Yeah, her again.

Amanda Marcotte: Babies are time-sucking monsters, abortion like removing a cavity

AmandaMarcotte1
Amanda Marcotte

Most abortion advocates are careful to act as if they’re not really fans of abortion. No one likes abortion, they’ll say. It’s a necessary decision that is painful for most women and they always think long and hard about it, and it isn’t a choice that is made cavalierly. No one wants to have an abortion, they’ll say. It’s only about “choice”.

Unfortunately, sometimes they let the mask slip and expose their rabid fanaticism for abortion show. The most recent person to do this is pro-abortion femisogynist extremist Amanda Marcotte in a two-part rant on Raw Story.

The first post shows a picture of a happy, smiling pregnant woman with the caption, This is what my version of hell looks like. She then goes on to talk about how only abortion activists can debate while thinking freely. (Caution for language — this is Amanda Marcotte, after all.)

[I]f wasting time typing that shit out amuses you, knock yourself out. But don’t pretend that you’re advancing the cause of free thought while doing so. That’s because rational, free discourse is predicated on the understanding that everyone involved in the debate is arguing in good faith, and I can assure you, after years of dealing with this issue, that anti-choicers are not arguing in good faith.

The real money quote comes later, though.

Well, let me just put a stop to this shit right now. You can give me gold-plated day care and an awesome public school right on the street corner and start paying me 15% more at work, and I still do not want a baby. I don’t particularly like babies. They are loud and smelly and, above all other things, demanding. No matter how much free day care you throw at women, babies are still time-sucking monsters with their constant neediness. No matter how flexible you make my work schedule, my entire life would be overturned by a baby. I like my life how it is, with my ability to do what I want when I want without having to arrange for a babysitter. I like being able to watch True Detective right now and not wait until baby is in bed. I like sex in any room of the house I please. I don’t want a baby. I’ve heard your pro-baby arguments. Glad those work for you, but they are unconvincing to me. Nothing will make me want a baby.

And don’t float “adoption” as an answer. Adoption? Fuck you, seriously. I am not turning my body over for nine months of gaining weight and puking and being tired and suffering and not being able to sleep on my side and going to the hospital for a bout of misery and pain so that some couple I don’t know and probably don’t even like can have a baby. I don’t owe that couple a free couch to sleep on while they come to my city to check out the local orphans, so I sure as shit don’t own them my body. I like drinking alcohol and eating soft cheese. I like not having a giant growth protruding out of my stomach. I hate hospitals and like not having stretch marks. We don’t even force men to donate sperm—a largely pleasurable activity with no physical cost—so forcing women to donate babies is reprehensible.

This is why, if my birth control fails, I am totally having an abortion. Given the choice between living my life how I please and having my body within my control and the fate of a lentil-sized, brainless embryo that has half a chance of dying on its own anyway, I choose me. Here’s another uncomfortable fact for anti-choicers: Just because a woman does want children doesn’t mean she wants them now. Maybe she’s still got some fun-having to do. Or maybe she has a couple already and, already well-educated about the smelly neediness of babies, feels done with having them. Either way, what she wants trumps the non-existent desires of a mindless pre-person that is so small it can be removed in about two minutes during an outpatient procedure. Your cavities fight harder to stay in place.

She acknowledges that most normal people probably recoiled reading that, and she would be right. And here’s why: the truth is, most people don’t care if you don’t want a baby. No one really cares what you do with your life, Amanda, shocking as that may be. The thing is, just because you don’t want a baby doesn’t mean that you should have the ability to take a child’s life. And while she sneers about how much she hates babies, most people want and love children. Probably has something to do with not being narcissistic, self-absorbed pro-abortion extremists. You know, or something like that.

What’s interesting is how she acts as if floating the idea of adoption for those facing unplanned pregnancies is somehow forcing them into it. No, Amanda. It’s called having sex. You choose to have sex, you choose to open the door to having a baby, no matter what kind of birth control you’re on. Every time a person has sex, there is a possibility that they will get pregnant, barring a full hysterectomy. She compares it to forcing men to donate sperm, surely what she feels is a no-fail argument against “the patriarchy.” The problem with that is that no one made it to where women are the ones who carry babies. It wasn’t something that men engineered. It’s called science, Amanda. It’s just the way it is, fair or unfair. Acknowledge reality and move on.

And comparing abortion to having a cavity removed? That’s rich. Most patients who get cavities removed don’t end up with a litany of potential future health problems and psychological trauma. It isn’t a difficult, emotionally charged decision to have a cavity removed. Oh, yeah, and removing a cavity? It isn’t taking a life.

Her follow-up post basically retreads a tired and incredibly false argument:

Frankly, the more traditional, conservative argument against abortion—no, they’re not going to lift a finger to help you with your unwanted baby and you should have thought about that before fucking, you stupid slut who deserves to suffer—at least has the refreshing scent of honesty to it.

This is, of course, patently false. Catholic Charities, for example, has many programs designed to help pregnant women, and not just through their pregnancy. Giving them cribs and baby clothes and helping them get connected with their local resources and social services isn’t just beneficial just during pregnancy, after all. Crisis pregnancy centers also often have similar programs, but people like Amanda Marcotte will never acknowledge them. They’d rather tell scared pregnant women that there is nothing and no one out there to help — they’re more likely to get an abortion that way.

Of course, none of this is unusual for Amanda Marcotte. She’s called babies human waste before, as an example. And it’s illuminating, really. In order to win this war, we have to know who we’re fighting. And Amanda Marcotte shows that. While it’s easy to get outraged and angry about the vile she spews, don’t be. Pity her, or pray for her. It must be hard to live each day filled with so much anger, hatred, and misery.

  • PantheraLeo

    I almost puked reading this.

    (What Marcotte wrote, not this article)

    • JDC

      Well, that is how more or less all healthy people react to Marcotte’s work.

    • Basset_Hound

      It gave me the shivers. I’m growing older, and I’m thinking of someone like that deciding if I receive medical care.

      • Mindy Robinson

        They have already decided Basset_Hound. I have read many comments from the primoridal ooze, they flat out state, kill the old people, we don’t want them to take the money they paid into ssi, we want it. No kidding Basset.

        • MamaBear

          I do not consider myself old, but I’m pretty sure I will be on their list do to health. I’m a little expensive these days.

        • DianaG2

          Really?

        • Basset_Hound

          Seriously, I’m NOT surprised. It makes my heart ache for parents who will see the children they’ve loved and raised turn into these soul-less monsters.

  • PJ4

    If every pro abort would just come out and admit their true feelings like this one….we could win this war overnight

    Of course if every pro abort looked like Marcotte, we also wouldn’t have to worry about them finding anyone with whom to accidentally pro create

    • Basset_Hound

      It seems like they do. On the other hand many conservative female commentators are drop dead gorgeous. Consider, not only Lila Rose, but Michelle Malkin, Meghan Fox and Michelle Malkin.

      BTW, a local talk show host here in Dallas read this article this morning. It will probably turn up on LAN in the next few days. The blog itself looks VERY interesting…

      http://rare.us/story/aboard-the-missing-malaysian-plane-are-2-infants-but-apparently-thats-irrelevant-to-some-feminists/

      • PJ4

        Saw that.
        Not surprising
        They’ll be losing fans over this… that’s a good thing

      • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

        On the other hand many conservative female commentators are drop dead gorgeous. Consider, not only Lila Rose, but Michelle Malkin, Meghan Fox and Michelle Malkin.

        I would add the female Live Action commentators to that list :)

    • DianaG2

      LOL.

      I feel a little guilty about laughing, because I try not to talk about looks, etc. I know it’s just a joke, though :-)

      Any rate — I think it’s not about facial features per se, but just her nasty expression, so . . . Agreed LOL.

    • Mindy Robinson

      Perhaps the reason they are ugly on the outside is because beauty comes from the inside, their outword appearance is a direct result of the putrid evil that is inside them.

      • DianaG2

        That makes perfect sense, Mindy.

  • john lind

    Actually, as disgusting and reprehensible as she is, it is refreshing that the pro abort truth gets out there in raw, unadulterated language.

  • Basset_Hound

    Suppose Amanda would have said “I hate Asians. Their slanty eyes and smooched in faces make me want to puke”…or “I hate Blacks. All of them are shiftless, lazy dopers, and we all would be better off if they blew each other away”, we’d recognize the ugliness of her hatred and prejudice. But since it’s against babies and children, that’s another matter. That’s cool, at least for pro-aborts.

    • Lilian Stoltzfus

      It’s one thing to find the mannerisms of infants and children irritating. They are irritating, sometimes.

      It’s another thing to actually despise infants and children enough to think that hatred enough reason to justify a choice to participate in feticide.

      Ever heard of ageism? If it is socially unacceptable to rail against gays, blacks, women, or others in this way, it should be socially unacceptable to do the same against fetuses, infants, children, or the elderly.

      • Mindy Robinson

        You don’t understand, libs are not about good, their platform is one of evil, their motivator is hate and arrogance. They use sectors of society, while abusing them at the same time, to deceive the foolish into bowing to their evil.

        • RaBo

          You don’t understand, conservatives are not about good, their platform is one of evil, their motivator is hate and arrogance. They use sectors of society, while abusing them at the same time, to deceive the foolish into bowing to their evil.

          See what I did there.

          • Lilian Stoltzfus

            Thank, RaBo. I actually used the same technique in response to someone else on this page… albeit that someone stands in opposition to Mindy and I regarding the topic of elective abortion rights.

            But poor arguing is poor arguing, be it from liberal or conservative, anti-abortion-rights or pro. So… yeah. Keep thinking.

          • PJ4

            If she keeps thinking she’ll become pro life…
            Don’t expect her to keep thinking… she’s just going to keep believing.

            I’m predicting what she’s going to do right now =)

      • blondein_tokyo

        And there is a difference between disliking children and not wanting to have one, and outright hating them as individuals and wanting to murder them in cold blood. But yeah, I guess if you believe a blastocyst is the exact same thing as a living, breathing, sentient baby, then this would make sense.

        • DianaG2

          <>

          Difference of time and location.

    • MamaBear

      I’ve known plenty of people who didn’t want children of their own, but who did not hate children. They are the friends/relations who prefer to only be around your kids when they are clean, dry, and happy, and hand them back to you the first whimper. But they still seem to have that inborn instinct most of us have that infants and small children are to be protected and cared for, even though they would prefer not to be the person doing it.
      Marcotte sounds mentally ill.

      • Lilian Stoltzfus

        Exactly.

      • Basset_Hound

        “I’ve known plenty of people who didn’t want children of their own, but who did not hate children.”

        YES…like my late brother in law and his wife. They were wonderful people.

      • DianaG2

        Most people with diagnoses of “MI” would find her repugnant.

        • MamaBear

          I’m sure you are right. Apologies. Most MI people would indeed be repulsed by someone so without conscience or compassion.
          Perhaps more specific? Psychopath or sociopath?

          • DianaG2

            Yes, because there is no treatment for that.

            Thanks, Mama.

          • Emma Duncan

            Or knowing how the “pro-life” faction thinks…possible demon possession?

    • Lilian Stoltzfus

      Marcotte’s remarks are sad in addition to being upsetting. I mean, think about it – what she says about infants she says about herself. To hate people for their fetal development and infancy is to hate oneself, as one has been there and had to be there in order to accomplish anything in their later life.

      Babies are indeed time-sucking little machines. They scream for unknown reasons. They poop. They spit up. They get sick. They are an endless string of demands. They take time and money and sleep. They take an enormous investment.

      But, Ms. Marcotte, you were once the same monstrous little being. You could not be who you are now were you NOT that monster. You had no choice but to be that monster. You did not ask to be that monster. You simply did what you knew and felt to do.

      And can that which is a monster ever become otherwise? If what you say of infants is true, we either all come of monsters or we still are monsters, no? Can anything be done for a species that descends from monsters?

      • Mary Lee

        I feel so sorry for her….She is such an angry, angry, bitter, hate-filled human being. I have no hatred for her. I have great pity. She is in tremendous pain.

        • PJ4

          You just described all feminazis

          • Basset_Hound

            You’ve got to bear in mind that there are also those who become trapped into feminist groupthink because they want to be thought of as hip, urbane and intelligent. I consumed a steady diet of Glamour and Cosmo for their human interest articles and fell for this crap hook, line and sinker.

          • Mary Lee

            My first reaction (as you can see by my “anti-Amanda Marcotte” comment) was revulsion. It quickly gave way to great pity.

          • DianaG2

            I did the same, BH :-((

          • blondein_tokyo

            You think Glamour and Cosmo are feminist? Then you have no idea what feminism actually is.

          • DianaG2

            “feminist groupthink” is what BH wrote.

            She was specifically referring to the pro-abort mentality, I believe? No need to lecture anyone about “what feminist actually is.”

          • blondein_tokyo

            Okay, so she’s saying that reading Glamour and Cosmo led her to feminist group think in regards to abortion. I’m not sure what to say about that, except that everyone should read critically, and rather than blaming a magazine on leading you to the wrong conclusions, you ought to blame yourself for not thinking critically enough or reading widely enough.

            I also don’t think it’s reasonable to say “feminist group think” because feminists argue *all the time* about what is, or isn’t, feminist. In fact you attempted to shame me by asking me not to lecture you on what “feminist” is- so it seems to me you know quite well that even within feminism, there are many varying viewpoints on every single issue, and this includes abortion.

            However, I do think that if one is absolutely, rabidly, set against abortion under ANY circumstance, that person cannot call themselves a feminist. I can make a full argument for that, but my time is limited and I don’t wish to go into it in the comments section of a blog. :) Suffice it to say, anti-abortion is anti-woman in that it places the needs of a non-sentient being above those of a sentient one.

        • SeeMore7

          Regardless how she came by her beliefs about infants or how much “pain” she is in – she spews nothing but hatred, vile and evil. I don’t feel sorry for her at all. There is a very warm place for people like her…

        • Mindy Robinson

          I feel nothing but disgust for it.

      • SweetMarmot

        I bet she was a cute little monster too. There’s nothing cute about her now. Too bad.

      • Mindy Robinson

        Lilian, even sleep deprived, anxiety ridden, driven beyond the point of rational thought, holding and comforting that new life, fills the soul with love beyond measure. Take your infant or toddler to a nursing home, it brings joy to the hearts even of those who are in the late stages of alzheimers. The only beings that cannot look at an infant or toddler and feel tenderness and protective towards them are those whose hearts are filled with the evil of hell.

      • blondein_tokyo

        How is saying “I don’t like children” akin to self-hate? This makes no sense at all. You loosely tie it to the fact that we were all once children, but we were all once bald, too- does that mean people who don’t think baldness is attractive are also self-hating? Hellooooo….let’s use some common sense here.

        • Victoria Bingham

          The self hate is abundantly evident in the vitriol.

          The commentators are correct. This woman is to be pitied. She needs prayer desperately. Hate is it’s own reward.

          • blondein_tokyo

            How does that even make sense? This is pure hyperbole. And it’s rather ironic that you’d feel sorry for someone who knows what they want and don’t want in life, and who has stuck to that despite huge societal pressure, which includes people claiming she hates herself. Pray all you like. I bet it’ll have the same 50-50 chance results that making wishes on a birthday cake gets.

          • Victoria Bingham

            Again, since you missed it again, no one is saying she hates herself because she doesn’t want children. The self hate is self evident in her extraordinarily vitriolic remarks. If there is any hyperbole at work here, it is in this miserable woman’s rhetoric.

