who supports right to choose

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Cleo's, that's one of the more straight forward explanations of what's been going on than I've heard in a while.

And those same fat cats are responsible for taking their jobs (the ones who own corporations) out of the country. Why can't they understand that they've effectively cut off their nose to spite their face. That's what is so insidious about greed - the extent to which greed has become the standard in business in America -it has nearly brought this country to its' knees.

Let's hope that Obama's remarks last night addressing this very topic will have some effect. Perhaps bringing it out in the open in that very public forum, will give some of these people the conscicence that they are sorely lacking.

If your senators are democrats call them and tell them to support the jobs bill and healthcare reform with the provisions that the public wants and the financial reforms for wall street (small fee to get them to pay back ALL the taxpayer money) and DARE the republicans to filibuster these and then televise the filibuster. WOULD THAT BE TRANSPARENT ENOUGH FOR EVERYONE???

[pattygreen 5]

I can't believe you actually used, if guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns. Cool. I hadn't thought of that.

So it's fine with me if Sara Palin uses some high powered rifle to shoot animals from a helicopter. Because if she gets cross-ways with her government, she'll just pick up that rifle and hole up in some encampment and have her very own war. There have been plenty of examples of right wing extremists doing just that. And religious fanatics like Waco, for instance.

Just because 'some' people use guns inappropriately, doesn't mean we should remove them from 'all' people. With that logic, we'd have to remove all knives and bats and alcohol and many other things that we have in life from the people.

If we all were issued guns after an extensive course on the use of firearms and the safety of having firearms in your home, then I would not be opposed to them.

Why do liberals 'need' to have soooooo many regulations on everything the people do? why? Do we have classes on how to use a knife? Do you think all the CRIMINALS out there who would use the guns inappropriately will take the classes?

Right now, it sure feels like most of the folks who have lots of guns are a threat to me because their political viewpoints (right wing extremist) are the opposite of mine.

You are paranoid. I feel sorry for you. You oppose how I think, yet I am not threatened by you.

So I'm not afraid of the government invading my land and taking it away. I'm afraid of people like Timothy McVeigh and kooks that love to sleep with a warm gun under their pillow.

..................................................................

[Corliss 0]

Okay heres my thoughts (in red) on the statement from BJEAN (in black) and Patty Green (in green).

Originally Posted by BJean

Some of these right wing (I guess Republican, although I'm not convinced all Republicans feel this way) are just so hard to figure. One of their major issues of contention is to make abortion illegal.

I mean to say that, for some of the right wing, is the ONLY real seriously important issue on the agenda.

Allowing the killing of human life should be high on everyones agenda. We can't figure out how there are some in this country who allow it so freely.

What About helping prevent unwanted pregnancies instead of focusing on forcing women to carry to term, how about helping support daycare for those who want to have their children nd raise them themselves but have too little in resources?

Interestingly, they love the death penalty and support it implicitly.

That's because when you allow the death penalty it is used on the GUILTY, and when you allow abortion it is used on the INNOCENT.

In the case where an innocent person is falsley convicted he is just as dead as the guilty person who is executed.

They also believe everyone should have the right to bear arms of any kind. Never mind that killing with guns by accident is a problem and being able to grab a gun and quickly kill in a rage is a problem and gangs carrying guns and using them on the streets is a big problem in some cities.

When you outlaw guns, then only the outlaws have guns. People with the intent or ability within them to kill others will use anything to kill them, they don't need a gun. If Joe Shmoe wants Suzy Q killed, he will get the job done with a knife. If the law were to take away weapons from the citizenry, then only those in authority and criminals will have them. This puts the regular law abiding citizen at a disadvantage and allows for government control and criminal action without defense to be used against you.As stated in the Second Amendment of our Constitution, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Now come the arguments. Who are "the people?" What does "bear arms" mean? Does "the people" refer to the "well regulated militia?" Should our states still have "a well regulated militia?"

All these details make arguing difficult and keep many picky and persnickety people from seeing the truth. Self-defense is protected by law. The Constitution says the people have the right to keep and bear arms. And that right "shall not be infringed."

Why, then, is there still an argument?

If one or two students at Virginia Tech could have had concealed weapons, or if a classroom could have had a gun stashed under the teacher's podium, the massacre may have only been a one- or two-fatality incident, rather than a shooting spree that ended in suicide.

