Four top GOP candidates would ban abortion in rape, incest
In November, 58 percent of voters in Mississippi rejected a so-called “personhood amendment,” which stated that human life begins at the moment of fertilization and gave human embryos all of the legal protections of a person. Destroying an embryo by any means would be considered murder.
The amendment would have outlawed abortion even in cases of rape and incest, as well as embryonic stem-cell research. According to personhood backers, it would also affect birth-control methods such as the morning-after pill, the IUD and even the standard birth-control pill, which works by preventing the fertilized embryo from attaching itself to the uterus. As a practical matter, its adoption would also halt in vitro fertilization to help childless couples.
Nonetheless, four of the top five candidates for the Republican nomination — Newt Gingrich, Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum and Rick Perry — last night publicly committed themselves to the cause of personhood and to the candidate pledge promoted by Personhood USA.
Mitt Romney has ducked the issue, arguing that human life begins at conception but concluding that such decisions should be made at the state rather than federal level. Jon Huntsman has said the personhood movement “goes too far.”
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
527 comments Add your comment
stands for decibels
December 29th, 2011
8:52 am
This whole rape problem would be minimized if we could start torturing the violent criminals.
I see that the stupid is strong with this thread.
md
December 29th, 2011
8:53 am
“Paul – the only flaw with your post is that he hasn’t stated it as opinions … he’s stated them as facts:”
And if you read them, they include:
The women made the choice to share her baby making machine….fact.
The equation went from one (the woman) to 3…….fact.
Nature requires the man to use the woman to reproduce….fact.
After conception, BOTH are now parents (another definition that can be argued)…..fact.
As far as the man is concerned, he now has a child……fact.
Granted, I’m using my definitions……but as I said, definitions change. And most of this is based on personal observation and science.
So, in your opinion, what is not “fact”?
Adam
December 29th, 2011
8:54 am
josef: From yesterday and a few pages back: I would have been surprised if the margin had not been higher in certain states, like Washington, California, and New York. I would be surprised if ANY southern state had this on their ballot and it lost by such a margin, even Florida which can be considered a swing state.
Finn McCool
December 29th, 2011
8:54 am
Eli’s link charges $19 to send a fax to Congress. What a racket.
Paul
December 29th, 2011
8:55 am
Eli
freedomizerradio.com?
“Freedomists freedomizing freedom”?!!?
You really, really, really need to get out more.
Adam
December 29th, 2011
8:55 am
md: How are ANY of your definitions based in science, aside from the arguable “both are parents” if you define parents to mean DNA donors?
Paul
December 29th, 2011
8:57 am
md
When does ‘childhood’ begin? Just trying to clarify your stated…. opinion.
Finn McCool
December 29th, 2011
8:57 am
I’ll vote for the candidate that legalizes prostitution nationwide. That will cut into the number of rape occurrences.
TaxPayer
December 29th, 2011
8:57 am
But, why shouldn’t what I believe be considered? We have current laws based on somebody’s beliefs………and some science. When we get to the point where we can reproduce without the female, then all bets are off…….as the definitions will likely change anyhow.
Could you be more specific, md, and explain how your beliefs have not been taken into consideration in Roe v. Wade. I think perhaps you mean to say that your beliefs were not implemented as the law of the land, don’t you.
md
December 29th, 2011
8:57 am
“It’s really sad for you if “your” baby was aborted.. Next time make one with someone interested in providing you with a child.”
At least I said I was assuming…..you may want to try it too. Never said I had one aborted.
And for the sake of argument, it should also be noted that the primary party in Roe v Wade no longer believes in abortion…..just thought I’d throw that out there. That “perspective” thingy.
Doggone/GA
December 29th, 2011
8:58 am
“The women made the choice to share her baby making machine….fact.”
Not a fact. She chose to share her body. That does not necessarily include the production of a pregnancy
“The equation went from one (the woman) to 3…….fact.”
Not a fact. The equation is still only 1. The woman.
