Obviously, that right is in one of the parts of the Constitution conservatives don't recognize.

The first amendment is one of those pesky inconveniences the right would love to ignore.

The problem is that information does not change peoples minds. I applaud the idea of asking the women to know what it is they are doing buy you can't, and should not, force morality on the unwilling.

~libs
We don't give a shit if the little bastard is humming Twinkle Twinkle little Star - just cut his head off and SUCK!

Obviously, that right is in one of the parts of the Constitution conservatives don't recognize.

#1 | POSTED BY NORTHGUY3 AT 2012-02-07 01:51 PM | REPLY | FLAG

I don't quite understand your point. the "first amendment" right of a doctor? to not tell a patient of a condition?? that's rich. or is it the right to have an abortion, which this law does not interfere with? I don't agree with the law from a legislative standpoint, but your comment makes no sense.

Ahhhh more government intervention from the party of limited government.

"We don't give a shit if the little bastard is humming Twinkle Twinkle little Star - just cut his head off and SUCK!"

Rick Santorum

The following Republican Presidents and Governors have all taken steps to make abortion illegal:

So this law forces providers to provide a service whether it is against someones beliefs or not. I assume the provider pays for this procedure even when it is not necessary thus increasing health care costs?

hmmm interesting.

Support Planned Parenthood. If you provide better access to family planning you would have less abortions to deal with.

I know Judge Sparks personally, and can attest to him being a man of character and conviction. Much respect for him.

#9
The same can be said for his wife.

"There can be little doubt that (the law) is an attempt by the Texas Legislature to discourage women from exercising their constitutional rights by making it more difficult for caring and competent physicians to perform abortions," Sparks wrote in his decision.

So it's all about choice but if you show them what choice they are making it is bad?

If people can suggest abortion, shouldn't people be equally able to suggest not aborting?

~libs
we HATE it when people make sense:
"If people can suggest abortion, shouldn't people be equally able to suggest not aborting?"

Texas Talibaptists coup.

So it's all about choice but if you show them what choice they are making it is bad?
If people can suggest abortion, shouldn't people be equally able to suggest not aborting?
#11 | Posted by ExpsRedemption

In who's opinion is the choice bad? Yours? It's really none of your damn business what a woman what's do when she is in this position. It's between her, her doctor and if she so deems those she elects to be involved with her decision. It certainly is not the government and certainly not you. Stay out of it asshole, it's not your choice.

Vote smaller government! Riiight!

Stay out of it asshole, it's not your choice.
#14 | Posted by billyray at 2012-02-07 02:46 PM | Reply | Flag: Right on!

BTW, interfering with medical services is really fucking rude too. I saw abortion services denied to a friend and she "had to" self abort via her own fist. It took her nearly 3 months to succeed (OMFG that was bizzar).

After they denied her services at 4 moths she got madder by the day - like a rapist was there every day or something - and whack went her fist again into her stomach. Each time getting more certain there was NFW this daemon is getting out alive... Thanks to her success on that, she and her other two sons are fine (she would have taken a knife to herself if it wasn't). Having met the SOB I'm sure she was right too.

Ahhhh more government intervention from the party of limited government.

#6 | Posted by 726

You're just pissed they rub that cream on your stomach.

It's disgusting to see the government interject in such a personal matter. Fucking conservatihadists should keep it in the mosque/church. Don't have abortions if you don't want to, or if your religion prohibits (just don't worry about all of the other things you're not following out of your holy books).

Funny how many people will defend the life of a stray dog more vigorously than an unborn baby with a heartbeat...and *JUSTIFY* it besides.

In who's opinion is the choice bad? Yours? It's really none of your damn business what a woman what's do when she is in this position. It's between her, her doctor and if she so deems those she elects to be involved with her decision. It certainly is not the government and certainly not you. Stay out of it asshole, it's not your choice.

#14 | Posted by billyray at 2012-02-07 02:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

So I guess you have a lot of disdain for pro-choice advocates. They are always sticking their nose into an issue that is between a woman and her doctor. No?

BTW, interfering with medical services is really fucking rude too. I saw abortion services denied to a friend and she "had to" self abort via her own fist. It took her nearly 3 months to succeed (OMFG that was bizzar).

After they denied her services at 4 moths she got madder by the day - like a rapist was there every day or something - and whack went her fist again into her stomach. Each time getting more certain there was NFW this daemon is getting out alive... Thanks to her success on that, she and her other two sons are fine (she would have taken a knife to herself if it wasn't). Having met the SOB I'm sure she was right too.

#16 | Posted by reitze at 2012-02-07 03:00 PM

Some gentleman you are.

Having met the SOB I'm sure she was right too.

#16 | Posted by reitze at 2012-02-07 03:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

Then she's dumber then a bag of rocks---what the heck was she doing with him in the first place? I love it how these women are self-absorbed in the first place and screw these idiots and then make a 2nd bad decision and take an innocent life.

#20 | Posted by ExpsRedemption

Bulls-eye!

Funny how many people will defend the life of a stray dog more vigorously than an unborn baby with a heartbeat...and *JUSTIFY* it besides.
#19 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2012-02-07 03:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

Its not that we don't care about fetuses. HOWEVER, treating a fetus like a human while ignoring the mother carrying it as though she doesn't OWN it as a body-part (or slave-owner-with-right-to-kill if you consider it "human")is ENSLAVING to the woman, or at best denying key medical services at times most needed.

