled by government.

 
Stream Live Now  News Find Us Recent Coverage Trials On Demand 

Talent About Us Press Contact
Former Cheerleader on Trial for Killing Newborn Daughter
September 3, 2019

https://www.courttv.com/news/cheerleader-accused-of-killing-her-newborn-baby-trial-begins-sept-3/ (https://www.courttv.com/news/cheerleader-accused-of-killing-her-newborn-baby-trial-begins-sept-3/)

This girl faces life in prison for essentially the same thing that the Democrats support.  Killing the baby at birth.  Or up until birth.  You tell me how this is different?  Why should people feel any outrage at this mother (not) anymore?  Where is the line drawn?  Its OK for a "doctor" to kill, but not a stupid teenager?

Had she gone to an abortion doctor she could have murdered her baby and her cheerleader shape would have been back.  No problem.  No investigation.  No prison time. 
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 08, 2019, 04:20:06 pm
Which person?  The one being aborted or the one doing the abortion?

The one with a Social Security number.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Wingnut on September 08, 2019, 04:23:06 pm

Abortion should just be up the the person to decide, imo.

Then you agree with Dave Chappelle opinion on this mater.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: 240B on September 08, 2019, 04:24:17 pm
The one with a Social Security number.
Ok then.
A Social Security Number now defines life?
So....all the illegals can be killed at will?
After all, they are not really alive.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Chosen Daughter on September 08, 2019, 04:26:58 pm
Ok then.
A Social Security Number now defines life?
So....all the illegals can be killed at will?
After all, they are not really alive.

Speaking of that its in the news today.  A pregnant woman with contractions tries to cross the Rio Grand.  Is caught and given medicine to stop labor and sent back to Mexico.  Good. 
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: mystery-ak on September 08, 2019, 04:46:05 pm
@OfTheCross

With a name like yours I am surprised with your stance on abortion.... :crying:
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Wingnut on September 08, 2019, 04:49:22 pm
@OfTheCross

With a name like yours I am surprised with your stance on abortion.... :crying:
All trolls take a name likely to be opposite of their true persona.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: 240B on September 08, 2019, 04:53:47 pm
@OfTheCross

With a name like yours I am surprised with your stance on abortion.... :crying:
@mystery-ak
I share your view on this subject?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: mystery-ak on September 08, 2019, 04:56:25 pm
@mystery-ak
I share your view on this subject?

My view, if you are asking, is that I consider abortion murder at any stage of the pregnancy..
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sanguine on September 08, 2019, 05:20:36 pm
The one with a Social Security number.

Now I get it!  You have to be recognized by the government to be a person!

 *****rollingeyes*****
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bilo on September 08, 2019, 05:40:45 pm
A good starting point to discuss abortion is: Exodus 21:-22-25;

"If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman's husband imposes on him;....But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life.

When looking at this verse the "harm" is about the survival of the baby. If the fight causes a miscarriage, or birth before the baby can survive, the perpetrator is to forfeit his life.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: IsailedawayfromFR on September 08, 2019, 07:09:14 pm
Butts appears to not agree with God then.

  Isaiah 43-3

"Listen to me, O house of Jacob, all you who remain of the house of Israel, you whom I have upheld since you were conceived, and have carried since your birth."
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: IsailedawayfromFR on September 08, 2019, 07:12:02 pm
I don't recall ever having read in the bible that life begins at breath or that life begins at conception either.

I see what @PeteS in CA posted, it's interesting, but I don't think it says what Mayor Pete wants it to say.

Abortion should just be up the the person to decide, imo.
If God said it would you believe it?

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,374700.msg2050604.html#msg2050604 (http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,374700.msg2050604.html#msg2050604)
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: IsailedawayfromFR on September 11, 2019, 08:58:23 pm
Butt's own brother-in-law does not believe what he is saying.
Brother-in-Law: Pete Buttigieg ‘Misinterpreting’ Bible for ‘Absurd’ Abortion Agenda
https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2019/09/11/brother-in-law-pete-buttigieg-misinterpreting-bible-for-absurd-abortion-agenda/ (https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2019/09/11/brother-in-law-pete-buttigieg-misinterpreting-bible-for-absurd-abortion-agenda/)
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 11, 2019, 09:11:12 pm
If God said it would you believe it?

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,374700.msg2050604.html#msg2050604 (http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,374700.msg2050604.html#msg2050604)

Would I believe that life begins at conception? No.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: austingirl on September 11, 2019, 09:28:18 pm
I saw the pastor, brother of Buttdigger's "wife" on Tucker. It is beyond sickening that the failed mayor is cloaking himself in religion that he maniacally twists for his own political ends.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 11, 2019, 09:31:22 pm
Buttigieg is right.  Abortion is a moral question upon which reasonable, moral minds will differ.   The question is who has the right to make that decision.

And the answer should be:  every woman must have the right to decide for herself, on the basis of her own conscience informed by her experience,  her faith and those who love and support her.

It is not a decision to be compelled by government.

Not Biblically, he ain't. You can wax philosofickle all you want. You cannot get that Book to say abortion is OK. Not with any honesty.

When John the Baptist was a child in the womb, he leapt at the presence of his Lord - His Lord who was in the womb too. And yes, the Scripture calls John a child while he is in the womb.

You've got no legs here.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 11, 2019, 09:36:43 pm
Psalm 139:13 For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 11, 2019, 09:38:17 pm
Abortion should just be up the the person to decide, imo.

Which person? The mother, the father, or the child?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: berdie on September 11, 2019, 09:40:11 pm
Would I believe that life begins at conception? No.



Why not?  When does it begin? And on what basis do you have an opinion?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 11, 2019, 09:41:04 pm
A good starting point to discuss abortion is: Exodus 21:-22-25;

"If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman's husband imposes on him;....But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life.

When looking at this verse the "harm" is about the survival of the baby. If the fight causes a miscarriage, or birth before the baby can survive, the perpetrator is to forfeit his life.

Torah is a sharp sword.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 11, 2019, 09:45:34 pm


Why not?  When does it begin? And on what basis do you have an opinion?

When the fetus is realistically viable. With great medical assistance that is around 22 - 24 weeks.

Life definitely begins when the fetus is able to survive on its own.

 


Which person? The mother, the father, or the child?
The mother and father should decide. The mom has final say, though.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 11, 2019, 09:55:36 pm
When the fetus is realistically viable. With great medical assistance that is around 22 - 24 weeks.

Life definitely begins when the fetus is able to survive on its own.

The 'fetus' (you know that means baby in Latin, don't you?) is perfectly viable if you leave it alone.
 
Quote
The mother and father should decide. The mom has final say, though.

Why? Does the old man get a say wrt support after the fact? No, he gets to pay his treasure for twenty years. Under coercion. So if it ain't a life, and is part of both the man and woman, how is it that she gets to decide his fortunes (not to mention the child's, of course).

It seems to me that if the man can be coerced for twenty years, the woman should be coerced the same. Or at least the paltry 9 months it would take to deliver the child to his father, and quit claim.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: berdie on September 11, 2019, 09:57:26 pm
When the fetus is realistically viable. With great medical assistance that is around 22 - 24 weeks.

Life definitely begins when the fetus is able to survive on its own.

 

The mother and father should decide. The mom has final say, though.




Actually...the "fetus" will be able to survive as soon as it grows... as soon as it is implanted in the mother's womb. If there is a problem...nature will expel it (miscarriage).

You didn't really say what you base this opinion on.  That's o.k....I have to go for the evening.

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: PeteS in CA on September 11, 2019, 10:11:37 pm
When the fetus is realistically viable. With great medical assistance that is around 22 - 24 weeks. 1

Life definitely begins when the fetus is able to survive on its own. 2
...

1 So, how is a non-living fetus able to grow from a single cell to having limbs that move and internal organs that function when the placenta only passes oxygen and nutrition? The mother's body isn't directing that growth. Reality contradicts "When the fetus is realistically viable". There is no magical point during a pregnancy when the baby goes from non-living to living. The baby is alive, growing according to what amounts to a plan undirected by the mother, is genetically uniquely human, and is genetically unique from the mother.

2 I don't know if you've ever been a parent, but having been one I can guarantee that a baby left "on its own" on a floor surrounded by food, water, and blankets will not survive on its own.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 11, 2019, 10:36:44 pm



Actually...the "fetus" will be able to survive as soon as it grows... as soon as it is implanted in the mother's womb. If there is a problem...nature will expel it (miscarriage).

You didn't really say what you base this opinion on.  That's o.k....I have to go for the evening.



That's not necessarily the case. People are born with terrible medical conditions and birth defects all the time. Those, too, are problems.

I based that on the fact that Naturally the woman is the one who carries, births, and feeds the child.



1 So, how is a non-living fetus able to grow from a single cell to having limbs that move and internal organs that function when the placenta only passes oxygen and nutrition? The mother's body isn't directing that growth. Reality contradicts "When the fetus is realistically viable". There is no magical point during a pregnancy when the baby goes from non-living to living. The baby is alive, growing according to what amounts to a plan undirected by the mother, is genetically uniquely human, and is genetically unique from the mother.

2 I don't know if you've ever been a parent, but having been one I can guarantee that a baby left "on its own" on a floor surrounded by food, water, and blankets will not survive on its own.

If a woman gives birth in the woods to a baby at 16 weeks that's going to be called a miscarriage. It's not going to survive.

At 22 weeks your chances are 50/50 with extreme medical attention. Left alone, those are miscarriages too.

So, in the medical profession Doctors induce births when a woman is well past her 40 weeks. An abortion is an induced miscarriage.



The 'fetus' (you know that means baby in Latin, don't you?) is perfectly viable if you leave it alone.
 
Why? Does the old man get a say wrt support after the fact? No, he gets to pay his treasure for twenty years. Under coercion. So if it ain't a life, and is part of both the man and woman, how is it that she gets to decide his fortunes (not to mention the child's, of course).

It seems to me that if the man can be coerced for twenty years, the woman should be coerced the same. Or at least the paltry 9 months it would take to deliver the child to his father, and quit claim.

See above regarding viability.

Change's in child support laws are a different topic. See above above for my reasoning why the woman gets final say.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 11, 2019, 10:51:28 pm
See above regarding viability.

No, as I said, the child is perfectly viable if you leave it alone. In fact is it supremely viable for the environment it is in.

Quote
Change's in child support laws are a different topic. See above above for my reasoning why the woman gets final say.

No they are not. It is the very same thing. The root is the responsibility for the formation of a child. Legally the father is liable from the start. He cannot quit that liability.
Why isn't the woman equally liable?
Why can she act upon the father's liability and/or interests without his consent?
Why can she quit her own liability by murdering the child, but the father cannot?

Surely you can see the inequity in this, even if you can't see the inequity in the murder of the child.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 11, 2019, 10:55:19 pm
No, as I said, the child is perfectly viable if you leave it alone. In fact is it supremely viable for the environment it is in.

No they are not. It is the very same thing. The root is the responsibility for the formation of a child. Legally the father is liable from the start. He cannot quit that liability.
Why isn't the woman equally liable?
Why can she act upon the father's liability and/or interests without his consent?
Why can she quit her own liability by murdering the child, but the father cannot?

Surely you can see the inequity in this, even if you can't see the inequity in the murder of the child.

Being a live human being means breathing oxygen and a bunch of other internal processes outside of the womb. In the natural world.

If a fetus is not capable of that, I cannot say they are a live human being.

Okay, what if the woman wants to keep the child and the father wants the abortion? Who makes the final call?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 11, 2019, 11:11:50 pm
Being a live human being means breathing oxygen and a bunch of other internal processes outside of the womb. In the natural world.

No, being a human being is a matter of genetics. That child is a human being without question. A genetically unique individual human. If a pregnant mother is killed two murders are prosecuted. There is no question as to the definition.

As to whether the child is alive - it thinks, it emotes, it has motor control... It reacts to pain, it takes in sustenance and eliminates waste. It is every bit as alive, with more complexity and signature than the bacteria inhabiting the very same space - That bacterium, which you will no doubt recognize as being alive.

Quote
If a fetus is not capable of that, I cannot say they are a live human being.

There are creatures living in your body right now.

Quote
Okay, what if the woman wants to keep the child and the father wants the abortion? Who makes the final call?

Who indeed. A legitimate test would require a trial and a judgement. Even without the interest of the child. The two parents have an equal interest, and either both should be coerce-able, or both should be able to quit claim, or both should be able to do either.

Certainly it is not right that the woman decides alone.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: GtHawk on September 11, 2019, 11:24:25 pm
The one with a Social Security number.
Oh, so you would discriminate against illegals?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 11, 2019, 11:29:43 pm
Oh, so you would discriminate against illegals?

Oh SMACK!
 :beer:
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 11, 2019, 11:48:18 pm
This is really really simple. There is no creating life. THE LIFE IS ALREADY THERE. There is only the continuation of life. If the egg is alive and the sperm is alive and they unite all that happens is a new human being is started at conception. Any disruption of that process, after conception, by unnatural causes, like abortion, is MURDER. Murder of a human being.

If the woman chooses to end a pregnancy she is a murderer. Capital murder.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 11, 2019, 11:52:51 pm
No, being a human being is a matter of genetics. That child is a human being without question. A genetically unique individual human. If a pregnant mother is killed two murders are prosecuted. There is no question as to the definition.

As to whether the child is alive - it thinks, it emotes, it has motor control... It reacts to pain, it takes in sustenance and eliminates waste. It is every bit as alive, with more complexity and signature than the bacteria inhabiting the very same space - That bacterium, which you will no doubt recognize as being alive.

There are creatures living in your body right now.

Who indeed. A legitimate test would require a trial and a judgement. Even without the interest of the child. The two parents have an equal interest, and either both should be coerce-able, or both should be able to quit claim, or both should be able to do either.

Certainly it is not right that the woman decides alone.

Viability is the true test.

92% of abortions occur in the first 13 weeks. A fetus at the stage would never survive in the natural world. Which is to be it's environment.

I never said a woman decides alone. But she certainly has the final call. She's the one that has to show up or not show up to the procedure.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 11, 2019, 11:54:36 pm
This is really really simple. There is no creating life. THE LIFE IS ALREADY THERE. There is only the continuation of life. If the egg is alive and the sperm is alive and they unite all that happens is a new human being is started at conception. Any disruption of that process, after conception, by unnatural causes, like abortion, is MURDER. Murder of a human being.

If the woman chooses to end a pregnancy she is a murderer. Capital murder.

Would she be charged with manslaughter is she does it w/o prior knowledge? Maybe she miscarries due to heavy drinking and smoking or other drug use. Is that manslaughter?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 11, 2019, 11:56:14 pm
Viability is the true test.

92% of abortions occur in the first 13 weeks. A fetus at the stage would never survive in the natural world. Which is to be it's environment.

I never said a woman decides alone. But she certainly has the final call. She's the one that has to show up or not show up to the procedure.

Quote
is to be

BANG!

A human being "at that stage" is surviving in the natural world.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 12, 2019, 12:00:57 am
BANG!

A human being "at that stage" is surviving in the natural world.
But not on it's own. It's not a viable life. It can't survive independent of the mother. A baby can.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 12, 2019, 12:09:02 am
But not on it's own. It's not a viable life. It can't survive independent of the mother. A baby can.

uh huh

There are tens, if not hundreds of MILLIONS of adult people in this country who couldn't survive on their own in the natural world.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 12, 2019, 12:11:17 am
uh huh

There are tens, if not hundreds of MILLIONS of adult people in this country who couldn't survive on their own in the natural world.

What do you mean?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 12, 2019, 12:23:43 am
Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you.

Jeremiah 1:5
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Wingnut on September 12, 2019, 12:24:14 am
What do you mean?
He means humans eat more banana's than monkeys... but he has never seen a human eat a monkey.

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 12, 2019, 12:27:07 am
And the answer should be:  every woman must have the right to decide for herself, on the basis of her own conscience informed by her experience,  her faith and those who love and support her.

The woman already made a decision.  The result of that decision led to a new life being created.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 12, 2019, 12:28:27 am
What do you mean?

Most people, especially those raised in urban environments, are taught no survival skills. Take them from that unnatural environment and drop them into their natural environment and they will probably die without the aid of someone who does have survival skills. They aren't "viable" in the natural world.

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 12, 2019, 12:29:31 am
He means humans eat more banana's than monkeys... but he has never seen a human eat a monkey.

Does rat on a stick count?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: skeeter on September 12, 2019, 12:30:53 am
But not on it's own. It's not a viable life. It can't survive independent of the mother. A baby can.

Huh? No it can’t.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 12, 2019, 12:33:11 am
Most people, especially those raised in urban environments, are taught no survival skills. Take them from that unnatural environment and drop them into their natural environment and they will probably die without the aid of someone who does have survival skills. They aren't "viable" in the natural world.



I see you're being disingenuous in your response. I suppose that means you concede that 13 week old fetus is not viable.

The woman already made a decision.  The result of that decision led to a new life being created.

Obvious follow-up: What about in cases of rape?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 12, 2019, 12:34:41 am
Huh? No it can’t.
Yes, it can. Of course it's an infant, and an adult has to care for it. But it does not depend on the mother to survive.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 12, 2019, 12:36:03 am
I see you're being disingenuous in your response. I suppose that means you concede that 13 week old fetus is not viable.

Obvious follow-up: What about in cases of rape?

It is viable because it is in its natural environment.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 12, 2019, 12:40:23 am
Personally,  I believe that life begins at conception.  But that's not the issue.  The issue is whether the State should impose my moral view on others at the point of a gun.