“Nature requires the man to use the woman to reproduce….fact.”
Yes, that’s a fact
“After conception, BOTH are now parents (another definition that can be argued)…..fact.”
Not a fact. Parenthood begins at birth, not a conception.
“As far as the man is concerned, he now has a child……fact”
Not a fact. He has nothing. The woman has a pregnancy, not a child.
Finn McCool
December 29th, 2011
8:59 am
So conservatives want freedom – less government, fewer regulations, etc. But they want to regulate the people on when they can do a perfectly legal act. They want to take away a freedom.
conservatives are like dogs chasing their tales.
TaxPayer
December 29th, 2011
9:00 am
md, your so-called “facts” are in fact just your opinions unless you have a new definition of “fact” that yoyu failed to share as well.
Paul
December 29th, 2011
9:01 am
Ann Coulter
“Running against an incumbent president in a make-or-break election, Republicans need a candidate with a track record of winning elections with voters similar to the entire American electorate. ”
She just acknowledges the Republican primary voters and power brokers are not similar to the entire American electorate.
But we knew that, Ann.
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2011-12-28.html
Doggone/GA
December 29th, 2011
9:02 am
“That will cut into the number of rape occurrences.”
Actually…no, it doesn’t. Rape is not caused by a lack of sex, it’s a power play and the freer availablity of willing sex partners does not reduce rape.
Joseph
December 29th, 2011
9:02 am
Just like you and your ilk do every single day Jay… Lie, manipulate and take out of context every idea that comes from the pro-life Conservative movement…. Your folks actually aired commercials saying that birth control would be banned by this law along with the morning after pill…. That’s simply not true… Read the bill instead of making things up about as you far lefties do on many occasions. You should be more honest and forthcoming to your few readers Jay…. Tell it like it is… Democrats don’t mind killing a baby… They do mind killing a mass murderer though… Go figure….
md
December 29th, 2011
9:02 am
Adam, Science says a “life form” is created at conception…….(there you go Paul).
After that is when definitions come into play, but that life form only grows (or dies) into a human.
We are the ones that draw the arbitrary line…………..
TaxPayer
December 29th, 2011
9:03 am
And for the sake of argument, it should also be noted that the primary party in Roe v Wade no longer believes in abortion…..just thought I’d throw that out there. That “perspective” thingy.
And for the sake of non-argument, the judges took into consideration the fact that some people believe in abortion and some do not. That perspective thingie. It just dangles there, don’t it.
Joseph
December 29th, 2011
9:04 am
Paul:
And Obama the most far left President in our nations history hold the majority of the electorates values… I think not….
Adam
December 29th, 2011
9:04 am
Doggone: “Nature requires the man to use the woman to reproduce….fact.”
Yes, that’s a fact
No, that’s not a fact unless you are saying that “using” the woman really means “must negotiate so the woman AGREES to let her body reproduce.”
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:04 am
Amazing how the GOP say Science is a factor in Birth, conception, etc…BUT NOT in Global Warming.
We only want our Science when it make Religious sense !
USinUK
December 29th, 2011
9:05 am
Joseph –
first of all, it’s not a BILL, it’s a pledge.
and I suggest that YOU might want to read it – you’ll find it enlightening:
“I oppose assisted suicide, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, and procedures that intentionally destroy developing human beings.
I pledge to the American people that I will defend all innocent human life. Abortion and the intentional killing of an innocent human being are always wrong and should be prohibited.”
in other words, it will outlaw the morning-after pill and certain forms of contraception.
Adam
December 29th, 2011
9:05 am
md: Science says a “life form” is created at conception…
I’m sure you have evidence to back this up? And besides that, you still haven’t addressed the four other definitions from a scientific standpoint just by pulling out a term like “life form.”
USinUK
December 29th, 2011
9:06 am
“And Obama the most far left President in our nations history hold the majority of the electorates values”
considering how many of Bush’s edicts he’s upheld, does that mean that W was a leftist, as well???
md
December 29th, 2011
9:06 am
“Not a fact. She chose to share her body. That does not necessarily include the production of a pregnancy”
Really? She can put that part to the side and reattach it after having sex? I didn’t know that.
