|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
 Posted - 09/11/2005 : 21:20:02
|
Whoa
Yep, it looks like it's true. Now, I'm pro-life myself, but whoa.
quote:
It had to happen somewhere, sooner or later, and none of us should be surprised that it has happened first in Texas. The rabidly anti-choice mob comprising the majority of the Texas Legislature passed a law this year that finally has abortion-providing physicians exactly where the Rapture Right wants them: subject to the death penalty.
How could such a thing have happened? In a state like mine, how can you ask?
The new law was signed by Rick Perry at a Fort Worth church three months ago, on the same occasion that he notoriously suggested that returning Iraq veterans should come back to anywhere but Texas . . . if they were gay.
But at least he didn't sign their death warrants.
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 09/11/2005 : 23:46:56 [Permalink]
|
"It has been a tragedy of unspeakable consequences that for decades activist courts denied many Texas parents their right to be involved in one of the most important decisions their young daughter could ever make - whether to end the life that was growing inside her," Perry told a crowd of about 1,000 people gathered at the Calvary Christian Academy.
Notice the careful wording: "be involved in one of the most important decisions". But this isn't about the parents being involved. It's about them having full power to make that decision regardless of what the pregnant person actually wants.
Hey, the_ignored, I'm always curious to know what people mean exactly when they say they are pro-choice or pro-life, since the specifics of most peoples' views on abortion actually lie somewhere in the middle. (For example, I call myself pro-choice, though I favor the banning of abortion in third trimesters except when the woman's life is threatened.) Since you brought it up, where do you draw your line and why? |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 09/11/2005 23:49:52 |
 |
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2005 : 07:27:50 [Permalink]
|
I myself am both pro-life and pro-choice.
It's every single pregnant woman's right to choose her own life. A zygote or embryo can not be considered a separate part of a woman since it would nor survive on it's own, apart from her. As it is a part of her, she and she alone should decide what to do with it. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2005 : 08:10:07 [Permalink]
|
| Dr. Mabuse, in the US that is a pro-Death stance. ;-) |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2005 : 08:22:56 [Permalink]
|
| Yeah, the rhetoric certainly screwed things up in more ways than one. Not only are most people somewhere in the huge range of grey (in between banning all forms of abortion including potential abortifacient birth control to having zero restrictions or regulations on abortion up until the day before birth) but nobody wants to be labeled "anti-choice" or "pro-death". All the high emotions on both sides have probably damaged a lot of peoples' ability to think and talk about this issue rationally in every-day conversation. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2005 : 10:37:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
"It has been a tragedy of unspeakable consequences that for decades activist courts denied many Texas parents their right to be involved in one of the most important decisions their young daughter could ever make - whether to end the life that was growing inside her," Perry told a crowd of about 1,000 people gathered at the Calvary Christian Academy.
Notice the careful wording: "be involved in one of the most important decisions". But this isn't about the parents being involved. It's about them having full power to make that decision regardless of what the pregnant person actually wants.
Hey, the_ignored, I'm always curious to know what people mean exactly when they say they are pro-choice or pro-life, since the specifics of most peoples' views on abortion actually lie somewhere in the middle. (For example, I call myself pro-choice, though I favor the banning of abortion in third trimesters except when the woman's life is threatened.) Since you brought it up, where do you draw your line and why?
I would just say "adoption". I'd only support the abortion itself if the woman' life/health were at risk.
Now, drugs that prevent the pregnancy from taking hold, I've no problem with. |
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
|
|
|
Subjectmatter
Skeptic Friend
173 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2005 : 10:39:48 [Permalink]
|
| What about 'morning after' pills? |
|
|
|
CourseKnot
Skeptic Friend
USA
82 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2005 : 11:57:12 [Permalink]
|
| Yikes! I'm grey! |
Just flying through space with the rest of you... |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2005 : 12:03:59 [Permalink]
|
With Bush stacking the Supreme Court who knows how that law will fare. I presume it stays on the books until a test case takes it to a higher court for the constitutionality question.
I hope doctors flee the Lone star in droves. Let the Evangelical jerks reap what they sew. You won't see me in Texas anytime soon.
All those sick little smiles in the background of the guy signing the bill are disgusting.
Re pro-life vs pro-choice, if it were your body wouldn't you want the decision? I keep thinking how pissed I'd be if some cop told me I had to evacuate my unflooded home and I didn't agree. How would you like it if someone else was telling you that their beliefs were going to force you to carry a fetus to term?
Once the baby is viable outside the womb then it's hard to justify an abortion procedure that kills the fetus before or during an abortion. But there just aren't many cases that occur nor many doctors willing to do that unless the maternal life is threatened. |
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 09/12/2005 22:58:33 |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2005 : 14:33:50 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
Notice the careful wording: "be involved in one of the most important decisions". But this isn't about the parents being involved. It's about them having full power to make that decision regardless of what the pregnant person actually wants.
I guess the government should raise our children instead of the parents. I will be held responsible if my child commits a crime, I am ultimately responsible for my children until they are 18. Isn't that what the law states.