And my answer is - of course not.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sanguine on September 12, 2019, 12:43:53 am
Personally,  I believe that life begins at conception.  But that's not the issue.  The issue is whether the State should impose my moral view on others at the point of a gun.

And my answer is - of course not.

Wait - we impose our moral view on murderers.  We impose our views on child abusers, burglars and arsonists.  But, when it comes to killing babies we shouldn't? 
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 12, 2019, 12:48:25 am
Viability is the true test.

So who gets to decide what is viable?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 12, 2019, 12:50:04 am
Wait - we impose our moral view on murderers.  We impose our views on child abusers, burglars and arsonists.  But, when it comes to killing babies we shouldn't?

Correct.  At least not before the fetus is viable. 
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 12, 2019, 12:50:19 am
Personally,  I believe that life begins at conception.  But that's not the issue.  The issue is whether the State should impose my moral view on others at the point of a gun.

And my answer is - of course not.

Is it a moral view or a biological imperative?

The State is imposing a moral view on others at the point of a knife.

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 12, 2019, 12:51:21 am
Obvious follow-up: What about in cases of rape?

I'm simply not seeing how a woman being raped justifies a woman who wasn't raped to kill her child.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: skeeter on September 12, 2019, 12:51:38 am
Yes, it can. Of course it's an infant, and an adult has to care for it. But it does not depend on the mother to survive.

Ok. Then can THAT adult kill it?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 12, 2019, 12:54:30 am
Personally,  I believe that life begins at conception.  But that's not the issue.  The issue is whether the State should impose my moral view on others at the point of a gun.

And my answer is - of course not.

Yet you advocate exactly that.  You unequivocally deny the right of the people of each State to formulate their own laws under Amendment X of the Constitution of the United States of America, supporting instead the tyranny of the court (the de facto 'state') to impose its will on an entire nation.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 12, 2019, 01:02:28 am
Someone try to out stupid this>

You take a live viable sperm and a live viable egg. Unite them and they form a nonviable--life?

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sanguine on September 12, 2019, 01:03:58 am
Correct.  At least not before the fetus is viable.

We've already debunked the viability argument.  Maybe you skimmed over that?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 12, 2019, 01:24:40 am
Someone try to out stupid this>

You take a live viable sperm and a live viable egg. Unite them and they form a nonviable--life?

You take a viable egg and some good viable flour and you don't get a viable cake. It has get cooked in the oven.

If you take it out too soon, it's no good.

Same logic applies.

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 12, 2019, 01:28:19 am
You take a viable egg and some good viable flour and you don't get a viable cake. It has get cooked in the oven.

If you take it out too soon, it's no good.

Same logic applies.

So the lesson here is to leave it in the oven until it's done.  Got it.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 12, 2019, 01:30:20 am
So the lesson here is to leave it in the oven until it's done.  Got it.

Or take it out if you don't want it
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 12, 2019, 01:31:32 am
Or take it out if you don't want it

Why would someone put it in the oven if they didn't want it?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 12, 2019, 01:33:35 am
Why would someone put it in the oven if they didn't want it?

Why do people do anything?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 12, 2019, 01:37:09 am
Why do people want a voice in the moral shaping of their society?  Or even more importantly, why do other people seek to deny those people that voice?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 12, 2019, 02:09:45 am
Why do people do anything?

Because their Rice Krispies told them to.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 12, 2019, 02:12:41 am
Viability is the true test.

92% of abortions occur in the first 13 weeks. A fetus at the stage would never survive in the natural world. Which is to be it's environment.

Again you dissemble - The child is in the natural world.

Quote
I never said a woman decides alone. But she certainly has the final call. She's the one that has to show up or not show up to the procedure.

Again a poor excuse to justify a great injustice.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: jafo2010 on September 12, 2019, 02:15:33 am
7 of 9 people on the Supreme Court, people NOT ELECTED, decided the fatal fate of 60+ million of the most innocent, defenseless humans in America.

The USA has been practicing genocide for 47 years and counting. 

If a national referendum were conducted today, 47 years after the decision by the Supreme Court, the majority of people in America would say NO to abortion.  So why are we allowing this genocide to continue?

Most Americans resent anything that has to do with the USSR/now Russia, and yet with the current policies we become more like them every day.  Abortion in Russia is the primary means for birth control.  MY wife, a physician from Russia knows one woman that had 34 abortions in her lifetime.  The people cannot afford the methodologies we take for granted here in the USA i.e. condoms, etc.

The folks that support abortion, the very last thing they would ever want to happen is a referendum on the subject.  But if politicians are not going to end this nightmare, then it is time for people to demand a referendum on the matter.

My own mother, ended up being a hypocrite on the subject.  She was vehemently against abortion.  My sister gets pregnant to a guy that as it turned out had two other women pregnant within the prior year who gave birth to both kids.  She was planning to marry the guy, and when she found this out, she had an abortion. After that, my mother never said another word on abortion, and believe me, she was extremely vocal before, and condemning of all seeking abortion.  After my sister had her abortion, crickets for the rest of her life on the subject.

Abortion is genocide.  There is no argument to defend it with possibly one exception, when the life of the mother is in danger.  And that is a relatively small number versus the numbers that seek it now.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 12, 2019, 02:16:03 am
What do you mean?

Come on out here to Montana for a couple of weeks, and lets see how you survive in the natural world.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 12, 2019, 02:18:51 am
Wait - we impose our moral view on murderers.  We impose our views on child abusers, burglars and arsonists.  But, when it comes to killing babies we shouldn't?

How weird is that?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 12, 2019, 02:23:28 am
How weird is that?

Right.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 12, 2019, 02:23:43 am
Why would someone put it in the oven if they didn't want it?

And there's the truth of it, right there.

It has nothing to do with viability arguments, or women's rights, or anything else - It has to do with a continuance of meaningless humping without accountability.

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sanguine on September 12, 2019, 02:32:17 am
How weird is that?

Totally weird.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: IsailedawayfromFR on September 12, 2019, 10:39:29 am
Would I believe that life begins at conception? No.
That does not answer the question now, does it?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 12, 2019, 12:21:19 pm
7 of 9 people on the Supreme Court, people NOT ELECTED, decided the fatal fate of 60+ million of the most innocent, defenseless humans in America.

The USA has been practicing genocide for 47 years and counting. 


Defenseless against whom?   What you describe as "genocide" is just the sum total of 60 million women exercising their liberties.  Or are you prepared to send them all to jail as murderers?   

There is no easy solution here.   The hard task is to persuade women in crisis that abortion is not the answer.   It's hard because it involves a different sort of effort than demanding the state criminalize a woman's choice to have kids when she's able and not when she's not.   
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 12, 2019, 01:50:22 pm
demanding the state criminalize a woman's choice to have kids when she's able and not when she's not.   

Nonsense. No such choice exists for men.

The real problem is that the minute women are treated like men with regard to accountability, the free and easy humping is over.

The whole and entire myth of women's 'sexual freedom' is built upon the bloody bodies of millions upon millions of children.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bilo on September 12, 2019, 01:53:08 pm
Torah is a sharp sword.

Amen!

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: mystery-ak on September 12, 2019, 01:55:58 pm
Peter Buttigieg Loves God’s Creation When It’s A Rainbow But Not When It’s A Baby
https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/12/peter-buttigieg-loves-gods-creation-rainbow-not-baby/
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 12, 2019, 01:58:12 pm
And there's the truth of it, right there.
It has nothing to do with viability arguments, or women's rights, or anything else - It has to do with a continuance of meaningless humping without accountability.

B-I-N-G-O.  It is quite telling to see male posters here as abortion's biggest advocates.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 12, 2019, 02:03:15 pm
It's hard because it involves a different sort of effort than demanding the state criminalize a woman's choice to have kids when she's able and not when she's not.   

No one is demanding that the state criminalize a woman's choice to have kids.  No one.  Women already have control over their bodies.  If they don't want to create a new singular life, then they should exercise that control accordingly.  I refuse to buy in to the argument that women are helpless victims here.  They are not.  Far from it.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bilo on September 12, 2019, 02:05:41 pm
I find it interesting that Buttgieg claims Scriptural support for abortion, but all the pro abortion posters can't post verses of Scripture to back up their position. I've long believed you won't find real believers (whether they be Christian or Jew) in the pro abortion crowd.

The point being that the leftists know they have to discredit belief in God because absolute truth found in Scripture refutes their beliefs.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 12, 2019, 02:19:20 pm
I find it interesting that Buttgieg claims Scriptural support for abortion, but all the pro abortion posters can't post verses of Scripture to back up their position. I've long believed you won't find real believers (whether they be Christian or Jew) in the pro abortion crowd.

Who here is pro-abortion?   Defending a woman's Constitutional liberty is not the same as being "pro-abortion".   Liberty means it is up to the individual to decide.   Many women exercise their liberty by continuing with an unplanned pregnancy.  For many,  they reason they do is their religious faith. 

Persuasion, not coercion, is the answer. 
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 12, 2019, 02:23:39 pm
I find it interesting that Buttgieg claims Scriptural support for abortion, but all the pro abortion posters can't post verses of Scripture to back up their position. I've long believed you won't find real believers (whether they be Christian or Jew) in the pro abortion crowd.

The point being that the leftists know they have to discredit belief in God because absolute truth found in Scripture refutes their beliefs.

Absolutely right. The only defense I have seen is YHWH breathing life into Adam...

In the first place, that process seems to be entirely different from birth, so it does not apply. In the second place, the breath of life is not necessarily breath in the conventional sense - Many things live that have no breath at all. So I fail to see how the passage definitively supports the idea that life begins with breath.

Word-wrangling. I so cannot stand verse-slingers.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 12, 2019, 02:25:19 pm
Who here is pro-abortion?   Defending a woman's Constitutional liberty is not the same as being "pro-abortion".   Liberty means it is up to the individual to decide.   Many women exercise their liberty by continuing with an unplanned pregnancy.  For many,  they reason they do is their religious faith. 

Persuasion, not coercion, is the answer.

No.
Liberty has responsibilities
Freedom has consequences.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 12, 2019, 02:29:33 pm
Nonsense. No such choice exists for men.

The real problem is that the minute women are treated like men with regard to accountability, the free and easy humping is over.

The whole and entire myth of women's 'sexual freedom' is built upon the bloody bodies of millions upon millions of children.

@roamer_1 you have to remember Jazzy believes that it's always the mans fault a woman gets pregnant...and a woman in his view has no self control or obligation to keep their legs closed.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 12, 2019, 02:31:22 pm
Buttigieg is right.  Abortion is a moral question upon which reasonable, moral minds will differ.   The question is who has the right to make that decision.

And the answer should be:  every woman must have the right to decide for herself, on the basis of her own conscience informed by her experience,  her faith and those who love and support her.

It is not a decision to be compelled by government.

Amazing how easily...based on your favorite liberal cause...you shift from saying that only the judiciary can make a decision on our rights to railing against an overreaching judiciary.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 12, 2019, 02:33:12 pm
If life begins with breath...how does Mayor Pete explain a baby's heartbeat while in the womb...the full development of a baby while in the womb.

If life begins with breath...there's no way a baby could every form and be born.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 12, 2019, 02:35:40 pm
@roamer_1 you have to remember Jazzy believes that it's always the mans fault a woman gets pregnant...and a woman in his view has no self control or obligation to keep their legs closed.

@txradioguy
Likewise the cackling hags of feminism...
'Reproductive rights' my a$$.

If men and women are truly equal, then 'reproductive accountability' would reflect it... And would not be at the heart-wrenching expense of a mountain of slaughtered children.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 12, 2019, 02:37:32 pm
Who here is pro-abortion?   Defending a woman's Constitutional liberty is not the same as being "pro-abortion".

Constitutional liberty?  This ought to be good.  Where exactly in the Constitution can I find this 'liberty to kill the unborn'?

As for "pro-abortion", anyone who argues that "abortion must remain legal" without regard to the Constitution is most certainly "pro-abortion".  Likewise, anyone denying the right of the people of each State to establish their own laws under Amendment X in order for abortion to remain 'legal' is not only "pro-abortion", but is also "pro-tyranny".
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 12, 2019, 02:42:56 pm
@txradioguy
Likewise the cackling hags of feminism...
'Reproductive rights' my a$$.

If men and women are truly equal, then 'reproductive accountability' would reflect it... And would not be at the heart-wrenching expense of a mountain of slaughtered children.

Couldn't have said it better myself.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 12, 2019, 02:44:01 pm
Constitutional liberty?  This ought to be good.  Where exactly in the Constitution can I find this 'liberty to kill the unborn'?

As for "pro-abortion", anyone who argues that "abortion must remain legal" without regard to the Constitution is most certainly "pro-abortion".  Likewise, anyone denying the right of the people of each State to establish their own laws under Amendment X in order for abortion to remain 'legal' is not only "pro-abortion", but is also "pro-tyranny".

Even the Clerk for Justice Blackmun that actually wrote the majority opinion in what became Roe v Wade says the decision had nothing to do with the Constitution.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: XenaLee on September 12, 2019, 02:52:43 pm
Come on out here to Montana for a couple of weeks, and lets see how you survive in the natural world.

Montana is great.   I once hiked up a mountain there (Missoula area) 2 miles steep uphill, to a pristine trout-hungry lake.   It was beautiful!   The trout would hit a bare hook they were so starved.  If I ever had to move from Texas, that's where I'd probably go.  (sorry for the derail... I just had to)
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 12, 2019, 02:56:27 pm
I once hiked up a mountain there (Missoula area) 2 miles steep uphill, to a pristine trout-hungry lake.   It was beautiful!   The trout would hit a bare hook they were so starved.

Had that same experience in Wyoming.  Not many fishermen are willing to venture above the tree line.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: XenaLee on September 12, 2019, 03:02:52 pm
Had that same experience in Wyoming.  Not many fishermen are willing to venture above the tree line.

It was a tough climb, but in the end, it was well worth it.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 12, 2019, 03:09:01 pm
Montana is great.   I once hiked up a mountain there (Missoula area) 2 miles steep uphill, to a pristine trout-hungry lake.   It was beautiful!   The trout would hit a bare hook they were so starved.  If I ever had to move from Texas, that's where I'd probably go.  (sorry for the derail... I just had to)

You ain't seen nothin yet, darlin. It's God's own country, but the truly spectacular can only be seen with a week or two to kill... Hiking or horses... Or snowshoe in to a high mountain lake, hot-tenting in below zero conditions... So beautiful... So crisp and pristine it makes your heart hurt.

There's a hanging valley I know... Only one way in... massive walls reaching to the sky on three sides... A creek runs through a twenty acre meadow to a little puddle of a lake... Deep, crystal blue, clean and clear to the bottom... full of pan-size brookies.

It is very literally the best place on earth... Other than it takes two days to get there, and most of it nearly rock climbing... Which may partly be why, once I get there, I don't want to leave.  happy77

 :beer:
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: XenaLee on September 12, 2019, 03:24:10 pm
You ain't seen nothin yet, darlin. It's God's own country, but the truly spectacular can only be seen with a week or two to kill... Hiking or horses... Or snowshoe in to a high mountain lake, hot-tenting in below zero conditions... So beautiful... So crisp and pristine it makes your heart hurt.

There's a hanging valley I know... Only one way in... massive walls reaching to the sky on three sides... A creek runs through a twenty acre meadow to a little puddle of a lake... Deep, crystal blue, clean and clear to the bottom... full of pan-size brookies.

It is very literally the best place on earth... Other than it takes two days to get there, and most of it nearly rock climbing... Which may partly be why, once I get there, I don't want to leave.  happy77

 :beer:

The scenery is spectacular there.  My hike was in the dead of summer, btw.  No cold or snow at all, which I detest.  Got enough snow to last a lifetime in Norfolk, Virginia.   I love horses, but don't think the hike I/we made would have been good for them.   Love, love, love fresh water fishing.  Ah.... nice dream, roamer.   Hike to heaven and get to stay....lol.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 12, 2019, 03:27:43 pm
You ain't seen nothin yet, darlin. It's God's own country, but the truly spectacular can only be seen with a week or two to kill... Hiking or horses... Or snowshoe in to a high mountain lake, hot-tenting in below zero conditions... So beautiful... So crisp and pristine it makes your heart hurt.

There's a hanging valley I know... Only one way in... massive walls reaching to the sky on three sides... A creek runs through a twenty acre meadow to a little puddle of a lake... Deep, crystal blue, clean and clear to the bottom... full of pan-size brookies.

It is very literally the best place on earth... Other than it takes two days to get there, and most of it nearly rock climbing... Which may partly be why, once I get there, I don't want to leave.  happy77

 :beer:

That's poetry, @roamer_1 .   Thanks for the description.   
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: aligncare on September 12, 2019, 03:30:19 pm
I wonder how many women who have considered abortion at a point late in her pregnancy because she recently lost her job, or her husband died and she’s in a critical financial situation, or in the interim got a new job that demands lots of travel and time away from home—whatever her reasons; how many have earlier in the pregnancy chosen a name for their gestating baby?

My point is, she knew fully her baby was a brand new life and not some anonymous tissue mass, some non-person that she can just dispose as they were about to be born.

For this person, “choice” is just code for “rationalization” of murder.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 12, 2019, 03:40:48 pm
Ah.... nice dream, roamer.   Hike to heaven and get to stay....lol.

I'll go dig around in the couch and see if I cain't raise up a bus ticket for ya.  :beer:
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 12, 2019, 03:41:35 pm
That's poetry, @roamer_1 .   Thanks for the description.

