>.It's all very well to sit back on your high horse and say 'No, that's wrong' when you've never been in the same position as most of the people that are even considering abortion.  I also don't believe that you can 'put yourself in the other persons shoes' for a decision of this magnitude.  I wonder how many of your views on this subject would be altered if you were actually in the situation mentioned. <

I never felt so horny I had to rape a woman.  Can I condemn that?

I never had a drug network threatened by a snitch who was only vulnerable at home with his kids.  Can I condemn a murderous arsonist in that situation?

I never had to live in a mud hut next to Tutsis and put up with their Tutsi bullshit til the day came when I could chop em up with a machete.  Am I a jerk to look down on that too?

What can I condemn?

Mail fraud? Trespassing?  Parking on the wrong side of the street on a snow day?

ok that is clearly Caveman Clusterfark

Um maybe regarding British politics, they sure are not neutral when it comes to global reporting

you mean Matthews??!!

>>"Abortion is being pushed as necessary for a woman's growth, a duty to themselves to permit a focus on their own advancement, by social workers and Democrats."

It is a fundamental right for women to decide wether they want the foetus to become a baby or not, that's a motion I agree with.  A government must not decide for them. Instead, they should be determined to allow women the choice, and give them all the necessary tools and help to make a choice that was decided after thorough reasoning. Again, an abortion is never decided upon in a jiffy..<<

No, I don't agree that's a right. 

And the practice in the USA at least, and I have to wonder about elsewhere, is to emphasize the ability of a woman to get an abortion in 24 hours or less. In fact the Supreme Court doesn't like mandatory waiting periods since that supposedly impedes access to this right.  And the practice in the USA is for medical professionals to urge minors to have this potentially lethal surgery despite their parents and without their parents knowledge before or after.  It's illegal for a kid to get braces without a parental signature, but they can go to a school nurse and most likely get a ride to the clinic and get an abortion that afternoon.

The idea that it's never done easily or in a jiffy presumes there's something significant about pregnancy at any stage--an idea the abortion mills want to discourage. 

>> I think the coreissue is this: "Does the foetus' 'claim' to life, in whatever social environment, outweigh the right of the involved (wich is in the worst scenario only the mother-to-be) to organise its own life?"<<

I think the term "right" is being abused.  In traditional US terms a "right" is not just "something better than its absence" or a "social goal if convenient", it means "I'm doing it, and you and the government can both go to Hell".  I have a "right" to free speech.  I have a "right" to due process.  Don't like it, F off!

I can't imagine you think I have a "right" to "organize my own life" in the same sense that I have a "right" to due process in an arrest.  I can't imagine you would describe an action of the government, such as a tax, or registering for a governmetn program, or applying for a license to do something, or a punishment, as void and proscribed if it conflicted with my "right to organize my life".

100% of the House and 33% of the Senate are up for election every 2 years. Its the presidential elections that are 2 years off. The House election is this November.

oh shit, Amok = the Transporter!

sadly Amok has learned about earning money and talking to women and he never comes here anymore

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Vb2U89EJG4

General Calrissian

so I'd feel like helping instead of throwing a brick?