Collins: Won’t Support SCOTUS Pick Hostile To Abortion Rights

[Oceander]

It was exceedingly rare and shameful, all the way back to Egypt. Not just a Christian thing, mind you. It is industrialization that made the notion possible that a child was a burden and another mouth to feed.

In normative agrarian and nomadic terms, the child is valuable. Priceless even.

Actually no, it wasn’t.  In fact, the ancients also practiced infanticide. A Roman father had the right to expose a newborn to the elements, invariably killing it.

[musiclady]

Thanks for so much virtue-signaling.

I never realized until this moment how narrow minded, self-righteous and ideologically motivated and downright callous you are.

I suppose I should have noticed it before, but I actually thought you could think reasoned thoughts and have adult conversations............. until now.

My bad.   

Liberalism truly  DOES destroy brain cells.......

[roamer_1]

Actually no, it wasn’t.

Actually, yes, it was.
and another remarkable historical fact: A nation that kills it's own children doesn't have far to go.

[Oceander]

I never realized until this moment how narrow minded, self-righteous and ideologically motivated and downright callous you are.

I suppose I should have noticed it before, but I actually thought you could think reasoned thoughts and have adult conversations............. until now.

My bad.   

Liberalism truly  DOES destroy brain cells.......

As you wish.  If you want a conversation, try having one instead of throwing around dog-whistle words that are intended to stop conversation (the way that liberals throw around racism) and grasp that your little subjective feelings on things are not genetically universal and others may not feel the same way you do. 

[Oceander]

Actually, yes, it was.
and another remarkable historical fact: A nation that kills it's own children doesn't have far to go.

Actually, no, it wasn’t.  And it was accompanied by infanticide as well. 

[musiclady]

As you wish.  If you want a conversation, try having one instead of throwing around dog-whistle words that are intended to stop conversation (the way that liberals throw around racism) and grasp that your little subjective feelings on things are not genetically universal and others may not feel the same way you do.

Dog whistle words like "virtue signaling?"

You have done nothing here but vomit leftist, thoughtless propaganda, and denied the science and reality of what abortion is.

It is YOU who have done nothing but repeat the subjective emotions of the pro-abortion crowd, but down deep......... somewhere............  I still believe you understand that killing babies is wrong, and that this country needs to stop doing it.

btw, you have lied about what I've said multiple times, so the self-righteousness you have on display here is paper thin.

Learn to tell the truth about this subject, or leave it alone.

[Oceander]

Dog whistle words like "virtue signaling?"

You have done nothing here but vomit leftist, thoughtless propaganda, and denied the science and reality of what abortion is.

It is YOU who have done nothing but repeat the subjective emotions of the pro-abortion crowd, because down deep......... somewhere............ you understand that killing babies is wrong, and that this country needs to stop doing it.

btw, you have lied about what I've said multiple times, so the self-righteousness you have on display here is paper thin.

Learn to tell the truth about this subject, or leave it alone.

I have advocated for the view that a woman still has the right to control her body, even if she becomes pregnant, and does not become a mere tool for the implementation of someone else’s religious ideology the moment she becomes pregnant.

I guess individual liberty really isn’t much of a conservative value after all. 

[Right_in_Virginia]

No one on this thread is advocating killing babies.

The debate seems to have settled on the best way to pave their way into this world. 

Some think beating the woman as uncaring and selfish with an added punch in the mouth from God should be cemented into American law.

The other half thinks there's a better way.

But no one is advocating killing babies.  Those who claim some are or intimate others don't care are flat out wrong, and they know it.

[musiclady]

I have advocated for the view that a woman still has the right to control her body, even if she becomes pregnant, and does not become a mere tool for the implementation of someone else’s religious ideology the moment she becomes pregnant.

I guess individual liberty really isn’t much of a conservative value after all.

Now it's my turn to laugh. 

Except that you once again deny the SCIENTIFIC REALITY that the child is NOT the mother's body. and that she doesn't have ANY "right" to control that child by killing it.  And that using the word "liberty" to describe abortion is an outright lie.

On this subject, you are willfully blind.

I would suggest that you put aside your hatred for all things religious, and for people of faith, and actually look at the SCIENCE of abortion.

Many atheists understand the abject horror of ripping apart a human being for convenience. 

Try actually thinking for a change, and stop advocating the death of the innocent.  You can distort all you want and deny what you are doing, but that is exactly what you are doing here.

Think.

[Right_in_Virginia]

stop advocating the death of the innocent. 

Stop the damn virtue signaling    @musiclady   No one is doing that.

[Bigun]

No one on this thread is advocating killing babies.

The debate seems to have settled on the best way to pave their way into this world. 

Some think beating the woman as uncaring and selfish with an added punch in the mouth from God should be cemented into American law.

The other half thinks there's a better way.

But no one is advocating killing babies.  Those who claim some are or intimate others don't care are flat out wrong, and they know it.

There is no half vs half on this thread as far as I have been able to determine.  It's you and a couple of others vs everyone else.

[roamer_1]

Actually, no, it wasn’t.  And it was accompanied by infanticide as well.

nope.
Among elites perhaps. Among nomadic war tribes, yes - girls were killed at birth. And they swelled themselves with rape and slaves. Which is widely why they often suffered depredation and decimation.

But to your average agrarian or hunter/gatherer, big families made for more range and less work, as it is to this very day.  And peace time farming and hunting are the norm.

Chastity in women has always been a virtue. Periods of rampant sex never have lasted long, because rampant sex causes disease and it's participants would suffer that consequence - you forget that there was no cure for any of it until very recently.