 :beer: :seeya:
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: XenaLee on September 12, 2019, 03:46:18 pm
I'll go dig around in the couch and see if I cain't raise up a bus ticket for ya.  :beer:

Lol!
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 12, 2019, 03:55:14 pm
I wonder how many women who have considered abortion at a point late in her pregnancy because she recently lost her job, or her husband died and she’s in a critical financial situation, or in the interim got a new job that demands lots of travel and time away from home—whatever her reasons; how many have earlier in the pregnancy chosen a name for their gestating baby?

My point is, she knew fully her baby was a brand new life and not some anonymous tissue mass, some non-person that she can just dispose as they were about to be born.

For this person, “choice” is just code for “rationalization” of murder.

Literally always the case.
Every child is a gift from God.
In my experience they never come at the right time.
You never know how the hell to make the ends meet.
But somehow, they always do.

I know a little gal right now... maybe thirty... got raped a while back.
She's got nothin. She lives in a shitty ol motor home on borrowed land, getting shore power from a shop my buddy owns. She makes do this way and that - my buddy has her answering phones at the shop to help her get along.
But her baby girl... That precious girl that rape gave her... She's the light of her life. Bright and lively, cute as a bug. Just the best.

Ain't it funny how that worked out.
And that is the truth of it. That is why I find abortion to be such a scourge. The 'easy' way in what looks like a dark time of trouble destroys the coming blessing a young girl can't yet see. And what a penultimate blessing it is.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: XenaLee on September 12, 2019, 04:16:31 pm
Literally always the case.
Every child is a gift from God.
In my experience they never come at the right time.
You never know how the hell to make the ends meet.
But somehow, they always do.

I know a little gal right now... maybe thirty... got raped a while back.
She's got nothin. She lives in a shitty ol motor home on borrowed land, getting shore power from a shop my buddy owns. She makes do this way and that - my buddy has her answering phones at the shop to help her get along.
But her baby girl... That precious girl that rape gave her... She's the light of her life. Bright and lively, cute as a bug. Just the best.

Ain't it funny how that worked out.
And that is the truth of it. That is why I find abortion to be such a scourge. The 'easy' way in what looks like a dark time of trouble destroys the coming blessing a young girl can't yet see. And what a penultimate blessing it is.

Most of the folks that have abortions (multiple) probably don't really believe in "blessings", much less in God.   If they did they'd be afraid to have an abortion re: God's judgment and wrath. 

I have a friend, like a sister, that had two abortions in her college years.   She regrets it now, and is a Christian now (only pretended to be previously), but all she can do is ask for forgiveness and hope it is given.  If your Christian faith is strong, you would never have an abortion.   What's alarming is how many non-Christians (much less anti-Christians) there are in America now.  Fundamental transformation, indeed.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bilo on September 12, 2019, 04:41:15 pm
Absolutely right. The only defense I have seen is YHWH breathing life into Adam...

In the first place, that process seems to be entirely different from birth, so it does not apply. In the second place, the breath of life is not necessarily breath in the conventional sense - Many things live that have no breath at all. So I fail to see how the passage definitively supports the idea that life begins with breath.

Word-wrangling. I so cannot stand verse-slingers.

Great points. Also, for serious believers we understand that Scripture interprets Scripture. IOW, Scripture is consistent. If an interpretation of one verse is is in conflict with numerous other verses there is something wrong with the interpretation of the one verse.   
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 12, 2019, 04:42:57 pm
Most of the folks that have abortions (multiple) probably don't really believe in "blessings", much less in God.   If they did they'd be afraid to have an abortion re: God's judgment and wrath. 

I have a friend, like a sister, that had two abortions in her college years.   She regrets it now, and is a Christian now (only pretended to be previously), but all she can do is ask for forgiveness and hope it is given.  If your Christian faith is strong, you would never have an abortion.   What's alarming is how many non-Christians (much less anti-Christians) there are in America now.  Fundamental transformation, indeed.

Being a product of my brilliantly misspent yoot, I have the pleasure of knowing a few gals who were likewise... And while it ain't really the sort of thing women talk to to men, I have witnessed similar confessions. The regret that haunts those women... After they actually have children, and wonder about the faces of the ones they 'rejected'... That is another deep and scarring aspect that no one ever talks about... The aftermath.

As to Christian strength preventing it - SO very many get sucked into the bottomless pit of party life. I was a stalwart and paladin before my faith was tested - Tested by honkytonks and hoochie-mammas... Drinkin, and lovin, and fightin, and carryin on... And oh, how I failed that test. I blowed that up real good.

So I have no stones to throw.

And I expect, just as my walk down that road has made me a powerful witness against it, those recovered party gals have a similar tale to tell. And nothing in the world gives you faith like knowing what the difference is, by experience. May God bless em, every one, and forgive em, like he has me.

That's all I got.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 12, 2019, 04:57:23 pm
Great points. Also, for serious believers we understand that Scripture interprets Scripture. IOW, Scripture is consistent. If an interpretation of one verse is is in conflict with numerous other verses there is something wrong with the interpretation of the one verse.

@bilo
That's right - More than consistent. Interlocked. Critical path with guardrails and backstops.

As an aside, and as one who comes from the position of textual criticism, That Book simply amazes me in its construction. For nigh on thirty years I have been reading it over and over, and every time, there's another layer to peel back... You find something that seems out of place, and it makes you dig deeper... to yet another discovery, and another reference, and another layer... Over and over, every which way... It is simply an astonishment. I have never seen anything to compare.

And that construction - the framework, the hyperlinks (since ancient days), the coding, the Hebrew puns, heck, even the names and placenames... More that anything else, that construction and composition convinced me that no mere man inspired it.

A marvelous work. A miracle.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: XenaLee on September 12, 2019, 05:08:43 pm
Being a product of my brilliantly misspent yoot, I have the pleasure of knowing a few gals who were likewise... And while it ain't really the sort of thing women talk to to men, I have witnessed similar confessions. The regret that haunts those women... After they actually have children, and wonder about the faces of the ones they 'rejected'... That is another deep and scarring aspect that no one ever talks about... The aftermath.

As to Christian strength preventing it - SO very many get sucked into the bottomless pit of party life. I was a stalwart and paladin before my faith was tested - Tested by honkytonks and hoochie-mammas... Drinkin, and lovin, and fightin, and carryin on... And oh, how I failed that test. I blowed that up real good.

So I have no stones to throw.

And I expect, just as my walk down that road has made me a powerful witness against it, those recovered party gals have a similar tale to tell. And nothing in the world gives you faith like knowing what the difference is, by experience. May God bless em, every one, and forgive em, like he has me.

That's all I got.

Exactly.   We all were much more "liberal" (I really hate that word now) in our youth.  But with age comes experience and wisdom, if you're lucky and if you're not a stuckonstupid leftie Democrat.   888mouth

 :amen:   :beer: 
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 12, 2019, 05:12:29 pm
Exactly.   We all were much more "liberal" (I really hate that word now) in our youth.  But with age comes experience and wisdom, if you're lucky and if you're not a stuckonstupid leftie Democrat.   888mouth

 :amen:   :beer:

That's right.
 :beer:
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 12, 2019, 07:05:56 pm
For the pro-life crowd...what then of the children once they're born?

What happens if the parents are poor, unable to maintain a livelihood and living off the government?

Should we bolster our SNAP and Low-income programs to assure them a better life?

Should we increase investments in education and after-care so that, hopefully, the children don't repeat the same mistakes as their parents?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Wingnut on September 12, 2019, 07:11:32 pm
For the pro-life crowd...what then of the children once they're born?

What happens if the parents are poor, unable to maintain a livelihood and living off the government?

Should we bolster our SNAP and Low-income programs to assure them a better life?

Should we increase investments in education and after-care so that, hopefully, the children don't repeat the same mistakes as their parents?

Are you of the mind that we should make some slight provision for the Poor and Destitute, who suffer greatly at the present time. Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are in want of common comforts?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: IsailedawayfromFR on September 12, 2019, 07:21:52 pm
For the pro-life crowd...what then of the children once they're born?

What happens if the parents are poor, unable to maintain a livelihood and living off the government?

Should we bolster our SNAP and Low-income programs to assure them a better life?

Should we increase investments in education and after-care so that, hopefully, the children don't repeat the same mistakes as their parents?
If they are born into this country as citizens, they have every opportunity any of us had when we were born.

Only the truly gutless or ignorant believe otherwise.

I believe you and Sanger share a common belief.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 12, 2019, 07:40:02 pm
For the pro-life crowd...what then of the children once they're born?

What happens if the parents are poor, unable to maintain a livelihood and living off the government?

Should we bolster our SNAP and Low-income programs to assure them a better life?

Should we increase investments in education and after-care so that, hopefully, the children don't repeat the same mistakes as their parents?

What works is marriage.

Income has little to do with 'better life'

Marriage was the norm before the rampant sexual revolution spawned millions of SNAP sucking single parent households full of bastard children. Endorse marriage and SNAP will go down.

And again, the repeated mistake is in the party mentality that society endorses via the idea of rampant sex being normal. Endorse marriage. Insist. You get more of what you endorse. And mistakes will go down. Also make divorce way harder to do. The vow is life long, and commitment is a priority.

As to the equity of that, like we talked about earlier, both the man, and the woman are equally committed within wedlock, and the child in an unbroken home has a far greater chance of a good raising. Far better than any other.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sanguine on September 12, 2019, 08:53:37 pm
If they are born into this country as citizens, they have every opportunity any of us had when we were born.

Only the truly gutless or ignorant believe otherwise.

I believe you and Sanger share a common belief.

And, remember, those who are "poor" in this country would be rich in most of the world. 

That's a BS argument.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 12, 2019, 09:00:16 pm
For the pro-life crowd...what then of the children once they're born?

What happens if the parents are poor, unable to maintain a livelihood and living off the government?

Should we bolster our SNAP and Low-income programs to assure them a better life?

Should we increase investments in education and after-care so that, hopefully, the children don't repeat the same mistakes as their parents?

Your post made Margaret Sanger smile.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 12, 2019, 11:22:18 pm
I want you all to know if need be I will dig in my couch cushions for bus fare, too. So you can go see @roamer_1.

Cause there ain't nothing to see here. There ain't nothing to do. No, you can't see the Grand Tetons from my house. You have to drive 10 miles north. Don't know nothing about marriage, sexual relationships, kids, grandkids because I have only been married once for 33 years and only had sex with that one person. Only had two kids and coming on four grandkids.

Don't know nothing about survival, hunting, fishing, especially fishing. Or building anything.

(https://i.imgur.com/34YMPIn.jpg)

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bilo on September 12, 2019, 11:57:54 pm
@bilo
That's right - More than consistent. Interlocked. Critical path with guardrails and backstops.

As an aside, and as one who comes from the position of textual criticism, That Book simply amazes me in its construction. For nigh on thirty years I have been reading it over and over, and every time, there's another layer to peel back... You find something that seems out of place, and it makes you dig deeper... to yet another discovery, and another reference, and another layer... Over and over, every which way... It is simply an astonishment. I have never seen anything to compare.
[/b]
And that construction - the framework, the hyperlinks (since ancient days), the coding, the Hebrew puns, heck, even the names and placenames... More that anything else, that construction and composition convinced me that no mere man inspired it.

A marvelous work. A miracle.

 :amen:

I share the same experience as you.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 13, 2019, 12:04:35 am
I want you all to know if need be I will dig in my couch cushions for bus fare, too. So you can go see @roamer_1.

Cause there ain't nothing to see here. There ain't nothing to do. No, you can't see the Grand Tetons from my house. You have to drive 10 miles north. Don't know nothing about marriage, sexual relationships, kids, grandkids because I have only been married once for 33 years and only had sex with that one person. Only had two kids and coming on four grandkids.

Don't know nothing about survival, hunting, fishing, especially fishing. Or building anything.

(https://i.imgur.com/34YMPIn.jpg)

Well, @bigheadfred All I can say is you should try harder next time.  :beer:

Nice lookin fish - Who'd ya buy that from?

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Smokin Joe on September 13, 2019, 06:02:19 am
Buttigieg is right.  Abortion is a moral question upon which reasonable, moral minds will differ.   The question is who has the right to make that decision.

And the answer should be:  every woman must have the right to decide for herself, on the basis of her own conscience informed by her experience,  her faith and those who love and support her.

It is not a decision to be compelled by government.
I'm just going to ignore your nonsense today. Really.  888mouth
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Smokin Joe on September 13, 2019, 06:10:13 am
Would I believe that life begins at conception? No.
At that point there is a developing human with unique DNA. It may not be recognizable yet, but then, it's appearance will change throughout its life, should it live an ordinary lifespan. But it is unique, and inarguably human.

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: InHeavenThereIsNoBeer on September 13, 2019, 07:33:45 am
For the pro-life crowd...what then of the children once they're born?

What happens if the parents are poor, unable to maintain a livelihood and living off the government?

Should we bolster our SNAP and Low-income programs to assure them a better life?

Should we increase investments in education and after-care so that, hopefully, the children don't repeat the same mistakes as their parents?

No, @Dexter, we should not.  If we did, they'd "grow up" thinking that govt was the answer to all problems, and honestly, we've got too f'king many lawyers as it is.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 13, 2019, 12:04:31 pm
I'm just going to ignore your nonsense today. Really.  888mouth

Got it.   Can't have any of that "individual liberty" nonsense.   The government knows best.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 13, 2019, 12:17:27 pm
Got it.   Can't have any of that "individual liberty" nonsense.   The government knows best.

Right. No need to be responsible, either.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 13, 2019, 12:24:52 pm
Right. No need to be responsible, either.

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.   
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 13, 2019, 12:30:27 pm
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.

I know it can be seen as such. I want the government out of a large portion of the people's business. Since we all know that isn't going to happen, I can only hope that eventually, we will learn how to become a civilized society.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: XenaLee on September 13, 2019, 12:34:11 pm
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.

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)
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 13, 2019, 04:35:13 pm
Got it.   Can't have any of that "individual liberty" nonsense.   The government knows best.

Considering how much government interference you want in other aspects of our lives...you step on a rake every time you try to champion "individual liberty".  You should just take a seat on ever mentioning that as something you support.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 13, 2019, 04:36:18 pm
Right. No need to be responsible, either.

According to some of Jazz's previous scoldings of us..it's never the woman's fault.  She's not responsible for keeping her legs closed.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: XenaLee on September 13, 2019, 04:36:31 pm
Considering how much government interference you want in other aspects of our lives...you step on a rake every time you try to champion "individual liberty".  You should just take a seat on ever mentioning that as something you support.

Should, but won't. 
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 13, 2019, 04:38:05 pm
According to some of Jazz's previous scoldings of us..it's never the woman's fault.  She's not responsible for keeping her legs closed.

Well, to be fair, some ARE naturally bow-legged...  :whistle:
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 13, 2019, 05:45:20 pm
That's a non-sequitur.  Are you saying that government's role is to enforce sexual ethics?

The role of government (by the people and for the people) is to do what the people want within the confines of the Constitution.  And the people of Georgia want abortion regulated in Georgia once a heartbeat is detected.


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.

The role of government that you support is one where the federal judiciary reaches beyond the confines of the Constitution and exacts its version of tyranny against the people of Georgia, Alabama, etc.  It is YOU that demands the power of the state to prohibit the people from enjoying the Constitutional liberties delegated within.  So keep that in mind the next time you use the word 'liberty', because it is YOU that demands my liberty - my right as a Georgia citizen to shape the society in which live through the action of my representative legislature as enumerated in the Bill of rights - to be denied.

Let's be clear who the tyrant here is.  I am willing to live by what my fellow society members choose in regard to the laws my State enacts.  And you clearly are not.  Even further, you don't even live in this State, yet you are willing to use the power of the state (i.e. the federal judiciary) to impose your will on other States.  Tyranny.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: skeeter on September 13, 2019, 05:52:26 pm
The role of government (by the people and for the people) is to do what the people want within the confines of the Constitution.  And the people of Georgia want abortion regulated in Georgia once a heartbeat is detected.


The role of government that you support is one where the federal judiciary reaches beyond the confines of the Constitution and exacts its version of tyranny against the people of Georgia, Alabama, etc.  It is YOU that demands the power of the state to prohibit the people from enjoying the Constitutional liberties delegated within.  So keep that in mind the next time you use the word 'liberty', because it is YOU that demands my liberty - my right as a Georgia citizen to shape the society in which live through the action of my representative legislature as enumerated in the Bill of rights - to be denied.

Let's be clear who the tyrant here is.  I am willing to live by what my fellow society members choose in regard to the laws my State enacts.  And you clearly are not.  Even further, you don't even live in this State, yet you are willing to use the power of the state (i.e. the federal judiciary) to impose your will on other States.  Tyranny.
pointing-up
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 13, 2019, 06:03:29 pm
The role of government (by the people and for the people) is to do what the people want within the confines of the Constitution.  And the people of Georgia want abortion regulated in Georgia once a heartbeat is detected.


The role of government that you support is one where the federal judiciary reaches beyond the confines of the Constitution and exacts its version of tyranny against the people of Georgia, Alabama, etc.  It is YOU that demands the power of the state to prohibit the people from enjoying the Constitutional liberties delegated within.  So keep that in mind the next time you use the word 'liberty', because it is YOU that demands my liberty - my right as a Georgia citizen to shape the society in which live through the action of my representative legislature as enumerated in the Bill of rights - to be denied.

Let's be clear who the tyrant here is.  I am willing to live by what my fellow society members choose in regard to the laws my State enacts.  And you clearly are not.  Even further, you don't even live in this State, yet you are willing to use the power of the state (i.e. the federal judiciary) to impose your will on other States.  Tyranny.