          • blondein_tokyo

            Again, I ask, how dies that even make sense? You aren’t explaining your reasoning. You’re making assertions with nothing to back it up. I can’t understand why you think this unless you explain it. It’s not in any way self-evident, as she’s said nothing whatsoever, for example, about having low self-esteem, feeling depressed, or agonizing about her decision. Everything here indicates the opposite- she’s quite sure of herself, happy with her decision, and confident in regards to knowing what she wants and doesn’t want in life. Nothing here indicates in any way that she’s unhappy, regretful, or self-hating.

            Explain please.

        • Lilian Stoltzfus

          Her sentiment would seem to be stronger than mere dislike. But perhaps her use of the word “monsters” is more flippant than serious.

          I was raised to equate “hatred” with a something strong enough to motivate murder. It’s a Christian principle. Doesn’t mean you agree, but figured I’d point that out.

          And mainstream neo-liberals seem to think of hatred as a very, very bad thing. At least when it is leveled against homosexuals. So if Amanda hates children, isn’t that bad too? Many people would say Amanda’s willingness to commit feticide, and kill the human organism so she doesn’t have to live with it in his or her more mature forms, is a hateful attitude.

          • blondein_tokyo

            She said “I don’t particularly like children”. She didn’t say “I hate children and want to kill them/see them die”. Her use of the word “monsters” was definitely hyperbolic, as in “time sucking monsters”, and I tend to think most mothers would actually agree with her on that. I know mine would, and she had 8, so it can’t be argued she hates children. :)

            We see similar memes all over Facebook from moms jokingly complaining about how they never get time alone, and have an audience even when they want to pee. It’s descriptive language, not to be taken literally. We know that those moms love their kids in the same way we know Amanda Marcotte does not literally hate children.

            As for calling abortion feticide, this in itself is a dishonest tactic. You know very well what the arguments on the pro-choice side are regarding the difference between a living sentient child and a non-sentient cluster of cells. Characterizing pro-choicers as “willing to commit feticide” is the worst hyperbolic argument that is used. The discussion would be all around more civil if people refrained from using such over the top language.

            I tend to think that people just use that as a way to shut down the discussion and avoid the real argument. I wonder, do you know the actual science, or are you only interested in emotional arguments? Because you must know that appeals to emotion aren’t based on logic or evidence or on facts. They are simply personal opinions, and personal opinions are not going to go very far in convincing people who are basing their beliefs on scientific fact.

            That said, I do understand very well why this is an emotional subject and why the emotional side of things plays an important part in pro-life beliefs. I would not ever try to change anyone’s mind on how they personally feel about abortion, or try to convince them that having an abortion is something they should feel comfortable with or should support. All I really want is to be left alone to make my own personal choice without someone rushing in to tell me I hate babies or want to kill children. Is that really too much to ask?

    • Ingrid Heimark

      Then she would have been attacked by the National Association for the Abortion of Coloured People

    • blondein_tokyo

      This reply is utter hyperbole. A person who dislikes children is not akin to a racist. The comparison is a false and rather disingenuous one. A racist is a person who is prejudiced; while a person who dislikes children isn’t. Having or not having, liking or not liking children is a personal preference. You may as well call someone a racist for saying they don’t like clowns, or because they dislike noisy people or people who engage in dishonest hyperbolic arguments on blogs. Ahem.

      • Basset_Hound

        “You may as well call someone a racist for saying they don’t like clowns, or because they dislike noisy people ”

        Or because he/she doesn’t like the policies of the current administration…which often happens…

        But go back and read Marcotte’s comments about children…they’re “time sucking monsters”. Those of us on the thread who are thinking people rather than trolls realize that Marcotte isn’t merely a “personal preference”, but actual animosity. When someone dismisses a person simply for a characteristic over which he has no control, that’s prejudice (to pre judge)

        • blondein_tokyo

          Prejudice is “an opinion formed beforehand without knowledge or examination of the facts”. I think it’s clear that Marcotte is fully informed of the general nature of children and has fully examined her reasons for not wanting any. That is her personal preference as well as her right.

          As for someone disliking or having aminosity for children as a whole, I do not think it can be called irrational or unreasonable. Again, it’s a personal preference. The nature of children is well understood and it’s hardly prejudice to say that you dislike the noise, screaming, and running around that is characteristic of children. It’s the parents themselves who, when someone complains about the noise and general rowdiness, say, “What do you expect, they’re only children!” I also think that generally speaking most people who say “I dislike/hate children” aren’t speaking of children as a monolith, even if they often fail to qualify it. For example, I don’t much like children either, particularly noisy, disobedient, mouthy, loud, obnoxious ones. Being that I’ve qualified it, you can understand then that there are exceptions to that general rule. I like well-behaved, respectful children. I like playful, sweet, smiling children. I like children who sit down and stop screaming when they’re told to.

          Of course, that doesn’t mean I’ll be babysitting my nieces and nephews anytime soon. :)

          • MamaBear

            And the KKK liked their n_____ s (blacks) respectful and obedient, too.

    • pokeyblow

      Being Asian or Black isn’t a behavior. A Black person at a given age can behave anywhere across a spectrum of human behaviors. Looking at that person’s skin doesn’t tell you what the person is like, Tea Party and KKK beliefs to the contrary notwithstanding.

      If you look at a baby, however, and think “taking care of that little feces-making machine would be a lot of unpleasant work,” you’d very likely be 100% correct.

      Nice false equivalency.

  • Cauchy

    You guys should check this book out, “Abortion, Execution and the Consequences of Taking Life.” by James D. Slack. This book is pretty good because it talks about the harsh realities of abortion and the death penalty from a more concrete view.

  • Ingrid Heimark

    Sad as it is, maybe we should be glad women like her does not reproduce. But I wish she had a hysterectomy rather than risk an innocent life

  • Mary Lee

    I’m not anti-choice. I’m anti-Amanda Marcotte.

    Her putrescence speaks for itself.

    • Lilian Stoltzfus

      Putrescence! I laud you for your use of such a fine word.

  • Marauder

    Oh, Amanda. Such a ray of sunshine and happiness, spreading joy, love and acceptance of one’s fellow humans through the world. *eyeroll* Behold, the evidence that vehement hatred didn’t die with Fred Phelps.

    I love how she seems to have this assumption that pro-lifers all want her to have a baby, as though anyone would wish Amanda Marcotte as a mother on an innocent little kid. If she’s so adamant about never wanting a baby ever, why doesn’t she just get her tubes tied or something?

    Personally, I’m not real big on dogs (sorry, Basset Hound), although I’ve met a few individual dogs I’ve liked. Dogs don’t really appeal to me, I would never want to put the time and money into taking care of one, and I think the way they sometimes sniff or lick their own poop is disgusting. I never want to be a dog owner. But I get that some people really like dogs and dogs make them happy, so I’m not going to pretend that there’s something inherently wrong with dogs just because *I* don’t like them. If a stray dog snuck into my basement, I wouldn’t kill it because I personally didn’t want it. The dog didn’t do anything bad to me; I’m just not a dog person. If nobody could come and take it off my hands for nine months, I still wouldn’t kill it.

    Know who else can be loud, smelly and demanding? Old people. Something tells me Amanda Marcotte doesn’t go into nursing homes and tell old people they’re time-sucking monsters with their constant neediness. It’s so brave, insulting tiny little people who can’t talk back.

    • PJ4

      I feel the same way about cats

      • MamaBear

        So did my dad, but he was quite tolerant of my kids’ pet cat. (Dad and our cat had an agreement – they left each other alone.) He even was sad when the cat died of old age.
        My dad was a crosscountry trucker moving furniture. One time, his clients could not find their kitten, everyone even searched the whole trailer. When dad was unloading for temporary storage in a warehouse, there was the kitten. (My brother was his helper or I would have never heard about this.) Dad immediately got that kitten a bowl of milk. Then he took the kitten to the warehouse manager and told him what family it belonged to and asked him to care for the kitten until the family came for their furniture.

        • Mindy Robinson

          I am not a cat person, it’s not that I don’t like them, it’s just that they do what they want to do. Despite that, when we bought the farm we have now the people we bought it from had allowed cats to breed and multiply and die, to catch the mice. There were over 30 still alive when we bought the place , all feral. I domesticated them, had them fixed, love them. Over the years some I was able to find homes for, some disappeared, I suspect coyote. They were allowed in the house but most of them just were not comfortable with it. I have 5 left, they live in the house and I clean the cat box, which I hate. They are happy fat cats.

      • Basset_Hound

        Cats are alien to me. I don’t dislike them. I’m open to the possibility of owning one when we’re ready for another pet after our anniversary trip in May. I just don’t have any experience with them. But it was hard enough to sign my dog’s life away, and watch her try to get up and walk after the first round of anesthetics hit. I can’t imagine what it must be like to sign a child’s life away, and walk out of the clinic realizing your womb is empty and your baby is dead.

        • MamaBear

          Several years ago, I had our cat put to sleep who had hours to days to live. She had had a stroke, could not walk, did not know us, slipping in and out of a coma. So very hard. She was actually older than two of my three kids.
          Yet each of my kids was of far greater value to me than that cat. How can women ever just “chose” to kill their baby?
          BTW, I swore no more pets. My youngest, then HS, brought in a beautiful stray kitten. Do not ever believe promises that if you keep a stray, it will leave home with the child who brings it in.

          • DianaG2

            LOL

            We had to put two cats down in the past several months. One of them was older than my granddaughter. He used to sleep on my daughter’s tummy while she was pregnant.

            :-(

            So sorry, Mama.

          • MamaBear

            Diana,
            Sorry you lost your two kitties. So hard even when you deal with old age issues for a good while before. You can know it is coming, but still can’t really prepare for it.
            Ironically, my cat had her fatal stroke just weeks after my dad was disabled by strokes. (He lived 3 more years.)

          • DianaG2

            Oh, dear. That is a horrible run of trauma for you, Mama. So sorry :-(

            Thank you for your kind words Mama. Yes, I do miss them.

            The worst thing is that it was all my fault, as I have been homeless for three years, and was really not getting them in for their checkups as I should have been. I think of it as if I killed them :-(( because I probably should have given them to the shelter or something, as I knew I could not afford the checkups at the vet, but kept putting it off.

            I feel very terrible about that. I wish I at least had the reassurance of knowing that I did everything I could, but I do not have that reassurance, as I’m sure you do.

            I know that G-d forgives all, but sometimes one can barely forgive oneself. I have not even been to Confession yet. It’s so painful.

            We do have one old kitty left still, thank Heavens. He is fifteen. My son promised he is making the vet appointment TODAY, no excuses.

            I know that you pro-life friends will not judge me harshly for this? I am ashamed to be typing this.

          • MamaBear

            Sometimes life is hard and there really are not good choices. Even if you can’t make confession, God listens (or we Protestants are in a whole lot of trouble). Take care. I hope things are going better these days.

          • DianaG2

            LOL, Oh, no , Mama, didn’t mean that.

            Protestants are not in any trouble at all — especially not really good ones like you.

            Just for us who DO have it — We’re supposed to go before partaking of — Well, basically, I’ve excommunicated myself, until I get to Confession.

            I guess I’m just so disgusted with myself right now. Thanks for listening, dear. Please pray for my dear Jason, to get to the vet very soon. I’m still praying he can have years of good health and happiness.

        • DianaG2

          Sorry about poor Greta, BH

          ;-(

      • DianaG2

        A lot of people feel that way about cats. My mom, for one.

        I don’t judge :-))

        Rofl.

    • Basset_Hound

      I wasn’t “real big on dogs” either when we got Greta back in 2000. But it didn’t take long to realize that she wanted to please us, she was devoted, and wanted our attention. She also was quiet, low key and low maintenance. Up until the last year of her life, I could let her out to pee, bring her back in and leave her for an hour or so in the house without worrying about anything in our house being chewed or broken. I still miss her terribly even though it’s been a couple of months now. Yes, we’ll probably get another dog this fall (probably another Basset if I have any say), but that dog just won’t be Gretal.

      • Mindy Robinson

        I love all animals, can’t even kill a mouse. Lol! I even pull them out of my cats mouths! I am sorry about your Gretal, I understand how painful it is to lose them. If you choose to bring another into your family, look in the rescues , please. There are so many, you will find basset hounds too.

        • DianaG2

          LOL, I have also pulled a mole out of Jason’s mouth, too. It was soo funny!!

          I think it hurt his feelings, though? Because they do that as a “gift” for the human family. He looked hurt.

          The mole was a little dizzy, but found his hole and disappeared.

          Thanks for the reminder.

      • DianaG2

        True, but you can still fall in love again! Perhaps you will learn to see Greta in that new dog?

        God bless, dear. The poor fur babies have so much to teach us, don’t they.

        A lot like real babies also. :-(

      • sandraleesmith46

        No, it won’t. Animals, like humans, each have their own distinct personalities and that’s a wonderful thing. It is hard to lose one you’ve grown to love dearly. I’m sorry for your loss.

  • Stormii

    It’s like she’s trying to convince us she doesn’t want a baby. We get it Amanda! We don’t want you reproducing either!

    • MamaBear

      Maybe we should start a fund to get her “spayed.” It really improved my cat’s behavior.

      • PJ4

        I’m in!!
        What are the odds of getting this ball rolling?
        Do you think if enough people sign a petition and raise the money for her it’ll happen?
        The last thing we need is mini Marcottes running around
        The world is corrupt enough as it is.

      • Mindy Robinson

        Good idea, a fund to spay the hell spawn.

      • Ingrid Heimark

        I’ll chip in :)

      • idahogie

        The worst thing I’ve seen in this comment thread about the author is that she is jealous of Amanda Marcotte.

        But look at the hate-filled morons attacking Marcotte. And you all want us to think that your (most likely) mythological basis for attacking abortion isn’t misogynistic?

        • PJ4

          You wanna see hate filled just go over to RH or Jezebel

      • Tim

        Hates the dehumanization of fetuses, but gleefully dehumanizes a grown woman.

  • Stormii

    It’s like she’s trying to convince us she doesn’t want a baby. We get it Amanda! We don’t want you reproducing either!

  • DianaG2

    Where on earth did Amanda Marcotte get a degree in journalism? And, who on earth would ever publish such boring nonsense?

    • MamaBear

      Wikipedia says her degree is in English literature from St. Edwards University in Austin, TX. If anyone knows a more reliable source, feel free to double check. She worked as a blogger for Edwards for a while.

      • DianaG2

        Thanks, Mama.

  • Mariah O.

    While I don’t agree with a lot of what Amanda Marcotte had to say (particularly about hating infants), I have to agree with her points about how a woman’s body is not owned and if she didn’t choose to have a fetus or an embryo, she shouldn’t be forced to go through a pregnancy. I also have to disagree with Casey Fiano’s comments about adoption.

    An abortion involves the removal of an embryo or of a fetus. If a legal abortion is completed, the embryo or fetus is too young to be considered a human from a biological and philosophical standpoint. Fetuses are not conscious until well after the legal abortion period. Since a fetus is not conscious before this point, they do not have the ability to think, make decisions, ask questions, discern right from wrong, etc. An accurate analogy regarding morality would be to compare a fetus to a comatose patient. Although a comatose patient is biologically human in terms of their ability to look, act, and behave like a developed human, a comatose patient must rely on their guardians to make choices for them in regards to whether or not to “pull the plug.”

    Now it’s time to knock some pro-lifers off of their fictitious moral high ground…

    Is it considered immoral for a guardian to pull the plug on a comatose patient? And is it considered moral for a guardian to keep a comatose patient alive even if their quality of life will be severely depleted? Parents must make similar decisions when choosing whether or not to abort an embryo or fetus.

    If a mother is raped, is it moral or immoral to keep the embryo or fetus?

    If a mother is stricken with poverty, is it moral or immoral to care for a child, knowing that you are not able to provide for them?