Do children really know the consequences of having an abortion or raising a child? The parents should have the final say until they are 18. They should know what is best for their children. Unless it is an emergency a doctor cannot operate on my child without my consent. Why is performing an abortion any different? |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2005 : 19:39:46 [Permalink]
|
I will be held responsible if my child commits a crime, I am ultimately responsible for my children until they are 18. Isn't that what the law states.
While you are held partially responsible if your child commits a crime, you will never go to prison because your child commits a crime. You can only be criminally charged and sentence for neglect or abuse.
I was mocking the rhetoric. Requiring parental consent does in fact leave teenage girls no choice. I didn't mean to gloss over the issue. Choosing a side on the issue of parental consent for abortion is really like being in between a rock and hard place. Personally, I side with the girls making the choice because the health risks of pregnancy - especially in teens - is greater than the risk of a first or second trimester abortion, and also, the risk of post-pardum depression is greater than the risk of being emotionally traumatized by the abortion. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2005 : 23:05:56 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
... Unless it is an emergency a doctor cannot operate on my child without my consent. Why is performing an abortion any different?
Well for one thing, once your daughter has a kid they are considered emancipated in most (all?) states. So your rights as a parent are revoked before children reach the age of 18 in some circumstances.
A 14 yr old can consent to STD testing and birth control use here. I presume that is also a common law in other states.
The bottom line is the decision to make decisions for your child until the age of 18 is arbitrary in the first place and there are many exceptions that have been made in the law. Just as legislators decided 18 was the cutoff, legislators have decided there are exceptions.
|
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 09/13/2005 : 00:33:42 [Permalink]
|
Pro-choice/Pro-life...
One option, in the extreme version, says, no abortions, no contraceptives, no sex ed, the only viable teaching to children should and must be abstinence. The other extreme, the woman's choice regardless of the gestational period. Most of us fall somewhere between the two on a sliding scale.
I can't find the numbers on the UN website anymore, but Denmark legalized the handing out of contraceptives to young people without questions. Their per capita abortion rates dropped from one of the highest in Western Industrialized society to one of the lowest following this move. This has proven the case where such measures have been taken. So, here's a question, if people don't want abortions performed, why do they oppose sex ed and contraceptives? Yeah, I know that it's all wrapped up in the chastity and religious thing.
But making something illicit, will only induce most children to explore that something on their own. We've ill equipped our children to handle what is a normal response in their growing and changing bodies. By educating children and removing that idea of breaking the rules and providing them with the necessary material to assist in their exploration, i.e. condoms and the pill, we'll probably do more for our children.
Anyway, I suppose I ought to put my soap box away now.
By the way, the 'morning after pill' is actually effective for approximately 72 hours following intercourse and is properly called 'emergency contraception'. This pill prevents the implantation of the fertilized egg into the uterine wall. Something that is more likely to happen than not, this just ensures that it does.
Well, I also think that rape is a case where an abortion ought to be allowed. Why force a woman to potentially relive a brutalization for 9 months? Seems rather cruel punishment for a person who bears no fault in the situation in which they find themself. |
...no one has ever found a 4.5 billion year old stone artifact (at the right geological stratum) with the words "Made by God."
No Sense of Obligation by Matt Young
"Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith. I consider the capacity for it terrifying and vile!"
Mother Night by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
They (Women Marines) don't have a nickname, and they don't need one. They get their basic training in a Marine atmosphere, at a Marine Post. They inherit the traditions of the Marines. They are Marines.
LtGen Thomas Holcomb, USMC
Commandant of the Marine Corps, 1943
|
|
|
|
moakley
SFN Regular
USA
1888 Posts |
Posted - 09/13/2005 : 04:44:09 [Permalink]
|
quote:
"It seems to me that people of the great state of Texas will be silent no more," said Rod Parsley, of the Center for Moral Clarity in Ohio. "Folks in this room understand, God is still watching."
Fear is such a marvelous motivator for the believer. |
Life is good
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 09/13/2005 : 04:56:04 [Permalink]
|
Once again, I don't understand why christians care. All of these aborted fetus are going straight to heaven, right? And the doctors, women, and other accomplices will be judged when they die (i.e. burn in hell), so what's the rush? A few decades is just a blip of time compared to all of eternity. Why don't chrisitans let their god do the judging?
One could argue that by sending the fetus to heaven BEFORE they have a chance to "go bad", that they are being done a favor.
So, why do christians involve themselves in the secular world beyond just proselytising? Again, it is along the same lines as why do christians wear seatbelts and do other things to prolong their life. If I thought I would be going to heaven, I sure wouldn't want to stay around here any longer than possible.
Is it just me or are fundie-christians the biggest bunch of hypocrites on the planet? |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
| Edited by - pleco on 09/13/2005 04:58:13 |
|
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 09/13/2005 : 06:56:47 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by pleco...
Is it just me or are fundie-christians the biggest bunch of hypocrites on the planet?
It's not just you.
|
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