This claptrap argument again?   *****rollingeyes*****

The Constitution (via Roe and via Heller) secures both a woman's right to choose when to reproduce and your right to own a gun for self-protection.   Each of these INDIVIDUAL rights is secured against the would-be tyrants in your state's legislature that would take it away.

You advocate the tyranny of the majority when it's not an individual right important to you being denied.  But I guarantee you won't be arguing for the right of the legislature in your state to require you register and insure your gun.   You spout the hypocritical position of "rights for me but not for thee".   
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 13, 2019, 06:08:38 pm

The Constitution (via Roe and via Heller) secures both a woman's right to choose when to reproduce and your right to own a gun for self-protection.   Each of these INDIVIDUAL rights is secured against the would-be tyrants in your state's legislature that would take it away.

Where in the Constitution is the right to abortion stated? I know where the right to keep and bear amrs is...it's the Second AMendment.  But there's not an amendment guaranteeing the right to abortion on demand.

Quote
You advocate the tyranny of the majority when it's not an individual right important to you being denied.  But I guarantee you won't be arguing for the right of the legislature in your state to require you register and insure your gun.   You spout the hypocritical position of "rights for me but not for thee".

You left your projector on again.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: PeteS in CA on September 13, 2019, 06:18:07 pm
https://babylonbee.com/news/buttigeig-life-begins-when-you-register-as-a-democrat

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

Quote
U.S.—Mayor Pete Buttigieg has come under fire after claiming that life only begins when you register as a Democrat.

"Many conservative 'Christians' have bought into this lie that life begins at conception," Buttigieg said during a radio interview. "This flies in the face of basic biology, which teaches us that life begins when you register as a Democrat."
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 13, 2019, 06:21:02 pm
The role of government that you support is one where the federal judiciary reaches beyond the confines of the Constitution and exacts its version of tyranny against the people of Georgia, Alabama, etc.  It is YOU that demands the power of the state to prohibit the people from enjoying the Constitutional liberties delegated within.  So keep that in mind the next time you use the word 'liberty', because it is YOU that demands my liberty - my right as a Georgia citizen to shape the society in which live through the action of my representative legislature as enumerated in the Bill of rights - to be denied.

Let's be clear who the tyrant here is.  I am willing to live by what my fellow society members choose in regard to the laws my State enacts.  And you clearly are not.  Even further, you don't even live in this State, yet you are willing to use the power of the state (i.e. the federal judiciary) to impose your will on other States.  Tyranny.

That's right.
 :hands:
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 13, 2019, 06:32:25 pm
This claptrap argument again?   *****rollingeyes*****

The Constitution (via Roe and via Heller)

Speaking of clap traps.  The Constitution speaks for itself.  To find out what the Constitution says, all you have to do is to read the Constitution.  Here it is again:

Quote
Amendment X:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

And if you bothered to actually read Roe or Heller, you would find ZERO reference to the Tenth Amendment and the powers delegated therein.  So your decision to reference Roe and Heller as authorities on the Constitution were extremely poor choices.  But then you knew that already.  Besides, the Constitution itself is the last thing you would ever use in subjecting your version of tyranny on the good people of Georgia.


secures both a woman's right to choose when to reproduce

No one is denying a woman's right to reproduce.  But then you knew that already.


and your right to own a gun for self-protection.

It is the Constitution - not Heller - that secures my right to own a gun, for any reason I so choose.  It was included in the Bill of Rights as a protection against the tyranny of government, the exact type of tyranny that you advocate.


Each of these INDIVIDUAL rights is secured against the would-be tyrants in your state's legislature that would take it away.

My legislature is not composed of tyrants.  They legislate per the will of the people they represent.  And any time they go against the will of the people, they can be voted out of office and replaced with new legislators to do the people's bidding.  It's how a representative government works.  Yet your idea of government is a tyrannical federal judiciary that usurps our right to representative legislation with absolutely no Constitutional basis to do so.


You advocate the tyranny of the majority when it's not an individual right important to you being denied.

As a member of this society, the valuation of life is extremely important to me.  Because without it, our society falls apart.  The most heinous acts of anti-social violence become more common as society is forced (at the point of the federal gun) to tolerate the massacre of those most innocent and helpless.  The devaluation of human life spills over into every aspect of society.  And because of tyrants such as yourself, I am powerless as a member of said society to do a thing about it.

If you want to do things differently in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania by exercising your common right under the Constitution, then you will never find me standing in the way.  I only ask that you extend the same courtesy to me and allow my fellow Georgia citizens to exercise our Constitutional right to self-government. 


But I guarantee you won't be arguing for the right of the legislature in your state to require you register and insure your gun.

Good.  As a rule, you should have zero voice as to what our Legislature does.  We can handle it ourselves.  Yet that is not at all what you advocate.


You spout the hypocritical position of "rights for me but not for thee".   

Let's review again, shall we?  In the absence of federal law, I wholeheartedly advocate the right of the people to mold and shape their societies through their state legislatures unader Amendment X of the Constitution of the United States of America.  That goes for you in your State, a Texan in Texas, a New Jersean in New Jersey, and a Ohioan in Ohio.  There is zero hypocrisy in that.  None.  Zip.  Nada.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 13, 2019, 06:45:58 pm
It is the Constitution - not Heller - that secures my right to own a gun, for any reason I so choose.  It was included in the Bill of Rights as a protection against the tyranny of government, the exact type of tyranny that you advocate.

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.

Quote
As a member of this society, the valuation of life is extremely important to me.  Because without it, our society falls apart.  The most heinous acts of anti-social violence become more common as society is forced (at the point of the federal gun) to tolerate the massacre of those most innocent and helpless.  The devaluation of human life spills over into every aspect of society.

As history attests. The misery of our current condition is profound. high divorce, high single parent households, high rates of bastard children... High crime, high drugs, low esteem, low respect for women, low respect for family, latchkey kids, state indoctrination, social indoctrination... It literally cannot get much worse, and makes the heady days before social experimentation seem absolutely idyllic.

Quote
Let's review again, shall we?  In the absence of federal law, I wholeheartedly advocate the right of the people to mold and shape their societies through their state legislatures unader Amendment X of the Constitution of the United States of America.  That goes for you in your State, a Texan in Texas, a New Jersean in New Jersey, and a Ohioan in Ohio.  There is zero hypocrisy in that.  None.  Zip.  Nada.

Federalism at its finest.
Bravo!
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 13, 2019, 06:52:15 pm
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.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 13, 2019, 07:06:12 pm
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
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 14, 2019, 04:17:22 am
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.

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sanguine on September 14, 2019, 04:19:35 am
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.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 14, 2019, 05:40:12 am
You're a good man, Fred.

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

 :beer:

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 14, 2019, 06:48:44 am

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.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Smokin Joe on September 14, 2019, 09:19:03 am
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.

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 15, 2019, 01:25:15 pm
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.   
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: XenaLee on September 15, 2019, 01:34:54 pm
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 (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 (http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,374700.msg2054358.html#msg2054358)
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Victoria33 on September 15, 2019, 01:57:20 pm
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.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: austingirl on September 15, 2019, 02:02:10 pm
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.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Wingnut on September 15, 2019, 02:26:32 pm
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.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 15, 2019, 02:52:21 pm
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.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Victoria33 on September 15, 2019, 02:55:39 pm
@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.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 15, 2019, 03:55:53 pm
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.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: PeteS in CA on September 15, 2019, 04:01:58 pm
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.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: XenaLee on September 15, 2019, 04:09:57 pm
And maybe explain how the writers of the Bill of Rights coded into it a "right" they would have found abhorrent.

Exactly.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 15, 2019, 04:44:21 pm
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.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 15, 2019, 04:49:22 pm
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.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 15, 2019, 07:30:37 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 15, 2019, 08:16:51 pm
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.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: berdie on September 15, 2019, 08:30:05 pm
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.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 16, 2019, 01:12:08 am
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.

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 16, 2019, 01:23:01 am
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:
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 16, 2019, 05:09:39 am
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.

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Smokin Joe on September 16, 2019, 06:18:02 am
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.
Here is where my fundamental disagreement with you starts: At the point a woman is pregnant, she HAS reproduced.

The time for a decision about reproduction is before insemination.

After that, she is no longer just making some decision about bumping uglies with Mr. Right or Mr Close Enough or Mr. Turkey Baster, she is making a decision about whether a human life should continue.

You're already on the slippery slope, because you and the rest of the baby killers out there can't decide when to quit. Being 'mostly born' isn't safe any more, ("Partial birth abortion"--where the brains are sucked out of the base of the kid's skull while the rest of the kid is out of the birth canal), nor are you even protecting the survivors of procedures who have been "born". They're out, they are alive, but now, a survivor, once out of the woman entirely can be neglected to death--something that would get you or I a short stay in gen pop at any prison, because even mother rapers and father stabbers have standards about who or what they will associate with, and killing babies is frowned upon by the vast majority there.

Any time there is a pregnancy, she isn't deciding whether to reproduce or not, that's already done. What she is doing is making the call to end a human life, something we regard as "killing", and in that contest, the killing of a helpless innocent, which neatly fits the definition of murder.

There are quite a number of ways to prevent pregnancy, from pills to implants to shots, to IUDs to abstinence and barrier methods (condoms, diaphrams), and spermacides.

That's a choice of whether or not to reproduce. 

Killing the baby is not a 'choice', it's murder.
There is no Right, no Natural Right to murder. In fact, it is such a proscribed behaviour, it's in the big Ten Comandments.
No matter what judicial rabbit (dead or alive) the black robes pull out of their hats, there is one final Judge who will rule on the issue. Let the unrepentant beware.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 16, 2019, 12:44:06 pm
You again mischaracterize my position, @Smokin Joe .      I have never advocated late term abortions,  indeed I have never advocated abortion at all, but rather defend only the woman's natural right.   I share your abhorrence with the procedure,  although I am not so dishonest as to label it "murder".

 I advocate only for the right of a woman to decide for herself whether and when to reproduce.  But that right doesn't last indefinitely.   Once the fetus is viable,  I agree with Hoodat that the state may reflect the wishes of its majority and restrict and even ban abortion.    But until viability,  the attitude of the state must be agnostic -  it is not a "baby", it is part of the mother's body and within her dominion and control.   
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: XenaLee on September 16, 2019, 01:15:14 pm
You again mischaracterize my position, @Smokin Joe .      I have never advocated late term abortions,  indeed I have never advocated abortion at all, but rather defend only the woman's natural right.   I share your abhorrence with the procedure,  although I am not so dishonest as to label it "murder".

 I advocate only for the right of a woman to decide for herself whether and when to reproduce.  But that right doesn't last indefinitely.   Once the fetus is viable,  I agree with Hoodat that the state may reflect the wishes of its majority and restrict and even ban abortion.    But until viability,  the attitude of the state must be agnostic -  it is not a "baby", it is part of the mother's body and within her dominion and control.

Right.   Let's not call it what it is.   And let's call those that do call it what it is "dishonest".

Interesting that you use the term "viability"... since.... no baby or infant is viable without the care of another human until the baby is old enough to feed itself.   

Quote
Viable - viable: [ vi´ah-b'l ] able to maintain an independent existence; able to live after birth.

https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/viable

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 16, 2019, 01:18:52 pm

But until viability,  the attitude of the state must be agnostic - 

The child is entirely viable - Leave it alone and see.

Quote
it is not a "baby", it is part of the mother's body and within her dominion and control.

Bullcrap, plain and simple. Of course it is a baby. And everyone knows it.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 16, 2019, 05:19:17 pm
Once the fetus is viable,  I agree with Hoodat that the state may reflect the wishes of its majority and restrict and even ban abortion.

There is no viability clause in the Constitution.  Either a woman has a constitutional right to kill her unborn child or she does not.  Likewise, either States have a right to regulate abortion or they do not.


But until viability,  the attitude of the state must be agnostic

The attitude of the state should be to rely on the Constitution as THE basis of law.  Period.  Agnosticism, religion, etc., has absolutely NOTHING to do with this, nor does your personal opinion on whether a living organism having different DNA from the "mother" is really part of the "mother".  Your opinion is one of many distributed among the members of a society.  And it is entirely up to those members to come together and "choose" how their State society will be shaped through their elected legislators.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 16, 2019, 05:25:47 pm
Bullcrap, plain and simple. Of course it is a baby. And everyone knows it.

@roamer_1

One cannot convincingly deny it's a baby when one refers to the woman carrying it as "the mother".
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 16, 2019, 05:28:33 pm
Right.   Let's not call it what it is.   And let's call those that do call it what it is "dishonest".

Interesting that you use the term "viability"... since.... no baby or infant is viable without the care of another human until the baby is old enough to feed itself.

vi·a·ble (vī'ă-bĕl),
Capable of living; denoting a fetus sufficiently developed to live outside of the uterus.


https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/viable
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 16, 2019, 06:43:42 pm
vi·a·ble (vī'ă-bĕl),
Capable of living; denoting a fetus sufficiently developed to live outside of the uterus.


https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/viable

Says the definition written after the fact, by abortionists.
LOL!
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 16, 2019, 06:48:14 pm
Show me where that 'viability' can be found in the Constitution, and maybe then it will mean something.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sanguine on September 16, 2019, 06:52:32 pm
vi·a·ble (vī'ă-bĕl),
Capable of living; denoting a fetus sufficiently developed to live outside of the uterus.


https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/viable

I don't think this definition means what you think this definition means.  Fetus and baby are synonymous, and no baby/fetus is capable of living outside the womb without care.  And, obviously if they can live outside the womb with care, they are viable. This is a classic distinction without a difference.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 16, 2019, 06:56:01 pm
Show me where that 'viability' can be found in the Constitution, and maybe then it will mean something.

Show me where "fetus" can be found in the Constitution, or indeed any indication in the Constitution that a fetus in the womb has the rights of a citizen.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 16, 2019, 06:59:06 pm
I don't think this definition means what you think this definition means.  Fetus and baby are synonymous, and no baby/fetus is capable of living outside the womb without care.  And, obviously if they can live outside the womb with care, they are viable. This is a classic distinction without a difference.

Viable refers to biological viability - can the fetus live unattached to the mother's womb and placenta?   As for living outside the womb "without care", I know some teenagers who don't satisfy your definition.   
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sanguine on September 16, 2019, 07:02:52 pm
Show me where "fetus" can be found in the Constitution, or indeed any indication in the Constitution that a fetus in the womb has the rights of a citizen.

That's a losing argument.  The words "child", "woman" and "man" are also not found in the Constitution.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sanguine on September 16, 2019, 07:04:43 pm
Viable refers to biological viability - can the fetus live unattached to the mother's womb and placenta?   As for living outside the womb "without care", I know some teenagers who don't satisfy your definition.

If they're not viable they won't live upon birth. What are you trying to say?

And, as for teenagers, you do understand that we are not allowed to kill them either, right? 

Both of your points make the case against abortion.   :shrug:
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 16, 2019, 07:17:46 pm
And, as for teenagers, you do understand that we are not allowed to kill them either, right? 

Right. But sometimes...  **nononono*
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 16, 2019, 07:22:04 pm
@roamer_1

One cannot convincingly deny it's a baby when one refers to the woman carrying it as "the mother".

Indeed... And the language they use, trying to blunt the point, makes no difference in the stark reality.

Living children, sacrificed to lust and to escape the consequences thereof...
It is no different than the sacrifice to Molech, with the exception of the optics.
The result remains the same.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 16, 2019, 07:23:44 pm
Ye shall not cause thy children to pass through the fire.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sanguine on September 16, 2019, 07:33:09 pm
Ye shall not cause thy children to pass through the fire.

Yes, that is exactly what it is.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sanguine on September 16, 2019, 07:33:41 pm
If they're not viable they won't live upon birth. What are you trying to say?

And, as for teenagers, you do understand that we are not allowed to kill them either, right? 

Both of your points make the case against abortion.   :shrug:

Where'd you go @Jazzhead?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: jafo2010 on September 16, 2019, 07:45:49 pm
I think the founding fathers would have rather harsh words, and harsh actions for those killing babies because it is a woman's right to choose.  They would as I do consider it murder.

Women have self aborted in the USA for a long time prior to Roe vs Wade.  My maternal grandmother told me if a woman was pregnant in the 20s 30s 40s, and did not want the child, they merely went to the local drug store and got a reed to self abort.  She indicated it was a common practice for women.  Until she mentioned it, I had no idea.

Funny thing, when I mentioned it to my mother, the conversation, she quickly indicated 'she had no business telling you that'.  The secrets from prior generations.

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Smokin Joe on September 16, 2019, 07:46:33 pm
You again mischaracterize my position, @Smokin Joe .      I have never advocated late term abortions,  indeed I have never advocated abortion at all, but rather defend only the woman's natural right.   I share your abhorrence with the procedure,  although I am not so dishonest as to label it "murder".

 I advocate only for the right of a woman to decide for herself whether and when to reproduce.  But that right doesn't last indefinitely.   Once the fetus is viable,  I agree with Hoodat that the state may reflect the wishes of its majority and restrict and even ban abortion.    But until viability,  the attitude of the state must be agnostic -  it is not a "baby", it is part of the mother's body and within her dominion and control.
I agree that a woman has a natural right to decide with whom and where and when she wants to reproduce. That isn't at issue.
What is at issue, here, is the act of eliminating the result of reproduction, and calling that a "choice" to reproduce or not. It's like deciding to be childless when the little nippers are in kindergarden. That same child will not be able to walk and feed itself for years. Again, with the definitions, "viability" can be construed to permit killing the child right up until it can get a job and support itself. Ideally, the legal profession should clarify the meaning of words, but modern attorneys pushing agendae have gone off into using words as tools of obfustication.