    Even if a mother doesn’t want children regardless of her socioeconomic status, is it moral or immoral to give up a child for adoption, knowing or not knowing that there is a high chance they will bounce from foster home to foster home for most of their life?

    If a man and woman decide to have sexual relations and they use contraceptives and the contraceptives fail, is it moral for them to have an abortion even though they took the necessary steps to prevent an unwanted pregnancy?

    Is it moral to think sex is so evil that its participants should be subjected to procreation as a means of damnation or retribution for failing to use contraceptives or by using contraceptives that do not work? (I thought god was the judge over who deserves retribution for immoral behavior, not humans…)

    Is it moral to have parents pay $5,000 to $40,000 when they wish to adopt, while parents who abuse their children don’t have to pay anything to “care” for their children?

    Morality is subjective in the cases of abortion and of deciding whether or not to “pull the plug” on a comatose patient and the moral subjectivity of both cases is surprisingly similar.

    Instead of judging the choices of others in the cases of abortion, think of what may cause them to make those decisions. Why do you think a woman would want to get an abortion? The choices of parents to abort an embryo or fetus are not always black and white and I wish pro-lifers would stop judging others for making difficult choices.

    People like you are the reason why we have a separation of church and state…And why our foster care system is falling apart…And why child abuse exists…And why our health care, education, social security, and welfare systems cannot adequately benefit and provide for our population. A lot of embryos and fetuses are lost to abortion, but right now, we have bigger problems to fix that involve our current population.

    I don’t know about you, but I would rather fix the world we currently live in before worrying about the embryos and fetuses that don’t have to live in a world like this…

    • Mary Lee

      Your comment is just overflowing with cliches and excuses.

      1) Not all pro-lifers are religious. I am a secular pro-lifer. There are pro-life atheists, pro-life Hindus, Buddhists, Jews. There are pro-life Wiccans. The pro-life community is not all “right-wing Christians.”

      2) You do not understand the meaning of “separation between church and state.” There can be no state (government)-sanctioned religion. There is no national religion. That does not mean–it absolutely does NOT mean–that one’s religious beliefs should not inform one’s political beliefs. I should hope any good Christian, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, or Wiccan would allow their spiritual beliefs to go hand-in-hand with political beliefs. Our country was founded on this principal. Not all of them were Christian (John Adams was Unitarian), but they did believe in basic morality and allowed their consciences to guide them. Not all of us are Republican. I am fiscally conservative, but I am a vocal and ardent gay-rights advocate. There are pro-life Democrats and pro-life Libertarians, too.

      3) Your understanding of biology and logic is very poor. A human is a human at all stages. From beginning (conception) to end (death.) The size and age does not negate humanity. That is a false notion created by the pro-abortion community to dehumanize an entire class of humans. Humans create humans. Humans are persons. We do not become persons; we ARE persons. We know this because logic tells us this. I was once pro-choice. It was difficult for me to admit to the humanity of our unborn sons and daughters, but the truth here is so obvious and so blatant that any argument against it is clearly an excuse to minimize guilt.
      4) Our unborn sons and daughters come into existence because of choices we have made. We put them there. Pregnancy is not a disease. It does not need to be cured. It is not a “consequence” either. It is simply a natural, healthy result of a body working properly.

      5) The uterus is made specifically to hold our unborn children. That is the purpose of the uterus. They are exactly where they should be, looking exactly as they should look. We have no right to kill them. They are separate persons with their own bodies, and their own right to exist.

      6) You might want to look up fetal development; you seem to have no grasp on it whatsoever.

      7) As the survivor of a sexual assault, I ask that you retract your rape argument; abortion advocates exploit women like me in order to justify abortion-on-demand-and-without-apology. Leave rape out of this. We do not (and should not) create policy based on hard cases.

      8) As a woman who survived a crisis pregnancy, and also destitution (near-homelessness), and as a woman who once believed abortion was simply a matter of “choice,” I ask that you examine your reasoning. Can we use your arguments to kill anyone else?

      9) This begs the question: Does abortion really kill a human person? After researching this and reading and studying and debating and arguing, I reluctantly (once, years ago, now I say this happily) admitted that our sons and daughters in utero cannot be anything BUT human persons at all points. Pro-lifers are not bestowing a non-existent right onto non-persons. We are recognizing a natural right (the right to not be killed; the right to exist) that all human persons have, at all stages. Abortion supporters are bestowing a non-existent right (the right to kill) onto themselves, claiming it is for liberty and equality. What abortion supporters are fighting for is SUPREMACY, not equality. That is a dangerous thing.

      10) If we establish that these beings are human persons–as they cannot be anything else BUT human persons–then we must recognize what we are saying when we believe they can be killed. Many vocal abortion supporters have admitted to the humanity and personhood of our unborn babies (Mary Elizabeth Williams, Camille Paglia, Naomi Wolf), but claim that a woman gets to say if her baby lives or dies. Again, this is not equality. This is supremacy. Supremacy is very, very dangerous.

      11) What your position argues is “Might makes right.” Because you are bigger, and older, then you get to kill the little person who has no say. These are little people that are being killed every single day. It is a mistake (and quite a serious one) that people who support abortion believe pro-lifers are trying to “punish” and/or “control” women. Pro-lifers love women. We believe women are strong, and resilient, and we believe in life for all. We want to change the conditions so that women do not feel they “need” abortion. We need to ask–BOTH SIDES NEED TO ASK–why. Why do women feel they need this? And then we address those issues. Pro-lifers do this. I did not believe this was true, once. I believed pro-lifers were judgey and holier-than-thou. We’re not. We simply recognize the natural right to live of every human person (including those in the womb).

      Not every choice we make is right; we cannot be right about everything all the time. I am wrong about many things. But I am sure as hell about this–that abortion is not a right. There is no such thing as the right to kill one’s own child. It does not exist. There is nothing good about abortion. Nothing. Not. One. Thing. It is destructive, it is based on lies, it kills, it is damaging, and it is deadly–not only for the babies, who die 100%, but for women, too. Women die from legal abortion. This is not the lynchpin to our liberty. Our liberty should not be built on the blood and bones of our own sons and daughters. All of us should be horrified at that notion.

      • PJ4

        BOOM!

        ML, I could kiss you!!!

      • Mariah

        I like how you glossed over the comatose patient example.

        Is pulling the plug on a fully developed human more moral than eradicating an embryo or fetus (which are technically parasites until they are born since they cause the mother (the host) to give up her own nutrients in order for them to survive ); if the mother dies, the embryo or fetus dies (depending on how close it is to the 9-month term).

        You don’t judge humans for having to decide whether or not to pull the plug on a fully-developed comatose human, do you? So why should you judge people for having to choose whether or not to abort a clump of cells or a fetus? The mother and father have a better idea about the life they can give the child than any of you naysayers in this argument, so stop butting into their lives over whether or not they’re able to suffice the needs of a clump of cells. A clump of cells is at the beginning of human development, but the clump of cells are NOT able to live without a host and they are NOT able to make decisions. Should cells have more rights than a full-grown woman who is able to make important decisions? While we have uteruses, we also are one of two animals who are able to have sex for pleasure. Humans should not be punished for wanting to have sex without having kids. It’s not our fault that our sexual and reproductive organs are one in the same. If humans could have sex in pleasurable ways that would not result in having children (or STDs), I’m sure they would.

        Also, your argument about how women can die from abortion is negated by the fact that women can also die from delivering an infant.

        As far as the separation of church and state go, as a political science major, the separation of church and state also includes the limitation of religious influence when taking new laws into account. We all have the right to form political beliefs around our religious beliefs, but when creating new laws, the government must not be bias towards supporting religious views when the new laws take effect. Some state governments adhere to this separation better than others, however (i.e. state laws about using creationism in educational systems). I also don’t understand how, ideologically, Republicans are supposed to be opposed to government intervention (much like libertarians), however, by supporting laws against abortion, you are allowing the government to intervene in your life as a woman. Also, most pro-lifers are Republicans, Christians, and/or Muslims. The reason why pro-life views have increased is because more Americans support the Bible (even if they aren’t very Biblically literate) today than ever before. Also, most non-Christian post-grads (i.e. intelligent, college-educated Americans) are pro-choice: http://www.gallup.com/poll/154946/non-christians-postgrads-highly-pro-choice.aspx

        I will respond to your other non-logical arguments later. I have to go to my Old Testament Bible class. :)

        • Marauder

          “As far as the separation of church and state go, as a political science major, the separation of church and state also includes the limitation of religious influence when taking new laws into account.”

          Oooh, is it whip-out-your-academic/professional credentials time? I’m a lawyer, and no, it doesn’t. Creationism is a bad example because teaching creationism actually involves teaching a religious belief. If people can make a non-religious as to why a law should exist or not exist, it has no relevance whatsoever if they’re inspired by religious beliefs to make that argument.

          • MamaBear

            Did Mariah remove her post? I saw it and then it was gone.

          • PJ4

            I’m hazarding a guess that Mariah and Old Testament are one and the same They sound too much alike

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Oh, I have plenty of other examples of how religion has (wrongly) influenced U.S. law either due to misconceptions or due to federal or state government inaction. Also, if you were really a lawyer, you would be working around 60 hours per week (counting the billable and un-billable hours) which means you would have little time to “socialize” on the Live Action News website (or to have any social life whatsoever). (I was going to be a lawyer, but the job outlook wasn’t that great in terms of the number of hours you work per week and the available jobs, so now I’m combining my political science major with a business major to increase the job prospects.)

            1. The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from establishing an official religion or showing preference among religions or between religion and non-religion. The fact that the words “under God” were added to the Pledge of Allegiance during Eisenhower’s presidency obviously shows a preference for Christianity. Eisenhower also signed a law stating that America’s official motto is “In God We Trust;” this is also a violation of the Establishment Clause since a preference is made to those who believe in god.

            2. Creationism is a good example because it shows how states violate the Establishment Clause.

            (more coming later)

            Also, if fetuses and embryos were seen as developed or free-thinking humans (or at the same status as you or I), then it would be considered a human rights violation to abort fetuses or embryos (but it isn’t).

            According to The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (established by the United Nations), “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” The key word here is “born.” Until someone is born, they are not equal in dignity and rights.

          • Andrew J. Corrales

            And the UN is how effective, again, at its job of preventing wars? How absolute is the UN, exactly? It’s no more powerful than the big countries. And why should we be like foreign countries, anyway? This is America, let’s have uniquely American national principles and values.

            The Declaration of Independence states that all humans beings are created equal. Question: are humans created at birth or at conception? After saying that, the Declaration moves on to say that humans have rights, and the first right listed is the right to life. As living human beings with unique DNA, different from that of the mother, I’d say that unborn children have the right to be alive.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Aside from Russia and the Ukraine (right now, at least), foreign relations in the developed world are slowly improving. If oil weren’t a valuable resource, the state of foreign relations would be superb. We could argue on and on about each country’s separate violations of the UN’S Declaration of Human Rights, but right now I’m only concerned about Article 1’s statement regarding human life and birth.

            According to the Declaration of Independence, if all human beings are created equal, then why does affirmative action exist? Why aren’t homosexuals allowed to married in some states? Why do women receive, on average, lower salaries than men? Why is segregation and/or unequal public services still allowed through gentrification (i.e. minorities are being forced out of their homes in many metropolitan areas due to rising taxes [taxes are implemented by the city government to drive out the “riff-raff”; these areas never had adequate police forces, schools, hospitals, etc. and now that non-minorities are moving into the area, there is a sudden increase in the presence of quality public services]). The Declaration of Independence is ignored in our society for the above reasons and it was also written about 170 years before the UN’s Declaration of Human Rights (i.e. the UN’s declaration is more up-to-date) and it specifically targets human rights while the Declaration of Independence is centered around the independence of the U.S. from Great Britain.

            From an international level, when the term “human rights” is brought up, abortion isn’t really the issue.

            Human rights violations in today’s world surround sex trafficking, child soldiers, child labor laws, war crimes, etc.

            What do all of the participants in these violations have in common? They are no longer in someone’s uterus.

          • Andrew J. Corrales

            Affirmative action? I oppose it. I believe that inasmuch as all humans are created equal, no ethnic group needs its own government program.

            Same-sex marriage? Marriage is not a right. It was designed/evolved to A. Reconcile the sexes, male and female and B. Make sure that in childrearing, both sexes are represented equally. If a boy has two fathers, he won’t know how to treat women or what kind of woman to be attracted to (if he decides to be straight), at least not as effectively as if he’d had a mom and a dad. If he has two moms he won’t know how to be a man. Same with girls having two moms or two dads. Traditional heterosexual marriage is not, and no proponent of it pretends that it’s, a right. It’s a moral obligation, according to its proponents, and the only morally acceptable alternative to lifelong abstinence.

            Women receiving lower salaries than men: probably unintentional.

            Can you prove that this “gentrification” is real? If so, is it not probably caused by the fact that more unborn minority children are aborted than white ones? The website Protecting Black Life (a .org website) proves as much. Of course if abortion provider companies keep pushing abortion on minority ethnic groups eventually population decline kicks in.

            And the Declaration being ignored doesn’t make it less right. Also, the all humans being created equal and being endowed with the right to be alive is called, in the Declaration, a “truth” that is “self-evident.” The UN’s idea isn’t more up to date, it just compromises nine and a half lunar months.

            An international level doesn’t matter, this is American politics. The UN isn’t a world government, it’s a lame attempt at a world alliance of nations.

            Human trafficking etc. is violating human rights, I agree, but so is abortion. It violates the rights of people who haven’t even been born yet to just be alive.

          • MamaBear

            I can answer the lower salary part for women right now. There is still some disparity in promotions, but the biggest factor is women’s own choices. We tend to choose careers where the pay is lower. Helping professions like teachers among the college educated women, beauticians and office workers rather than mechanics and construction among the skilled workers.
            Also, in the typical family, if someone drops out of the workforce to care for infants and small children, or even just drops hours to part-time, in the majority of cases it is the woman. If someone in the family must take time from working for an elderly parent, again in most cases it is the woman. We are the caregivers – in our professional choices and in our family roles. Not because we are forced or coerced, but because that is what many of us naturally are.

            Is it inborn, from example of our mothers, a cultural thing? I really don’t know. I know I went into a helping profession myself, took time out for babies, was part-time to care for dad, and I wouldn’t change a thing. My choices!

          • john lind

            If you think that the Declaration of Independence somehow says that there is a right for a woman to be paid the same as a man,or for a man to paid the same as a woman, you don’t understand libertarianism.
            Under libertarianism an employer would be free to pay an employee whatever the employer and employee agreed to, and the employer would be free to hire whoever they wanted regardless of sex, age, white, black, gay, straight, or any other criteria that the owner of the business wanted to use in his or her decision.
            If I owned a Hooters restaurant, should there be a law that I have to pay a fat, middle-aged guy the same as a hot girl in her twenties?

          • Mindy Robinson

            What world do you live in? Certainly , it is not this one.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Well, if sweeping all of those problems I addressed under the rug makes you sleep better at night, then I guess I can’t judge you and the rest of the Americans who do the same thing… I guess the world you live in resides behind rose-colored glasses.

          • MamaBear

            I don’t think Mindy lives behind rose-colored glasses. I think it is more like she sees no connection between you academic attitudes and the way people who are working to survive and raising families actually live.
            The reason so many cultures (and at one time that included ours) had such respect for elders was there are some things you only understand in life through experience.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Also, don’t defend ignorance, defeat it. You’re doing more harm than help for Mindy in the long-run.

          • Marauder

            No, honey, I am a lawyer. That’s what it’s called when you pass the bar exam and get a law license. I’m not working full-time at the moment. Do you tell doctors they’re not really doctors if they only see a couple of patients a week?