As for the rest, you and TP seemed to have missed the part about using “my” definitions……if we are going to draw imaginary lines, I prefer to draw mine according to science……the life form absolutely does exist.
Adam
December 29th, 2011
9:07 am
md: but that life form only grows (or dies) into a human.
This is also not true. First, there could be abnormal growth. Second, something must first be “alive” to “die,” and I am not convinced anything is alive until it is born or outside the womb with a heartbeat and breathing.
Adam
December 29th, 2011
9:08 am
Really? She can put that part to the side and reattach it after having sex? I didn’t know that.
Don’t be obtuse. She has plenty of options to prevent pregnancy from occurring even while having sex.
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:08 am
USinUK .. Really was Bush a conservative ?
He hoodwinked a nation and the party for sure….”Deficits don’t matter “…. Kind of like going bankrupt is OK.
Bigger government, not smaller…… the only really GOP thing he did was allow the markets to be free wheeling, and crush the American Home owner.
md
December 29th, 2011
9:08 am
“That perspective thingie. It just dangles there, don’t it.”
Yep….it does.
USinUK
December 29th, 2011
9:09 am
“Really? She can put that part to the side and reattach it after having sex? I didn’t know that.”
not surprising.
but, yes, the woman can do everything she can to prevent pregnancy (the pill, IUD, etc) and yet STILL get pregnant.
TaxPayer
December 29th, 2011
9:09 am
Adam, Science says a “life form” is created at conception…….(there you go Paul).
I’m not sure that science says any such thing. Perhaps science would result in the identification of two so-called “life-forms”, the sperm and the egg, merging to form a fertilized egg. Upon successful attachment of fertilized egg to a source of nourishment, the formation of a viable fetus may be complete if said fetus eventually forms into an entity that contains all components necessary for completion of its cycle including a heart and lungs and brain, etc.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 29th, 2011
9:10 am
the primary party in Roe v Wade no longer believes in abortion…..just thought I’d throw that out there. That “perspective” thingy.
Well if you are going for accurate “perspective”, there were several named plaintiffs in 2 class actions which were combined into one case. The caption of the case is Jane Roe, et. al., appellants. There were also the Does, a childless married couple.
And I believe that Ms. Roe’s claim differs from “no longer believes in abortion”. Of course those who quickly say that Mr. Cain’s accusers are in it for the “money” and attention would never see the possibility that the “change of heart” could be motivated by the same drivers (not saying they are, just saying it be possible).
Paul
December 29th, 2011
9:10 am
md
“ah. no. really, only 1: the woman who has to carry the pregnancy. the woman who could die due to complications and/or childbirth. ”
Hmmm…….wasn’t she aware of those possibilities prior to getting into that state?”
This strikes me as more of the ‘everyone has a choice and when complications come, tough luck” silliness.
But, given you said “We choose to engage in the making of junior (personal responsibility), then we need to also be big enough to handle the consequences of having junior. Junior didn’t ask or choose to enter the equation………”
and
““I’ll make it easy for you folks that don’t seem to get where I’m coming from. Just as usuk and other “women” will fight to the death for control over “their” body, I would fight to the death for the life of “my” child………”
and have ducked answering when childhood begins, let’s clarify the basic part:
In your opinion, should all abortions be illegal?
and
USinUK
December 29th, 2011
9:10 am
Peter – good point – FISCAL conservative, he was not.
however, that doesn’t seem to matter these days … all that matters to the GOP (God’s Own Party) is that he toed the party line in regards to wimmen and their uteruses …
Joseph
December 29th, 2011
9:10 am
USinUK:
Are you kidding….. What except for the Patriot Act and use of drones has he kept as for as Bush policies go… He had complete control for two solid years and changed and implemented so many regulations that have kept the economy from recovering more rapidly.