It isn't hard, counsellor, If you have a chicken egg, and it is not fertilized, you may have breakfast, at worst, something to go bad in the barn or get thrown at someone's car.
If it has been fertilized, you'll get a chicken.

If you have a human egg, and it is not fertilized, it goes out with the menses. If you have a human egg and it is fertilized, and implants in the uterine wall, you get a human.

That's when life begins, all need for nurturing aside. If you nurture an unfertilized egg, you get an infection...or a mess, but not a human.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 16, 2019, 07:53:57 pm
It isn't hard, counsellor, If you have a chicken egg, and it is not fertilized, you may have breakfast, at worst, something to go bad in the barn or get thrown at someone's car.
If it has been fertilized, you'll get a chicken.

If you have a human egg, and it is not fertilized, it goes out with the menses. If you have a human egg and it is fertilized, and implants in the uterine wall, you get a human.

That's when life begins, all need for nurturing aside. If you nurture an unfertilized egg, you get an infection...or a mess, but not a human.

If you have an eagle egg, or a condor, messin with the life within is a federal felony with mandatory prison time...

Weave that thought in there somewhere.
 :beer:
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: InHeavenThereIsNoBeer on September 16, 2019, 08:02:47 pm
Every year, medical advances make babies viable outside the womb earlier in the pregnancy.  According to the viability theory excuse, life is actually beginning earlier as time goes by.  Eventually, either life will begin at conception, or they'll have to find some other excuse.

Life begins when it begins.  It's not up to us.  It's not up to judges.  It doesn't matter if it eases your conscience to put some arbitrary time frame on it.  Life is life, not what we want it to be.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: XenaLee on September 16, 2019, 08:14:16 pm
Right. But sometimes...  **nononono*

Lol! 
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 16, 2019, 08:49:39 pm
Show me where "fetus" can be found in the Constitution, or indeed any indication in the Constitution that a fetus in the womb has the rights of a citizen.

I have never made that claim.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: berdie on September 16, 2019, 08:50:52 pm
I agree that a woman has a natural right to decide with whom and where and when she wants to reproduce. That isn't at issue.
What is at issue, here, is the act of eliminating the result of reproduction, and calling that a "choice" to reproduce or not. It's like deciding to be childless when the little nippers are in kindergarden. That same child will not be able to walk and feed itself for years. Again, with the definitions, "viability" can be construed to permit killing the child right up until it can get a job and support itself. Ideally, the legal profession should clarify the meaning of words, but modern attorneys pushing agendae have gone off into using words as tools of obfustication.

It isn't hard, counsellor, If you have a chicken egg, and it is not fertilized, you may have breakfast, at worst, something to go bad in the barn or get thrown at someone's car.
If it has been fertilized, you'll get a chicken.

If you have a human egg, and it is not fertilized, it goes out with the menses. If you have a human egg and it is fertilized, and implants in the uterine wall, you get a human.

That's when life begins, all need for nurturing aside. If you nurture an unfertilized egg, you get an infection...or a mess, but not a human.





 :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: berdie on September 16, 2019, 08:57:49 pm
I think the founding fathers would have rather harsh words, and harsh actions for those killing babies because it is a woman's right to choose.  They would as I do consider it murder.

Women have self aborted in the USA for a long time prior to Roe vs Wade.  My maternal grandmother told me if a woman was pregnant in the 20s 30s 40s, and did not want the child, they merely went to the local drug store and got a reed to self abort.  She indicated it was a common practice for women.  Until she mentioned it, I had no idea.

Funny thing, when I mentioned it to my mother, the conversation, she quickly indicated 'she had no business telling you that'.  The secrets from prior generations.




There is no doubt in my mind that this has happened for years.  But since it has become legalized it has become acceptable and more prevalent.

This is not a Constitutional right. It would take a strong argument to convince me that the right to privacy equates to abortion.  I haven't heard one yet.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 16, 2019, 09:06:06 pm
This is not a Constitutional right. It would take a strong argument to convince me that the right to privacy equates to abortion.  I haven't heard one yet.

There is no right to privacy in the Constitution either.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 16, 2019, 09:11:04 pm
There is no right to privacy in the Constitution either.

Well, not that way anyway.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 17, 2019, 12:28:39 pm
If they're not viable they won't live upon birth. What are you trying to say?

And, as for teenagers, you do understand that we are not allowed to kill them either, right? 

Both of your points make the case against abortion.   :shrug:

I'm  not interested in making the case "for" abortion.  Only the case in favor of individual liberty,  properly secured against government and the tyranny of the majority by the U.S. Constitution. 
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 17, 2019, 01:04:22 pm
I'm  not interested in making the case "for" abortion.  Only the case in favor of individual liberty,  properly secured against government and the tyranny of the majority by the U.S. Constitution.

You support the tyranny of the minority through judicial fiat.  That's about as anti individual liberty as you can get.

By the way...which amendment in the Constitution gives women the right to murder an unborn baby?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 17, 2019, 01:09:21 pm
You support the tyranny of the minority through judicial fiat.  That's about as anti individual liberty as you can get.

By the way...which amendment in the Constitution gives women the right to murder an unborn baby?

If it's murder why aren't States prosecuting them?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 17, 2019, 01:15:41 pm
If it's murder why aren't States prosecuting them?

Good question.  And the answer, of course, is that it's not murder.   That's just emotional language of the sort that both sides use to demonize those with opposing views.   

This is a matter of individual conscience, period.     
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: XenaLee on September 17, 2019, 01:20:59 pm
Good question.  And the answer, of course, is that it's not murder.   That's just emotional language of the sort that both sides use to demonize those with opposing views.   

This is a matter of individual conscience, period.   

It's more a matter of a severe LACK of individual conscience, period. 

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 17, 2019, 01:41:55 pm
If it's murder why aren't States prosecuting them?

The state is trying to stop it by cutting off funding to Planned Parenthood which in most states is the only place conducting abortions these days.

It should be up to the states whether to make it legal or illegal.  Were it illegal in a state then they could prosecute them.

When a pregnant woman is murdered and the baby dies as well the person committing the murder is charged twice.

More directly to your question...DA's can't go after the abortionist because more times than not the woman getting the abortion is the only witness against the doctor and they for various reasons refuse to testify.

States like Georgia and their LIFE Act are beginning to craft laws that will criminally prosecute a woman for having an abortion.

So there are states that are beginning to do exactly what you say they aren't.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 17, 2019, 01:44:04 pm
Good question.  And the answer, of course, is that it's not murder.

What do you call ending the life of a living human being?   



Quote
That's just emotional language of the sort that both sides use to demonize those with opposing views.


No...it's called facts and reality.  Again you're trying to frame an argument to support life as "emotional" is straight out of the Alinsky playbook.

So Progressive of you.

Quote
This is a matter of individual conscience, period.   

Anyone supporting abortion or choosing to end a human life by abortion has a severe lack of conscience...period.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sanguine on September 17, 2019, 01:47:59 pm
I'm  not interested in making the case "for" abortion.  Only the case in favor of individual liberty,  properly secured against government and the tyranny of the majority by the U.S. Constitution.

Regardless of what this morning's spin is, you very solidly made the case against abortion.  Now, you need to reconcile that with the "woman's right to choose".....

.....waiting...... 

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: aligncare on September 17, 2019, 02:23:49 pm
It's more a matter of a severe LACK of individual conscience, period.

But just let a mother who wants and delivers her baby and then disciplines her toddler based on biblical principles of corporal punishment, then they’ll put her in jail for child abuse. But, if she chooses to kill her third-trimester or just-born baby, then it’s health care.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: XenaLee on September 17, 2019, 02:31:56 pm
But just let a mother who wants and delivers her baby and then disciplines her toddler based on biblical principles of corporal punishment, then they’ll put her in jail for child abuse. But, if she chooses to kill her third-trimester or just-born baby, then it’s health care.

Typical leftist insanity.   Always backasswards from what it should be, ethically, morally and logically.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Smokin Joe on September 17, 2019, 03:26:45 pm
If it's murder why aren't States prosecuting them?
It's a federal crime...
Quote
The 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."[1]

The law is codified in two sections of the United States Code: Title 18, Chapter 1 (Crimes), §1841 (18 USC 1841) and Title 10, Chapter 22 (Uniform Code of Military Justice) §919a (Article 119a).

The law applies only to certain offenses over which the United States government has jurisdiction, including certain crimes committed on federal properties, against certain federal officials and employees, and by members of the military. In addition, it covers certain crimes that are defined by statute as federal offenses wherever they occur, no matter who commits them, such as certain crimes of terrorism.

Because of principles of federalism embodied in the United States Constitution, federal criminal law does not apply to crimes prosecuted by the individual states. However, 38 states also recognize the fetus or "unborn child" as a crime victim, at least for purposes of homicide or feticide.[2]
source (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unborn_Victims_of_Violence_Act)

Maybe you can reconcile for me why the unborn human is a "human being" when someone else kills it, but not when mommy contracts the hit.

The contention that it is not a human being does not stand up, scientifically, biologically, logically, not even within the contorted visions of the legal community. It is a cognitive disconnect which has been used as an excuse to perpetrate the slaughter of Americans by the tens of millions, even as we decry smaller acts of genocide in the world.

Margaret Sanger would be so proud.

Maybe Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: XenaLee on September 17, 2019, 04:29:02 pm
It's a federal crime...source (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unborn_Victims_of_Violence_Act)

Maybe you can reconcile for me why the unborn human is a "human being" when someone else kills it, but not when mommy contracts the hit.

The contention that it is not a human being does not stand up, scientifically, biologically, logically, not even within the contorted visions of the legal community. It is a cognitive disconnect which has been used as an excuse to perpetrate the slaughter of Americans by the tens of millions, even as we decry smaller acts of genocide in the world.

Margaret Sanger would be so proud.

Maybe Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius?

I don't consider it to be a disconnect, per se.   I consider it to be just one more leftist lie, one of many.  Especially despicable is the leftist lawyers that will prosecute for murder someone for having killed or caused the death of an infant in utero....  and then will turn around and defend abortion and those that have abortions as 'their right'.   

And anyone that participates in a late term partial birth abortion is a damn ghoul.   Scientists are developing artificial wombs that should, logically, keep that practice from ever happening, since the infant could be removed from the mother and grown in the artificial womb and then adopted when fully developed.   The only thing that would stop that is the evil forces behind pushing abortions.   They want those murders to continue.   Plus, we've all seen how rich the ghouls have gotten by selling "baby parts".
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 17, 2019, 07:27:05 pm
It's a federal crime...source (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unborn_Victims_of_Violence_Act)

Maybe you can reconcile for me why the unborn human is a "human being" when someone else kills it, but not when mommy contracts the hit.

The contention that it is not a human being does not stand up, scientifically, biologically, logically, not even within the contorted visions of the legal community. It is a cognitive disconnect which has been used as an excuse to perpetrate the slaughter of Americans by the tens of millions, even as we decry smaller acts of genocide in the world.

Margaret Sanger would be so proud.

Maybe Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius?

Well, in terms of the law they could make them match.

 as is. the law that you're referring to applies with the exclusion of abortion:

Quote
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the prosecution—

(1) of any person for conduct relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman, or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf, has been obtained or for which such consent is implied by law;

(2) of any person for any medical treatment of the pregnant woman or her unborn child; or

(3) of any woman with respect to her unborn child.

(d) As used in this section, the term "unborn child" means a child in utero, and the term "child in utero" or "child, who is in utero" means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 17, 2019, 08:07:30 pm
Well, in terms of the law they could make them match.

 as is. the law that you're referring to applies with the exclusion of abortion:

Here let me help you...you cherry picked the law and left out some salient points.

Quote
Sec. 1841. Protection of unborn children

(a) (1) Whoever engages in conduct that violates any of the provisions of law listed in subsection (b) and thereby causes the death of, or bodily injury (as defined in section 1365) to, a child, who is in utero at the time the conduct takes place, is guilty of a separate offense under this section.
(2) (A) Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, the punishment for that separate offense is the same as the punishment provided under Federal law for that conduct had that injury or death occurred to the unborn child's mother.

(B) An offense under this section does not require proof that—
(i) the person engaging in the conduct had knowledge or should have had knowledge that the victim of the underlying offense was pregnant; or
(ii) the defendant intended to cause the death of, or bodily injury to, the unborn child.

(C) If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall instead of being punished under subparagraph (A), be punished as provided under sections 1111, 1112, and 1113 of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being.

(D) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the death penalty shall not be imposed for an offense under this section.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Smokin Joe on September 18, 2019, 04:45:55 am
Let me see....for generations, or at least the seven I have been acquainted (from my great grandparents to my great grandchildren), the condition of a pregnant woman has been referred to by a phrase: "With child".

Not "With lump of tissue"

Not "With fetus"

But "With child".

All the mincing words and other lawyerly nonsense does not change the simple cultural regard for the situation, a regard that crosses cultures and persists throughout history.

She is described as being "with child".
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 18, 2019, 05:08:21 am
She is described as being "with child".

It is not entirely their fault - Being raised in materialistic evolution, there is no sense of the nobility which is the cause that Man strives toward thoroughout all of recorded history.

Having no sense thereof, is it any surprise that they would trample upon all that is noble or pure?
Because that is certainly the result, always - the legitimization of sin, and the deflowering of purity, as noble man regresses with a surety - ever circling closer to Sodom and Gomorrah.

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: jafo2010 on September 18, 2019, 05:01:54 pm
Seven non elected lying lawyers made the decision to support abortion.  As a result, what would be 20% of our population was murdered and planted to satisfy the eugenics policies of Margaret Sanger and the present day Democommie Party.

We lost roughly 3,000 people each with the Pearl Harbor attack by Japan and the attack on 9/11, but the destruction 0f 60+ million lives, and we have one political party defending this eugenics policy with a fervor.

It is a tragedy of grand proportion, and if you believe in God, I doubt he is very happy with the people of this nation.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sanguine on September 18, 2019, 05:03:42 pm
Seven non elected lying lawyers made the decision to support abortion.  As a result, what would be 20% of our population was murdered and planted to satisfy the eugenics policies of Margaret Sanger and the present day Democommie Party.

We lost roughly 3,000 people each with the Pearl Harbor attack by Japan and the attack on 9/11, but the destruction 0f 60+ million lives, and we have one political party defending this eugenics policy with a fervor.

It is a tragedy of grand proportion, and if you believe in God, I doubt he is very happy with the people of this nation.

Even if you don't believe in God, I doubt He is very happy with this situation.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 18, 2019, 05:52:57 pm
Here let me help you...you cherry picked the law and left out some salient points.
Yeah..abortion is excluded. The law doesn't apply there.

When someone kills themselves you don't charge them with murder. All deaths aren't treated the same in the eyes of the law.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 18, 2019, 06:07:20 pm
Yeah..abortion is excluded. The law doesn't apply there.

Ummm yes section B includes abortion.

Quote
(B) An offense under this section does not require proof that—
(i) the person engaging in the conduct had knowledge or should have had knowledge that the victim of the underlying offense was pregnant; or
(ii) the defendant intended to cause the death of, or bodily injury to, the unborn child.


Abortion is intentionally causing the death of an unborn child.

Quote
When someone kills themselves you don't charge them with murder. All deaths aren't treated the same in the eyes of the law.

Are you really this obtuse?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 18, 2019, 06:17:38 pm
When someone kills themselves you don't charge them with murder. All deaths aren't treated the same in the eyes of the law.

That would depend on what State you are in.  Each State has different laws regarding murder, assault, pumping gas, getting tattoos, erecting billboards, practicing law, elective surgery, etc.  This is stated explicitly in the Bill of Rights as a power reserved for the States.   Abortion and marriage are no different.  It is up to each State to determine its laws per the Constitution of the United States of America.  Either you follow the Constitution or you don't.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Maj. Bill Martin on September 18, 2019, 06:26:16 pm
I thought we all learned how life begins in 7th grade biology?

And from what I learned, it damned sure doesn't being by one guy sticking his ***** in another guy's ***.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 18, 2019, 06:31:56 pm
I thought we all learned how life begins in 7th grade biology?

And from what I learned, it damned sure doesn't being by one guy sticking his ***** in another guy's ***.

@Maj. Bill Martin that was before it was discovered there are 25...not two different genders...and just because you're born with a twig and berries...that doesn't mean you're male.

You're clearly still stuck on that whole archaic XX and XY chromosome thing. /sarc
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 18, 2019, 06:44:20 pm
That would depend on what State you are in.  Each State has different laws regarding murder, assault, pumping gas, getting tattoos, erecting billboards, practicing law, elective surgery, etc.  This is stated explicitly in the Bill of Rights as a power reserved for the States.   Abortion and marriage are no different.  It is up to each State to determine its laws per the Constitution of the United States of America.  Either you follow the Constitution or you don't.

Abortion was already legal before the Supreme Court decision.

All that they did was make it so that the decision up the the individual.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sighlass on September 18, 2019, 07:35:23 pm
Abortion was already legal before the Supreme Court decision.

All that they did was make it so that the decision up the the individual.

You mean they took the focus off of saving life (mother's life in danger) to allowing disregarding the precious life of the child at all.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 18, 2019, 07:44:30 pm
You mean they took the focus off of saving life (mother's life in danger) to allowing disregarding the precious life of the child at all.