          • Mindy Robinson

            Theres a major flaw in your propaganda, religion is a belief, a philosophy, something that all humans posses, given that religion always affects law, The most unjust laws have come about do to the secular religion, today, tyranny reigns, infants are murdered, innocents persecuted and prosecuted while the criminals are coddled, even glorified. Secualr religion is the most corrupt, most oppresive, most destructive religion in this nation.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            All humans do not possess a religion. Religion does not always affect laws. If religion affected laws, we wouldn’t have Hammurabi’s Code (the laws were humanistic, not religious) and by golly gee, HC is one of the first written codes of law in history, therefore, it’s illogical to say that “religion always affects law” – obviously, the Babylonians were able to figure out how to create humanistic laws without religious guidance. Not everyone shares the same philosophies as you and not everyone requires a religion in order to have “morals.” I’m agnostic because I believe humans are not intelligent enough to know whether or not there is or isn’t a god. That level of comprehension is beyond our power. Also, I can’t speak for the Koran or other religious texts, but the Old Testament was written long after the stated events in the OT took place, therefore, stories change. I don’t think it’s fair for people to put their trust into holy books that were written long ago and try to apply it to today’s world. Especially books that condone misogyny, the hatred of homosexuals, the hatred of foreigners, etc. I’d say the Old Testament is pretty corrupt and oppressive (if you’ve ever read it) and religious books have the power to create destruction when people use the phrase, “This is okay because the (insert holy book’s name here) says it’s okay.”

          • MamaBear

            Try reading ALL of Hammurabi’s Code, including the beginning and the end. Hint: Bel, Sin, Anu. Shamash, etc. were all Babylonian gods and goddesses. Hammurabi’s whole claim to the right to rule, to make laws, was based on the gods.
            BTW, If you believe the Old Testament to be so corrupt, it is false and misleading to label yourself as “Old Testament Rockstar.” Not sure you are as conversant with the Old Testament as you claim either.

          • MamaBear

            Question, if we have no human rights until we are born, is the premature child without rights until his due date? If he does have rights, how can that be justified logically while at the same time denying rights to unborn children who are at the exact same gestational development?
            And for your info, viability has now been pushed back to 22 weeks, not the 26 weeks which is legal in many states. In Europe, which you are so enamored with, abortions are not allowed past 12 or 13 weeks in most countries.
            And just because something is not considered a human rights violation, does not mean it isn’t. Look at the prevailing view of blacks in the 1800s.

      • Ranger Troy

        Wow, Mary. You need to be a contributor here. Spot on!

        • Mary Lee

          And I wrote that at, like, 5 am hopped up on Nyquil. (I seem to be immune to the drowsiness effect of Nyquil.)

          • JDC

            Honestly, if this is how you write while on Nyquil, I think we should all try drinking more of it!

          • Andrew J. Corrales

            You’re elite, ML. B-D

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            The sedative ingredient in Nyquil is diphenhydramine–you might want to try something with doxylamine instead. And I agree, that was a well done response :)

          • MamaBear

            Hope your feeling better. I think Nyquil has (generic) Benadryl in it. One of my kids always reacted opposite to it, as well as a cousin. Too bad!
            I had to get treatment (my anti-cancer injections) today and slept all afternoon. So now I am awake and feeling lousy, too.

          • Mary Lee

            Oh my word, a cold is nothing! You, however…. Well, I wish you all the healing and strength and health in the world.

          • MamaBear

            Thank you. Still alive and kicking! I’m going to be achy with extra hot flashes next few days.

      • Cauchy

        (Applauding)

      • Colleen S

        Great logic and well articulated!

      • http://remnantofremnant.blogspot.com/ priest’s wife

        woohoo! now THAT is a great post!

      • john lind

        ML, excellent as always! My wife just gave me permission to give you a big internet kiss!!

      • Mindy Robinson

        I am a Christian and a consertative, my husband is an atheist and , well , untill the thug in chief, was a dem. He is against the murder of infants, unborn and born. The thug in chief and the creatures like those discussed in this article are the reason he has swung away from dems and is now consertative.

    • PJ4

      I don’t have much more to add as Mary Lee totally knocked you off of your moral high ground schooled you.

      There is never a moral reason to have an abortion.

      If the mother’s life is in jeopardy then all attempts should be made to save both lives as both lives are equal.

      Is there ever a moral reason for rape or pedophilia? No. There isn’t. Abortion falls into the same category.

      People like you are the reason why we have a separation of church and state…And why our foster care system is falling apart…And why child abuse exists…And why our health care, education, social security, and welfare systems cannot adequately benefit and provide for our population. A lot of embryos and fetuses are lost to abortion, but right now, we have bigger problems to fix that involve our current population.

      People like you hold women back.
      You seem to think women are one diminutional and that we lack the skills to have babies and pursue our dreams.
      People of your ilk are why young girls limit themselves.
      People of your ilk pit mother against child (mostly for financial gain)
      People of your ilk told me I’d never amount to anything if I didn’t kill my son when he was in my womb.
      People of your ilk seem to feel it’s ok for a woman to be raped as long as she’s unconscious, can feel no pain and has no recollection of the incident (while she’s in a coma).

      If I listened to people like you, I’d have a dead baby.
      If I listened to people like I would never have finished college and gotten a good career.
      If I listened to people like you…this world would be a less better place to live in.

      You people never come up with anything original do you?
      You constantly sound like the same 3 or 4 people over and over again

    • MamaBear

      There is little to add that Mary Lee did not so completely and thoroughly cover, except that about being guardian of a comatose patient. Been there and done that, so I believe I have the right to speak here.

    • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

      If a legal abortion is completed, the embryo or fetus is too young to be considered a human from a biological and philosophical standpoint.

      Giana Jessen was born after a botched late term abortion. So was Melissa Ohden. Can you please explain to me how each of these women were “too young to be a human” when the abortion started and yet were somehow fully human by the time the procedure ended?
      http://www.liveaction.org/inhuman/melissa-ohden/

      Fetuses are not conscious until well after the legal abortion period.
      Since a fetus is not conscious before this point, they do not have the
      ability to think, make decisions, ask questions, discern right from
      wrong, etc.

      Well, there’s certainly evidence that they can feel pain. According to research done by Dr. Kanwaljeet Anand, a fetus can experience pain at 20 weeks gestation, and possibly even earlier than that.
      http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/10/magazine/10Fetal-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

      Just out of curiosity, when do you think that the “legal abortion period” ends? (I have a feeling that you’re in for a surprise).

      Now it’s time to knock some pro-lifers off of their fictitious moral high ground…

      It’s not easy to knock someone off something that doesn’t exist, but you’re welcome to keep trying, however.

      If a mother is raped, is it moral or immoral to keep the embryo or fetus?

      That would be moral.

      If a mother is stricken with poverty, is it moral or immoral to care for
      a child, knowing that you are not able to provide for them?

      Well, the good news is that you don’t need to kill a child to save her or him from a life of poverty. There are currently long lines of hopeful parents looking to adopt and a shortage of healthy infants.

      Even if a mother doesn’t want children regardless of her socioeconomic status, is it moral or immoral to give up a child for adoption, knowing or not knowing that there is a high chance they will bounce from foster home to foster home for most of their life?

      Again, that simply isn’t the case–a mother who gives her baby up for adoption stands a very good chance of finding a good home. But let’s assume for a moment that this wasn’t true. Would it also be acceptable to kill a newborn in order to save her or him from a life of poverty? If not, then why not? After all, a newborn baby and a fetus in the ninth month of a pregnancy are essentially identical.

      Is it moral to think sex is so evil that its participants should be
      subjected to procreation as a means of damnation or retribution for
      failing to use contraceptives or by using contraceptives that do not
      work?

      Can you find anyone here at Live Action who has publicly advocated such a view? On a personal note, I’ve had sex on multiple occasions, and yet I’ve never felt that my choice to use contraception should result in some form of retribution. Guess I’m strange like that.

      Why do you think a woman would want to get an abortion?

      Well it could be a number of things, such as having an abusive partner. Some studies indicate that as many of half of all abortions are consented to under pressure, with some women facing violence when they refuse.
      http://liveactionnews.org/how-to-wage-a-real-war-on-women-lessons-from-the-pro-abortion-crowd/

      Or perhaps she was taken to a clinic by her rapist father in order to
      cover up his crime. John Blanks Jr. was sent to prison after doing just
      that, and Planned Parenthood was sued by his daughter when she alleged that the clinic didn’t prevent the cover-up.
      http://www.lifenews.com/2007/05/10/state-2279/

      Or maybe she was brought by an abductor. Adam Gault took the teenage girl that he kidnapped in for an abortion, with clinic staff being all to happy to ask no questions.
      http://www.lifenews.com/2007/08/02/state-2393/

      Or finally, perhaps she’s an underage prostitute being coerced into
      it by her pimp. Live Action has produced video footage of NJ Planned
      Parenthood staffer Amy Woodruff volunteering to procure involuntary
      abortions for victims of human trafficking.
      http://liveactionnews.org/planned-parenthood-aids-sex-ring/

      So…yeah, could be all kinds of reasons.

      People like you are the reason why we have a separation of church and state.

      Really? Wow–all this time I thought it was because the Founding Father’s were concerned about the imposition of a national church like that which existed in England and so they came up with the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment as a safe guard.

      Damn. You learn something new every day…

      And why child abuse exists…

      Well, I guess that’s true in so far as some of us have been victims of child abuse and if there were no victims then the abuse wouldn’t exist. On the other hand, many of us also donate our time and money to help those who are vulnerable. Can you explain what it is that you’re doing to help out in this area?

      I don’t know about you, but I would rather fix the world we currently
      live in before worrying about the embryos and fetuses that don’t have to live in a world like this…

      I’m pretty sure that cultivating respect for innocent life is part of that whole fixing-the-world-thing. Just saying.

      • john lind

        Adam, excellent rebuttal!!

        • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

          Thanks John, although I have to say that the rest of you put on a pretty tough act to follow.

    • Cauchy

      The statement “separation of church and state” is widely held in our society that that’s what the First Amendment means. However, this is not so. The statement came from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists . Jefferson used it as something metaphorical, obviously the letter was not some crucial legal or political framework that he established.

      It wasn’t until 1947 when the US Supreme Court ruled in the case Everson vs. Board of Education that they used that statement to mean the First Amendment. From then on the government became less friendly against religion. Some good examples are Engel vs Vitale, and Lemon vs Kurtzman.

    • SweetMarmot

      Babies put up for adoption get adopted quickly. It is a myth that babies put up for adoption are rarely adopted and bounce through foster care all their childhoods. This myth is promoted by the abortion industry to stop women in crisis pregnancies from putting their babies up for adoption. They want people to believe that their is no hope if the babies are born so that they can force abortion on women who otherwise wouldn’t have one. This is only so they can get more money for the abortion industry. If they could, they’d make adoption illegal. In fact, they’d make all alternatives to abortion illegal for women whose situations were less than perfect. That way they’d be assured of even greater profits than they get now. It’s a business and a racket for them.

      • Old Testament Rockstar

        And how many myths were started by the pro-life platform (a lot)? Surely, there are myths and legends in every platform that can be swayed in favor or against either said.

      • Old Testament Rockstar

        And how many myths were started by the pro-life platform (a lot)? Surely, there are myths and legends in every platform that can be swayed in favor or against either said. Oh, yes, I have secret connections to Planned Parenthood so they can increase their business output and slide some profits to me under the door. That’s really why I’m pro-choice. It’s strictly business. *Yawns*

        Everyone keeps asking for my sources (which I’ve given), where in the hell are yours?

        And by the way, .org websites are not valid sources. Kthxbai

        • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

          So you’re going to reject any information put out by the Mayo Clinic because their website ends in .org?

          http://www.mayoclinic.org/

        • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

          Your comment below is awaiting moderation and apparently that means I can’t reply to it directly so I’m going to reply here instead.

          I hate mainstream American media sources because they’re bias. I get my news from the BBC and Reuters.

          To hold a bias simply means that you have a certain set of assumptions and you interpret data in light of them. All of us have biases of one sort or another and the reporters at the BBC are no different. I can also assure you that the material they put out is influenced by those biases.

          Take the topic of gun violence, for example. According to the FBI, homicide (and violent crime in general) dropped again last year. However, the FBI also reports that gun sales rose in the past year, just as they have gone up significantly every year since 2008. Of course, these facts are counter intuitive to many of those who staff the Beeb. In their view, easy access to firearms is one of the primary causes of gun violence. So, for every story story like the one below, you’ll find many more that report on atrocious examples of American gun violence.

          http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-22443441
          http://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-releases-preliminary-semiannual-crime-statistics-for-2013
          http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/27/us/record-gun-sales/

          The U.S. needs laws on fair reporting so we don’t have people running around with false information or bias information.

          One of the things that I love about America is that it has no time for such chicanery. Rather, its citizens (and those of us fortunate enough to live here) are able to sort through available data and decide for themselves whose nose has grown and whose hasn’t. That’s a far preferable system than some Orwellian outfit that sorts out the issues via coercion.

          How would such a thing even work? For example, would pro-choice groups be compelled to disclose that a significant number of women who undergo abortions are pressured into them and face violence when they refuse, thus negating the element of “choice”? I doubt it. Rather, I suspect that any body of this type would simply be a means to institutionalize bias and put the force of law behind.

        • PJ4

          Why?
          Because you in your high and mighty educated glory says so?
          You’re the new authority on .org website due to a degree in political science?
          Again.. there’s a reason you’re not a bio major. You obviously have no grasp on the real sciences

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            See my other comment about how most SIG websites are .org websites…

            Are you a bio major either? Didn’t think so.

          • PJ4

            Archeology and paleontology.
            candidate for phd in embryology.

            You were saying?

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Prove it.

          • PJ4

            *eye roll*
            Can you prove you’re a political science major?
            Can you prove you got an A in Theo?

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I don’t have my degree yet, so obviously, I can’t. But when I have my diploma, you’ll be the first to receive it… Taking my International Business Law course right now (to fulfill my Legal Studies in Business minor and HR Management major) and my management courses, too, this semester. Taking my Business Law in Accounting course next semester and more management and ethics courses. Then I’m focusing on my politics courses next spring to finish my Political Science major.

            When I graduate, I’ll have a double major in Political Science and HR Management (B.A.) and a double minor in Classical Music Performance and Legal Studies in Business. Finished my music minor already; was going to major in it, but I’d probably have to be an undergraduate for six years in order to complete all of those majors. I finished my A.A. in accounting in high school (since there were some classes that crossed over into my future management degree) so I could focus on my majors and minors in college without worrying about the non-THEO and non-PHIL general requirement classes.

            So, there you have it.

          • PJ4

            Of course you will
            Sure

            And I’m sure I’ll be the first to receive it
            Lol
            You’re a bit of a joke really
            But you’re pretentiousness is entertaining

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I still don’t see your diploma, so you’re one to talk… At least I provided the proof I can provide. :)

            “You’re?” Yes, you’re really on track for your Ph.D. *eye roll* How on Earth will you write your dissertation?

          • PJ4

            LOL… iphone auto correct.. apologies.

            You call what you provided “proof”
            LOL
            I call it “the check is in the mail”

            You sound like you’re still in high school

            Would you like a side helping of Appeal to Accomplishment with that humble pie?

            I know right now you’re scratching your head going
            “huh? what’s that?”

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I graduated high school (I can send you my diploma :P) and pro-lifers are fallacious. If you really had a college education, statistics show the probability of you being pro-life would be low. And yes, I have a source (Gallup source I posted a few days ago).