I personally have no problem with well trained people having permits to own handguns The problems come in when people who are not permitted carry concealed weapons or for those who believe we need AKA 47s for personal protection and machine guns to hunt with.

But their major anger and intolerance seems to stem from their anger about women having the choice in the question of abortion.

They talk about not wanting government interference in their right to buy guns and carry them. They don't want the government telling them have to pay taxes. They don't want the government having oversight or any control over the insurance companies who make billions on their health care policies. And they bellyache about government intrusion in their lives as being a very bad thing.

It's actually "TOO much intrusion" that we belly ache about. And, I could say that liberals want MORE intrusion as their answer to every problem.

It seems that most right wingers are just fine with intrusion as long as it does not affect their pocket books or their status.

Mainly as long as the intrusion affects OTHERS and not them. Unfortunately many who hold the right wing point of view are simply following along like blind stupid sheep.

They don't want to pay taxes and they don't want any government programs of the welfare type - they think everybody should be able to work, as they do.

Unfortunately many of them are not working and are the very ones who benefit from disability and unemployment. Had a long discussion with such a fellow at a health care reform rally back in the summer in Nashville. He was disabled and had no insurance. He was applying for disability benifits and stupidly and blindly was opposing universal coverage. Sadly he is not alone. I also work with many nurses who see the patients who cannot afford medications come through the revolving doors of our hospital in worse condition every time. A couple of hundred dollars per months in medications could avoid millions in outlay for intensive care and long term care. Many of my coworkers are not even capable of seeing the economics of it when we have the evidence right under our noses.

They don't want to pay for somebody elses mistakes. They don't want generations on welfare. They think it is unfair to have to give part of their salary to someone who is on the dole.

We want government to pare back on their spending and charity to others. This is true. We can't afford it. If we had a surplus of funds and we weren't going bankrupt, that would be a different story, but that's not the case. Sure, it's great to help the poor, but not if you are going to put you children and grandchildren into financial ruin because of it. This is what you liberals don't get. You just want to spend, spend, spend, and let the next person worry about where to get the money to repay it all. Then there are programs in the working that are soooooo wasteful and unnecessary, yet they continue on and on.

You computations makes no sense. Invest money early on to avoid higher costs later. The prison system costs a fortune. We could save so much with a better investment in day care and school programs with more money available for assisting people who try to get ahead. It all ties in with gearing health care toward prevention. Our country needs a massive overhaul and only then can we stop wasting money to imprison and execute and provide expensive emergency and acute medical care to so many of our citizens.

But they want the government to intrude in the case of a woman's choice.They want children or women who become impregnated without their consent and against their wishes, to be forced into carrying those embryos to full term. What happens after that to those women and those babies is not their concern. Although they say they know lots of people who want to adopt them.

We want life (all life) to be cherished and not abused or murdered.

Unless it is the life of someone who has been convicted rightly or WRONGFULLY of a crime. How can we give those people their lives back?

How is that an answer? They want to make a law to force women to have babies in order to be baby mills for their friends who need babies?

NOT to be baby mills for our friends, but to save the lives of the babies being murdered.

Nobody wants babies to be murdered. The gist of the issue is whether or not a woman should have a right to end an unwanted pregnancy, not kill a baby. Again we disagree with the time at which the fetus becomes a separate life and we will never agree on that, so why not work together and put some money into prevention of unwanted pregnancies in a rational sane manner and at the same time, help subsidize families who do not have resources to provide a healthy living for their children. It is very shortsighted to advocate forced child bearing while not being willing to see that the child has a chance to grow up healthy and has a chance to avoid the pitfalls of poverty.

It is ridiculous to say Liberals want babies murdered, again that is a lie Patty. Not just your lie but the lie that is being plastered across the US. Liberals want to kill babies and grandmas. Hogwash! Right wingers want to starve kids and old folks! Hogwash! Stop with the stupid blanket statements and listen for a change.

And to heck with the mothers and their lives. Because if that mother is unable to make a living for herself and her child because she lost her job when she became pregnant and can't get another one because she has a baby, that's just too bad. Don't ask the right wing to pay any taxes to come to her rescue. It's her problem. She shouldn't have had sex.

I am sorry, it just makes absolutely no sense to me and it seems heartless and cruel and convoluted. And did I mention stupid? It seems real, real, stupid.

It is n0t only stupid it is unrealistic!