Roe basically decriminalized abortion in the states where it was illegal and forced states that didn't allow abortions to have to make them available.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 18, 2019, 08:20:22 pm
Roe basically decriminalized abortion in the states where it was illegal and forced states that didn't allow abortions to have to make them available.

And it was done by the same people who falsely decry government involvement in our lives.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 18, 2019, 08:22:39 pm
Abortion was already legal before the Supreme Court decision.

Not in Georgia.  Not in Texas.


All that they did was make it so that the decision up the the individual.

Uh, no.  All they did what deny the right of the people of Georgia and Texas to choose their own abortion laws in direct violation of the Bill of Rights.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: berdie on September 18, 2019, 09:13:20 pm
When someone kills themselves you don't charge them with murder. All deaths aren't treated the same in the eyes of the law.




Depending on where you live,  that is an incorrect statement.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 18, 2019, 09:30:55 pm


Uh, no.  All they did what deny the right of the people of Georgia and Texas to choose their own abortion laws in direct violation of the Bill of Rights.

The 10th amendment doesn't give majorities in the States the ability to deny folks their natural rights as individuals which are secured by the federal Constitution.    A woman's natural right to self-determination is secured by the Constitution just as is your natural right to protect your person and home.   Texas can't take away your individual gun right, just as Texas cannot take away (at least not before the fetus is viable) your daughter's right to choose whether and when to reproduce.     
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Maj. Bill Martin on September 18, 2019, 09:34:35 pm
The 10th amendment doesn't give majorities in the States the ability to deny folks their natural rights as individuals which are secured by the federal Constitution.    A woman's natural right to self-determination is secured by the Constitution just as is your natural right to protect your person and home.   Texas can't take away your individual gun right, just as Texas cannot take away (at least not before the fetus is viable) your daughter's right to choose whether and when to reproduce.   

Your right to protect your person and home doesn't come from the 10th Amendment.  It comes from the 4th, and the right to guns comes from the 2nd.

Absolutely nobody involved in the drafting or ratification of the 10th Amendment would have believed it created a right to abortion - even though abortion was known practice at the time.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 18, 2019, 09:47:13 pm
The 10th amendment doesn't give majorities in the States the ability to deny folks their natural rights as individuals which are secured by the federal Constitution.

The right to an abortion is not secured by the Constitution.  But you knew that already.


A woman's natural right to self-determination is secured by the Constitution just as is your natural right to protect your person and home.

In regards to getting pregnant, no one is denying a woman that right.  No one.  But you knew that already.

As for self-determination, the citizens of each State have the right of self-determination to mold and shape their societies through their State Legislatures.  It is explicitly stated in Amendment X of the Bill of Rights - a self-determining right you wish to deny.  Here it is again:


The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.


Texas can't take away your individual gun right  .  .  .

Gun rights are explicitly stated in Amendment II.  But you knew that already.


.  .  .  just as Texas cannot take away (at least not before the fetus is viable) your daughter's right to choose whether and when to reproduce.   

No one is choosing whether and when a woman can reproduce.  Women are empowered with control over their own bodies.  It is 100% up to each individual woman whether she will grant an access to her body that leads to pregnancy.  No one is taking that away.  No one.  But you knew that already.

Nor does viability have anything to do with this.  Either a woman has a God-given right to kill her unborn child or she does not.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 18, 2019, 09:54:15 pm
Quote
Gun rights are explicitly stated in Amendment II.  But you knew that already.

@Hoodat actually if you read enough of his posts about the right to keep and bear arms...he doesn't seem to know that.

Kinda funny that to Jazz Abortion is "a right protected and guaranteed in the Constitution"

But the 2nd Amendment is "a permission granted to us only since the ruling in DC v Heller."
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 18, 2019, 10:26:55 pm
Let the record show, as well, that judges in the State of Texas unanimously ruled in favor of Roe over Wade as well.

The Supreme Court was also 7 - 2.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 18, 2019, 10:28:42 pm
@txradioguy @Hoodat

The 2nd Amendment also mentions a well-regulated Militia by the States. But that's another discussion for another thread
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 18, 2019, 11:07:37 pm
Let the record show, as well, that judges in the State of Texas unanimously ruled in favor of Roe over Wade as well.

The Supreme Court was also 7 - 2.

None of the Roe justices were from Texas.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 18, 2019, 11:23:50 pm
None of the Roe justices were from Texas.

The ones that unanimously decided in favor of Roe were Texans.

Wade then appealed to the Supreme Court and lost there as well.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 18, 2019, 11:43:57 pm
The ones that unanimously decided in favor of Roe were Texans.
Wade then appealed to the Supreme Court and lost there as well.

You may want to go back and double-check that, chief.  The Texas district judges refused to issue an injunction against Wade.  It was the appeal of that refusal that made its way to the Supreme Court.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 18, 2019, 11:53:22 pm
You may want to go back and double-check that, chief.  The Texas district judges refused to issue an injunction against Wade.  It was the appeal of that refusal that made its way to the Supreme Court.

I did. Texas judges declared it unconstitutional and did not grant an injunction.


Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 18, 2019, 11:57:32 pm
But not unconstitutional enough to prevent prosecutions for violating it.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 19, 2019, 12:11:21 am
Let the record show, as well, that judges in the State of Texas unanimously ruled in favor of Roe over Wade as well.

The Supreme Court was also 7 - 2.

Let the record show that the law clerk that wrote Roe for Justice Blackmun admitted that the ruling he authored had nothing to donwoth abortion rights.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 19, 2019, 12:13:11 am
I did. Texas judges declared it unconstitutional and did not grant an injunction.

Texas was deep blue Democrat at the time. Your point?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 19, 2019, 12:53:18 am
Let the record show that the law clerk that wrote Roe for Justice Blackmun admitted that the ruling he authored had nothing to donwoth abortion rights.

Here's what Justice Byron White had to say about it:

With all due respect, I dissent. I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court's judgment. The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant mothers [410 U.S. 222] and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes. The upshot is that the people and the legislatures of the 50 States are constitutionally dissentitled to weigh the relative importance of the continued existence and development of the fetus, on the one hand, against a spectrum of possible impacts on the mother, on the other hand. As an exercise of raw judicial power, the Court perhaps has authority to do what it does today; but, in my view, its judgment is an improvident and extravagant exercise of the power of judicial review that the Constitution extends to this Court.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Bigun on September 19, 2019, 01:03:39 am
Here's what Justice Byron White had to say about it:

With all due respect, I dissent. I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court's judgment. The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant mothers [410 U.S. 222] and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes. The upshot is that the people and the legislatures of the 50 States are constitutionally dissentitled to weigh the relative importance of the continued existence and development of the fetus, on the one hand, against a spectrum of possible impacts on the mother, on the other hand. As an exercise of raw judicial power, the Court perhaps has authority to do what it does today; but, in my view, its judgment is an improvident and extravagant exercise of the power of judicial review that the Constitution extends to this Court.

I wish someone would show me the constitutional language granting the court this power of judicial review as I simply cannot find it.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 19, 2019, 01:17:16 am
I wish someone would show me the constitutional language granting the court this power of judicial review as I simply cannot find it.

Would it make any difference?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Bigun on September 19, 2019, 01:33:51 am
Would it make any difference?

To me at least.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sanguine on September 19, 2019, 01:34:20 am
Would it make any difference?

None whatsoever.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 19, 2019, 01:41:18 am
To me at least.

Not just to you. It should matter to us all.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Smokin Joe on September 19, 2019, 01:42:18 am
The 10th amendment doesn't give majorities in the States the ability to deny folks their natural rights as individuals which are secured by the federal Constitution.    A woman's natural right to self-determination is secured by the Constitution just as is your natural right to protect your person and home.   Texas can't take away your individual gun right, just as Texas cannot take away (at least not before the fetus is viable) your daughter's right to choose whether and when to reproduce.   
Quote the part of the Constitution which reserves the right of a woman to contract the killing of her offspring, regardless of age.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 19, 2019, 01:42:25 am
None whatsoever.

I think that identifies the problem.  What to do about it is something else.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 19, 2019, 01:53:23 am
Quote the part of the Constitution which reserves the right of a woman to contract the killing of her offspring, regardless of age.

Depends on which Constitution you are referring to.

Definition of constitution

1a : the basic principles and laws of a nation, state, or social group that determine the powers and duties of the government and guarantee certain rights to the people in it...

2a : the physical makeup of the individual especially with respect to the health, strength, and appearance of the body...

I've made my view clear in earlier posts.







Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 19, 2019, 02:46:30 am
The Constitution doesn't explicitly say we have a Right to Privacy either, but we certainly do.

It doesn't say anything about us having the Right to Travel, but I'd say we do. Who's going ot stop us from going state to state?..

It doesn't say we have a Right to an Education, but all 50 States have given us that Right as well with public education. If it were challenged, I bet the Supreme Court would give it to us as well.

In the Bill of Rights, it's acknowledged that we have the Rights to things that may not be explicitly mentioned in the Constitution

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: bigheadfred on September 19, 2019, 02:58:50 am
The Constitution doesn't explicitly say we have a Right to Privacy either, but we certainly do.

It doesn't say anything about us having the Right to Travel, but I'd say we do. Who's going ot stop us from going state to state?..

It doesn't say we have a Right to an Education, but all 50 States have given us that Right as well with public education. If it were challenged, I bet the Supreme Court would give it to us as well.

In the Bill of Rights, it's acknowledged that we have the Rights to things that may not be explicitly mentioned in the Constitution

Uh huh


The three R's.

What is your's is R's.

What is ours is R's.

Everything else is R's.


Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 19, 2019, 03:54:46 am
The Constitution doesn't explicitly say we have a Right to Privacy either, but we certainly do.

So it's a right, just not a Constitutional right.  Got it.


It doesn't say anything about us having the Right to Travel, but I'd say we do. Who's going ot stop us from going state to state?

See Article IV, Section 2.


It doesn't say we have a Right to an Education, but all 50 States have given us that Right as well with public education.

See Amendment X.  There is no Constitutional right to an education.  That power is reserved for the States.  It is the States who decide through their legislatures whether their citizens shall be eligible for state-run education.  This is how the Founding Fathers intended it.  They left it up to the citizens of each State to decide on their own laws.  (See:  Fraud, murder, assault, pumping gas, marriage, abortion, recycling, etc.)


If it were challenged, I bet the Supreme Court would give it to us as well.

Hey, they gave us Plessy and Scott.  That same reasoning gave us Roe and Obergfell.  So yes, anything is possible when the Constitution is ignored.


In the Bill of Rights, it's acknowledged that we have the Rights to things that may not be explicitly mentioned in the Constitution

That does not mean that we have rights to everything and anything not mentioned.  Here is the exact wording:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

This does not mean that there is a right to abortion, murder, shoplifting, fraud, etc.  It means that the listing of rights within the Constitution cannot be used to deny or minimize other rights.  Amendment IX was added as a compromise between the two main factions during the drafting of our Constitution - those who wanted a bill of rights included in our Constitution, and those who did not.  The latter faction won out.  The Bill of Rights was offered separately after the Constitution was ratified.

In Federalist 84 (https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed84.asp), Alexander Hamilton questioned the need for a Bill of Rights at all.  In it, he pointed out several specific rights the people retained in the Constitution itself (e.g. trial by jury, habeas corpus, republican government, etc.)  Hamilton pointed out that our preamble goes further towards expressing our rights than our Bill of Rights ever could.   He states further:

I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?


Unfortunately, decisions like Roe and Obergfell are an affront to Hamilton's words above.  For the guarantee of the Constitution includes republican government for the people of each State.  Yet with the judicial overreach listed above, the right of the people to establish their own laws within the confines of the Constitution is denied.  So your 9th Amendment argument actually backfires since you are using it to deny and disparage rights retained by the people.

Again:

Quote
For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?

-Alexander Hamilton-

Why declare that Georgia cannot determine its own abortion laws when there is no such power to do so?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 19, 2019, 12:32:57 pm
Quote the part of the Constitution which reserves the right of a woman to contract the killing of her offspring, regardless of age.

Well, how about the passage that Hoodat always relies on:  The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The natural rights of man (and woman)  endowed by the Creator and secured against state tyranny by the Constitution are not limited to those specifically enumerated therein.   The Courts in exercise of their Constitutional authority have from time to time extended the Constitution's protections to such unenumerated natural rights,  perhaps the most significant for our purposes being the right of personal privacy.    The decision made by a woman whether and when to reproduce is personal and private because,  at least before viability,  the fetus has no independent legal rights of its own.   I understand you want to call it a "baby" and do so because of your religious belief that it has a separate soul.  But your religious view does not afford a pre-viable fetus with separate rights as a matter of law vis a vis the woman of whose body it is wholly and inextricably a part.   

It is odd to see so-called conservatives clamoring for the state to impose its will on the individual, personal and private decisions made by millions of women.   As far as the rights of the states under the 10th amendment,   those rights were never intended to permit a tyranny of the majority to deny the natural and therefore Constitutionally protected rights of the individual.   Conservatives understand well that principle,  except when they choose to apply it only with respect to the rights they care about.   

I keep raising the issue of Heller because it illustrates well your hypocrisy.   Protest all you want,  but the natural right of self-defense is not the subject of the Second Amendment.   The 2A does not address natural rights, but rather the sovereignty of each state vis a vis the new federal government.   The individual states' ability to maintain their citizen militias is protected from denial by the federal government.   It was only, over two centuries later, that a SCOTUS majority midwifed by means of the 2A the Constitution's protection of yet another natural right not specifically enumerated in the Constitution.

So why do conservatives champion the Constitution's protection of the natural right of self-defense but not the natural rights of privacy and self-determination?    Why are conservatives willing to man the barricades to protect a gunowner's rights, but not a woman's?   (And, of course,  that hypocrisy is not only shared by conservatives -  liberals stop at literally nothing to defend the abortion right,  but will no doubt overturn Heller if they achieve the power to do so.) 

What I am urging, when all is said and done,  is merely the politically unacceptable position of rights for me AND right for thee.       

 
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 19, 2019, 01:07:12 pm
Well, how about the passage that Hoodat always relies on:  The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
     

Wrong.

Lets try this again...because you always play duck and weave when you're pressed on this question. 

What is the specific Amendment that grants the right of abortion?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Smokin Joe on September 19, 2019, 01:26:15 pm
Well, how about the passage that Hoodat always relies on:  The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The natural rights of man (and woman)  endowed by the Creator and secured against state tyranny by the Constitution are not limited to those specifically enumerated therein.   The Courts in exercise of their Constitutional authority have from time to time extended the Constitution's protections to such unenumerated natural rights,  perhaps the most significant for our purposes being the right of personal privacy.    The decision made by a woman whether and when to reproduce is personal and private because,  at least before viability,  the fetus has no independent legal rights of its own.   I understand you want to call it a "baby" and do so because of your religious belief that it has a separate soul.  But your religious view does not afford a pre-viable fetus with separate rights as a matter of law vis a vis the woman of whose body it is wholly and inextricably a part.   

It is odd to see so-called conservatives clamoring for the state to impose its will on the individual, personal and private decisions made by millions of women.   As far as the rights of the states under the 10th amendment,   those rights were never intended to permit a tyranny of the majority to deny the natural and therefore Constitutionally protected rights of the individual.   Conservatives understand well that principle,  except when they choose to apply it only with respect to the rights they care about.   

I keep raising the issue of Heller because it illustrates well your hypocrisy.   Protest all you want,  but the natural right of self-defense is not the subject of the Second Amendment.   The 2A does not address natural rights, but rather the sovereignty of each state vis a vis the new federal government.   The individual states' ability to maintain their citizen militias is protected from denial by the federal government.   It was only, over two centuries later, that a SCOTUS majority midwifed by means of the 2A the Constitution's protection of yet another natural right not specifically enumerated in the Constitution.

So why do conservatives champion the Constitution's protection of the natural right of self-defense but not the natural rights of privacy and self-determination?    Why are conservatives willing to man the barricades to protect a gunowner's rights, but not a woman's?   (And, of course,  that hypocrisy is not only shared by conservatives -  liberals stop at literally nothing to defend the abortion right,  but will no doubt overturn Heller if they achieve the power to do so.) 

What I am urging, when all is said and done,  is merely the politically unacceptable position of rights for me AND right for thee.       
Well, here you go conflating firearm ownership with murdering babies again. How tedious.

Note I said "at any age", so you would contend the mother could just off that pesky toddler and get on with her business, whatever that is.

Heller is a rebuke of the government of The Federal District for an egregious violation of the Second Amendment, as it should be. But it wasn't an issue of the States, and the Right is not reserved to the States, but to The People. Seems to me that phrase is in there somewhere, and it was expressly so, so the people could retain that and all their other Rights in the face of a government that no longer just derived its powers from the consent of the governed, but tried to impose its usurpations upon the people by force, despite their unalienable Rights.

You apparently forget the primary right protected, that of Life. Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness come after, and in that instance, I'd say that places Life first. Once that life exists, at conception, it is no longer just an argument about a woman's privacy, or her convenience, but a discussion of two lives. As I noted up thread, she is considered "With Child" (As opposed to being "With lump of tissue" or "With fetus".) TO say the one life is without rights, even an immortal soul is to deny the personhood and individuality which the child's DNA would prove. SO whether you angle at this scientifically, theologically, or culturally, the developing child is just that, a state only attorneys seem to be capable of ignoring (and a few parts dealers who want Lambos.)