          • PJ4

            Sure you can
            And pro aborts are fallacious

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Sure I can what?
            And pro-lifers are fallacious by incorrectly labeling pro-choicers as pro-aborts. Thanks for solidifying my point. :)

          • PJ4

            You sound very desperate dear and very immature.

            Actually you asked what I majored in .. I answered your question.
            I’m beginning to think your high school diploma doesn’t exist.
            Oh and should I disclose my personal info on here?
            LOL

            You clearly do not know how to play with the big girls

            Edit:
            I’m really really enjoying watching you come undone. teehheeeee

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            No, I said, “Are you a bio major either? Didn’t think so.” You committed an Appeal to Accomplishment by using a relative major to tout your false accomplishments.

          • PJ4

            Also I mentioned the hard sciences.
            You couldn’t handle even a day of that.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            No, I said, “Are you a bio major either? Didn’t think so.” You committed an Appeal to Accomplishment by using a relative major to tout your false accomplishments.

          • PJ4

            OH yes… there I have it.. .
            Check is in the mail right?

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I would say that’s more evidence than what you provided. :)

            The burden of proof is still on your shoulders since you were the first to establish your “degrees.” If you even went to college, online universities don’t really count. :P

            As for “check is in the mail,” I can send you my tuition bill if you’d like. Lolol

          • PJ4

            Nope… you were the one who first established that you were a social science major.
            You’re running down the rabbit hole here

            Would you life me to display my personal info out here?
            Would you like my social security number and passwords as well?

            LOL
            You are so pathetic
            I’d feel sorry for you but you’re too pretentious and narcissistic

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I said I was a Political Science and HR Management major because that’s what I actually am… I’m not going to lie about all of the work I’ve had to do on the road to obtaining those majors. It’s not being “pretentious” either. I’ve earned the right to be proud of my accomplishments. I’ve worked long and hard to create a future career path for myself through my academics and that is hard work well spent.

          • PJ4

            You’re very desperate to prove something aren’t you?
            But you cannot prove any of it.

            For someone who denies vehemently that she’s not pretentious, you sure come off as a pretentious know- nothing high school student.

            I don’t think any of what you say is true.
            Every word you write makes me doubt your “credentials”

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            $70,000 in student loans don’t lie. Lol

          • PJ4

            You sound delirious
            LMAO

      • MamaBear

        It is also a myth that adoptable children are just floating around for years in the foster system. Children in the foster system are not there because their birthmother is choosing to give them up. (Those children are usually handled through adoption agencies.) Foster children are in the system because their parents have lost custody. The foster system can only take temporary custody. It takes a judge to make it permanent and they are very hesitant to do that.
        Friends who are trying to adopt through the foster system said that for every child (not infant) available to adopt, there are several families that want him/her.

    • Mindy Robinson

      Go back and do your homework, but, I already know you are well aware that the infant is alive , you are well aware that fully formed babies are tortured and murdered , you are well aware that seaweed sticks are stuck into the penis, into the brain, into the heart of the infant, you are well aware that many times they were not able to murder the infant in the womb and that they snap their necks or put them in a garbage can, place them in a closet or somewhere they don’t have to watch them struggle to survive. You are aware of it all. You are also aware that scientists have confirmed, life begins at conception. You are evil, one day, you will suffer , you will suffer just as these infants have suffered, I hope I see it.

      • Old Testament Rockstar

        Sources, please – thank you! And no pro-life SIG sources either. I want .edu sources, honey. Educate me, if you will. Now run along and do your homework. I’ve put my sources in my newer posts, now it’s your guys’ turn to do the same…

        • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

          Educate me, if you will.

          I’m quite willing to do that. How would you like my didactic efforts to begin?

        • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

          Once again, it seems that I can’t reply directly to your new comment as it’s under review, so I apologize to you and anyone who might read this if there is any confusion.

          According to the source that you cited, there were in excess of 765K abortions were performed in the United States in 2010. If it is true 1.3% of these terminations took place after 20 weeks gestation, than it means that somewhere in the neighborhood of ten thousand fetuses were killed after they had the capacity to experience pain. This fact becomes even more troubling when one looks at the methods that are used to dispatch them.

          As I’m sure you’re already aware, this often involves a dilation & evacuation (D&E) or sometimes a saline abortion. Does it not bother you that literally thousands of human beings capable of feeling pain were either torn apart or burned with a caustic solution?

          It’s also interesting to note that in Wilkerson v. Utah, the United States Supreme mentioned disembowelment and burning as being examples of unconstitutionally cruel “punishments of torture.” Isn’t it a little odd that you would be willing to kill an innocent child via methods that your highest courts said were too extreme to use on a convicted murderer?

          http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=99&invol=130

    • Coyote

      “they do not have the ability to think, make decisions, ask questions, discern right from wrong, etc.”

      And are human infants capable of doing these things?

  • Kathi Ferguson Hope

    Her mother didn’t abort her…

    • Mindy Robinson

      I am praying , praying that God will smite satan and his minions soon.

  • Lynne

    Amanda’s mother should have felt this way and saved the world from this evil person

    • Marauder

      Sorry, no, we don’t kill little kids because they might grow up to be Amanda Marcotte.

      • Lynne

        I only stated it this way because I’m sure Amanda feels like her life is worthwhile but fails to see if her mother had felt like this then she wouldn’t be here. The people who want to kill unborn babies don’t see them as growing up and having a life the same way she has been able to. It’s just tissue to be discarded.

    • Basset_Hound

      I think this argument is totally uncalled for. There are enough logical flaws in pro-abortion reasoning. We do not need to resort to wishing harm on them, even if the harm is retroactive. We do not need to reduce ourselves to the lowest form of argument on the Internet.

    • john lind

      Free speech is wonderful, as it exposes ideas to the marketplace of ideas. Amanda’s crazy ideas will likely persuade fence sitters that the pro choice side of the argument is perpetrated by bizarre radicals.

      Above was directed at OTR…not Lynne.

  • Lily Nikki Olmo

    I’m a young mother I got pregnant from the time the doctors told all I ever felt was love pure love it made me flush just before fear came and I thought oh I’m only 16 what about my life situation Etc but I choose life and I am blessed amazingly my life is so much better with my baby if I had an abortion my life would have fallen apart to pieces and I wouldn’t even have a lentil sized piece of hope so happy I choose life I will give anything to my boy my time I will give everything ivwould die for him there’s no greater love

    • DianaG2

      Bless your heart, dear Lily. Love to you and that little guy.

      Please hug him. How old is he now? Big hugs and kisses from all here.

      (They just elected me to represent them, right, guys?)

      • Mindy Robinson

        Yes, we did.

        • DianaG2

          LOL, thanks, hun :-))

      • Lily Nikki Olmo

        He will be turning 1 on may 15 and yes the Lord does provide and abundently our store house are bursting full lol I wish.nothing.but the best for my son and God bless all of u on here

    • Mindy Robinson

      I also had my first child young, 17. He brought nothing but joy and taught me I was worth something. I worked hard for my children, drove myself for them, became a success due to my desire to provide for my children. No food stamps, no welfare, I would not do that to my children. 11 grandsons now, my son is a regional manager for a hazmat company , my youngest, she is now a Dr. We did ok. I am proof the Lord will provide.

      • MamaBear

        I’m glad you did it without the welfare and food stamps, but I don’t even mind if people use those, as long as it is a stepping stone to independence and not a permanent way of life. Sounds like you did a wonderful job with your kids. And you are right. The Lord does indeed provide.

  • noodles5

    Just looking at Marcotte says it all. Look at the hate written all over her face. I understand why she doesn’t like babies. She more than likely doesn’t like anyone. I can think of a few more reasons why she doesn’t like babies. She probably hates men also. The world is becoming entrenched with more and more people like the evil Amanda Marcotte. How does one get that way?

    • Mindy Robinson

      That’s not hate, it’s evil, there is a big difference. The critters goal in this world is to spread as much pain and suffering as it possibly can.

  • Robert Lyles

    I want to say, I’m against abortion or to put it correctly KILLING BABIES! but I must say it would of been better if this womans mother would have aborted her, and call it poetic justice it would be her own mother having her own forsite! anyway I am against abortion even when it concerns somebody like this. she will receive her judgment whether she believes in YHVH or not. It’s not correct thinking, if I don’t believe it wont happen to me, I can promise anyone that! actually I feel really sorry for this woman, she is like so many condemning herself to eternity in a place that nothing on this earth can compare with, nothing! all I can do is pray she will allow her heart to be broke so she can see truth!

    • Marauder

      Amanda Marcotte is a nasty piece of work, but she’s a blogger, for heaven’s sake, not the most dangerous woman in the world. Don’t attribute power to her that she doesn’t have.

    • john lind

      Getting pissed at a pro-abort commenter and stating that it would have been better off if the commenter would have been aborted is pretty twisted. Obnoxious people do not deserve retroactive abortion.

    • Calvin Freiburger

      For the record, I’m only letting this (plus a couple of other
      gratuitously nasty comments on this thread) stand because the replies
      from LAN regulars standing up to them are such a strong contrast to the way pro-abortion bloggers and readers (fail to) address mean-spiritedness from people on their own side.

  • Sandra

    I really wonder how Amanda was raised for her to turn out like this. Her parents must have been lousy parents.

  • Mary Lee

    Next time I’m up at 5 am, dealing with a head cold and a sick kitty, I’ll be sure and make an outline for you.

    You clearly don’t want to listen to anything anyone has to say. And you clearly do not understand pro-life arguments at all. You are using all your energy to justify killing our babies in utero, and that, I’m afraid, can never be justified, no matter how hard you try. Use your obvious intelligence in an area that will bring life and goodness. Do not waste it on the lies of the abortion movement.

    Now I’m going to take some Alka Seltzer Plus Cold and take a nap. I have no energy today and my head is pounding like the hammers of Hephaestus.

    • Old Testament Rockstar

      According to The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (established by the United Nations), “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” The key word here is “born.” Until someone is born, they are not equal in dignity and rights (probably because they are not able to make decisions for themselves, form opinions, think about anything other than what nutrients they’re receiving from the umbilical cord, etc.).

      Bing. Boom. Bam. If 193 member nations adhere to the Declaration of Human Rights, then that says something.

      I don’t understand why some Americans are so hellbent against abortion when the rest of the modern, developed world views it as a necessary right for women to have a say over their body. Our country and (most) of its inhabitants are at least 50 years behind Europe. This is why I’m moving out of the US as soon as I finish my degree. There is no chance for societal progress in America. The rest of the world mocks us and our country (for good reasons).

      P.S. I’ve had mono and a sinus infection all morphed into one super illness for the past month. You don’t see me crying about it.

      • Basset_Hound

        Most European countries have much stricter abortion laws than does the US. They have gestational limits after the first trimester. They also require informed consent. Many have waiting periods, and others require that they be performed in hospitals.

        We, the unwashed, uncool, unhip Duck Dynasty fans can look at Europe to see how euthanasia is being pushed for those who are depressed, for the chronically ill, for the disabled, and for children. We see how the the cheapening of human life through abortion has lead to a society where anybody who is inconvenient is expendable. We also have observed history and know that’s how the German people were desensitized into accepting the deaths of millions of “undesirables” in the 30’s and 40’s, and how others were so intimidated by the prospect that they would be next to go to the death camps if they spoke up against it. If YOU want to live in Europe, with its high taxes, its high debt, its social stagnation, and its decreasing disrespect for human life, go ahead. Don’t let the door hit you on your way out.

        • Old Testament Rockstar

          Germany requires a waiting period of three days, however, I feel that that is important for anyone to make a decision about whether to use abortion, adoption, or to keep a baby. Germany’s laws aren’t necessarily strict, they just apply common sense.

          In the UK, the NHS will pay for your abortion in some cases, but not in others, and in the US, most health insurance companies cover elective abortions and Medicaid covers abortions in cases of rape, incest, or life endangerment.

          Your views of Europe are fed through the lens of a foreigner. I have a lot of friends and family who were either born in Europe or who have moved to Europe (after living in America) and they have all said it’s a breath of fresh air. The taxes are higher, but the quality of life is also higher. The cultures are vastly different, as well. A lot of my relatives live in Germany and they love how Germans are less materialistic than Americans. They own less “stuff” than we do and they’re happy with it. Walmart failed in Germany because Germans did not agree with Walmart’s view on not paying their workers living wages and the quality of the products at Walmart is sub-par compared to what is already offered in Germany. The European Medicines Agency (the EU’s version of the FDA) also has stricter food regulations than the U.S., resulting in healthier and more organic food requirements throughout the EU. I compared the cost of living for Berlin and the cost of living in Berlin is nearly equivalent to the cost of living for Fargo, North Dakota…

          As for the cheapening of human life, how about the cheapening of human life in America with all of our fatty foods, reality TV, and cheap “made in (insert country here)” imports?

          Your views on euthanasia in Europe are also misconstrued. Euthanasia is ONLY legal in Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands. In Belgium, euthanasia is legal, however, the only people who mainly use euthanasia in Belgium are cancer patients who have experienced tremendous suffering and who are near the end of their life (in terms of how much time they were given to survive due to cancer). It is rarely, if ever, used for people who are not experiencing tremendous suffering through a disease. I do not disagree with the right for someone to be able to choose to end their life if they are suffering so much that they cannot live a fulfilling life any longer. That’s their choice. No one’s holding a gun to their head, telling them they need to end their lie. They have the right to die with dignity instead of suffering.

          In terms of the Nazi regime, you do realize that Germany is extremely careful about those who read Mein Kampf, right? The only existing copies of the book in Germany are extremely annotated and excerpted in order to “direct” the reading of others so another Hitler-like leader doesn’t become influenced by the book. It has received so many annotations that the Central Council of Jews in Germany actually SUPPORT lifting the ban on Mein Kampf in order to educate people about Hitler’s flawed ideology. You should also read the book In the Garden of Beasts. It’s a true memoir about an American ambassador who is sent to Germany and his daughter, an American high school student, basically becomes “entranced” by the Nazi Socialist Party. She starts believing all of the ideologies the Nazis set forth even though she grew up in the U.S. with American ideals and whatnot. It’s a great book that shows how much the Nazi party controlled the people and that the people of Germany should not be blamed for the atrocities the Nazis committed. Most Germans didn’t even know about the atrocities. They knew about the work camps, but not about the conditions. The Nazi propaganda talked about how the Jews were building hospitals and soup kitchens, etc. to fabricate the “Final Solution.” Blaming German citizens for the Holocaust is like blaming American citizens for the Trail of Tears (an act of genocide on our own soil).

          If I had enough money for a plane ticket and job connections, trust me, I would be living in Germany right now. I already have several German universities in mind to pursue my M.B.A. in Business Law. Unfortunately, Germany is about as strict on foreign nationals as the U.S. (i.e. it’s very hard to get a work visa). Sucks for ex-pats like me.

          • Andrew J. Corrales

            Can you, again, cite sources? And can you not admit that Europe has its problems? And may I reiterate that Americans will run America based on American principles and values?

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I used reliable sources and all of the above statements about Europe are factual information, but I’m not going to scour the internet for evidence that supports what I said. I did my research and I’m not re-tracing my steps. If you would feel better knowing that what I said is actually true, then search for it yourself. I wish pro-lifers would start using sources, though, to cite their escapades rather than primarily using pathos to justify their opinion.

          • john lind

            Are you saying that capitalism is bad?

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I oppose crony capitalism where collusion exists between businesses and the federal or state governments at the expense of consumers and workers (i.e. bailouts). I also think we should have a higher federal minimum wage like in several European countries that force employers to pay “living wages” rather than creating a reliance on government and on citizens to provide for people under the poverty line. Walmart has gotten away with it for way too long and other corporations do, as well.