Its kicking someone when she's down ("the least among us" in Jesus context). And shame on any "pro-lifer" who would do that - they deserve life for it. Killing or enslaving women to protect their body parts. Wow that's fucked up. Way beyond a seat belt protecting me from myself re-enforced by govt paid advertizing "click it or ticket". Diablo (devil) must surely be having a good time on this one building on that shit into INSURED DEATH cuming next.

Why didn't you offer to punch it for her?
Some gentleman you are.
#21 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2012-02-07 03:07 PM | Reply | Flag: I did!

After we saw her doing that we all joked about it - like it was how to pull you own tooth or something.

Of course she said no. She didn't want us to get in trouble if anything happened to her in the process (whack 1 more time... "don't worry I'll take care of it,... NFW... SOB... bullshit... ...").

After they denied her services at 4 moths she got madder by the day - and whack went her fist again into her stomach. Each time getting more certain there was NFW this daemon is getting out alive... Thanks to her success on that, she and her other two sons are fine (she would have taken a knife to herself if it wasn't).

#16 | Posted by reitze at 2012-02-07 03:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

Reitze, a few comments:

1 The woman is an idiot. (unless she was raped)---first she screws a "SOB"---what the heck did she do it in the first place?

2 Her anger was misplaced; it should have been placed on herself and not her abdomen---she should have had you "whack" her upside her head with a 2x4 on general principle.

3 The demon was not in her belly; it's her miserable existence.

4 I can't believe her sons are fine. They're probably as screwed up as she is---fine example of motherhood.

5 You might want to pick out better friends.

When a woman orders a dead baby, it is interfering when a doctor makes sure she is fully informed that having a dead baby begins with a living baby.

Cut the hyperbole bs reitze. This is mostly about the inconvenience of a baby. You people justify it by any means possible.
Mom don't get prenatal care? bs - noone is turned away
Seat belt law? Ok now that is a stretch as a comparison.
~shakes head

They are always sticking their nose into an issue that is between a woman and her doctor. No?
#20 | Posted by ExpsRedemption at 2012-02-07 03:04 PM | Reply | Flag: NO - Dr Pusher can F off

Its up to the PREGNANT WOMAN. PERIOD. Some Dr asshole might offer a useful service like a clean cut and a suction tube. But its not up to him or her AND him. NFW.

Its up to the woman who's pregnant as the SOVEREIGN ruler of that biological unit which might contain eggs, sperms, and other living organisms like even bacteria and viruses. If she cuts off her finger she may think it sucks and ask for stitches but that's up to her. Same with a fetus. And anyone interfering with her medical needs simply adds risks and compounds her problems - in their own interest, not hers. And not in the interest of some unwanted fetus to be raised by the govt or other family members IN THE FACE of the woman's desires of that too.

My friend was raped - but had let the guy couch surf because he had done similar for her in her past homeless crisis. She had pity on him about jail time too - so would not make formal rape accusations into a he-she-said thing either. But wow was she pissed - at him and his fetus.

BTW, the USA has a C-Section crisis too - like 30% of pregnancies because Drs PUSHERs getting women to use DRUGS at that vulnerable time - and in vulnerable physical positions in an unfamiliar setting... but it sure sells the health care. It only costs a few lives and creates a bunch of retards.

The very people that should be getting abortions are getting abortions.

Reitze, a few comments:

1 The woman is an idiot. (unless she was raped)---first she screws a "SOB"---what the heck did she do it in the first place?
It was an "unprosecutable" rape
2 Her anger was misplaced; it should have been placed on herself and not her abdomen---she should have had you "whack" her upside her head with a 2x4 on general principle.
easy for you to say - she got mader by the day
3 The demon was not in her belly; it's her miserable existence.
she has 2 other sons and their dads live in the same neighborhood - she honers them and I was impressed and became friends with them hanging in that apartment's yead with the crew there
4 I can't believe her sons are fine. They're probably as screwed up as she is---fine example of motherhood.
nice boys last I saw them (1998)
5 You might want to pick out better friends.
Her and her 1st X were good friends for a while - good people with lots of friends, and a bizar coincidence where she had previously owned the car I rebuilt and then sold to her. I was quite impressed that she actually paid the whole price in payments and then got a plate the next day and a week later had a job. That was why I didn't see her much in the hood after that. She got a job - thanks to no car insurance requriement for so someone on welfare could get off welfare and raise their OWN kids.
#26 | Posted by matsop at 2012-02-07 03:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

BTW, the USA has a C-Section crisis too - like 30% of pregnancies because Drs PUSHERs getting women to use DRUGS at that vulnerable time - and in vulnerable physical positions in an unfamiliar setting... but it sure sells the health care. It only costs a few lives and creates a bunch of retards.

#29 | Posted by reitze at 2012-02-07 03:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

Every once in awhile, Reitze, you pull a fecal nugget out of a pile of dung. You're correct that we have a c-section crisis in America. All you have to do is follow the money to know why. Also, the advocates for these sections that used to parrot better outcomes as a reason have recently been proven wrong. My father was an Ob/Gyn physician and they had the same issue years ago but it wasn't as acute as today. He was the head of his department for years and kept data on the c-section rate by the various physicians. When they started to edge up to 10%, he would call their sorry rear-ends in for a talk with the committee to justify the increasing rate. Needless to say, after awhile it was no longer an issue.