But again, as so often, you didn't answer my question. Please quote the part of the Constitution which protects the alleged right of a woman to kill her offspring at any age.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 19, 2019, 02:18:32 pm
Well, how about the passage that Hoodat always relies on:  The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

That happens to be Amendment IX, not Amendment X, although I am not surprised to see you get that wrong considering your contempt for using the Constitution as a basis for law.  But since you bring it up, allow me to point out again that the only right being denied here is the right of the people to formulate and establish their own abortion laws.  And the fact that you are now using the Ninth Amendment to do so is the greatest irony of all.


The natural rights of man (and woman)  endowed by the Creator and secured against state tyranny by the Constitution are not limited to those specifically enumerated therein.

You are not going to get any support for your cause by claiming that the right of a woman to kill her child is an inalienable right granted by God Almighty.  A God-given right that suddenly deteriorates to nothing when some arbitrary condition called 'viability' is reached.  Never mind that rocks and stones themselves are 'viable' to the Creator you mention.


The Courts in exercise of their Constitutional authority have from time to time extended the Constitution's protections to such unenumerated natural rights,  perhaps the most significant for our purposes being the right of personal privacy.

With Roe, it isn't a matter of extending the Constitution's protection.  It is a matter of denying the Constitution's protection outright.  In this case, the right of the citizens of a State to formulate its own laws as explicitly stated in the Bill of Rights.


The decision made by a woman whether and when to reproduce is personal and private

This has never been about a woman's right to reproduce.  The fact that a woman is pregnant shows that her right to reproduce has already been freely exercised.  The issue here rests with the new singular life that has been created (by the same Creator you mentioned earlier).


because,  at least before viability,  the fetus has no independent legal rights of its own.

There you go with that magic 'viability' word again.  The word that magically takes a 'constitutional' [sic] right and makes it null and void.  The word that is defined by a tyrant wearing a black robe with zero medical training.  The same tyrant that would even deny the State's interests by disallowing any testing of viability throughout the mother's guardianship of the unborn child.

And what about that unborn child?  The inalienable rights endowed to us by our Creator somehow do not apply to that Creation?  Bah!  Good luck with that defiance of logic and critical thought.


I understand you want to call it a "baby" and do so because of your religious belief that it has a separate soul.

You don't understand jack.  My argument has been a legal argument from Day One.  I am willing to live under the conditions agreed upon by my societal peers in this society called Georgia.  And it is our right as citizens to mold and shape our society as we see fit.  If this society decides that shoplifting is a punishable crime, then we will draft laws against shoplifting.  If we decide that private citizens pumping their own gas is too dangerous for their own safety, then we will draft laws against pumping your own gas.  And if we decide that the valuation of human life will have a positive effect on our society, then we will set laws in place to protect it.  But it is OUR CHOICE, not yours.  Do whatever you want to do in Pennsylvania, but leave us out of it.

Isn't it ironic that the ones claiming to be "pro-choice" are the same ones hell-bent and determined to deny a "choice" explicitly enumerated in the Constitution to the people of Georgia.


But your religious view does not afford a pre-viable fetus with separate rights as a matter of law

Says the tyrant who has zero law to back up his claim.  Contrast that with the Bill of Rights which explicitly says that I do have that right.  Besides, when it comes to religion, YOU are the one claiming that abortion is a God-given right, while I continue to claim that self-determination is a legal (i.e. based upon written law) right.  Your hypocrisy on this is astounding.


vis a vis the woman of whose body it is wholly and inextricably a part.

Uh, no.  The baby has his/her own DNA, his/her own blood, his/her own vital organs, his/her own heartbeat.  This remains a medical fact no matter how much you try to dismiss it.  The mother and baby do not share anything except for nutrients that pass at the molecular level through the placenta.   It is no different than a mother breastfeeding or giving a bottle of formula to a newborn.  By law, she is required to provide sustenance to the life she chose to create by the free exercise of her reproductive rights.


It is odd to see so-called conservatives clamoring for the state to impose its will on the individual, personal and private decisions made by millions of women.

No one is imposing their will on women exercising their reproductive rights.  A woman is free to engage in any exercise that will lead to pregnancy any time she chooses.  But once a new singular right is Created (see "Creator" above), the the State has a vested interest in the outcome of that life.


As far as the rights of the states under the 10th amendment,   those rights were never intended to permit a tyranny of the majority to deny the natural and therefore Constitutionally protected rights of the individual.   

The right to abortion is not Constitutionally protected.  If they were, you would have cited it by now.  But after three years of asking, you still come up empty.  So quit lying.  There is no Constitutional abortion right.  Even the drafter of the Roe decision admits that.  Enough already.


Conservatives understand well that principle,  except when they choose to apply it only with respect to the rights they care about.

Allow me to point out once again that this Conservative is the one standing by what the Constitution actually says while you are the one bypassing the Constitution to impose your will.  I am the one willing to accept the collective decision made by my fellow society members here in Georgia in the formulation of our own laws while you are not.  I am the one who will never interfere with the right of the people of Pennsylvania to decide their own laws while you stand firm in interfering with Georgia's Constitutionally-protected citizens' rights.  So don't try to lecture me about tyranny when you are the one standing by those wearing black robes and holding guns on us.


I keep raising the issue of Heller because it illustrates well your hypocrisy.

You keep bringing up Heller because it is a strawman you think you can win.  And unlike abortion, there actually is a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.


Protest all you want,  but the natural right of self-defense is not the subject of the Second Amendment.

Our Founding Fathers vehemently disagree.  I happen to trust their judgment a heck of a lot more than I trust yours, just as they trust me to determine what is best for Georgia's society than they do you.  But don't take my word for it.  Here is what Madison had to say about it in Federalist 46 (https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed46.asp):

The federal and State governments are in fact but different agents and trustees of the people, constituted with different powers, and designed for different purposes. The adversaries of the Constitution seem to have lost sight of the people altogether in their reasonings on this subject; and to have viewed these different establishments, not only as mutual rivals and enemies, but as uncontrolled by any common superior in their efforts to usurp the authorities of each other. These gentlemen must here be reminded of their error. They must be told that the ultimate authority, wherever the derivative may be found, resides in the people alone, and that it will not depend merely on the comparative ambition or address of the different governments, whether either, or which of them, will be able to enlarge its sphere of jurisdiction at the expense of the other.

He goes on:


It has appeared also, that the prepossessions of the people, on whom both will depend, will be more on the side of the State governments, than of the federal government. So far as the disposition of each towards the other may be influenced by these causes, the State governments must clearly have the advantage.  .  .  .  Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it.

The purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect the people from a tyrannical federal government.  So yes, self-defense was absolutely the purpose behind it.


The 2A does not address natural rights, but rather the sovereignty of each state vis a vis the new federal government.       

Madison was clear.  Each State is its own society made up by individuals in order to serve its people.  To each person, it takes precedence over the federal government.  To deny that States rights are derived from the people is ludicrous.


The individual states' ability to maintain their citizen militias is protected from denial by the federal government.     

The people themselves have that same protection.


It was only, over two centuries later, that a SCOTUS majority midwifed by means of the 2A the Constitution's protection of yet another natural right not specifically enumerated in the Constitution.

There are many other cases that predate Heller that have been presented to you.  One case being, Nunn v. Georgia, where the Georgia Supreme Court overturned a ban on handguns by acknowledging that individual gun ownership was a Constitutionally protected right.  This has been carefully explained to you more than once already, yet you dishonestly choose to willfully ignore it each time.   


So why do conservatives champion the Constitution's protection of the natural right of self-defense but not the natural rights of privacy and self-determination?

This Conservative champions both.  Keep in mind that I am the one here standing up for each Georgian's right of self-determination in shaping our society under Amendment X of the Constitution.  Contrast that with your stance to deny the people of Georgia that right with absolutely no Constitutional basis at all.

Again, YOU are the one stating unequivocally that "Abortion must remain legal" in Georgia, while I could care less what you do in Pennsylvania.  So who is the tyrant now?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sanguine on September 19, 2019, 03:51:19 pm
Guys, there has already here been a very clear and right presentation of the argument that babies=fetuses=little bitty humans, and that American humans have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  Jazzhead and the Cross guy have repeatedly ignored that argument.  If they haven't been able to pull their heads out of their respective cabooses by now, that's because they are firmly and permanently stuck there.

Remember these words of wisdom:

(https://i1.wp.com/blog.zerodean.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/never-wrestle-with-pigs-the-both-get-dirty-george-bernard-shaw.jpg?w=550&ssl=1)
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Bigun on September 19, 2019, 03:56:36 pm
Guys, there has already here been a very clear and right presentation of the argument that babies=fetuses=little bitty humans, and that American humans have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  Jazzhead and the Cross guy have repeatedly ignored that argument.  If they haven't been able to pull their heads out of their respective cabooses by now, that's because they are firmly and permanently stuck there.

Remember these words of wisdom:

(https://i1.wp.com/blog.zerodean.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/never-wrestle-with-pigs-the-both-get-dirty-george-bernard-shaw.jpg?w=550&ssl=1)

 :yowsa:   :amen:
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Maj. Bill Martin on September 19, 2019, 04:14:46 pm
The Constitution doesn't explicitly say we have a Right to Privacy either, but we certainly do.

Only because of one of the top 5 worst Supreme Court decisions in history.  To the extent the Constitution actually speaks to privacy -- a word that doesn't appear anywhere in the document -- it is in the specific context of the 4th Amendment limitations on searches of private property, the Third Amendment prohibition on the quartering of troops, etc..  But there isn't some broad guaranteed to an undefined "Right to Privacy" that could pretty much mean anything to anyone, and stretch the Constitution beyond the bounds of rational restraint.

Quote
It doesn't say anything about us having the Right to Travel, but I'd say we do. Who's going ot stop us from going state to state?..

You're reading the Constitution backwards, as if the federal government can do anything it wants unless the Constitution prohibits us from doing so.  The reason we have a right to travel is because the Constitution doesn't give the federal government the power to limit travelling.  But again, that doesn't mean the Constitution guarantees a "Right to Travel".  It simply doesn't give the feds the power to limit it.

Before you dismiss that as a mere semantic distinction, a "Right to Travel" expressly guaranteed by the Constitution might be used to argue against all sorts of perfectly reasonable things, such as house arrest in lieu of jail, bail restrictions, temporary confinement of people who have entered the country illegally, etc..  The invention of new "affirmative" rights not expressly defined in the Constitution is part of what turns Supreme Court justices into the unelected makers of policy rather than just interpreters of the law.

Quote
In the Bill of Rights, it's acknowledged that we have the Rights to things that may not be explicitly mentioned in the Constitution.

Again, that was to eliminate the argument that the federal government was permitted to do anything that wasn't expressly prohibited.  For example, the Constitution doesn't permit the federal government to outlaw abortion.  That is NOT the same as saying the Constitution guarantees a "right" to abortion because that still leaves the state free to regulate it.  It's the entire concept of federalism that was a core component of our Constitutional debates.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Maj. Bill Martin on September 19, 2019, 05:02:28 pm
Well, how about the passage that Hoodat always relies on:  The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The natural rights of man (and woman)  endowed by the Creator and secured against state tyranny by the Constitution are not limited to those specifically enumerated therein.

Absolutely correct.  But that's because our government only has certain enumerated powers, and none others.  So, it's the lack of authority to act, not a specific prohibition against certain acts or the recognition of brand new "rights", that protect us from an oppressive federal government.

Endorsing the Supreme Court's whole cloth creation of specific new, enforceable rights out of the 9th or 10th Amendments is the road to collectivism/tyranny by Court decree:  Newly-discovered "rights" to housing, transportation, health care, college educations, the "right" not to be offended or degraded, the "right" to choose your own gender....etc., etc. etc..  All of those "rights" could be found in the Constitution just as the Right to Privacy was, and we'd all lose liberty because of it.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Sanguine on September 19, 2019, 05:35:41 pm
(https://wnax-am.sagacom.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/108/files/2015/07/pig-wrestling.jpg)
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 19, 2019, 06:48:27 pm
Guys, there has already here been a very clear and right presentation of the argument that babies=fetuses=little bitty humans, and that American humans have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  Jazzhead and the Cross guy have repeatedly ignored that argument.  If they haven't been able to pull their heads out of their respective cabooses by now, that's because they are firmly and permanently stuck there. 

No, it's very simple - the right to liberty of a born, adult woman is the only right at stake here.  There is no conflict between the competing rights of "humans".   A pre-viable fetus simply isn't, yet, a human being.     A fetus is pre-viable precisely because it is wholly dependent for its survival on the body of the woman in which it is growing.  Without the woman, it cannot have a separate existence.   Hence - vis a vis the woman - it has no separate "right to life". 

Cross's analogy to the baking of a cake is apt.   Flour, eggs and sugar don't make a cake.  Neither is placing all the ingredients in a pan.  Only by baking the assembled ingredients for the required time is a cake created.   Until then, no cake.   And until birth, no baby.   

Now it's not that cut and dried.  At some point along the way,  that baking cake, er, I mean fetus, is well enough along on its way that if it were to exit the womb it could survive on its own.   That's the idea of "viability".  Only when viability is reached may the State assert an interest in the fetus's protection - which does not IMO conflict with the woman's liberty because the months it takes for a fetus to attain viability offers the woman ample time to exercise her liberty.   

I understand that smacks of an unprincipled compromise to you.   But there is no other Constitutional way to balance the woman's liberty against the state's interest in protecting life.   But take heart -  you can always persuade the woman to do the right thing.   You just can't enlist the State to coerce her to do so.       

Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: truth_seeker on September 19, 2019, 07:28:39 pm
Thecurrent Left, seem to favor women killing their children, even after birth.

The child is not "viiable during the final months before birth, or for the first years after birth.

In Nature, the Mother's role is to take care of the chil. Before and after birth, that it may grow and learn to be self-supporting.

By the Lef't reasoning, the mother can kill the child at birth minus two months, and at birth plus two years.

Too much inconvenience.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 19, 2019, 08:02:20 pm
No, it's very simple -


Yes, it is very simple. If you don't want a baby, don't hump.
That is the point of reproductive right and reproductive decision.

Quote
I understand that smacks of an unprincipled compromise to you.   But there is no other Constitutional way to balance the woman's liberty against the state's interest in protecting life.   But take heart -  you can always persuade the woman to do the right thing.   You just can't enlist the State to coerce her to do so.     

Utterly false, and an absurd artifice, as unnatural and unrefined as to be a barbarism.
Every moment of a females being once she is pregnant is for the continuation of the offspring. Animals know instinctively, from dietary changes, to nesting, and etc, what the human female has been trained and fooled into ignoring. There is no such pre and post viable condition - There is only baby.

And the female is hard-wired for that purpose, in every species there is. And in every species, there is nothing more precious, especially to that female.

To include the human female. Not a generation ago, the most noble act a woman could do was to die in the act of saving her unborn child. "Don't worry about me, save my baby!" If it is not still so, that it is not so is a crying shame. A damnation.

Your sophistry has warped your mind.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 19, 2019, 08:26:25 pm
Guys, there has already here been a very clear and right presentation of the argument that babies=fetuses=little bitty humans, and that American humans have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  Jazzhead and the Cross guy have repeatedly ignored that argument.  If they haven't been able to pull their heads out of their respective cabooses by now, that's because they are firmly and permanently stuck there.

Remember these words of wisdom:

(https://i1.wp.com/blog.zerodean.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/never-wrestle-with-pigs-the-both-get-dirty-george-bernard-shaw.jpg?w=550&ssl=1)

Untruths should never go unchallenged.  If one prefers the tyranny of the courts instead of the restraint of the Constitution, then one should man-up and take ownership.  But calling cops criminals and sinners saints should never be allowed to stand under any circumstances.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 19, 2019, 08:35:37 pm
Yes, it is very simple. If you don't want a baby, don't hump.
That is the point of reproductive right and reproductive decision.

Utterly false, and an absurd artifice, as unnatural and unrefined as to be a barbarism.
Every moment of a females being once she is pregnant is for the continuation of the offspring. Animals know instinctively, from dietary changes, to nesting, and etc, what the human female has been trained and fooled into ignoring. There is no such pre and post viable condition - There is only baby.

And the female is hard-wired for that purpose, in every species there is. And in every species, there is nothing more precious, especially to that female.

To include the human female. Not a generation ago, the most noble act a woman could do was to die in the act of saving her unborn child. "Don't worry about me, save my baby!" If it is not still so, that it is not so is a crying shame. A damnation.

I don't disagree personally with any of that, @roamer_1 .    Where we differ is I am willing to try to persuade but unwilling to enlist the state to coerce.   Most women exercise their liberty in the way you describe - they view pregnancy as a blessing and a fulfillment of what makes them female.   But sometimes life's circumstances compel a different choice.   It may be the worst decision a woman can make, but it is still her decision, and hers alone.     
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 19, 2019, 08:37:59 pm
Untruths should never go unchallenged.  If one prefers the tyranny of the courts instead of the restraint of the Constitution, then one should man-up and take ownership.  But calling cops criminals and sinners saints should never be allowed to stand under any circumstances.

I fear the tyranny of the majority over the "tyranny" of courts who dare to secure my, your and our daughters'  individual rights against such majorities.   
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 19, 2019, 08:44:09 pm
A pre-viable fetus simply isn't, yet, a human being.     

What is your basis for this?  I ask because there are many who believe that it is.  Why do you get to decide and not them?


A fetus is pre-viable precisely because it is wholly dependent for its survival on the body of the woman in which it is growing.

What does viability have to do with this?  Either a woman has a Constitutional right to kill her unborn child or she does not.


Without the woman, it cannot have a separate existence.     