Adam
December 29th, 2011
9:10 am
Joseph: Read the bill instead of making things up about as you far lefties do on many occasions.
I read the bill. And I know exactly what it does. I also know once passed, the enforcement is no longer up to the electorate. It’s up to however the executive branch wishes to enforce it, usually to the letter of the law. Meaning: No IVF, no abortions ever for any reason, etc.
TaxPayer
December 29th, 2011
9:11 am
Then again, perhaps md wishes to redefine the term “science” as well.
md
December 29th, 2011
9:11 am
“Second, something must first be “alive” to “die,” and I am not convinced anything is alive until it is born or outside the womb with a heartbeat and breathing.”
Talking about being obtuse……so, when C-sections are scheduled, the “baby” only exists on the day it is scheduled to be taken out?
So if they decide to move the c-section up a week, what exactly are they taking out?
Paul
December 29th, 2011
9:11 am
Joseph
“And Obama the most far left President in our nations history hold the majority of the electorates values… I think not….”
Ummmm…. then how on earth did he get elected?
Doggone/GA
December 29th, 2011
9:12 am
“No, that’s not a fact unless you are saying that “using” the woman really means “must negotiate so the woman AGREES to let her body reproduce.”
Nature is not concerned with agreement. Nature requires both the man and the woman to create a fertilied egg. Once that is accomplished the man has no further use to nature and everything else is up to the woman and her body. Whether the woman consents or not is not germain to nature’s requirements.
md
December 29th, 2011
9:12 am
“but, yes, the woman can do everything she can to prevent pregnancy (the pill, IUD, etc) and yet STILL get pregnant.”
And she knows that when??
USinUK
December 29th, 2011
9:13 am
“He had complete control for two solid years and changed and implemented so many regulations that have kept the economy from recovering more rapidly.”
YAY!!!! finally, we might be able to get an answer to this perplexing question:
WHICH / WHAT regulation has stymied economic recovery???
please. be specific. and show your work.
Doggone/GA
December 29th, 2011
9:14 am
“Really? She can put that part to the side and reattach it after having sex? I didn’t know that”
She can takes steps to ensure a pregnancy does not occur, if she so chooses.
independent thinker
December 29th, 2011
9:14 am
How many of those bible thumping right wing tea baggers are willing to adopt unwanted minority children who are born to dysfunctional mothers?
0311/1811
December 29th, 2011
9:14 am
Bumper Sticker:
“Equal Rights for Unborn Women”
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:15 am
USinUK. Yes BUSH was not a financial conservative, please tell me anything he ran his entire life that actually made money ?
BUT hey his buddies couldn’t make all that War Money without war, and steal from the Treasury directly, as in what happened to a few Billion of the War funds, no one can account for ?
Back to the Abortion issue…. that ALL points to science, since they changed all the data for Global Warming to allow the environment to get ripped apart….. Oh that was for Jobs….. HA HA HA……what a joke….. Science is what they are using for the abortion issue.
Talk about a flip flop !
Thomas
December 29th, 2011
9:15 am
Ummmm…. then how on earth did he get elected?
too funny- I think there 745 million reasons why.
USinUK
December 29th, 2011
9:15 am
“And she knows that when??”
excellent!!!
so, basically, being responsible with birth control isn’t enough … we’re back to the Sex Only for Procreation position (so to speak) that you’re supposedly not advocating
I hope you’re taking dramamine, md … you must be getting motion sickness from all the spinning
stands for decibels
December 29th, 2011
9:16 am
The women made the choice to share her baby making machine….fact
so much sickness in one sentence.
Paul
December 29th, 2011
9:16 am
Joseph
“Are you kidding….. What except for the Patriot Act and use of drones has he kept as for as Bush policies go… ”
You could learn a lot if you’d spend more time her.
Answer: spending.
It’s been extremely close to Pres Bush’s final budget.
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:16 am
Bumper sticker…… a fallacy with the GOP.
