Civil discussion about abortion

[chm2023]

1) Shift resources into preventing unwanted pregnancies--education, education, education. Abstinence, easy access to condoms, all good ideas need to put into play. Like every other human problem, there are many and varied solutions.

2) Actively counsel women to give birth--make adoption a viable option.

3) Keep abortion legal as a last resort.

4) Make sensible decisions re minors--if a child is pregnant, the parents need to know.

5) In states that outlaw abortion, the complete financial burden of that child born to a woman denied an abortion falls to the state.

6) Lastly, and critically, lose the didactic. When does this ever work?

:cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

[Darris Chambless]

chm,

I like your outcomes. I will add a statement if I may.

"6) Lastly, and critically, lose the didactic. When does this ever work?"

Almost never except when those doing it actually care about those receiving it. I'm not talking about government or one party over another but rather those directly envolved e.g. parents, mentors, etc. It seems to me that this task has been delegated to UAPs and they are ineffective at getting the message to sink in, but their task was and is only to get the message out and you are right, that never works.

:cheers:

Darris C.

[Spexvet]

Spex:

You still don't get it. We don't give a damn about the woman's body. She can destroy or preserve it as she chooses...
Chip

Third wife, right? Gee, I wonder why...

[Spexvet]

Does that also include men? If so does this "right to choose" include making the right choice prior to getting pregnant? Does it include personal responsibility on the part of men and women (you didn't include anything directly relating to the men in your plan)? Does it include the rights of the unborn child? You are referring to a constitutional right to an abortion (which doesn't exist) and a womans right to choose an abortion but then ignoring everything else that goes along with it. If a man and a woman know that the consequences of their actions will fall squarely on thier shoulders I believe the decisions prior to their actions will be thought through a little better as well as the decisions following actions that are carried out. Shifting the financial burden from one group to another and not to those directly envolved can't work except from the standpoint I mentioned before regarding private funding to pro-life groups and the limits thereof.

A woman and mans right/responsibility to make the right choices. I like it.

Darris C.

What? Oh, you're done? Ok...
Lot's of questions.... No substance.
I'll fill you in on the constitutional right issue. There was this Supreme Court ruling, in a case called Roe V Wade. God spoke to the supreme court justices, and did cause them to rule in favor of Roe. He had them decide in a democratic way that the constitution of the USA protects a woman's right to privacy. Included in that privacy is what she does with her own body. What she does with her own body includes ending a pregnancy. Do you need more explanation? Google it. BTW, it also includes a man's right to have an abortion, get a vasectomy, or to wear a condom.

[chip anderson]

Spex:

Ain't you noticed God and the "Supreme Court" ain't been on the same side for a while and they sho' ain't been speaking. Or at least the "Supreme Court" sho' ain't been listening to God. God is the Supreme Court!

Chip

[Spexvet]

Spex:

Ain't you noticed God and the "Supreme Court" ain't been on the same side for a while and they sho' ain't been speaking. Or at least the "Supreme Court" sho' ain't been listening to God. God is the Supreme Court!

Chip

How do you know? Are you so arrogant that you presume to know the mind of God?

[chip anderson]

Spex: I'm worse than that I presume to know God better than you know "the Supreme Court." His laws and instructions are far more discernable.

[Darris Chambless]

Spexvet,


Isn't the title of this thread "Civil discussion about abortion?" and didn't you start the thread? And weren't you inviting comment? I sure thought you were but evidently not.

Anyway...I did Google the constitutional right to an abortion prior to my statements and questions and there isn't one. Here's a link with cases and decisions made by the court, what they based their decisions on and how they came to their conclusions. After reading their basis and the referenced material to the Constition their argument is thin at best. This is not a constitutional right it is however a court ordered legality based on non-existant documented fact (they made it up and made it fit basically) http://members.aol.com/abtrbng/conlaw.htm

I don't believe I need more explanation but it would appear that you need more education. I would also have to agree with Chip in that I'm sure God spoke to the Supreme Court justices but they were not inclined to listen.

Spexvet wrote:
He had them decide in a democratic way...

Do you understand what that means? Do you know what it means to decide something in a democratic way? Just fyi when three Supremem court justices (appointed not elected) decide on an issue for the entire country that's not democratic in any way. It is dictatorial however.

Spexvet wrote:BTW, it also includes a man's right to have an abortion, get a vasectomy, or to wear a condom.

Again you're stating by your own words that it does not exist in the Constitution.

Take care,

Darris C.

[Spexvet]

Spexvet,

Darris,

Isn't the title of this thread "Civil discussion about abortion?"

Yes.

and didn't you start the thread?

Yes.

And weren't you inviting comment?

Actually, I invited constructive ideas with regards to my incredibly well-thought-out plan.

I sure thought

Sure...

you were but evidently not.

Why would you say this? Because I disagree with you? Because I considered and rejected your input? Because I found your posts to be tedious and uninteresting? Please explain.

Anyway...I did Google the constitutional right to an abortion prior to my statements and questions and there isn't one. Here's a link with cases and decisions made by the court, what they based their decisions on and how they came to their conclusions. After reading their basis and the referenced material to the Constition their argument is thin at best.