#31 | Posted by reitze at 2012-02-07 03:38 PM | Reply | Flag

Thanks for the followup. Sometimes things never change in the environments we live in.

The very people that should be getting abortions are getting abortions.

#30 | Posted by attbay at 2012-02-07 03:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

Unfortunately that is the case---it even occurs with readily available contraceptives. I dislike calling individuals idiots; I have a feeling it's more of a lack of personal accountability issue---but then I guess one could call that a criteria for the "idiot" classification.

#30 That's the best anti-abortion point here yet, the "Idiocracy" concept!
#32 | Posted by reitze at 2012-02-07 03:40 PM | Reply | Flag: WRONG!

Actually state-sanctioned abortion for anyone that would get one, especially welfare recipients would actually help the "Idiocracy" concept that obviously is going on.

"requires abortion providers to perform an ultrasound on pregnant women and offer to show them the image and play sounds of the fetal heartbeat."

I'm sure what they meant to say was that adding another procedure, no matter how unnecessary, will ultimately bring healthcare costs down for the rest of us.

Sincerely,
Exhaustedredemption

The decision to undergo a medical procedure rests in the hands of patient and physician alone. The state has no business mandating unnecessary ultrasounds.

This isn't the first time that anti-choice morons have tried something like this. Remember when they wanted to force doctors to warn of the thoroughly-refuted "link" between abortion and cancer? Religious conservatives mandated that physicians lie to their patients by relaying inaccurate medical information.

So much for the party of "personal liberty" and "limited government". The right has decayed into a loathsome horde of superstitious idiots and self-righteous hypocrites.

#39 its because of bullshit laws like that that I've had broken bones and not been able to get an X-ray because I didn't feel like paying some asshole Dr Pusher to treat me like his subject and spew opinions onto me. Fuck that, Dr Pushers are dangerous and so are medical laws like that. Healthcare Reform will surely be a nightmare of Insured Death if it stands.

#38 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2012-02-07 03:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

When did I say anything like that? You must be a little confused.

#41 | Posted by reitze
I hate the beggers as well, it just seems many people go off the deep end on this issue, when they say nothing at all about the same type of thing for some other procedure.

#42 you know you would have if you had that much bandwidth - you're not confusing anyone.

Would someone please post the part of the constitution that says a woman has a right to an abortion? I seem to have missed that in my study of it. If she did not want to become pregnant there are ways of stopping it before this happens. What about the right of the fetus? If we had abortion in the 60's your beloved Obama would not have been here today.

#41 | Posted by reitze
I hate the beggers as well, it just seems many people go off the deep end on this issue, when they say nothing at all about the same type of thing for some other procedure.
#43 | Posted by freechoice at 2012-02-07 04:10 PM | Reply | Flag: Thanks

I had flipped my harley on the railroad stones behind a bar with an audience and gotten outa there. ALL my ribs were broken on my left side but NFW did I want to "check in" and "answer questions". And NFW can someone just go for an X-Ray. So there's an example, SERVICES DENIED!

Another? OK I got a bee-sting, elergic and armpits started swelling slowly but painful. Hospital ER said no benedrill w/o Dr but Dr unavial - waite and tell if worse. I left and went to the pharmacy. The pharmacist was quite helpful, gave me the chewable benedrills and had me try the BP machine and then said good you didn't use that epi-pen from 5 years ago. So again, medial system rules/laws equate to SERVICES DENIED!

There's lots of stories like these.

The very people that should be getting abortions are getting abortions.

#30 | POSTED BY ATTBAY

No, Tea Party members are mainly Pro-Life.

"Would someone please post the part of the constitution that says a woman has a right to an abortion?"

Would someone please post the part of the Constitution that says the United States of America should have an Air Force? Also the part that regulates individuals' possession of 50-caliber machine guns? And the part that says I can't keep a coffee can full of anthrax in my basement?

Stupid antiabortion folks don't they know the proabortion folks have a monopoly on perverting the Constitution

#45 GTJR its more an interpretation of the Declaration of Independence and what are "inalianable rights". The constitution gets most of them but I believe its even simpler. Anything into/out of a persons body.

1. Food & Water
2. Fuck & Fetus
3. Sleep and think
4. Speak & religion (1st amendment)
5. Drugs & Herbs
6. Air
7. Piss & Shit

Anything short of those seems like torture.

And yea in my POV that because the fetus is part of HER BODY its her inalianable rights to control it. Its also morally fowel to define it into something law protected then use that law to judge that women as though she were guilty of murder.

So regardless how much you may love a certain fetus or all fetus kind, the fact remains they only exist inside of a WOMAN's body - and only that woman owns her own body and has the right to control something as central to health as nutrition, pregnancy, drugs, etc.

And the part that says I can't keep a coffee can full of anthrax in my basement?

#48 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2012-02-07 04:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

Verifies adroitly his abode of existence.

#50

So if some guy slipped a pregnant woman some pennyroyal tea then he should only be responsible for property damage?