“Equal rights for American Citizens”
md
December 29th, 2011
9:17 am
Paul…..I believe in education……that is the only answer to the situation. I’m not naive enough to believe abortions can ever be regulated to match what I believe. Folks are going to do what folks are going to do.
Much like regulating anything else……guns, drugs, speed limit…..pick one.
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:17 am
The women made the choice to share her baby making machine.
Yes being Raped is sharing….. a GOP Mantra !
td
December 29th, 2011
9:18 am
Doggone/GA
December 29th, 2011
8:58 am
If I am reading your statements correctly then a woman has total right over the unborn child. She has the right to terminate the child, to have the child or to have the child and give it up for adoption and the man has no say so in the decision what so ever. (please correct me if I am misinterpreting your thoughts).
If the woman chooses to have said child then the man is then, at least, financially responsible to taking care of the child no matter if he wanted the child or not.
Can you please tell me why we have a law that gives one gender special rights over another gender? Is not the courts breaking the equal protection clause of the Constitution by enforcing the child support laws in this country?
Doggone/GA
December 29th, 2011
9:18 am
“I am not convinced anything is alive until it is born or outside the womb with a heartbeat and breathing”
You need to reassess that. The sperm and the egg are living cells, that join to create a new living cell. The only things not “living” are inanimate things like rocks and metals.
Paul
December 29th, 2011
9:19 am
md
You are posting a lot, flitting from one thing to another, yet really not saying much.
Do you think any abortions should be legal?
And to clarify an earlier post of yours, when does childhood begin?
md
December 29th, 2011
9:19 am
“so much sickness in one sentence.”
We choose everything we do…..fact.
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:21 am
Yup…… that 14 year old girl walking home from school in Marietta was sharing !
Paul
December 29th, 2011
9:21 am
md
See my 9:19 and a few earlier posts. I did not ask if you believe in education.
It appears you are making broad-brush comments and asking general questions to get people to pay attention to you, but when pressed for something concrete, like answering “please clarify: should abortion be legal?” you retreat to more floaty comments like “I believe in education.”
md
December 29th, 2011
9:21 am
“Yes being Raped is sharing….. a GOP Mantra !”
I think you missed the word “choose”…………..
Jay
December 29th, 2011
9:21 am
sheets
Paul
December 29th, 2011
9:22 am
sheets
md
December 29th, 2011
9:22 am
Paul…….I wouldn’t have to post so much if you actually read the others……your questions have been answered……slow down and go read them.
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:23 am
md.. not sure I understand your point..If the GOP says no abortion to a 14 year old girl for getting raped walking home from school, who is protecting her ?
0311/1811
December 29th, 2011
9:24 am
When you can “control and line up” people like the photo here they are in terror of their government.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45813667/ns/world_news-asia_pacific/
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:26 am
Perhaps a GOP follower will answer this question I posed earlier……
If the GOP says no abortion to a 14 year old girl for getting raped walking home from school, who is protecting her ?
md
December 29th, 2011
9:27 am
Peter…..you responded to my post about choice…….not the GOP.
Folks don’t choose to be raped……….
Paul
December 29th, 2011
9:27 am
md
“your questions have been answered……slow down and go read them.”
So this is where I ask “where” and you say “go back and do your own reading”?
I have.
You haven’t.
Diiiiiiiiiiiiiivert and Duuuuuuuuuuuuck!
Peter
He already answered that. You’ll just have to go back, read, and when you can’t find it, do it again!
GT/MIT
December 29th, 2011
9:28 am
I consider myself as fiscally conservative as most republicans. Where I differ with many Republicans is that I believe that individuals should be in charge of their own social actions. I also believe that each individual should be responsible for those actions.
As to the abortion issue, there are many who would have us hold funeral services for a used condom, whereas I believe that there are teenagers that should be aborted. It should be a personal decision, keeping in mind that there are unwanted children mangled and murdered almost daily.
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:28 am
md. Are the GOP saying no abortion to those who get raped.YES or NO ?
Please answer.. Thank you !
