who supports right to choose

[Carrie_C 9]

14th amendment.

[gadgetlady 4]

Equal protection? This doesn't bestow a mother's "Constitutional right" to kill her child, but certainly could be used to argue the unborn's EQUAL PROTECTION of the State under the law. Right now, unborn people (female and male alike) are discriminated against to the point of death.

[MrsFlipFlops 2]

MissFFs: I am seriously wanting to take issue with your claim that there is some relationship between abusive parents and people of color.

I lived in Florida for 16 years (one of your "sources" of experience that provided your claim). My sister worked in state-run drug program. Most of the people she helped into the program (both live-in treatment and out-patient treatment) were black. If she were a single minded, biased person, she would have claimed that most drug abusers are people of color.

But whoa...she didn't believe that for one minute because she understood that she was working in an area of town that was accessible to black people more readily than to white people, and the people they treated had fewer options for treatment than more financially well-off white people.

So just because she saw more black people with drug problems in her treatment center, that had absolutely nothing to do with the statistic of which race has more drug problems.

By the same token, during the 16 years I lived in Florida, the number of cases across Florida of child abuse, child endangerment (people leaving their babies in hot cars) and the outright torture and murder of children was alarming! And the majority of those cases were not black people abusing their children - they were nearly all white people abusing and killing their children.

So I take exception to your claim that child abuse is probably more prevelant in black families and I would suggest that you cite serious references to back up your suggestion.

I never said more child abuse happens in black families. If you read my statement, you would see that I stated that most abuse THAT'S reported happens in black families! We have no way to track what's not reported. I do not think that most abuse happens with black families, I'm not that naive.

And yes, you say that what you see on TV about Florida child abuse is accurate, what the common man sees on TV is white people abusing white children. The media portrays it's own form of racism. Of all the cases I had in Florida, only one that was picked up by the media involved a black child. Even though these cases were the same to the ones that were picked up involving a white child. And that's a personal experience statistic.

My point was stating that killing these children that are abused/neglected, be they black or white, it's ridiculous.

[MrsFlipFlops 2]

You know, after responding I've had a bad feeling about this whole discussion. Let's stick to the topic of abortion. I feel that conversation should be uplifting and cause us to think about our previous thoughts, but this thread, myself included, has used it as a means to insult and belittle. So I apologize for making this conversation anything but.

[Carrie_C 9]

Equal protection? This doesn't bestow a mother's "Constitutional right" to kill her child, but certainly could be used to argue the unborn's EQUAL PROTECTION of the State under the law. Right now, unborn people (female and male alike) are discriminated against to the point of death.

Actually, I think it is the 9th and 14th amendment, which states

"No State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Not allowing a woman to have an abortion is in violation of that. I have also read that when the Supreme court made it legal, they mentioned that a fetus is considered the woman's property and therefore, she can terminate it if she wishes. But when Norma McCorvey wanted to have an abortion, it was because she was raped. I think she only wanted to make it legal in certain circumstances, not like it is now. I found it interesting that after she became prolife, she made the following statement to congress,

"It was my pseudonym, Jane Roe, which had been used to create the "right" to abortion out of legal thin air. But Sarah Weddington and Linda coffee never told me that what I was signing would allow women to come up to me 15, 20 years later and say, "Thank you for allowing me to have my five or six abortions. Without you, it wouldn't have been possible." Sarah never mentioned women using abortions as a form of birth control. We talked about truly desperate and needy women, not women already wearing maternity clothes."

[gadgetlady 4]

"No State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Not allowing a woman to have an abortion is in violation of that. I have also read that when the Supreme court made it legal, they mentioned that a fetus is considered the woman's property and therefore, she can terminate it if she wishes.

Thereby violating the baby of life (and liberty and property as well). One of the Supreme Court justices at the time penned that if the personhood of the fetus could be established, abortion would not just have to be presented back to the states, but would have to be made federally ILLEGAL precisely for this reason. I have been unable to find the reference, but I will keep looking.

But when Norma McCorvey wanted to have an abortion, it was because she was raped. I think she only wanted to make it legal in certain circumstances, not like it is now.

Actually, she wasn't raped. It was consensual sex with her boyfriend.

And Doe v. Bolton, the companion case to Roe v. Wade, guaranteed abortion through all 9 months of pregnancy for any reason.

When Norma was first "found" by the pro-abortion movement, they gleefully paraded her up on stage and handed her the microphone. They then watched in horror as she said, "All I want to do is find my baby." You see, she placed her baby for adoption after birth (she didn't have an abortion) -- in fact, making Roe v. Wade legally moot before the court in question. There are so many legal problems with Roe it's ridiculous. Even liberals like Alan Dershowitz, Laurence Tribe, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg have problems with Roe as a legal decision.

[BJean 16]

You're underscoring my belief that abortion is not always a good answer to a very difficult problem.

As for the Constitution, I find it amusing that you have decided to interpret it and some of the Amendments to the Constitution for all of us.

If you don't trust the Supreme Court to rule on Constitutional issues, that pretty much tells us that you have appointed yourself and your demonstrating buddies, as the supreme deciders for women in this country. A proposition I find particularly abhorrent.

MissFFs: I was not trying to insult you at all. I was very distressed that you might have come to a conclusion, as do many people in certain areas of this country, that someone's skin color has anything at all to do with their behavior toward their children. It made me very uncomfortable for something tpo be posted here at LBT, that could be possibly interpreted that way. I am happy to drop the issue after having read your most recent post.

[BJean 16]

Carrie- don't let the wing nuts get you down. They may innundate you with their propaganda and profession of right-ness, but they are wrong and most Americans know that. Thank the good Lord.

[missy4gordon 0]

Carrie- don't let the wing nuts get you down. They may innundate you with their propaganda and profession of right-ness, but they are wrong and most Americans know that. Thank the good Lord.

Wing nuts? Come on BJean, why do you consistently resort to childish name calling? Does it get anyone anywhere? I used to respect your posts, used to. Lately, not so much. If you can't seem to get your point across w/out that type of language, perhaps you should re-evaluate your point.

[gadgetlady 4]

If you don't trust the Supreme Court to rule on Constitutional issues, that pretty much tells us that you have appointed yourself and your demonstrating buddies, as the supreme deciders for women in this country. A proposition I find particularly abhorrent.

The 14th Amendment was a response to a particularly abhorrent Supreme Court decision on a Constitutional issue: Dred Scott. Yes, the Supreme Court does get things wrong (unless you agree with the Dred Scott decision?). I also find it interesting that the 14th Amendment, which established that no, one person cannot own another (a slave), was then subsequently illegitimately used to establish that one person CAN own another (a mother owning her baby).

[gadgetlady 4]

Wing nuts? Come on BJean, why do you consistently resort to childish name calling?

People resort to name-calling when a logical discourse on the issues escapes them.

[BJean 16]

Why do you think I'm calling YOU a wing-nut?

So you don't think I have a logical discourse in me, gadget?

I rest my case.

[missy4gordon 0]

Why do you think I'm calling YOU a wing-nut?

So you don't think I have a logical discourse in me, gadget?

I rest my case.

I didn't say I thought you called me a wing nut, the fact that you would call anybody a wing nut is unnecessary.

[gadgetlady 4]

I rest my case.

On what? LOL!

[green 6]

I think the expression "wing-nut" is cute. I always refer to folks as left or right wing-nuts. I myself am a left wing-nut.