Mischa Gelman wrote:
> Or like your claims that pro-life Democrats don't exist.
I never said they didn't exist, I said anyone who votes for them is a
fool because whatever they claim to be the party and leaders won't allow
them to act any other way but they way they tell them.
You proved that with your own posts describing the party's efforts to
crush the pro-life voice within.
Paul Galvanek - Ver. 4.0
In article <look-33542C.03035013072003@no-spam>,
The Expatriate <look@no-spam> wrote:
> "D.F. Manno" <dommanno@no-spam> wrote:
>
> > "i'm from north of here" <Me@no-spam> wrote:
> >
> > > So whats the
> > > difference? The cell count? The differentiation of the cells?
> >
> > The inability of the fetus to live independent of the mother.
>
> Neither can a newborn.
So I suppose that every child born to a mother who died during
childbirth died immediately afterward?
A newborn can be cared for by other people. A fetus is not capable of
living outside the womb.
You're not too bright, you know.
> > > I also can't understand the concept of charging , say, a drunk driver
> > > with the death of a fetus, while not applying the same to the exact same
> > > act of abortion. I'd at least like consistency.
> >
> > So would I. I'd like to see laws like the one you cite repealed.
>
> I'm sure you would. Well, you just keep spouting your indignation. The
> more that people like you talk, the more that people of conscience who
> were otherwise leaning toward a pro-abortion stance will realize that
> position's hypocrisy and insidious evil.
>
> Only a cold-hearted monster would believe that Laci Peterson's killer
> deserves to face only one murder charge.
Or someobdy without an axe to grind. The killer only killed one living
person--Laci Peterson. To say otherwise is phony moral outrage.
Apart from the anti-abortion fanatics, nobody considers a fetus to be
a living person.
Example: For all intents and purposes--the law, government, society,
even the Catholic Church--a person's age is calculated from the day
s/he was born, not the day s/he was conceived. Nobody counts the nine
months spent in utero.
Example: Ask a pregnant woman with children how many children she has.
She'll say something like "Two with another one on the way." She
doesn't say "Three."
Example: You can't take a dependency exemption or claim the child tax
credit on your tax return for a fetus.
Example: Governments don't issue death certificates and families do
not hold funeral services for fetuses after a miscarriage or
spontaneous abortion (or an induced one, for that matter).
The idea that life begins at conception is a political concept, used
by the anti-abortion zealots to support their campaign to outlaw
abortion. It has no validity in biology or in everyday life.
evil.
--
D.F. Manno
dommanno@no-spam
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." (Benjamin Franklin)
In article <dommanno-44D462.04064113072003@no-spam>,
"D.F. Manno" <dommanno@no-spam> wrote:
> In article <look-33542C.03035013072003@no-spam>,
> The Expatriate <look@no-spam> wrote:
>
> > "D.F. Manno" <dommanno@no-spam> wrote:
> >
> > > "i'm from north of here" <Me@no-spam> wrote:
> > >
> > > > So whats the
> > > > difference? The cell count? The differentiation of the cells?
> > >
> > > The inability of the fetus to live independent of the mother.
> >
> > Neither can a newborn.
>
> So I suppose that every child born to a mother who died during
> childbirth died immediately afterward?
And every fetus born prematurely has died?
> A newborn can be cared for by other people. A fetus is not capable of
> living outside the womb.
_Nothing_ is capable of living outside the womb without immediate help,
dumbass.
> You're not too bright, you know.
Heh. No retort necessary.
> > > > I also can't understand the concept of charging , say, a drunk driver
> > > > with the death of a fetus, while not applying the same to the exact
> > > > same act of abortion. I'd at least like consistency.
> > >
> > > So would I. I'd like to see laws like the one you cite repealed.
> >
> > I'm sure you would. Well, you just keep spouting your indignation. The
> > more that people like you talk, the more that people of conscience who
> > were otherwise leaning toward a pro-abortion stance will realize that
> > position's hypocrisy and insidious evil.
> >
> > Only a cold-hearted monster would believe that Laci Peterson's killer
> > deserves to face only one murder charge.
>
> Or someobdy without an axe to grind. The killer only killed one living
> person--Laci Peterson. To say otherwise is phony moral outrage.
No, it's not phony at all. People of conscience feel moral outrage at
the murder of a pregnant woman and recognize it as two lives lost.
That's why 26 states have laws that recognize fetal homicide, despite
the protestations of the feminist and abortionist lobbies. You can't
attribute that solely to those nasty old pro-lifers you hate so much.
> Apart from the anti-abortion fanatics, nobody considers a fetus to be
> a living person.
Wrong.
> The idea that life begins at conception is a political concept, used
> by the anti-abortion zealots to support their campaign to outlaw
> abortion. It has no validity in biology or in everyday life.
> evil.
The Laci Peterson murder case is shooting holes in that argument.
Virtually everyone except the pro-abortionists consider it a double
homicide, and the fact that people are in fact doing so has them
double-guessing the pro-abortionist mantra you spouted above. That's why
you guys right now are squealing like a litter of cornered pigs.
Perhaps you could spend less time blaming pro-lifers for your
philosophical dilemmas, and come up with better excuses to justify your
position. The ones you're using now aren't working well with anyone.
i'm from north of here wrote:
>>The inability of the fetus to live independent of the mother.
>
>
> Eventually, medical science will create an artificial womb. Then a fetus
> will be able to live independtly of its mother. What will your standard then
> be? I think you need to do a lot better.
Here's my prediction:
Long before an artificial womb is created science will perfect a safe
reliable male contraceptive along the lines of the birth control pill.
When that happens, and it's a lot close than many people realize with
some suggesting within the next ten years, and women no long have sole
control over reproduction, birth rates are going to plummet to
unimaginable levels, the impact on society will be enormous and there
will be a major shift in attitudes that will lead to outlawing of
abortion and strict regulation if not bans on birth control...
And it'll be those who currently call themselves "pro-choice" will be
leading the charge.
Paul Galvanek - Ver. 4.0