Adam
December 29th, 2011
9:30 am
md: Talking about being obtuse……so, when C-sections are scheduled, the “baby” only exists on the day it is scheduled to be taken out?
I didn’t say “exists” I said ALIVE
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:30 am
GT/MIT… Fantastic statement !
I believe that individuals should be in charge of their own social actions. I also believe that each individual should be responsible for those actions.
Thus they should have their own choice, kind of like how Republican’s want the “Market” to dictate the out come.
td
December 29th, 2011
9:30 am
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:26 am
Perhaps a GOP follower will answer this question I posed earlier……
If the GOP says no abortion to a 14 year old girl for getting raped walking home from school, who is protecting her ?
She has the baby and gives it up for adoption. Did the child rape the mother? Why must the child receive a automatic death sentence because of the actions of another person? Try dealing with those questions.
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:31 am
td… Ok so you say she MUST have the child correct ?
You and the GOP playing God then correct ?
Adam
December 29th, 2011
9:32 am
USinUK: “He had complete control for two solid years and changed and implemented so many regulations that have kept the economy from recovering more rapidly.”
YAY!!!! finally, we might be able to get an answer to this perplexing question:
WHICH / WHAT regulation has stymied economic recovery???
please. be specific. and show your work.
Personally, I’d first like to see proof of:
1) Total control for two years (false), and
2) Implemented tons of regulations
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:33 am
td …….did the innocent Iraq citizens that got killed in US bombing, receive a automatic death sentence because of the actions of another person?
Try dealing with those questions.
td
December 29th, 2011
9:39 am
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:31 am
td… Ok so you say she MUST have the child correct ?
You and the GOP playing God then correct ?
I do not know the answers. I am asking the questions to see what others think.
To answer your question then I am thinking right now that it seems the 14 year old “being forced” to have the child is more humane then to kill the innocent child. What are your and others thoughts?
td
December 29th, 2011
9:40 am
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:33 am
td …….did the innocent Iraq citizens that got killed in US bombing, receive a automatic death sentence because of the actions of another person?
Who is to say they were innocent?
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:41 am
I think I don’t have the answer td…BUT if the GOP is all about choice in the “Free Market”, then an individual must have free choice about their own personal body.
No different then you do when eating farm raised animal meat…..you know it is bad for you, most likely cause cancer down the road, but you do it anyway.
Paul
December 29th, 2011
9:41 am
Peter
How’s life in the vortex?
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:42 am
td. Please you think every Iraq Citizen was trying to take over America or the world ?
td
December 29th, 2011
9:43 am
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:33 am
Also go look at my post from 9:18. Why is this nation giving special rights and powers to one gender over the other? Is this fair?
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:44 am
Paul…being a GOP lover of GOD, and all about Freeing other nations via War, thus KILLING………is your spin buddy !
td
December 29th, 2011
9:45 am
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:42 am
td. Please you think every Iraq Citizen was trying to take over America or the world ?
I do not know do you? If you go and look at what the Koran states then the answer is yes but who is to say if they really all believe in their own religious teachings.
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:45 am
I guess really td you don’t believe in individual rights….. I am talking about a rape victim, someone who has already had her rights taken away from her, by a sick person.
Adam
December 29th, 2011
9:46 am
td: Why is this nation giving special rights and powers to one gender over the other? Is this fair?
No, it’s not. You’re right. Male privilege has to end.
And if you thought women are getting all the benefits while men are being persecuted, well, congratulations! You are a perfect example of the male privilege line of thinking!
Adam
December 29th, 2011
9:47 am
td: If you go and look at what the Koran states then the answer is yes
Not intended to be a factual statement.
The Mooslim fear is strong in this one….
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:47 am
thank you td..
If you go and look at what the Koran states then the answer is yes but who is to say if they really all believe in their own religious teachings.
Back to my original point about Religion’s of all types are a TOOL for those who use it !
Paul
December 29th, 2011
9:48 am
Peter
The upstairs thread is more fun.