          • john lind

            Should a higher minimum wage be mandated by government?

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Although I’m a libertarian (and I know a lot of libertarians are against many forms of government intervention), I believe a higher minimum wage should be mandated by the federal government. I believe a higher minimum wage will decrease the necessity for the welfare program and for government-issued healthcare services that are supported with our tax dollars. We pay a lot of money each year for people who cannot afford to go to the clinic because they end up going to the emergency room for the flu (or other non-life-threatening illnesses) since ER’s can’t legally turn people away. We already spend more per person on healthcare within our taxes than most of the countries with universal healthcare (the movie Sicko is my source for that, since I know the citation police will jump out at any moment). I would be willing to pay more for consumer goods and services in return, knowing that the higher minimum wage will likely increase the cost of goods and services for consumers as the people who would otherwise have to work multiple jobs would be able to make ends meet. Happier workers also result in higher work productivity and higher quality products/services with fewer customer complaints or glitches, so employers may not have to raise the prices for goods or services if the output increases due to the increased wages (source: three college-level management courses).

          • MamaBear

            You are using Michael Moore (Sicko) as a source and you are picky about our sources!!!!!!!!!!!!
            Words fail me!

          • PJ4

            Of course!
            She’s no exception to the pro abortion double standard and hypocrisy She’s also not very original
            It’s same ol same ol with her tripe
            And here we are engaging
            She’s desperately seeking validation

            Thankfully hubby and I have been on a stay-cation in Malibu
            Yesterday was all day spa treatments
            Today we’re just hanging out on the beach

            Maybe Monday I’ll give her her much craved attention
            Wow…she sounds a lot like Marcotte: vile and attention starved pseudo-intellectual

          • MamaBear

            Yeah, claims to be libertarian, but likes Europe better and wants government control in wages. Oh well, we are clearly dealing with a student who “knows it all” except real life.
            Enjoy Malibu. Sounds lovely!

          • PJ4

            HEAVENLY
            Beach front room
            Just ordered room service… nothing like crab cakes benedict in the morning!!

            And yes… I’v been sneaking peaks at my phone on and off…she’s just like the rest.
            Too bad none of them can come up with anything original… it’s almost as though most pro abort bots go to the same few anti-life websites…distasteful…
            It’s getting boring

          • PJ4

            Sorry, no Michael Moore propaganda as sources
            We want .edu
            Educate us please
            Your 3 college course don’t suffice for us
            Ah pro aborts….you people are the worst hypocrites I’ve ever had the misfortune to encounter

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            If you would’ve paid attention, I provided a .edu source for that reference. Where are your sources?

          • PJ4

            I don’t see your edu source save for one about cultures and religion
            What sources do you need from me?
            Your question is arbitrary and non relevant to the statement I made
            Makes you sound slightly desperate

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Although I’m a libertarian (and I know a lot of libertarians are against many forms of government intervention), I believe a higher minimum wage
            should be mandated by the federal government.

            Which libertarian theorist do you identify most with?

          • john lind

            If a worker’s productive output is not high enough to cover the cost of their wages and associated employer payroll taxes, why would the employer hire them?
            If somebody is willing to work for $3/hour and someone is willing to pay them that rate, why should government keep them from contracting with each other?
            Shouldn’t private charities funded through voluntary donations be the way that people care for the less fortunate under libertarian principles?
            If businesses are losing customers because of unhappy employees, why wouldn’t they raise salaries if they perceive that will keep profits intact?
            You mention Walmart in one of your posts. Nobody is forced to work at Walmart. If Walmart starts losing employees to other businesses due to the other businesses paying more, then Walmart will raise its pay.
            I’m curious…what libertarian principles do you support?

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Private charities receive donations from people, therefore, you would still be indirectly supporting people who would otherwise be on food stamps, in the welfare program, etc. I don’t believe in solely relying on charities to carry the burden of citizens in the absence of taxes that would go towards helping those who would be helped by the charities. Charities already have enough on their plate. I feel that the only government intervention that should take place in our country surrounds minimum wages. If employees are paid higher wages, enough so that they can live off of the wage, then the value of our country’s products and services will increase since employee dissatisfaction would decrease and employer compassion would increase. Take a managerial class and you’ll find out that big names in the field of management (Ivy League MBA professors, Fortune 500 CEOs, etc.) are realizing the importance of keeping workers happy, giving workers more autonomy, giving workers more control over their work schedule so they can have more time with their families, etc. Source: I attended a Nobel Peace Prize Forum a few weeks back; the Dalai Lama was there (on the Peace lecture day) as well as several renowned business and human rights professors from Harvard, NYU, and other notable business institutions.

            The idea of a higher federal minimum wage still fits in with libertarian ideology (I’m a leftist libertarian) because the burden left by paying workers low wages would be placed on the shoulders of taxed payers due to the need for subsidized housing, food stamps, welfare, healthcare costs for the uninsured, unemployment benefits, etc. The higher wages for business owners wouldn’t be a burden since the quality of the products and services would be higher and work productivity would also increase. If I was willing to work for $3 per hour and I still had to find a way to take care of myself and my family, I wouldn’t be too happy about being paid $3 per hour. I’ve noticed that in the jobs where I’m paid a higher wage, I feel inclined to produce better results, whereas if I am paid a lower wage in another job, I am unhappy and unmotivated. Basically, don’t screw over the workers if you want results or they’ll screw over you or your business. :)

            And in regards to worker output, the output would increase as wages increase. Obviously, there would be an equilibrium point where output would not increase if the minimum wage hits a certain point, though.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Your views of Europe are fed through the lens of a foreigner.

            The fact that Basset is an American doesn’t necessarily mean that she’s going to reflexively hold anti-European views. Indeed, my views of America are fed through the lens of a foreigner, and I can tell you that those views are (for the most part) quite favourable.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I told Basset that because a lot of statements she made were assumptions that were not factual (quite possibly fed by the American media, but I honestly don’t know of the sources for his/her info).

          • MamaBear

            OK, American Media is not reliable, but Michael Moore (Sicko) is. REALLY??????

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Responded to your other comment with a .edu source…

          • MamaBear

            Go to Germany. Stay there. I have a family member who was just came back from work/grad school over there. She loved her time there. Enjoyed the differences. But, said she was glad to return to sunshine, wide open spaces, friendly Americans, and Mexican food.
            As to the Holocaust, I know several Germans who live here now. They may not have known the full extent of what Hitler was doing, but they knew something pretty bad was happening to their Jewish neighbors. Laws banning Jews from jobs and schools, Kristallnacht, were not secrets. Dachau opened in 1933!
            As far as MURDER of the sick is concerned. What you give the less gruesome name of euthanasia. BTW, you missed Switzerland in your list.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Bah, Disqus did not allow me to see more than the first few paragraphs of what you said. Honestly almost every medical movement in the U.S. can be argued as being based on cold hard cash. That’s how our health care system works and how health insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies make money. Why do you think doctors over-prescribe patients? Why do you think so many new cases of Asperger’s, ADHD, ADD, and other syndromes are being diagnosed (one could argue that such syndromes are either over-diagnosed or they were ignored before the new millennium – argument could go either way). Medical marijuana wouldn’t even be legalized if the government couldn’t make some money off of it and you know the pharmaceutical companies are just waiting to get their hands on it so they can inflate the hell out of it to make a bundle.

            Basically, don’t just single out euthanasia as a potential movement that is a result of “cold hard cash.” If I do enough research, I could come up with a huge list of reasons how and why the American medical industry inflates prices, over-diagnoses illnesses, over-prescribes medicine, etc. for areas outside of euthanasia. I never said I agreed that governments should heavily influence people to use euthanasia. I only stated that a person should have the right to end their life if they want to to end their suffering. That should be their choice, not the government’s. I only talked about euthanasia laws in Europe to show that a majority of European countries aren’t legalizing euthanasia. It’s like saying that just because a few states in the U.S. choose to legalize marijuana doesn’t mean the other states feel the same. A few European countries can’t speak for all of Europe.

            I do have empathy. I was kind of ticked that she felt she deserved a monopoly on my empathy, and the empathy of those reading her post, due to her illness when I’m ill and other readers/writers may be ill, as well, yet I didn’t comment about it in my post and make it a big intro/conclusion. While we’re bringing empathy up, I feel that there were a lot of writers who were rude to me, as well, at more heightened tones than me calling out someone for being ill (i.e. words like murderer and hopes and praises for my suffering, etc.). Lovely bunch here.

          • PJ4

            If you want to see rude.. try being a pro lifer on Rh, Jezebel, Huffpo ,mommish et al.
            Pro aborts are some of the coldest, rudest, meanest, heartless people I’ve ever encountered.

            You can stop your whining. None of us will ever treat you the way we’ve been treated on those sites.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Pro-lifers have a stereotype to live up to in regards to kindness and the whole “we’re saving lives” propaganda (if pro-lifers don’t live up to the stereotype, they’re hypocrites), pro-choicers don’t have such a stereotype to live up to in order to support their cause. :P

          • PJ4

            Hahah.. so you admit that pro aborts lack morals and the higher ground.

            So good of you to comply.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            No, I’m saying that you guys try to use kindness and the “we’re saving lives” crap as a guise for being ignorant about the facts that go against the pro-life agenda.

          • PJ4

            What facts are those?

            The fact that you’re totally fine with humans having different levels of worth based on their developmental stage?
            The fact that your “empathy” starts only when you can physically see something of value and that you don’t care about life as a whole?
            The fact that you cherry pick what life is or what it’s worth?

            It’s not like you’re using facts.
            You’re using platitudes (what’s that?) and bumper sticker slogans as if they’re logical sold facts.

            How about the fact that you’re so deep in your own sophistry that you cannot be bothered to actually counter anything at which you sneer with anything more than idiotic 2nd grade snide remarks?

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I used sources in many of my posts. Pro-lifers didn’t start attempting to use sources till I called them out on it. I’d call that progress on the pro-life front. *rolls eyes*

            Pro-lifers are the ones who use platitudes and stupid remarks with no sources. Like I said, the pro-life community is full of lies. That’s why only 20% of Americans are actually pro-life while many more call themselves “pro-lifers” when they’re really not entirely pro-life at all (Source: Gallup poll link I posted before). Pro-lifers mislabel themselves to thwart would-be pro-choicers.

          • PJ4

            You also claimed that .org sites have no credibility.

            Does that include Guttmacher.org and http://www.plannedparenthood.org and http://www.naral.org? and now.org

            Oh please say yes. =)

            And.. way to skirt around the issues.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I don’t answer loaded questions. :)

          • PJ4

            Because you have no answers.

            Well that’s the first honest thing you’ve said in the past 3 days.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            They are loaded questions and they are not “facts” as you stated. You misinterpret the pro-choice platform based on what you want to see as the big picture when it’s not the big picture at all. Your philosophy is different than ours in terms of human rights and whether the rights of one human can infringe on another (in the pro-life POV, whether the rights of a mother can infringe on the rights of the fetus or embryo she bears. In the pro-choice POV, whether the rights of an embryo or fetus can infringe on the rights of the bearing mother). It doesn’t come down to biology, it comes down to philosophy. You can argue about the stages of fetal development, but it all comes down to who has the right to infringe on the other person’s rights. And this is where the standstill exists.

          • PJ4

            Both sides misrepresent each other.
            You clearly have no understanding of the pro life stance.

            I agree that it has much to do with ethics
            However, one must take into consideration fetal development.
            Is it morally acceptable to kill a child in the womb?
            Is it not our duty to protect the weak?
            Is it morally acceptable to harvest ovaries of aborted baby girls?
            Is it morally acceptable to rip embracing twins out of each others arms in utero?

            Fetal development plays a very big part.

            Argue all you want about philosophy
            The only thing pro aborts have is Might means Right.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            “Hot Air is the leading conservative blog for breaking news and commentary covering the Obama administration…”

          • PJ4

            And it lists the cnn poll
            CNN is a liberal shill

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I used the Gallup poll as my source. I don’t cite CNN…

          • PJ4

            So you only use polls that agree with your agenda.

            So what?

            Oh wait… it’s still a hotly debated subject with slightly more people identifying as pro life.

            http://www.gallup.com/poll/162374/americans-abortion-views-steady-amid-gosnell-trial.aspx

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            “Abortion remains an issue that closely divides Americans in their basic outlook as either “pro-choice” or “pro-life” and engenders fairly similar proportions of Americans taking the more absolutist positions on either side of the legality question. However, the majority of Americans fall in the broad middle, saying abortion should be legal, but only under certain circumstances.”

            Source: the Gallup link you provided

            What’s your point? Most Americans agree with legalizing abortion.

          • PJ4

            We’re trending more and more pro life.
            The gap is narrowing

            I’ll take “only under certain circumstances” over unlimited.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I would say that I’m pro-choice in that I believe women should be able to use abortion if their health or the fetus’ health is at risk or if the woman is raped. If an abortion is used as a form of contraception, I only agree with it if the man and woman used a reliable form of contraception, they used it correctly, and it failed. I do not agree with people using abortion as a form of repetitive contraception (unless it’s the morning after pill, which technically isn’t a form of abortion since you don’t know if you’re pregnant or not at the time [and with an abortion, you’d have to know if you were pregnant, obviously]). If a woman has to have more than one abortion in her life (and it’s not due to health reasons or rape), that is too many.

            I would not consider myself to be “unlimited” and I never have considered myself to be “unlimited.” The article says we are not trending towards pro-life, though, Americans are just confused by the labels – by what is considered “pro-life” and “pro-choice.”

          • PJ4

            There is of course consistent evidence that pharmacy Emergency birth control are associated with higher teenage STI rates.

            In Sweden there is an increase in the number of abortions due to plan EBC

            EBC’s tend to discriminate against BBW’s

            If an abortion is used as a form of contraception, I only agree with it if the man and woman used a reliable form of contraception, they used it correctly, and it failed.

            Cherry picking on who has value and who doesn’t…again.
            Abortion as a means of birth control is never acceptable.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Read this: http://www.plospathogens.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.ppat.1003872 (Public Library of Science research) – a cure for HIV/AIDs has been found and they’re testing it out on mice (it’s working) and they’re moving on to human trials in December. I anticipate the cure will be “mainstream” sometime in 2015 when it goes viral (no pun intended).

            And I want sources for your three allegations.

            Yet, pro-lifers get to decide that a fetus has more rights than its mother? Who’s cherry picking now?

          • PJ4

            You’re comment is still in moderation, so I can’t comment to it directly, but..
            I’m glad to here there is finally a cure for HIV/AIDS.
            Good to know.
            But what does that have to do with what I said?

            Here are your citations:

            http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2013/03/15/More-abortions-in-Sweden-despite-pill/UPI-61001363369704/

            http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167629610001505

            and

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21920190

            Yet, pro-lifers get to decide that a fetus has more rights than its mother? Who’s cherry picking now?

            Again, you show your ignorance
            Pro lifers assert that mother and child are equal.

            Pro aborts assert that the mother has superiority over the child.

            LOL
            If you’re so afraid of the effects of pregnancy, then don’t get pregnant. Most ailments are temporary though; they end once the mother gives birth.
            Personally during all 3 of mine, my psoriasis cleared up and I had the best hair, skin and nails I’ve ever had.
            With my second one I almost got pregnancy diabetes but that was because my eating habits were out of control.
            My doctor warned me and I took the necessary precautions to reduce the risk.

            Not sure what you’re getting at though as you’d be hard pressed to find a pro lifer who would object to abortion if it’s to save the life of the mother (of course all efforts should be made to save both lives).