Advances in medical science have moved back your viability window.  Not that any judge has had any medical training.  Roe's 'viability' clause did not come from the Constitution.  Instead, it was pulled out of a judge's ass.

btw, the people of each State through their legislators have imposed a duty upon the mother to provide nourishment and nourishing for her baby after birth.  That duty can be equally applied before birth as well.  At least that's what the Constitution says.   Still can't find that abortion clause though.


Cross's analogy to the baking of a cake is apt.   Flour, eggs and sugar don't make a cake.

A cake doesn't have singular DNA, internal organs, a beating heart, blood flow, brain cells, etc.


Only by baking the assembled ingredients for the required time is a cake created.   Until then, no cake.   And until birth, no baby. 

So what happened to 'viability'?  Now it isn't a baby until it is born?  Geez.  How quickly the goal posts move.


Now it's not that cut and dried.  At some point along the way,  that baking cake, er, I mean fetus, is well enough along on its way that if it were to exit the womb it could survive on its own.   That's the idea of "viability".  Only when viability is reached may the State assert an interest in the fetus's protection   

Again, your basis?  Either the woman has a Constitutional right to kill her child or she does not.


I understand that smacks of an unprincipled compromise to you.   But there is no other Constitutional way to balance the woman's liberty against the state's interest in protecting life.

Actually, there is.  The Constitutional way to go about it is to actually do what the Constitution says and allow the members of a society to come together and work out that compromise.  It is what our Founding Fathers intended.  It is explicitly written into our treatise of government.  And it is something you hold in utter contempt.

I ask again, what does it matter to you what the people of Georgia decide on this matter?   No one from Georgia is dictating what Pennsylvania does.  Why are you such a supporter of tyranny and an enemy of our Constitution?
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 19, 2019, 08:50:46 pm
I fear the tyranny of the majority .  .  .

That would be believable if you were dealing with people in your own State.  But this has nothing to do with your State.  It has to do with mine.  And in that regard, it is you who is the tyrant because you wish to deny our Constitutional right towards self-rule.


over the "tyranny" of courts who dare to secure my, your and our daughters'  individual rights against such majorities.

This would be the same courts that gave us segregation because your right to send your kids to all-white schools trumps the 14th Amendment, just as your right to deny Georgia the right of self-determination trumps the Tenth Amendment.


Just come out and say it.  You don't trust the Constitution and are unwilling to allow people the power they are due if it threatens your right to knock up some woman and then persuade her to kill the baby so that you aren't stuck with 18 years of child support.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Hoodat on September 19, 2019, 08:54:52 pm
I don't disagree personally with any of that, @roamer_1 .    Where we differ is I am willing to try to persuade but unwilling to enlist the state to coerce.

Yet you are perfectly willing to use the power of the Federal Judiciary to deny Georgians their Constitutional rights (see Amendment X).  As for your State, do what you want.  But leave our State out of it.  We will decide what is best for our society, and we will live with that result.  But you have no right to deny our right to choose based on some nonsense about baby-killing being a Constitutionally protected form of birth control that no State can regulate.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 19, 2019, 09:37:57 pm
I don't disagree personally with any of that, @roamer_1 .    Where we differ is I am willing to try to persuade but unwilling to enlist the state to coerce.   Most women exercise their liberty in the way you describe - they view pregnancy as a blessing and a fulfillment of what makes them female.   But sometimes life's circumstances compel a different choice.   It may be the worst decision a woman can make, but it is still her decision, and hers alone.   

Still an artifice @Jazzhead , and a poor one, discounting not only the right of a living baby, but also the right of the father, to secure for the woman a non-existing preeminence, necessary only in the shade of the consequences of so-called sexual freedom.

In reality - the reality of aeons - the only time there is not the mixture of rights (that of the man, woman and child) is prior to engagement and conception. That is where the clean and clear decision lies, for both parties. PRIOR to the act. There is the moment of reproductive right.

And that artifice is not only insufferable, but will be our doom.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: jafo2010 on September 19, 2019, 09:58:19 pm

Quote
Jazzhead....
A pre-viable fetus simply isn't, yet, a human being.     A fetus is pre-viable precisely because it is wholly dependent for its survival on the body of the woman in which it is growing.  Without the woman, it cannot have a separate existence.   Hence - vis a vis the woman - it has no separate "right to life".

The majority of the electorate would disagree with you on this issue.  And frankly, what you say here is nonsense.  A fetus is not a human being?  Really?  What is it then?  I know, a lump of cells.  Pure poppycock. 

First off, not one single founder of this great nation would agree with you on that.  You think otherwise?  How could that be possible?  EVERY signer of the Constitution was a Christian.  Not a one was a muslim, or an atheist, not a one.

Because the unborn child/human being is dependent on the mother does not render it to a state of being non human.  Makes zero sense, but then again, liberals make no sense whatsoever.

If Scott Peterson can be indicted, convicted and sentenced to death for the first degree murder of his unborn child, our society recognizes the unborn as a human being!  So, if it recognizes that unborn child as a human being in his case(in California no less), how do we not do so for all in our society? 

The fact is that seven lying sacks of sh*t(unelected too) that sat on the Supreme Court determined that this great nation would practice mass genocide, and murder the most innocent of our society.  From my view, they are just as responsible for the murder of 60+ million unborn as Peterson was for his child.  Until this grave wrong is righted, America will never be a great nation again, and the people that think like you are hellbent to destroy what made this nation great.

And the irony of the whole matter is that people that think like you have fully embraced Margaret Sanger's policies of eugenics, and all of you are totally clueless.  The undesirables of our society, per Sanger's view, are being eliminated every day, those of color, the poor, Catholics, Jews, etc, and she never imagined this level of success for her eugenics policies...never!  And using taxpayer dollars too to fund this nightmare!

I have said it many times here on TBR that we are becoming more and more like Russia.  In saying this, it is no compliment.  I have traveled to Russia a number of times, and their culture is one of not valuing life as we do here in America, or should I say as we once did.  We kill our unborn, and many like you justify that by saying they are not human.  Now we have politicians and doctors saying we can kill after birth, if the mother so chooses, and we are killing people that want to die via assisted suicide, and soon any person wishing to depart this world, much like the character played by Edward G. Robinson in the movie Soylent Green, who decided he had enough and checks out while watching fields of flowers on screen and receiving a lethal dose of something to do the job.  That is where we are headed.

Somewhere along the way to having 330 million people, we all became expendable.  Either we change, or expect to see people's lives being treated as in Russia.  Terrorists seize a school, kill everyone.  They seize a concert hall, kill everybody.  Submarine goes down, yet has people alive that could be rescued by the USA or Britain, let them all die.  That is where we are headed.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 19, 2019, 11:22:30 pm
Because the unborn child/human being is dependent on the mother does not render it to a state of being non human.  Makes zero sense, but then again, liberals make no sense whatsoever.

IN FACT: Because of the child's dependency upon the mother, and the vital role that plays in the continuation of the house, the greater house, and the race; and further, because of the intrinsic and instinctive connection between the mother and the child, superseding every other relationship, the tuning thereof beginning early on, from conception forward...

Because of that, the rejection thereof makes the mother inhuman, not the child.
The argument, ANY argument, is foolishness.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: IsailedawayfromFR on September 20, 2019, 01:17:40 am
Would I believe that life begins at conception? No.
Are you ever going to answer the question?

It's been several days so I presume you are still thinking.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 20, 2019, 11:45:42 am
Are you ever going to answer the question?

It's been several days so I presume you are still thinking.

Huh? I thought I did. Explain...
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Jazzhead on September 20, 2019, 12:15:28 pm
Yet you are perfectly willing to use the power of the Federal Judiciary to deny Georgians their Constitutional rights (see Amendment X).

Guilty as charged.   That is because I support the liberty of the individual,  not the power of the majority to strip that liberty away.   That's what a conservative believes.   You believe it too -  you utterly oppose a tyrannical majority that would restrict your firearms right.   But is that only because that's a right that you happen to care about?

The power of the state to require a woman to reproduce is an imposition on a most basic sort of human liberty.   

Now understand that I do not adopt an extremist position.   A woman's right to choose must be meaningful, but it is not unlimited.  After the fetus is viable,  I think she's had more than enough time to exercise her right.   At that point, IMO, she's assumed a fiduciary obligation that I think the state can choose to enforce.   

I think viability is a useful marker that respects the dignity of each side of this issue.   Liberty is a difficult pill to swallow for some folks - because human beings can make bad choices.   Abortion is a bad choice,  but liberty is what it is.  It's the woman's choice, and hers alone, and God blessed her with both a conscience and free will.   

 But once the fetus can survive on its own,  the fact of its potentiality for humanity is obvious,   and requires only the exercise of fiduciary care.   So let the majority of citizens in your state choose to regulate or ban abortion,  after the point of viability.   

But not before.

Is that a compromise?  Of course it is.   But it is the best means I can think of to reconcile the competing ideals that animate the passions surrounding the abortion debate.     
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: IsailedawayfromFR on September 20, 2019, 01:42:01 pm
Huh? I thought I did. Explain...
I'll just requote:
Quote
If God said it would you believe it?

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,374700.msg2050606.html#msg2050606 (http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,374700.msg2050606.html#msg2050606)
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: OfTheCross on September 20, 2019, 06:34:45 pm
I'll just requote:
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,374700.msg2050606.html#msg2050606 (http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,374700.msg2050606.html#msg2050606)

What is "it" that God said?

I thought I answered that.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Smokin Joe on September 20, 2019, 08:35:48 pm
Guilty as charged.   That is because I support the liberty of the individual,  not the power of the majority to strip that liberty away.   That's what a conservative believes.   You believe it too -  you utterly oppose a tyrannical majority that would restrict your firearms right.   But is that only because that's a right that you happen to care about?

The power of the state to require a woman to reproduce is an imposition on a most basic sort of human liberty.   

You act as if standing up for the lives of the helpless is is treating people who have chosen to engage in sexual activity like brood mares.

No one is requiring her to engage in sexual behaviour or artificially inseminate herself.

No one at all. Any reproduction would, with the rare exception of rape, result from a consensual act on her part.
And, with almost universal sex education, there is little chance anyone capable of having sex doesn't know where babies come fron.

No one forced her to reproduce, the choice was hers.

Once a new life has been created, though, is it not inherent on the State to protect the very life of those who cannot protect themselves? Is this not the reason we have police? Is this not the ultimate duty of the law, to protect the rights of the innocent (a presumption given all) and helpless?

Yet that law, in a jurisprudential abortion, has been contorted to excuse the destruction of the most innocent and helpless.

Quote
Now understand that I do not adopt an extremist position.   
Just because a position is commonly held makes it no less extremist, just as a majority can be wrong, and often has been.
Quote

A woman's right to choose must be meaningful, but it is not unlimited. 
Which is why there are statutory age limits for such behaviour. After all, we can't have oversexed twelve year olds running about breeding like rats.

Quote
After the fetus is viable,  I think she's had more than enough time to exercise her right.
No, the time to exercise that right was before there was a little bun in the oven. 
Quote
  At that point, IMO, she's assumed a fiduciary obligation that I think the state can choose to enforce.   

I think viability is a useful marker that respects the dignity of each side of this issue.   Liberty is a difficult pill to swallow for some folks - because human beings can make bad choices.   Abortion is a bad choice,  but liberty is what it is.  It's the woman's choice, and hers alone, and God blessed her with both a conscience and free will.   

 But once the fetus can survive on its own,  the fact of its potentiality for humanity is obvious,   and requires only the exercise of fiduciary care.   So let the majority of citizens in your state choose to regulate or ban abortion,  after the point of viability.   

But not before.

Is that a compromise?  Of course it is.   But it is the best means I can think of to reconcile the competing ideals that animate the passions surrounding the abortion debate.     
The bad choices are already made before the ept ever says they are pregnant. You keep acting as if reproduction hasn't already occurred. The process has been set in motion by the combination of DNA that produces a unique individual.
Don't start it, no new life. Once it is started, reproduction has occurred. New life has been created. That new life will grow and develop until it dies.

"Viability" is a moveable goalpost, and nonsense. There are enough 20 somethings out there living in a relative's basement, who may be capable of locomotion, even reproduction, but cannot survive on their own.

That's a line that can be dragged all over the field, so contending that it is better to murder some of the people some of the time than declare open season on infants in the womb sounds so much better.
The viability line can come back on the field, on the other end, too.
As people get older or just sick, would you declare them 'non viable' and take them out of play like a damaged piece of equipment? And who gets to choose?

Strip away the gadgets, was Stephen Hawking "viable"?

Statistically speaking, in the few minutes it took to type this, enough babies lost their lives to , when older, fill a school bus, a couple of classrooms, a restaurant. Just because they will instead end up in a bucket/ medical waste pail/make a payment on someone's Lambo, doesn't mean they will be any less dead.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: roamer_1 on September 20, 2019, 08:42:21 pm
You act as if standing up for the lives of the helpless is is treating people who have chosen to engage in sexual activity like brood mares.


That, my friend, is an insult to brood mares. Brood mares bring their young to term, and care for them.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: Bigun on September 20, 2019, 08:57:07 pm
You act as if standing up for the lives of the helpless is is treating people who have chosen to engage in sexual activity like brood mares.

No one is requiring her to engage in sexual behaviour or artificially inseminate herself.

No one at all. Any reproduction would, with the rare exception of rape, result from a consensual act on her part.
And, with almost universal sex education, there is little chance anyone capable of having sex doesn't know where babies come fron.

No one forced her to reproduce, the choice was hers.

Once a new life has been created, though, is it not inherent on the State to protect the very life of those who cannot protect themselves? Is this not the reason we have police? Is this not the ultimate duty of the law, to protect the rights of the innocent (a presumption given all) and helpless?

Yet that law, in a jurisprudential abortion, has been contorted to excuse the destruction of the most innocent and helpless.
 Just because a position is commonly held makes it no less extremist, just as a majority can be wrong, and often has been.  Which is why there are statutory age limits for such behaviour. After all, we can't have oversexed twelve year olds running about breeding like rats.
 No, the time to exercise that right was before there was a little bun in the oven.  The bad choices are already made before the ept ever says they are pregnant. You keep acting as if reproduction hasn't already occurred. The process has been set in motion by the combination of DNA that produces a unique individual.
Don't start it, no new life. Once it is started, reproduction has occurred. New life has been created. That new life will grow and develop until it dies.

"Viability" is a moveable goalpost, and nonsense. There are enough 20 somethings out there living in a relative's basement, who may be capable of locomotion, even reproduction, but cannot survive on their own.

That's a line that can be dragged all over the field, so contending that it is better to murder some of the people some of the time than declare open season on infants in the womb sounds so much better.
The viability line can come back on the field, on the other end, too.
As people get older or just sick, would you declare them 'non viable' and take them out of play like a damaged piece of equipment? And who gets to choose?

Strip away the gadgets, was Stephen Hawking "viable"?

Statistically speaking, in the few minutes it took to type this, enough babies lost their lives to , when older, fill a school bus, a couple of classrooms, a restaurant. Just because they will instead end up in a bucket/ medical waste pail/make a payment on someone's Lambo, doesn't mean they will be any less dead.

Great Post @Smokin Joe!  Sadly, it will have zero effect on the poster you responded to and he will be back again later with the same tired old arguments.
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: txradioguy on September 20, 2019, 09:00:03 pm
You act as if standing up for the lives of the helpless is is treating people who have chosen to engage in sexual activity like brood mares.

No one is requiring her to engage in sexual behaviour or artificially inseminate herself.

No one at all. Any reproduction would, with the rare exception of rape, result from a consensual act on her part.
And, with almost universal sex education, there is little chance anyone capable of having sex doesn't know where babies come fron.

No one forced her to reproduce, the choice was hers.

Once a new life has been created, though, is it not inherent on the State to protect the very life of those who cannot protect themselves? Is this not the reason we have police? Is this not the ultimate duty of the law, to protect the rights of the innocent (a presumption given all) and helpless?

Yet that law, in a jurisprudential abortion, has been contorted to excuse the destruction of the most innocent and helpless.
 Just because a position is commonly held makes it no less extremist, just as a majority can be wrong, and often has been.  Which is why there are statutory age limits for such behaviour. After all, we can't have oversexed twelve year olds running about breeding like rats.
 No, the time to exercise that right was before there was a little bun in the oven.  The bad choices are already made before the ept ever says they are pregnant. You keep acting as if reproduction hasn't already occurred. The process has been set in motion by the combination of DNA that produces a unique individual.
Don't start it, no new life. Once it is started, reproduction has occurred. New life has been created. That new life will grow and develop until it dies.

"Viability" is a moveable goalpost, and nonsense. There are enough 20 somethings out there living in a relative's basement, who may be capable of locomotion, even reproduction, but cannot survive on their own.

That's a line that can be dragged all over the field, so contending that it is better to murder some of the people some of the time than declare open season on infants in the womb sounds so much better.
The viability line can come back on the field, on the other end, too.
As people get older or just sick, would you declare them 'non viable' and take them out of play like a damaged piece of equipment? And who gets to choose?

Strip away the gadgets, was Stephen Hawking "viable"?

Statistically speaking, in the few minutes it took to type this, enough babies lost their lives to , when older, fill a school bus, a couple of classrooms, a restaurant. Just because they will instead end up in a bucket/ medical waste pail/make a payment on someone's Lambo, doesn't mean they will be any less dead.


^^^^^^^

This!!! All day every day!
Title: Re: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’
Post by: IsailedawayfromFR on September 20, 2019, 09:38:44 pm
What is "it" that God said?

I thought I answered that.
'It' is that life begins at conception.  You simply said you do not believe it does.

So what I asked of you is would you believe life begins at conception if God says it does?