Would someone please post the part of the constitution that says a woman has a right to an abortion?

#45 | POSTED BY GTJR

Please tell me where in the Constitution it says you have the right to marry or have kids. Where does it say you have the right to move across town or state? Where does it say you have the right to choose your profession rather than having it assigned to you? Where does it say you have the right to an income?

"requires abortion providers to perform an ultrasound on pregnant women and offer to show them the image and play sounds of the fetal heartbeat."

I think what the author of this piece was trying to communicate is that its a long held belief amongst real conservatives that Government shouldn't get between or mandate what services occur between physicians and their patents. This mandated act, forwarded and championed by republicans, is simply an extension of this belief made manifest. I know this because I just mapped it all out in crayon (job creator, ya'll) and it makes perfect sense to me.

Sincerely,
Exhaustedandunredeemable

So if some guy slipped a pregnant woman some pennyroyal tea then he should only be responsible for property damage?
#52 | Posted by salamandagator at 2012-02-07 04:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

No I'd consider that an assault with a deadly weapon - aggravated by devastating impact upon the health of the victim, the woman. I think that makes it equiv to shooting but not killing someone during a robery, a felony on par with manslaughter as far as penalties go.

The PENAL law wouldn't address the loss of that woman nor would it be certain the child would have been born healthy. But the civil system could be also be applied in such an extreme hypothetical case with OJ$.

Verifies adroitly his abode of existence.
#51 | Posted by matsop

Hey, folks, Mudflap finally found an online thesaurus!

"No I'd consider that an assault with a deadly weapon"

But if it did not hurt her and only aborted her "property" then there is no victim of the attack only loss of property.

"The PENAL law wouldn't address the loss of that woman "
But it does, there have been many cases where someone has been charged with crimes to the unborn.

"But the civil system could be also be applied in such an extreme hypothetical"

In which case the value of a human being would have to have a finite value. But if it is not considered a human being then the value can only be to the physical value of the fetus or the replacement of said fetus. If i remember correctly an adult is worth $80 based on our contents so a fetus would be worth only a few bucks. that is unless you put the value of life on the fetus which would make abortion equal to taking a life.

You can not have it both ways. Either it is a human or it is physical property. I for one do not want to live in a world where anyone, unborn or not, is physical property.

I understand the argument that a woman should be able to choose whether to have a child or not, but i believe that that choice has been made when she choses to be sexual active. To use abortion as a way to escape the responsibility of her actions is only a mark of the degradation of society.

Used to save a mothers life, it is a different story and i believe that there is no obligation to carry the child of a rapist but that is a choice left to the woman and once made cannot be undone, read morning after pill or the like. It is the abortion as a contraceptive that really bugs me and a lot of others. It may be that we have gone too far and it is impossible to regain the responsibility that being an adult once carried but to enable more of that behavior is not the solution.

It may be that we have gone too far and it is impossible to regain the responsibility that being an adult once carried but to enable more of that behavior is not the solution.

#57 | Posted by salamandagator at 2012-02-07 05:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

On many levels. Furthermore, we probably have gone too far and is probably impossible to regain the value of life that we once had.

Any abortion thread is pointless on the DR. The left screams that the right ONLY wants control over a woman's body and then proceeds to lalala while a retort from the right is made. The sides will never meet. Abortion is legal to a certain point - the US has made its grave and must someday occupy it.

Please tell me where in the Constitution it says you have the right to marry or have kids. Where does it say you have the right to move across town or state? Where does it say you have the right to choose your profession rather than having it assigned to you? Where does it say you have the right to an income?

#53 | Posted by Sycophant at 2012-02-07 04:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

"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."

Abortion is a state issue. This federal judge should have turned the issue back to Texas. If you live in Texas and don't like it, tough shit. Or, move to California.

As to your silly post, those things are reserved to the individual.

Vote smaller government! Riiight!

#15 | Posted by danni

What?

FTA--U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks, who said an appeals court ruling obliged him to enforce it.......

About time some judge followed the law instead of making it,regardless of the legislatures intent.

rwd

So I guess you have a lot of disdain for pro-choice advocates. They are always sticking their nose into an issue that is between a woman and her doctor. No?

#20 | POSTED BY EXPSREDEMPTION

No. They aren't. Contrary to your bullshit beliefs, no one is Pro-Abortion.

In order for your statement to be valid, people that are pro choice would have to be actively advocating for pregnant women to have abortions. And by actively advocating abortions, I mean driving to hospitals and screaming at women in labor to abort their children. Much the same way anti-abortionists stand around abortion clinics screaming death threats to women choosing to get an abortion.

If we had abortion in the 60's your beloved Obama would not have been here today.

#45 | POSTED BY GTJR

Abortions were around in the sixties. It was usually done with a clothes hanger or a few swift punches to the uterus.

And, are you privy to some kind of information about Obama's mother wanting an abortion or are you simply spewing vomit?

The first amendment is one of those pesky inconveniences the right would love to ignore.

#2 | POSTED BY DR_ICEPICK AT 2012-02-07 01:53 PM

Hate to burst your bubble but it is the left that wants to curb our 1st amendment rights.