See you there.
scrappy
December 29th, 2011
9:48 am
“To answer your question then I am thinking right now that it seems the 14 year old “being forced” to have the child is more humane then to kill the innocent child. What are your and others thoughts?”
1 – refering to it as a “child” is wrong, when the pregnancy is first determined it is not a child, it is a fetus, or cells clinging together with no hope ability to survive on its own
2 – you have obviously never been a 14 yr old girl- do you know how damaging pregnancy is on a woman, much less a girl who was just raped – the most horrible of all crimes – and now she has to walk around showing that shame and embarassment for the next 9 months – while not even being mature enough to deal with either two life altering situations….
3 – you stay away from my body decisions and I will stay away form yours – end of argument – case closed.
td
December 29th, 2011
9:50 am
Adam
December 29th, 2011
9:46 am
Why are you making assumptions about what I stated and then bashing me for your own assumptions? I am stating facts about one part of the law and how it is not equatable for both genders. Can you address this one example and not make generalizations.
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:50 am
Paul. What thread are you referring too ?
Thank you.
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:51 am
td…….. I am stating facts about one part of the law and how it is not equatable for both genders.
What are you referring too ?
td
December 29th, 2011
9:54 am
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:45 am
I guess really td you don’t believe in individual rights….. I am talking about a rape victim, someone who has already had her rights taken away from her, by a sick person
So you are saying that we as a nation have to give a rape victim the special right to take another human life because their individual right was taken from them in the first place?
td
December 29th, 2011
9:54 am
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:51 am
td…….. I am stating facts about one part of the law and how it is not equatable for both genders.
What are you referring too ?
Please read my post at 9:18.
Paul
December 29th, 2011
9:55 am
Peter
If you scroll up to the top right, you’ll see a heading of “Recent Posts” and under that is the list of threads from newest descending to oldest. The most current is “Poor Newt Gingrich Hoisted By His Own Petard in Iowa.”
Peter
December 29th, 2011
9:58 am
I read your post td…… I am not sure a man doesn’t have a say in a consensual situation. Since I am not a lawyer, I don’t know the in’s and outs of the specific laws.
My issue is not with consensual situations, BUT i believe all men and women should have free choice, just like eating.
Ron Burgundy
December 29th, 2011
9:59 am
I think whether you are right or left you probably share a lot of the same values. No one wants high crime, high taxes and war. I think we all want the same things yet we bicker on how to acheive them.
I think the problem these days is that when chosing a President we chose what we deem is the lesser of two evils. I personally am not happy with gingrich or Romney but I think they are better then what we have…or even had with Bush. I think the current President has done little or nothing to solve issues we care baout today yet he has spent like no one before him.
td
December 29th, 2011
10:03 am
scrappy
December 29th, 2011
9:48 am
“1 – refering to it as a “child” is wrong, when the pregnancy is first determined it is not a child, it is a fetus, or cells clinging together with no hope ability to survive on its own”
We disagree here and referring to it as a fetus is just a way for one to justify that it is not human and can be destroyed.
2: So again because a 14 year old has been ashamed and there individual right has been taken that is justification to give them a special right to kill another human being? If you want to give them a special right to kill then why not give them the right to take the life of the person that took their rights?
3: So if my kidneys, liver or heart is failing then I should be able to take these parts from another human because I have the undeniable right to make my correct decisions for my body?
Joseph
December 29th, 2011
10:06 am
USinUK:
This is exactly what it says. I realize sometimes facts get in the way for you far leftys but this is the reality of what the amendment says….
Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Mississippi: SECTION 1. Article III of the constitution of the state of Mississippi is hereby amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION TO READ: Section 33. Person defined. As used in this Article III of the state constitution, “The term ‘person’ or ‘persons’ shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof.” This initiative shall not require any additional revenue for implementation.
This is exactly how it was worded on the ballot… I understand that most liberals get their information from irrelevant dishonest news sources who blantantly lie and distort so that their point of view seems real but most informed people know better….