This is your opinion, and I cherish it. But I also thank God that your opinion doesn't count. In the future, please refrain from positioning your opinion as though it were fact. Thank you.

This is not a constitutional right

Your opinion, etc.

it is however a court ordered legality based on non-existant documented fact (they made it up and made it fit basically)

Your opinion, etc.

http://members.aol.com/abtrbng/conlaw.htm

Did you even read your own link? Reading is fundamental, you know.

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973) [alternate] [District Court opinion] [Transcripts of Oral Argument (#1) (#2)] the landmark (7-2) abortion decision voided the abortion laws of nearly every state. Striking down a Texas statute that prohibited all abortions except to save the mother's life, the Supreme Court, per Blackmun, held that abortion was a constitutional right that the states could only abridge after the first six months of pregnancy. More specifically, the Court held that: (1) the Court had jurisdiction; (2) Roe's case was not moot, despite the birth of her child, because the case was "capable of repetition, yet evading review;" (3) the right to privacy includes the right to abortion; (4) since abortion is a fundamental right, state regulation must meet the "strict scrutiny" standard, which means the state must show it has a "compelling interest" in having the law; (5) the word "person" in the 14th Amendment, does not apply to the unborn; (6) the state has an important interest in both preserving the heath of a pregnant woman and in protecting fetal life; (7) the state's interest in maternal health becomes compelling at three months; (8) the state's interest in fetal life becomes compelling at viability--six months; (9) the state may not regulate abortion at all during the first trimester; (10) the state may regulate abortion during the second three months, but only for the protection of the woman's health; (11) the state may regulate or ban abortion during the third trimester to protect fetal life.

I don't believe I need more explanation but it would appear that you need more education.

Please go right ahead.

I would also have to agree with Chip in that I'm sure God spoke to the Supreme Court justices but they were not inclined to listen.

So, in your arrogance, you also presume to know what God said to the justices, and you know that they didn't listen. Hmm... God is all-powerful, is he not?

Do you understand what that means?

Yes

Do you know what it means to decide something in a democratic way?

Voting? Majority rule?

Just fyi when three Supremem court justices (appointed not elected) decide on an issue for the entire country that's not democratic in any way.

First, let me correct you. From your own link, there were seven votes supporting the decision. Reading Is Fundamental.
Second, let me clarify for you how our political system works. We live in a republic. We vote (democratically) for our government officials. The president nominates a supreme court justice, then the Senate votes to confirm the nominee. A case comes before the supreme court, and the justices vote for one side of the arguement. There's a lot of voting going on, there.

It is dictatorial however.

Can you explain how you draw that conclusion?
If the supreme court says it's unconstitutional to have an abortion, by your definition, would that then be dictatorial?

Again you're stating by your own words that it does not exist in the Constitution.

Really?

Take care,

Darris C.

May the force be with you,

Spexvet

[Darris Chambless]

All I can say is good luck with learning civility as well as learning to comprehend what you read. I can say nothing more sense you don't understand the content of the articles or the cases.

Good luck on becoming "king of the world."

Darris C.

[Steve Machol]

Spexvet,

Isn't the title of this thread "Civil discussion about abortion?" and didn't you start the thread? And weren't you inviting comment? I sure thought you were but evidently not.

Why would you say this? Because I disagree with you? Because I considered and rejected your input? Because I found your posts to be tedious and uninteresting? Please explain.

So, in your arrogance, you also presume to know what God said to the justices, and you know that they didn't listen. Hmm... God is all-powerful, is he not?

Spexvet, Darris makes a valid point. You were the one that asked for civility - and you have failed to follow your own request.

[Karenrp1956]

Read His word. God was not asked His oppinion

What? Oh, you're done? Ok...
Lot's of questions.... No substance.
I'll fill you in on the constitutional right issue. There was this Supreme Court ruling, in a case called Roe V Wade. God spoke to the supreme court justices, and did cause them to rule in favor of Roe. He had them decide in a democratic way that the constitution of the USA protects a woman's right to privacy. Included in that privacy is what she does with her own body. What she does with her own body includes ending a pregnancy. Do you need more explanation? Google it. BTW, it also includes a man's right to have an abortion, get a vasectomy, or to wear a condom.

[Karenrp1956]

Know His word, Know His mind about many things

How do you know? Are you so arrogant that you presume to know the mind of God?

[Spexvet]

Spexvet, Darris makes a valid point. You were the one that asked for civility - and you have failed to follow your own request.

Ok, I’m guilty. It’s a fair cop. Darris and I have a history. I did ask for

...Please provide constructive criticism of this plan, any ideas will be appreciated...

When I read snide comments like

I forgot to explain this in a manner you would understand.

Nothing gets past you does it? Except comprehension from time to time.

I admit I escalated the exchange.

[Spexvet]

Would anyone care if it were only poor minorities who were allowed to have abortions?

[Karenrp1956]

Do not want any to get abortions! Teach responsibilty. If you get pg, you are responsible for the childs lifetime $$$$, I can see helping out during pregnancy, but teach that these glasses are NOT FREE. This medicine is NOT FREE.


P.S. I DO care about the woman, not just the child. Most of the time the woman is as much as a victum as anyone else