"We believe in free speech as long as we agree with it"

~~~ libs

You can not have it both ways. Either it is a human or it is physical property. I for one do not want to live in a world where anyone, unborn or not, is physical property. ...
#57 | Posted by salamandagator at 2012-02-07 05:23 PM | Reply | Flag: Trying too hard.

Sal - you're trying too hard to construe a fetus into something its not in order to sanction assaulting women. Try again - hell roads are paved with good intentions like good sounding laws that hurt people inappropriately.

Again its PART of the WOMAN's BODY, not independent - and if its hurt its hurt like a body part. The woman "owns" it more than physical property. That physical property analogy works better after birth - especially in prisons.

Ahhhh more government intervention from the party of limited government.

#6 | Posted by 726 at 2012-02-07 02:01 PM | Reply |

Don't like the law, don't live in Texas. See how simple that is? You'd almost think it works that way on purpose.

Don't like the law, don't live in Texas. See how simple that is? You'd almost think it works that way on purpose.

#66 | Posted by Washboard

Works for me!

You won't catch me even being Dead in Texas.

The ignorami who ask where the constitution gives a right to opt against motherhood must understand that Justice Blackmun, a Republican Nixon appointee, based his Roe v Wade opinion of Justice Brandeis' developing a right to privacy. Braindeis said privacy was correctly based on the Bill of Rights. You can google it if you still have doubts. herm

Ahhh silly liberals, the fetus has one other component that you fail to address, the male sperm. Without it the woman is not carrying a child and does not the father have the same right to see his son or daughter born? To further confuse the issue is that in most states you can be prosecuted for manslaughter if you kill a fetus in a pregnant woman. So that means that a doctor performing an abortion is guilty of manslaughter and go to prison and lose his license. what about the right of the fetus?

Bottom line if the woman does not want to have a child there are ways to prevent it. To kill a living human is just flat wrong just because a woman or man made a mistake. Now I know that you "liberal screw everybody it is only about me" will never agree but face it you have no reasonable intellegent argument.

In order for your statement to be valid, people that are pro choice would have to be actively advocating for pregnant women to have abortions. And by actively advocating abortions, I mean driving to hospitals and screaming at women in labor to abort their children. Much the same way anti-abortionists stand around abortion clinics screaming death threats to women choosing to get an abortion.

#62 | Posted by ClownShack at 2012-02-07 07:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

Oh, you mean like some pro-choice groups protesting locations that try to help a woman come to the knowledge that she can have the child, not have to have an abortion, and get help supporting the child even though she does not think she can currently support the child?

I guess pro-choice never protest? Once they protest they are interjecting themselves into the situation the same way.

So either:

You have disdain for both pro-choice and pro-life (which is a choice) groups

Or

You accept that both groups have equal freedom to make sure the women know their choices.

GTJR the argument is in the thread - drive-by. A fetus is a female body part. She can nurture it or cut it like her own hair. Oh right you want to regulate her hair too. Tough, Lady Gaga Shows Off Hairy Armpits At 2011 Much..

#70 | Posted by reitze at 2012-02-07 11:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

Unfortunately it is not her "body part". Her body parts have the SAME DNA as her. The unique, living, human being in the developmental stage known described as fetal or fetus has unique DNA from the mother and is thus not one of the woman's "body parts".

Science says that the fetus is a unique living human being, not a body part of the woman.

#70 | Posted by reitze at 2012-02-07 11:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

Furthermore, your thought process would allow one conjoined twin to kill the other conjoined twin so long as the one being killed was the lesser controlling conjoined twin, as the lesser controlling twin would just be a body part of the twin with more control.

Surely you don't advocate that.

The ignorami who ask where the constitution gives a right to opt against motherhood must understand that Justice Blackmun, a Republican Nixon appointee, based his Roe v Wade opinion of Justice Brandeis' developing a right to privacy. Braindeis said privacy was correctly based on the Bill of Rights. You can google it if you still have doubts. herm

#68 | Posted by herm at 2012-02-07 08:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

Speaking of ignorami -

"The Court additionally added that the primary right being preserved in the Roe decision was that of the physician's right to practice medicine freely absent a compelling state interest â€" not women's rights in general.[25]"

The baby killer gets it wrong again. You can't spell Evil with hErm.

BTW, interfering with medical services is really fucking rude too. I saw abortion services denied to a friend and she "had to" self abort via her own fist. It took her nearly 3 months to succeed (OMFG that was bizzar).

After they denied her services at 4 moths she got madder by the day - like a rapist was there every day or something - and whack went her fist again into her stomach. Each time getting more certain there was NFW this daemon is getting out alive... Thanks to her success on that, she and her other two sons are fine (she would have taken a knife to herself if it wasn't). Having met the SOB I'm sure she was right too.

#16 | Posted by reitze at 2012-02-07 03:00 PM

This is by far is the most disturbing --if true--story from a poster.

Like the baby did anything wrong?

And we have comments that the baby is just another body part--like hair?

Really?

I guess that's the upgrade from a mass of tissue.

#75 | Posted by MURPHY at 2012-02-08 12:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

Ritz crackers is living up to his name - and competing with Herman for most deranged DR poster.

Lol, all I've said is a woman has inalianable rights to contol the content of her body including hair sex fetuses and even to shit.