So a society entering into a sexually liberal condition was in fact, sealing it's own fate.

[Oceander]

No one on this thread is advocating killing babies.

The debate seems to have settled on the best way to pave their way into this world. 

Some think beating the woman as uncaring and selfish with an added punch in the mouth from God should be cemented into American law.

The other half thinks there's a better way.

But no one is advocating killing babies.  Those who claim some are or intimate others don't care are flat out wrong, and they know it.

[roamer_1]

Dog whistle words like "virtue signaling?"

They sure like the term, don't they? Same crowd likes 'hater' and 'bigot'

No one I know use those terms, and certainly not in that fashion.

[Smokin Joe]

And the moment you refuse to let her abort it, it becomes servitude.  It really is just that simple.

As a guy, I have the option to insist that I wear something that will prevent that outcome. Both parties can prevent that, so I'm not buying that argument, from its inception.
I know others who have gone even beyond the barrier method, and had the tubes cut so they cannot become daddies (or create more lives, in addition to the ones they already started).

And there is no obligation to engage in coitus, no matter how great the moment of desire.

So, again, counselor, the time to decide not to father a child is before creating that life.

Afterwards, you are just setting a price on an innocent little head.

[roamer_1]

Stop the damn virtue signaling    @musiclady   No one is doing that.

Yes, @Right_in_Virginia . To advocate for abortion is exactly that, by definition.

[txradioguy]

There is no half vs half on this thread as far as I have been able to determine.  It's you and a couple of others vs everyone else.

There's gonna be some real tap dancing going on by a handful of people on this forum if the justice Trump picks and gets approved is very pro life and doesn't believe in this made up "right" that Harry Blackmon's clerks ginned up for him in the majority decision in Roe. 

[Oceander]

nope.
Among elites perhaps. Among nomadic war tribes, yes - girls were killed at birth. And they swelled themselves with rape and slaves. Which is widely why they often suffered depredation and decimation.

But to your average agrarian or hunter/gatherer, big families made for more range and less work, as it is to this very day.  And peace time farming and hunting are the norm.

Chastity in women has always been a virtue. Periods of rampant sex never have lasted long, because rampant sex causes disease and it's participants would suffer that consequence - you forget that there was no cure for any of it until very recently.

So a society entering into a sexually liberal condition was in fact, sealing it's own fate.

Go read some history.  Abortion was limited in many places due to the lack of abortifacients, but where they existed, it was practiced.  And infanticide was practiced, probably in part to make up for the lack of abortifacients.  Again, go read some history. 

[Smokin Joe]

It was exceedingly rare and shameful, all the way back to Egypt. Not just a Christian thing, mind you. It is industrialization that made the notion possible that a child was a burden and another mouth to feed.

In normative agrarian and nomadic terms, the child is valuable. Priceless even.

It was also a decision rarely made only to save the life of the mother, seriously and painfully deliberated, not taken lightly. As an elective to hide surreptitious sexual activity, something accompanied by shame and stigma, if found out.

[musiclady]

They sure like the term, don't they? Same crowd likes 'hater' and 'bigot'

No one I know use those terms, and certainly not in that fashion.

Who created the absurd term "Virtue signaling" anyway?  Talk about dog whistles and distortions.

Yikes.

It's used any time they lose an argument to someone using morality (and reason).

IMO, it's just a knee jerk response when the argument has been lost.

Downright Pavlovian.

And dumb.   

[Smokin Joe]

Actually no, it wasn’t.  In fact, the ancients also practiced infanticide. A Roman father had the right to expose a newborn to the elements, invariably killing it.

Because we have finally reached the point where we are as civilized as people who fed Christians to wild beasts for entertainment?

[musiclady]

There's gonna be some real tap dancing going on by a handful of people on this forum if the justice Trump picks and gets approved is very pro life and doesn't believe in this made up "right" that Harry Blackmon's clerks ginned up for him in the majority decision in Roe.

You know, I've been thinking about that.

One in particular adores Trump, and yet has spent half the day arguing on Collins' side of the debate.

It's a moral sticky wicket for the pretend "right" crowd.....

[Oceander]

As a guy, I have the option to insist that I wear something that will prevent that outcome. Both parties can prevent that, so I'm not buying that argument, from its inception.
I know others who have gone even beyond the barrier method, and had the tubes cut so they cannot become daddies (or create more lives, in addition to the ones they already started).

And there is no obligation to engage in coitus, no matter how great the moment of desire.

So, again, counselor, the time to decide not to father a child is before creating that life.

Afterwards, you are just setting a price on an innocent little head.

Sorry, but you seem to think that initial consent is some magical pixie dust that forever after prevents one from changing ones mind.  That means you are logically committed to the position, for example, that you cannot robbed or trespassed upon if you initially invited the robber or trespasser in, even if for just a moment or two.  In other words, your position necessarily entails logical absurdities, which means it is incorrect. 

[musiclady]

Because we have finally reached the point where we are as civilized as people who fed Christians to wild beasts for entertainment?

Zing!!!!!!!

(Those lovely Romans also covered Christians in wax and set them on fire to entertain themselves at garden parties.  Now THAT is a civilization to look up to!)

[Oceander]

Because we have finally reached the point where we are as civilized as people who fed Christians to wild beasts for entertainment?

That’s another issue, but don’t make false claims about history as a way of justifying a given position.

And I agree that infanticide was barbaric and best left to the past.  I also believe that turning a woman into a reproductive slave for the sake of a zygote that isn’t even viable yet is also barbaric.