            The link you provided on graves disease states:

            This suggests that pregnancy might trigger Graves’ disease in some women.

            It doesn’t directly link it. It doesn’t even any mention any studies on it.

            But there is this:
            http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10552-013-0325-7

            and

            http://www.indianjcancer.com/article.asp?issn=0019-509X;year=2013;volume=50;issue=4;spage=316;epage=321;aulast=Bhadoria

            The newest studies are in direct contradiction to what the US cancer.gov states.

            http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/reproductive-history

            But at least they admit that pregnancy and breast feeding helps to reduce your risk of breast cancer…. unless you wait till your older.

          • PJ4

            It directly correlates with what you said about an increase in STIs because a cure for HIV/AIDS has been found, rendering those statistics obsolete since the illness can be cured. It is no longer a death sentence.

            No it doesn’t. I wasn’t even referring to HIV

            Most STI’s are not death sentences.

            Even though emergency contraception may relate to an increase in STIs in teenagers due to false assumptions about the uses for emergency contraception, most STIs can be cured and STIs can also be prevented by using a condom.

            Interesting.. most illnesses due to pregnancy can be avoided, cured and are temporary.

            more education is needed so teenagers can avoid making assumptions about EC

            Yes.

            Thus rendering your, “LOLIf you’re so afraid of the effects of pregnancy, then don’t get pregnant” comment null and void and a bit offensive to someone like me who has dealt with rape.

            oooh you sure showed me, didn’t you?

            No
            Not really… actually you just look petty. I called you out on your fear and cowardice and you bring up 2% of the reason why women get an abortion.
            It’s a red herring.
            I was sexually molested for 7 years by my older cousin.
            If a pregnancy resulted due to the abuse, why should the child have to pay for the crimes of the father with his/her life?

            56 million dead babies are not from rape.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            “If a pregnancy resulted due to the abuse, why should the child have to pay for the crimes of the father with his/her life?”

            Why should the mother have to pay for the crimes of the father with her life (i.e. 18 years or more of dependency, potential pregnancy illness triggers, etc.)?

            “Interesting.. most illnesses due to pregnancy can be avoided, cured and are temporary.”

            If my aunt’s attempt at suicide was to be fulfilled, how would that have been “temporary?” Once again, she was a happy and healthy woman until she became pregnant. Then things went downhill from there.

            “I was sexually molested for 7 years by my older cousin.”

            I’m sorry about the molestation you faced, but it’s slightly odd that you’re just bringing this up now. I hope you’re not using that statement as a way to justify your offensive statement about pregnancy.

            “56 million dead babies are not from rape.”

            1. No source
            2. Not enough adoptive parents to support 56 million “dead babies” (another unnecessarily negative connotation used by pro-lifers)

          • PJ4

            Why should the mother have to pay for the crimes of the father with her life (i.e. 18 years or more of dependency, potential pregnancy illness triggers, etc.)?

            Again, pregnancy is temporary and there’s adoption afterwards

            If my aunt’s attempt at suicide was to be fulfilled, how would that have been “temporary?” Once again, she was a happy and healthy woman until she became pregnant. Then things went downhill from there.

            Oh so now we’re using anecdotes?

            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1579455/Artist-hanged-herself-after-aborting-her-twins.html

            She would still be her if it wasn’t for abortion.

            She killed her babies and then it all went downhill

            http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jill-stanek/2014/02/23/australian-tv-star-commits-suicide-after-depression-triggered-her-abort

            Her depression was triggered by an abortion

            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2572070/Pregnant-woman-26-accidentally-killed-moment-madness-boyfriend-dumped-refused-abort-baby.html

            That bro choicer could have been more compassionate

            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2568586/Oxford-student-hanged-splitting-boyfriend.html

            and finally

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16405636

            I’m sorry about the molestation you faced, but it’s slightly odd that you’re just bringing this up now. I hope you’re not using that statement as a way to justify your offensive statement about pregnancy.

            Thank you

            But I only brought it up bc of what you said:

            comment null and void and a bit offensive to someone like me who has dealt with rape
            I didn’t make any such offensive statement about pregnancy

            Most people on LAN know about my past.

            “56 million dead babies are not from rape.”

            1. No source
            2. Not enough adoptive parents to support 56 million “dead babies” (another unnecessarily negative connotation used by pro-lifers)

            You’ve already been schooled on this one so I wont beat a dead horse

            Also, you’re misinterpreting the statistics as to why women have abortions (once again, you’ve listed no source).

            I have’t misrepresented anything.
            You can look stuff up for yourself,
            You’re a big girl.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            “You’ve already been schooled on this one so I wont beat a dead horse.”

            A Guttmacher Institute source was used…by a pro-lifer. Desperation much?

          • PJ4

            Not really
            Most pro aborts depend solely on guttmacher for their stats

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I’ve never used Guttmacher as a source. I said that it is a SIG, so to be fair, I don’t use SIGs for sources. I would hope you pro-lifers would apply the same fairness to your sources. It is desperation when you have to use sources from a SIG website, especially when you can’t fulfill your hopes and dreams that there are “56 million dead babies.”

          • PJ4

            Well as Adam pointed out…not every state reports… but from the CDC it’s only a few numbers from the Guttmacher.
            It’s desperation that you’re on an “org” site despairing it.

            I said most pro aborts…and while you fall under the category for most… this SIG comment of your is an anomaly

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I’m on here to argue against the lies and misrepresentations of news articles and statistics by the pro-life community in the hopes that this indoctrination will end.

          • PJ4

            Interesting that all you have to combat us is pro abort propaganda

            In order to “end indoctrination” try not to sound so indoctrinated yourself

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I’ve debunked your sources. Why not respond to my last post?

          • PJ4

            You’ve debunked nothing
            I think I may have missed the last post
            Driving right now

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Texting while driving – I love it (well, no, I dont, but you seem to think it’s alright).

            Texting while driving leads to 1.6 million accidents a year (distracted driving, in general, leads to an even higher number of accidents) and I think you were the one who said there are around 1.6 million abortions a year. Hmm… You’re alright with endangering the lives of children and adults on the road, yet the idea of “dead babies” sounds quite grave to you.

            I love the smell of a fresh, hot cup of hypocrisy in the afternoon. :)

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I’m not “most pro-aborts” and I’m pro-choice, not pro-abortion.

            “Usually” – you use qualifiers a lot in your arguments, don’t you?

          • PJ4

            I try not to use extremes

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Nah, qualifiers just show that you’re not certain about your allegations and you want the comfort of knowing there’s some level of doubt.

          • PJ4

            Nope

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            You’re latest comment is under moderation so it seems that (once again) I cannot reply to it directly.

            …someone else, can’t remember who, talked about how a lot of women are coerced into having an abortion.

            I stated earlier that a significant number of abortions in America seemed to be consented to under pressure, and the source for this claim is a 2004 study published by Medical Science Monitor (a division of Thomas Reuters). The study compared abortion experiences among Russian and American women and found that 64% of US women in the study reported feeling pressure by others to abort. That information is found in a table on page 5.

            http://www.medscimonit.com/download/index/idArt/11784

            You can also find significant anecdotal examples of women facing physical violence when they refuse to consent to an abortion. The following link contains a compilation of news stories that document this.

            http://afterabortion.org/2012/the-many-faces-of-coercion/

            (Yes, the stories were compiled by a pro-life group but that doesn’t change the factuality of the original news reports)

            It should be noted that this isn’t just an America problem–in 2007 a Canadian woman named Roxanne Fernando made national head lines when she was brutally murdered by her boyfriend after she refused to abort their child. http://life.nationalpost.com/2010/12/04/why-we-need-a-public-debate-on-roxannes-law/

            If my aunt’s attempt at suicide was to be fulfilled, how would that have been ‘temporary?‘”

            Actually, a study published in the British Medical Journal found that abortion was associated with an increased risk of suicide.

            http://www.bmj.com/content/313/7070/1431

            Why should the mother have to pay for the crimes of the father with her life (i.e. 18 years or more of dependency, potential pregnancy illness triggers, etc.)?

            While physical problems that come with pregnancy shouldn’t be minimized, there is no requirement for a women to actually raise her child once she has given birth. I have pleasure of knowing women who became pregnant under difficult circumstances and opted to give their children for adoption and thus avoided “18 or years or more of dependency.”

            I’m sorry about the molestation you faced, but it’s slightly odd that you’re just bringing this up now.

            PJ has indicated in the past that part of her reason for supporting the pro-life movement is that she knows what it is like to be a powerless victim and she wishes to help others who can’t speak for themselves. A baby obviously an example of such an individual.

            “56 million dead babies are not from rape.”

            1. No source
            2. Not enough adoptive parents to support 56 million “dead babies” (another unnecessarily negative connotation used by pro-lifers)

            1. Pregnancies due to rape constitute a tiny fraction of the total number of abortions.

            http://www.musc.edu/vawprevention/research/sa.shtml

            2. So in your view it’s acceptable to simply kill children if there are an insufficient number of adoptive homes for them? I suppose we could save a good deal of money in the foster car system if this principal were expanded to include those outside of the womb as well… Also, you may be confusing “connotation” with “denotation.” Connotation refers to some suggested meaning beyond the literal definition of the words themselves. In this case, the phrase “dead babies” may be something of colloquialism, but it does accurately describe what one has after an abortion: a fetus that is no longer alive.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            1. I checked your source about rape constituting for a “tiny fraction” of abortions and the only mention of abortion in the entire article is in the phrase, “Provide free pregnancy counseling and abortions.” Nice filler citation.

            Good on you for verifying my source. I had two pages open: one with detailed information about rape in general and another specifically relating to rape and abortion–it seems that I posted the wrong link. Thank you for identifying that oversight. Here’s the correct source (you’ll find it in the original post now as well): http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/8765248/%29/

            “Point being – making abortion illegal will not change the fact that some men do not want their wife or girlfriend to have a child – by making abortion illegal, the homicide and suicide rates [and deaths associated
            with illegal abortion] may actually increase if abortion is made illegal.”

            Or one could argue that making it illegal would reduce the availability of abortion to such an extant that (at least in some cases), these men wouldn’t pressure their partners because their would be no abortion provider to pressure those women into seeing.

            I found a news story that outlines many reasons why a pregnant woman may be murdered, but abortion was mentioned in only one of the instances of murder or attempted murder on pregnant women: http://abcnews.go.com/US/story

            Here are some others:

            http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-09-18-parents-kidnapping_x.htm

            http://www.nytimes.com/2000/08/03/us/national-news-briefs-mother-is-said-to-try-to-force-girl-to-abort.html

            http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/08/19/teen_held_in_pregnant_womans_stabbing/

            Unless you can start a government task force that’s equipped to place 56 million children in loving homes, you’re one to talk.

            Well, we actually don’t need to find homes for those 56 million children–they’re already dead. All we would really have to do is find care for the three quarters of a million or so that are presently being aborted annually. I must say that I find it quite odd that you would favor killing as means to save tax dollars given that you previously expressed admiration for a European-style social system. Why is it acceptable to abort for reasons of fiscal policy and yet unacceptable to let those outside of the womb fend for themselves?

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Legalized abortion reduces homicide, violent and property crime rates and the amount of adolescent substance abuse: http://wwwdev.nber.org/papers/

            This study (http://www.nber.org/papers/w11
            shows that crime in the United States started to decline in 1992. Donohue and Levitt suggest that the absence of unwanted children, following legalization in 1973, led to a reduction in crime 18 years later, starting in 1992 and dropping sharply in 1995 (These would have
            been the peak crime-committing years of the unborn children).

            Economist John Lott wrote a paper criticizing the methodology and conclusions of the Donohue/Levitt study. However, let us argue for a moment that the study’s conclusions were accurate–so what? Does it follow then that it’s acceptable to abort (preemptively kill) children on the grounds that they fit the profile of someone who might go on to commit crimes? This idea is ghoulish.

            Did I ever say that I favor killing as a means to save tax dollars? I don’t believe I ever did.

            Well if you’re arguing for legalized abortion (ie killing) because you feel it would too expensive for the government to support unwanted children then yes, you’re implying it.

            And once again, where does this “56 million children” total come from? Does the total account for American abortions or for world-wide abortions?

            It’s a rough tally of the total number of abortions since the practice was legalized. I have to attend some other matters, but later on I’ll find you a break down of the annual tallies of abortions for years past.

            And quit tip-toeing around my final questions: what is your solution if abortion is made illegal? I know that you said we could just support the children who would’ve been born each year who weren’t by finding them
            families; however, I provided another source a few posts back about how this is not probable at all (I’ll let you find it since I found your incorrect source earlier).

            I think that more homes could be found if the state provided fiscal incentives for them, which might be affordable if the government were to swear off other ventures, such as the “Affordable” Care Act. (Speaking as someone who actually grew up with a government run health care scheme, I cannot fathom how that thing was bungled so badly).

            She looked into adoption, but it’s very expensive and it’s hard for single parents to make it through the adoption process.

            Well, that wouldn’t be the case if unwanted children weren’t getting aborted, would it? And congratulations on her little girl :)

            I think someone on here also concurred (or at least started talking about) how the number of annual abortions in America hover around 1.6 million. It’s funny how the statistics pro-lifers spew can change…

            The three quarters of million number that I cited earlier came from a CDC link that you provided. However, I know that the numbers do fluctuate from year to year and have been going down in the last decade.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            NOW, Naral, and Planned Parenthood are both SIGs (like I talked about before, if you even saw). Don’t know a lot about the Guttmacher Institute, but I Googled it and there weren’t any SIGs that appeared in the results that are associated with Guttmacher

          • PJ4

            Oh good lord… Guttmacher is associated with PP
            They used to be on PP’s payroll

            I didn’t bother reading most of your tripe. From what I did read you’re seriously misinformed and a pseudo-intellecutal.

            Do you have a point about SIG’s?
            Do you have a point on anything?
            I didn’t think so.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I said that I don’t regard most .org websites as credible sources because most SIGs have .org websites and SIGs are biased. It’s funny how I get shit on when I don’t cite sources, yet when I do, no one seems to remember. You’re a biased bunch, aren’t you?

          • PJ4

            So you admit that PP, Naral, NOW, Guttmahcer (all the pro abort groups) have a bias towards abortion?
            You admit that PP is not a credible source of anything– especially sex ed.
            Thank you.
            Your second most honest comment in 3 days.

            We’re a biased bunch?
            Clearly you’ve not been to RH and Jezebel.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I’ve said a few times already that SIGs are biased to the cause they are aligned with. How is this new or surprising information?

            I don’t frequent RH or Jezebel.

          • PJ4

            It’s surprising because pro aborts don’t usually admit PP’s biases and their ineptitude to serve women.

            Pro aborts usually tout the wonders of PP

            But it’s refreshing to hear even people of your ilk admit what pro lifers already know. I’m going to have to quote you on it now.

            I don’t frequent RH or Jezebel.

            You’re not missing anything.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            No, I’m saying that you guys try to use kindness and the “we’re saving lives” crap as a guise for being ignorant about the facts that go against the pro-life agenda.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            …pro-choicers don’t have such a stereotype to live up to in order to support their cause. :P

            Oh you don’t? So you mean to tell me that all of those moralistic euphemisms that your side is so fond of trotting out–words like “rights” and “freedom” and “respect” and “choice”–all of these articulate no standard to which you can be held? This is indeed a curious defense.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I would say that we’re improperly stereotyped as pro-aborts.

          • PJ4

            The pro abort community is made of lies and they depend on pro life stereotypes.
            People of you ilk have nothing honest to add to anything.