Corliss

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Pattygreen - this is the world you want to return to:

An era of tragedy for women

When abortion was illegal

October 21, 2005 | Pages 6 and 7

THE THREAT of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 landmark Supreme Court case that legalized abortion throughout the U.S., being overturned has never been more real.

Anti-choice Catholic and documented sexist John Roberts now heads the U.S. Supreme Court as chief justice. And Harriet Miers, a right-wing Christian fundamentalist who Bush has nominated for the Supreme Court, seems destined to be the next anti-abortion justice.

But even if Roe vs. Wade isn't formally overturned, the degree to which abortion is available in the U.S. today is an open question. Already, 87 percent of all U.S. counties don't have an abortion provider. After years of politicians chipping away with laws such as the federal late-term abortion ban and countless state restrictions, abortion rights have been rolled back beyond the point of real use by millions of women, particularly poor women and women of color.

History shows that women have always tried to terminate unwanted pregnancies. When safe medical procedures are banned by law, they have resorted to dangerous--sometimes deadly--"back-alley" abortions.

Such a world might be hard to imagine for the tens of millions of women in the U.S. who have never known a world without the right to legal abortion. A look at the horrors of illegal abortion in the years before Roe v. Wade shows that the health and welfare of women is at stake.

MICHELE BOLLINGER looks back at when abortion was illegal in the U.S.--and explains why the right of women to control their own bodies is fundamental, and a precondition for gaining full equality with men.

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

ABORTION WAS criminalized throughout the U.S. between the late 1800s and 1973. But during that time, millions of women sought and obtained abortions anyway.

Of these, tens upon tens of thousands died from illegal abortions or complications arising from them. One 1932 study estimated that illegal abortions or complications from them were the cause of death for 15,000 women each year. Current, more conservative, estimates of the death toll still stand at between 5,000 and 10,000 deaths per year. Some of these deaths were the result of the abortions themselves, but many more were from infection and hemorrhaging afterward. Because of the fear of being punished and socially ostracized, many women--and their doctors--kept their real condition a secret. The right wing has gone on an organized campaign to discredit such statistics, going as far to claim that deaths from illegal abortion were "just" a few dozen a year--and that the anecdotes of items such as coat hangers being inserted into women's bodies to cause an abortion are false. In reality, coat hangers were just one horror among many during the years of illegal abortion.

If your issue is the sanctity of life, then what does this solve? Both mother and baby die? Making abortion illegal won't stop it. It will just criminalize it. Women throughout history have sought abortion. Just putting them in prison won't solve anything. Has putting drug dealers in jail stopped them? If a woman is determined to have an abortion then she will get one, illegal or not. How does having the woman die too make it better? Because the fetus always trumps the woman's life???

If it really is life that you are concerned with you will work as passionately to promote free birth control and easy access and the morning after pill (which is not an abortefacient).

But it appears that you are less concerned with life than you are with punishment.

Edited January 28, 2010 by Cleo's Mom

[Jesusislove 26]

I believe abortion is wrong, but I can't talk as much as some of you, so I am going to state that and take care of my business. Anything else is between that person and God.

[BJean 16]

LLPlady3: "I believe abortion is wrong, but I can't talk as much as some of you, so I am going to state that and take care of my business. Anything else is between that person and God."

Yeah some of us sure can talk a lot, eh?

I agree that abortion is not a good thing. But it is sometimes necessary and those necessary times demand that the decision be made by the woman (or girl) and her doctor. And it's the woman's spiritual beliefs that are important, not the government's, when it comes to facing such a horrible decision.

And every decision we make is between us and God. Why do people think that the government should be our God?

[pattygreen 5]

I personally have no problem with well trained people having permits to own handguns The problems come in when people who are not permitted carry concealed weapons or for those who believe we need AKA 47s for personal protection and machine guns to hunt with.

People who are not permitted to carry guns are the ones who are carrying them illegally. They are the criminals, and will carry a gun whether it is legal to or not. You can NOT get rid of them. There will always be those who will kill and murder with a gun. Prohibiting guns in the USA will NOT keep those who want one from having one.(illegally) People who don't uphold the laws could care less if there are laws forbidding guns. They don't follow the laws.Therefore, what is the sense in forbidding guns or putting restrictions on owning them? The law abiding citizens will do what's right, and the law breakers will do as they please regardless of how the law is written.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Every law abiding citizen is just one gunshot away from being a criminal.