Of course try passing a law that you own her shit and she might stop using the plumbing system you want used (coat hangers instead of Dr Pushers & Priests).

I also mentioned the crappy performance of the USA in childbirth (30% C-sections).

------------

You can thank charlatan attorneys like John Edwards for that increase.

Claimed and sued and used voo-doo medical and quacks to win verdicts. He would 'channel the child' who has cerebral palsy--right there for the jury.

All because the baby was delivered vaginally the baby was inflicted with CP.

What did ob-gyn doctors do? They increased C-section procedures.

And once you have a c-section--it is nearly impossible to have a birth vaginally.

Lol, all I've said is a woman has inalianable rights to contol the content of her body including hair sex fetuses and even to shit.

#77 | Posted by reitze at 2012-02-08 02:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

She does not. Once another living being is involved, she loses her "control" over what is in her body - she should have had more "control" in the first place. And comparing a fetus to hair puts you in the mengele spectrum - or HERM - of "human" beings.

YOU don't have inalianable rights to control your own body - suicide is legally and morally wrong. YOU can't sell a kidney or a lung or any other appendage - the argument is ridiculous. Don't let a guy put sperm in you - you won't get pregnant. How you go about that is where the "choice" resides.

"Once another living being is involved, she loses her "control" over what is in her body"

And then "control" goes to the government...just what the "small government" conservatives want, right?

Oh, you mean like some pro-choice groups protesting locations that try to help a woman come to the knowledge that she can have the child, not have to have an abortion, and get help supporting the child even though she does not think she can currently support the child?

#71 | POSTED BY EXPSREDEMPTION

Wow your wording is vague. What were these locations being protested called? Do you have any proof of your accusation? Do you have proof it isn't an isolated incident?

YOU don't have inalianable rights to control your own body

So much for freedom. Hey A_Pliable_Anus, do YOU have the right to control SOMEONE ELSE'S body??

YOU can't sell a kidney or a lung or any other appendage - the argument is ridiculous.

People donate kidneys all the time to help save friends, loved ones, and sometimes perfect strangers. And what about organ donors? Do you hate them too?

By the way, you CAN sell organs. It happens all the time.

Don't let a guy put sperm in you...

Now there's some advice you could definitely listen to.

How you go about that is where the "choice" resides.

That's the beauty of freedom of choice. It allows you to be able to do what ever you want to, like get an abortion.

#80 | POSTED BY E_PLURIBUS_UNUM

E. P. Unum returns triumphantly to this forum with "suicide is legally and morally wrong."Not unlike this Santorum dude betraying himself by suggesting that not just the termination of pregnancies is sinful, but contraceptives too. This ugly Friend Of The Fetus who in prior posts compared me to concentration camp guards shares the sexual prudery of his idol, the pope from the Hitler Jugend. Let him rant, but recognize him for what he is. herm

#80 | POSTED BY E_PLURIBUS_UNUM --- LMFAO, foist on his own petard.

Until the baby is born, it is an appendage of the woman's body and as such she can do with it as she damn well pleases.

Until the baby is born, it is an appendage of the woman's body and as such she can do with it as she damn well pleases.

#86 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2012-02-09 09:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

Hmmm... how many of your appendages have unique DNA signatures and will continue to develop into separate human persons? Nope... I don't think appendage is the right word.

Let him rant, but recognize him for what he is. herm

#84 | Posted by herm at 2012-02-08 08:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

Which is defined by you? Hide behind the mask of "womans rights" to defend your pitiful actions Hermann. Cute prose and witty "pet names" don't remove the fact that you consider abortion equal to a tonsilectomy. Twisted and deranged. Not cute nor pet like - just accurate descriptions of a lost human being named Hermann.

Until the baby is born, it is an appendage of the woman's body and as such she can do with it as she damn well pleases.

#86 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2012-02-09 09:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

Up to the last second fedup?

#83 | Posted by ClownShack at 2012-02-08 06:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

Clownshit, the people have a right and duty to protect those who are unable to protect themselves. THIS is the entire argument for me on abortion - not religion, not some twisted control issue over women. If a woman wants to smoke crack 24hrs a day in her own bedroom while cutting her tits off - I don't care. But when she involves another life (which is where we probably will never agree it begins) then she no longer has an "individual" freedom or right over another life.

Did I say organ donors? Sorry, I said SELL your organs - yeah and people speed all the time - doesn't make it legal. dipshit

Up to the last second fedup?

Yes. Up to the last second. To do otherwise would mean that the woman is not in control of her body. Also, a clear line has to be drawn wrt time otherwise you get into the impossible situation of specifying when the woman no longer has control over her body i.e. 1 second before birth; 2 min before; 1 week before, etc.

The thought of an abortion in the third trimester is especially abhorrent to me but a person's body is theirs to do with as they please. Unless of course they are suffering from some mental/emotional ailment.

If a woman wants to smoke crack 24hrs a day in her own bedroom while cutting her tits off - I don't care.
I find it hard to believe you have any compassion for the fetus when you obviously have none for those who carry them.

the people have a right and duty to protect those who are unable to protect themselves.
On the contrary, you are arguing that this is the state's responsibility, not to be left to the people.

Conservatives want a government so small, it can fit up every woman's vagina!

Ms. Unum continues to make it personal. I think it's my volunteering as a clinic escort in the 1990s, one of my proudest post-retirement activities. herm