[pattygreen 5]

t seems that most right wingers are just fine with intrusion as long as it does not affect their pocket books or their status.

Mainly as long as the intrusion affects OTHERS and not them. Unfortunately many who hold the right wing point of view are simply following along like blind stupid sheep

This is NOT true. Government intrusion takes away your freedoms and liberties. Too much of it is an infringement on the people and their rights. What affects one person affects everyone. Your generalization of conservatives as blind and stupid is offensive. I consider myself as an intelligent, well informed person. The liberal stand in the media as well as with others I talk to is very demeaning towards those who hold to the right. To insult us and to act as though you are mightier and superior in intelligence is a sign of the parties true lack of self esteem. Obma does it. Pelosi and reid do it. The far left media is especially guilty of it. You don't see me going around calling liberals or democrats stupid and dumb and sstuck with their head in the sand now do you? Is there any wonder why the American people are turning their backs on the far left democratic party? Their intelligence has been insulted and they get the feeling that liberals think they have all the answers and will tell the right what's best for them as if they can't figure that out without them.

[BJean 16]

cleo's: "Every law abiding citizen is just one gunshot away from being a criminal."

Or the victim of a criminal.

[BJean 16]

patty: "Government intrusion takes away your freedoms and liberties. Too much of it is an infringement on the people and their rights."

Agreed. And that's one reason why the government needs to keep its' filthy paws off women's reproductive organs.

[pattygreen 5]

You computations makes no sense. Invest money early on to avoid higher costs later. The prison system costs a fortune. We could save so much with a better investment in day care and school programs with more money available for assisting people who try to get ahead. It all ties in with gearing health care toward prevention. Our country needs a massive overhaul and only then can we stop wasting money to imprison and execute and provide expensive emergency and acute medical care to so many of our citizens.

Spend! spend! spend! and spend some more!!!! You think that this is the time to spend money to make money?! This is the time to pare down and STOP spending. Did you hear Obama last night in his speech. ALL those plans to SPEND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just where is he going to get the money for all of his spending plans?! Hey! Why don't we just pay for EVERYBODY to get an education!? Something you liberals don't get. For everyone in this country who gets a free ride, someone has to PAY for it! We are DROWNING in our debt now!

[Corliss 0]

I personally have no problem with well trained people having permits to own handguns The problems come in when people who are not permitted carry concealed weapons or for those who believe we need AKA 47s for personal protection and machine guns to hunt with.

People who are not permitted to carry guns are the ones who are carrying them illegally. They are the criminals, and will carry a gun whether it is legal to or not. You can NOT get rid of them. There will always be those who will kill and murder with a gun. Prohibiting guns in the USA will NOT keep those who want one from having one.(illegally) People who don't uphold the laws could care less if there are laws forbidding guns. They don't follow the laws.Therefore, what is the sense in forbidding guns or putting restrictions on owning them? The law abiding citizens will do what's right, and the law breakers will do as they please regardless of how the law is written.

I don't have a problem with people owning hand guns. I just feel like they should be registered and severe penalties for those who possess them without registration.

[Corliss 0]

You computations makes no sense. Invest money early on to avoid higher costs later. The prison system costs a fortune. We could save so much with a better investment in day care and school programs with more money available for assisting people who try to get ahead. It all ties in with gearing health care toward prevention. Our country needs a massive overhaul and only then can we stop wasting money to imprison and execute and provide expensive emergency and acute medical care to so many of our citizens.

Spend! spend! spend! and spend some more!!!! You think that this is the time to spend money to make money?! This is the time to pare down and STOP spending. Did you hear Obama last night in his speech. ALL those plans to SPEND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just where is he going to get the money for all of his spending plans?! Hey! Why don't we just pay for EVERYBODY to get an education!? Something you liberals don't get. For everyone in this country who gets a free ride, someone has to PAY for it! We are DROWNING in our debt now!

It is cheaper to pay for education and give them a chance to become taxpayers than to send them to prison and support them. Do your kids all go to private school? If not we are all paying for their education too, as we should.

[pattygreen 5]

Unless it is the life of someone who has been convicted rightly or WRONGFULLY of a crime. How can we give those people their lives back?

How about the ones who are definitely guilty? They admitted it. They have been proven without a doubt. How about the mass murderers? those who make condfessions?