Yes. Up to the last second. To do otherwise would mean that the woman is not in control of her body. Also, a clear line has to be drawn wrt time otherwise you get into the impossible situation of specifying when the woman no longer has control over her body i.e. 1 second before birth; 2 min before; 1 week before, etc.

The thought of an abortion in the third trimester is especially abhorrent to me but a person's body is theirs to do with as they please. Unless of course they are suffering from some mental/emotional ailment.

#91 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2012-02-09 05:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

I only have two words: Your wrong. No need to say more.

Ms. Unum continues to make it personal. I think it's my volunteering as a clinic escort in the 1990s, one of my proudest post-retirement activities. herm

#94 | Posted by herm at 2012-02-09 06:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

Of course - when someone cares for innocent life as little as you do - it is personal. I am sure those lives who you escorted to their deaths can't wait for you to permanantly retire. YOU try to make it impersonal - thereby desensitizing those women who think they are going to have a tonsil removed. You're a sick bastard with a twisted sense of humanity. EVERYONE on the DR knows it - beyond my rhetoric. Why do you think NO ONE ever comments on your posts? They know what you are just as I do. A cold inhuman individual who cares less about life than the advancement of some lunatic agenda. It's probably too late for you, but I wish you could have had the "experience" of having a daughter and escorting your own grandchild to the death clinic. What a proud moment that could have been for you.

On the contrary, you are arguing that this is the state's responsibility, not to be left to the people.

#92 | Posted by snoofy at 2012-02-09 05:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

WHO makes up the state snoofy? I mean, for those of us who believe in a representative republic that is. - a little hint......we the people.

Clownshit, the people have a right and duty to protect those who are unable to protect themselves.

The embryo is a thing, it's not a those. It's like a tumor. If a woman chooses to get it removed its her choice.

THIS is the entire argument for me on abortion - not religion, not some twisted control issue over women.

But there's we're you are mistaken. You have no right to tell a woman she has to birth the embryo inside of her.

If a woman wants to smoke crack 24hrs a day in her own bedroom while cutting her tits off - I don't care.

What is she was smoking crack and cutting off her tits while being pregnant, would you care then?

But when she involves another life (which is where we probably will never agree it begins) then she no longer has an "individual" freedom or right over another life.

You believe life begins at conception. I believe life begins at birth. The embryo is not an independent living being. Remove it from the uterus and it dies. If it was an individual, independent, living being then you may have a point.

Did I say organ donors? Sorry, I said SELL your organs - yeah and people speed all the time - doesn't make it legal. dipshit

People CAN SELL their organs.

#90 | POSTED BY A_PLIABLE_ANUS

#98 That sounds reasonable. I'd bet a fetus would be worth its weight in gold!

#99 lol, that's really a key factor for a fetus. Ha mom what did ya bring me? Dad? Did ya get some silver? a little gold? to keep me from the deadly pole...

I always figured that mine is often the last post because no one has anything to add. Unum has zero clue to my feelings about human life, but I'm fond of my great granddaughter and did not advise her mother to abort - although if she'd wanted to, she'd have had my full support. No, with Unum is psychotic, some delusion that I have it in for her. herm

It IS psychotic. It's the same with the pretend paratrooper. I have civil disagreements with many who post here, but with 101 and EPU it's cold, viable, living hate. I wonder why. herm

Here's the thing, gay rights, abortion, what my neighbor ate for dinner...

I don't care. It's not my life.

Gays getting married? Good for them.

Some girl wants an abortion? Let her do it.

My neighbors ate green eggs and ham? Bon appetite.

People like Crispee, AmericanPly, E_P_U... They can't be happy until they control everything others do at all times since they think they know better.

If life begins in the womb, how should a woman that has an abortion be punished? Is she a murderer? Since an abortion is premeditated, should a woman that undergoes an abortion face capital murder charges? Suppose she accidently loses the "baby" as a result of a fall. Should she face man slaughter charges? What charges would a miscarriage carry? Suppose she didn't receive the proper pre-natal care and the baby were born underweight. Would the woman be charged with abuse?

Questions, questions; so many questions.....

I find it difficult to understand how people want to force women to give birth yet not be responsible for the babies once they are born. It is as though they place a higher value on life in the womb than on life outside the womb.

A federal judge on Monday upheld a Texas law that requires abortion providers to perform an ultrasound on pregnant women and offer to show them the image and play sounds of the fetal heartbeat.

Actually I have no problem with the law as long as Texas pays for the test and the doctor or nurse's time. Just because the offer is made does not mean that the pregnant woman is compelled to view the ultrasound and/or listen to the fetal heartbeat.

Practicing medicine in any state is a priviledge and as such, the licensing body gets to set the rules.

I find it difficult to understand how people want to force women to give birth yet not be responsible for the babies once they are born. It is as though they place a higher value on life in the womb than on life outside the womb.

#105 | POSTED BY FEDUPWITHPOLS

Most anti abortionists couldn't give a shit about the mother or the baby. They just have an unnatural fetish with embryos.

And they like telling everyone else what's best for them

You know, 17 year old girl has sex for the first time and thirty seconds later she's pregnant.

Now let's point out, thanks to the efforts or the concervative rightwing, she hasnt been taught sexual education or been provided birth control contraceptives (condoms).

Now, at the age of 17, she has no job, husband, education, and let's not forget she's only a fucking child herself.

The anti abortionist mentality is, she had sex, shes a fucking slut, her life is now and forever in bondage with those rapidly dividing cells in her belly she better hope mommy and daddy will help her, cause god only know how much right wingers hate single mothers on welfare.

The pro choice crowd, first of all are in full support of sexual education and distribution of contraceptives (condoms), secondly pro choicers support the girl in any decision she chooses to make. Does she want to birth the kid and raise it with her parents or with government aide? Fine. Does she want to abort it and wait until she's older, in a better financial situation? Also Fine.

Choice, it's what freedom actually provides us.

You know, 17 year old girl has sex for the first time and thirty seconds later she's pregnant.

Now let's point out, thanks to the efforts or the concervative rightwing, she hasnt been taught sexual education or been provided birth control contraceptives (condoms).

Now, at the age of 17, she has no job, husband, education, and let's not forget she's only a fucking child herself.

how pathetic. we have someone who hasn't had parents, made a destructive decsision, has to deal with the consequences, and you blame it on someone else.

The anti abortionist mentality is, she had sex, shes a fucking slut, her life is now and forever in bondage with those rapidly dividing cells in her belly she better hope mommy and daddy will help her, cause god only know how much right wingers hate single mothers on welfare.

tell us please, in what way has abortion touched your life?

obviously it has.

share with us.........

#98 | Posted by ClownShack at 2012-02-09 07:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

Clownshit, you need to shack up with herm - so, life begins at birth. Just want to confirm you are "ok" with an abortion 1 minute before delivery. Right? Just to get a barometer on your status as a member of the human race and all that.

how pathetic. we have someone who hasn't had parents, made a destructive decsision, has to deal with the consequences, and you blame it on someone else.
#108 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Not all parents can be you Eb. I'm sure you've raised your kid(s) well and what I wrote doesn't apply to you.

The only blame I was placing was on people that are vehemently against all and any sex Ed and are furiously against the distribution of contraceptives.

It IS psychotic. It's the same with the pretend paratrooper. I have civil disagreements with many who post here, but with 101 and EPU it's cold, viable, living hate. I wonder why. herm

#103 | Posted by herm at 2012-02-09 09:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

One cannot love evil HERM. And from everything you post - since I don't know you personally and don't really care to - shows you are evil. There is no civility in murder of innocent life. So yes, I hate your positions with a passion. I cannot make sense of your positions in the least as they go against humanity in every form. If you want to argue when life begins, I might have a discussion with you, but the absolute position YOU have on the "right" of a woman to control "her" body is absurd. No one has complete control and that's the way it's been and ALWAYS will be. You and the other libshits cry like babies when you don't get your way and scream civil rights without understanding the rights conveyed to you by a document 250 years old and another 2,000 years old.

Abortion and the DR is pointless. You think I want control of a woman and I think you value life as much as a toothache. I will not change your crusty old bitter self and you will not change my position on innocent life.

I don't think you have it in for ME Hermann - I think you have it in for innocent life - your posts tell this - again, NO ONE responds to you except in the negative - why do you think this is true? Only when I post a thread making it too personal do they come to your rescue. Why is this Hermann?

tell us please, in what way has abortion touched your life?
obviously it has.
share with us.........

#109 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Sorry to disappoint Eb, I'm actually anti abortion personally, but pro choice for everyone else. It's not my life. It's not my choice.

Here's as personal as it gets,

growing up, my neighbor was 30 and had two daughters (twins) age 14, she was pregnant by the time she was 15. She had it rough but with her family's support she had raised two girls whom she loved.

My step mother was raped twice while in college, both times she ended up pregnant, both times she got abortions.

Hope that helps you out.

Clownshit, you need to shack up with herm - so, life begins at birth. Just want to confirm you are "ok" with an abortion 1 minute before delivery. Right? Just to get a barometer on your status as a member of the human race and all that.

#110 | POSTED BY E_PLURIBUS_UNUM

Abortions happen in the first trimester jackass. Not as the baby is being born.

You obviously have no grasp of what an abortion is, what's involved, or how it'd done. You'd just a fucking control whore who thinks he knows what's best for everyone else.

Why don't you stop worrying what women are choosing to do with their lives and start fixing your own dysfunctional self.

You and the other libshits cry like babies when you don't get your way and scream civil rights without understanding the rights conveyed to you by a document 250 years old and another 2,000 years old.

So your contention is that when liberals see a woman not being given the right to choose what she wants to do with her body we scream civil rights?

And we do so because we don't understand the rights conveyed to us by some really old fiction novels?

Those, A_Pliable_Anus, are some winning arguments you've made here today.

Abortions happen in the first trimester jackass. Not as the baby is being born.

#114 | Posted by ClownShack at 2012-02-10 01:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

??????

An abortion can occur anytime before birth tool. Or I should say, people like you THINK it can occur or should be allowed to occur. Are you talking about the LAWFUL definition based on RvW?

thereby desensitizing those women who think they are going to have a tonsil removed.

All women, and even most men, can tell the difference between a fetus and a tonsil.

You, on the other hand, cannot. That's your own personal problem, and it has nothing to do with abortion.