            You don’t want to debate the topic and you cannot answer any question. So what is it that you want to do?
            You’re not helping your side.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I already stated my case and you all have stated yours. Now you all are turning it into a personal matter.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            I will concede that some of you are mischaracterized, although for others the term is completely accurate–take Nils Parker, for example:

            Any procedure that can erase a massive lapse in judgment while at the
            same time saving hundreds of thousands of dollars and no fewer than 18
            years of responsibility for the welfare of another human being, and can
            be performed with what amounts to a Black & Decker wet/dry vac from
            your local Home Depot – that’s a procedure from which I can derive
            countless hours of entertainment.

            http://books.google.com/books?id=TF-wJkGqg4YC&pg=PA331&lpg=PA331&dq=tucker+max+assholes+finish+first+baby+killer&source=bl&ots=P7rs1-W2P0&sig=wj2HGfi2P5Qs63pXq9j3IN6tT8o&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Wz2gUsWYKYbyyAGU4YG4Cw&ved=0CF8Q6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=tucker%20max%20assholes%20finish%20first%20baby%20killer&f=false

            However, that doesn’t address point. Are you saying that you can lecture us about individual rights and decency and then expect not to be held to those standards when you violate them? Such a view defies reason.

          • PJ4

            Ouch!

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            How did I violate individual rights and decency? I don’t believe I did such a thing. I’m confused by your accusation.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            How did I violate individual rights and decency? I don’t believe I did such a thing. I’m confused by your accusation.

            That’s quite all right–confusion is a regrettable but altogether natural experience and I’ll do my best to alleviate it for you.

            You opened your remarks by arguing that since pro-lifers profess to be interested in saving lives (hence the name), then they are setting themselves up as the good guys and can thus be denounced as hypocrites when they don’t behave in a kind manner. You then contended that because pro-choicers aren’t part of any such moral campaign, they can’t be called hypocrites for acting in a less than kind fashion.

            My point is that your side uses high sounding moral rhetoric just as much as mine. You prattle on endlessly about protecting vulnerable women, respecting rights, and so forth. So, if by taking on a morally themed cause, pro-lifers have also taken on responsibility to be kind, then why shouldn’t your side be judged by the same standard and called hypocrites when you conduct yourselves poorly?

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            There are a few nuts in every bunch and I don’t understand why you are aligning me with Nils Parker (no idea who that is, but I don’t agree with his or her negative connotations). I expressed my views in a response to PJ4. Comparing me to Nils Parker would be like me comparing you to a severe pro-life proponent. There are nutty pro-lifers and there are nutty pro-choicers. I’ve met a few misogynist pro-life proponents in my day.

            How am I not displaying individual rights and decency? Did you not read my post to PJ4 about the issue with rights within the pro-life and pro-choice agenda?

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            There are a few nuts in every bunch and I don’t understand why you are aligning me with Nils Parker…

            Earlier, you said that “we’re improperly stereotyped as pro-aborts.” I conceded that it might not be fair to apply the term “pro-abort” to all supporters of legalized abortion, but I also wanted to point out that there are some abortion supporters for whom it genuinely fits, with Nils Parker being one of them. Others include Tucker Max and Christian McQueen–you can read about these fellows in an article that I wrote last year if you like:

            http://liveactionnews.org/tucker-max-and-meghan-murphy-when-opposites-attract/

            How am I not displaying individual rights and decency?

            I wasn’t accusing you of any specific misconduct–I was criticizing your logic. Earlier, you said this:

            Pro-lifers have a stereotype to live up to in regards to kindness and the whole “we’re saving lives” propaganda (if pro-lifers don’t live up to the stereotype, they’re hypocrites) pro-choicers don’t have such a stereotype to live up to in order to support their cause. :P

            It sounds as though you’re arguing that because pro-lifers take a moral stance, they should then be expected to conform to a higher standard of kindness than pro-choicers. I responded that this differing standard makes no sense, as pro-choice people also use moral rhetoric as well. This can be seen seen in their habitual use of words like “rights” and “choice” (both of which are usually just euphemisms for “killing).

            So again, if (like us) pro-choicers also profess to fight for a noble cause, then why are you not prepared to hold them to the same noble standard that you would apply to us?

          • DianaG2

            Because their objective is to kill?

      • MamaBear

        I believe those “193 member nations” include nations that practice female genital mutilation, polygamy, child marriages, countries that do not allow women to work without spousal permission or drive, etc. It also includes at least one country where forced abortions and sex selected abortions are the norm.
        This is the United States. Let’s stick to our laws and documents.

        • Old Testament Rockstar

          We have polygamy within our own country. While it isn’t legal, it still happens. Unfortunately, you can have many laws, but people will still break them.

          Also, “There is nothing sacrosanct about culture anyway. Culture is constantly evolving in any living society, responding to both internal and external stimuli, and there is much in every culture that societies quite naturally outgrow and reject. Are we, as Indians [author is from India], obliged to defend, in the name of our culture, the practices of sati or of untouchability? The fact that slavery was acceptable across the world for at least two thousand years does not make it acceptable to us now.” Source: New Internationalist Magazine (BTW, this throws out your elder comment.)

        • Coyote

          “BTW, if the standard is to be able to make decisions for themselves, you just opened the door to infanticide.”

          Playing Devil’s Advocate here, but why exactly is legalizing painless infanticide in the event of a shortage of adoptive parents morally unjustifiable?

          • MamaBear

            It’s murder!

          • Coyote

            “It’s murder!”

            But why exactly *should* it be considered murder, though?

            In other words, why exactly *should* human infants be considered to be persons/worthy of having rights?

      • DianaG2

        <>

        What about taking away an unborn person’s life?

        You don;t have to be an evil person to participate in an evil act. The act is still evil.

      • Coyote

        “According to The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (established by the United Nations), “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” The key word here is “born.” Until someone is born, they are not equal in dignity and rights (probably because they are not able to make decisions for themselves, form opinions, think about anything other than what nutrients they’re receiving from the umbilical cord, etc.).”

        This might be an example of the appeal to authority fallacy and/or of the argumentum ad populum fallacy.

      • Coyote

        “Our country and (most) of its inhabitants are at least 50 years behind Europe.”

        Really? Because I am not sure that Europe is much ahead of us, if at all, on things such as gay marriage.

        And No, supporting legal abortion is not necessarily an indication of progress. Contrary to what you might think, the debate over the moral justifiability of abortion isn’t as black and white as the debate over the moral justifiability of, say, gay marriage.

  • Alicia Jewel Jake

    the thing that really bugs me about her words is the term mindless embryo. sure that baby might not be able to think for its self just yet but it will one day. it may not have the power to fight back and defend its self but it will one day. one day it realize how you didnt want them that you thought those horrible thoughts about them and you wanted them dead. think if you were that baby. your future nonexistent, your past not even there, your friends and your family the people that care for you gone as well. the fun and the freedom you enjoy now taken away by no one elses choice but your own mom because she thought you were worthless and she didnt want you because youre a burden, a disease easily taken care of without another thought. think about that

    • Mindy Robinson

      I have a theory, just a theory, that the day of their judgement, those murdered babies will be there, at God’s side.

    • Lilian Stoltzfus

      I don’t think she’s an expert on embryology or neurological embryology. Is an embryo mindless? We don’t *actually* know when sentience begins. We can only observe and deduce.

      And if an embryo is mindless, who cares? his isn’t (or shouldn’t be) about what embryos have or don’t have. This is about what they are.

      Some people would call newborns mindless. There are plenty of adults who could qualify as mindless. It doesn’t matter.

  • cheeriosinmypocket

    It is hard not to comment on such a rant. Mary Lee did a very good job at 5:00 a.m. Three other things come to mind…
    1. We all began as what she sort of refers to as “mindless persons” (sorry, I can’t agree with the ‘pre-‘); obviously, her comments demonstrate that some do not progress from such a state.
    2. We who pray will say a prayer for her conversion, freedom from the bondage that holds her in such contempt, and that no conception enter her womb.
    3. Finally, I’m quite certain that she would not have a cavity removed…a cavity is a hole or a space (i.e., the cavity that exists between her ears).

    • Mindy Robinson

      The only prayer I can come up with is , Father, please , wipe the evil from this earth, come for us soon. It really is the only prayer I can pray.

    • DianaG2

      1. Agreed.

      2. Yes, that is the best idea, really. All for it. The devil has no defense against humility, because he really doesn’t understand it at all. (If you’re not religious, it still works as a metaphor.)

      3. LOL Roflmao :-))

      Thanks, Cheriosimp.

  • Basset_Hound

    I’d like to make a few hasty points myself. Some friends are coming by to pick me up for a church retreat any time now, so this will be brief.

    The moral equivalence between pulling the plug on a comatose patient and having an abortion is a false one.
    A comatose patient is in his condition because of a pathological state, an injury, a disease or a deformity. No moral or ethical medical board would recommend “pulling the plug” unless it has clearly been established that the patient has no prospect of recovery. No one would condemn them, however not all people who are comatose die. Right now, a young man who was injured at last week’s South By Southwest festival in
    Austin, TX is in a medically induced coma after being hit by a drunk who ran a police barricade killing three and injuring 20 others. Neither his family nor his doctors have the right to disconnect him simply because they don’t want the responsibility of dealing with his injuries.

  • Wendy

    She needs to have a full blown hysterectomy “JUST IN CASE”.. Then she will never breed.. What a mentally sick Person she is.. Maybe this ones mother should have aborted her.. No, I take that back, I can’t even say that.. ALL babies are precious. Something must have happened to her during her life to make her so hateful towards beautiful little babies.. Feeling very sad that anyone could hold such distain for an innocent.

    • Mindy Robinson

      Yes , something happened to her, she follows hell, rolls in the blood of the unborn, she is death and destruction.

  • 441019

    We should all pray for Amanda Marcotte. She must have had a hateful mother in order to have her attitude toward babies. Or, alternatively, maybe she was so spoiled as a child that she became narcissistic.

    • DianaG2

      Sometimes I also wonder if she just writes this crap for the $$ also??

  • Andrew J. Corrales

    Can you back up your statistics by citing sources? And how should supporting the right of all human beings of any stage of development to be alive lead to the government being in your life more? A gal gets pregnant and then gives birth. Where does the government come in? And why, exactly, should the political or religious/secularist alignments of pro-lifers matter? We’re people who believe in said right of all humans at any stage of development to be alive. You don’t have to be either monotheistic or Republican to believe that. That third paragraph of yours makes a lot of unjust, ungrounded assumptions about pro-life males’ mindsets.

    • Old Testament Rockstar

      I’m taking an HR Management class this semester and we learned about how pregnant women are often discriminated against during their job search and during their employment (we were told this information to ensure that we are educated to not make the same mistakes in the future). The U.S. doesn’t have an official leave of absence policy for expecting mothers, so a lot of new moms have to use paid time off or short-term disability to make up for it. FMLA coverage doesn’t cover companies that have less than 50 employees and most companies require you require women to work for a year or more before they’re eligible for maternity leave.

      As for the stats on men and non-Christian post-grads, that’s why I posted the Gallup link…

      • Andrew J. Corrales

        I concede that you cited a source, but I have never understood why, precisely, pregnant women need time off. Nursing women, I understand that she’s interrupted by the baby crying every few minutes, but I don’t think that’s a problem while he or she’s still in the womb. Unless it’s a manual-labor or high-stress job.

        • ldwendy

          And that, Andrew, is your problem. Clearly, you have never met women whose pregnancies adversely impacted their health. I was working full time at a job which was not stressful or manual labor. I had preeclampsia at 29 weeks and was in the hospital having an unexpected c-section.
          When I was pregnant with my second daughter I went on bed rest for a few weeks before she was born.

          Pregnancy is NOT a state of wellness. Women experience preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, incompetent cervix, severe nausea to the point of being unable to work, and placenta previa.

          • Andrew J. Corrales

            None of which are normal. Pregnancy is not a state of wellness only if you think pregnancy is a disease.

          • MamaBear

            Wendy, it is true that pregnancy raises the risk of medical problems. But it is also true that most of those are temporary and the ones that actually make you unable to work most jobs are rare. It is also true that there are many other health problems that cause both men and women to have to go to light work-schedules, temporary disability, permanent disability, etc. Life does not come with guarantees. I know someone who was out of work and then on light-duty for a very lengthy time because he broke his foot on a fishing trip (boat hit an underwater rock). Shall we ban fishing because it is dangerous?

          • Marauder

            Pregnancy isn’t always total and complete happy fun time – I’m fifteen weeks pregnant and I spent two of those weeks not leaving my house because I kept throwing up every few hours, plus I had to quit taking medications for anxiety and depression – but it’s not a reason to kill a human being, either. I wasn’t “sick,” just pregnant.

  • john lind

    Do whatever you want with your own body.
    The fetus’ body is not your body though. Each of the fetus’ organs is its own. The
    fetus is placed in a state of dependency because of the actions of the parents
    or parent. If my action causes somebody to come onto my property, I can’t evict
    them without putting them in a situation that is at least as good as the
    position that they were in before I caused them to come onto my property. If
    they were walking along the sidewalk and I dragged them onto my property, I
    can’t evict them by throwing them into traffic.

    The fetus comes to life inside the woman’s body and if left alone by the abortionist
    and by nature, will thrive. It is unjust to evict it in any way that won’t
    allow it to be in a similar state as pre-eviction (in other words, alive).

    Being libertarian is not being anti-law. As a libertarian, I absolutely believe
    that there should be laws against murder, assault, rape, robbery, theft, and
    kidnapping because each of these crimes are true crimes in that they violate
    the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP).

    Abortion violates the NAP by aggressing against the fetus through murder
    (killing that is not self-defense), and robbery (the fetus’ property rights in
    their body have been violated).

    Pro-life views have increased due to advances in technology such as advanced
    ultrasound and the undisputed biological fact that human life begins at conception.

    You say that you are a libertarian but then you say, “I especially don’t
    want men and women who do not know me to judge me for the choices I make with
    MY body.”

    There is nothing about libertarianism that says your behavior won’t be judged
    by others. I think all drugs should be legalized and I think adult prostitution
    should be legalized, but I think anyone who abuses drugs is a dumbass and I
    think anyone who uses a prostitute is immoral. I just judged their actions.

    Libertarianism says that unless an action violates the NAP, it should not be
    illegal. Drug use and prostitution do not violate the NAP. Abortion clearly
    does.

  • sha49tn

    She doesn’t deserve to be called a woman, nor a female either. SHE’S the time sucking monster

    • Old Testament Rockstar

      Y’all realize that by reading this article, you’re giving Amanda the attention she probably wants from pro-lifers, right? You’re spending your time thinking about what she’s saying, therefore, she completed her task.

      • Mindy Robinson

        You are right and she is not worthy of it.

    • san_ban

      so “woman” and “female” are titles to be awarded to one that uses hir uterus for its procreative purpose? Shocking that some only allow it to be used for a few months instead of half their lives, as nature (or god/s) intended! Not fit to be called women or even females!

  • Betty DeKorte

    I wonder what happened to her growing up, something made her so bitter and angry. She must have been a rejected child!

    • Mindy Robinson

      Betty, with all due respect and being one who was rejected, abused and abandoned, that is not the problem. The problem is simple, the creature made a willing choice to embrace evil, it chose it over good because it enjoys death, destruction and suffering. This ongoing attitude in America that suffering excuses evil must end. It is a lie propagated by those who seek to control and manipulate on a mass scale. I feel empathy for those who have suffered but never sympanthy , nor will I let any use their past as an excuse for actions which are pure evil.

  • http://www.jimconnor.com/ James Connor

    As Mark Twain, in one of his more cynical moments said that “God created Man because he was disappointed in the monkey.” After reading this terribly sad woman’s comments, I am tempted to agree.

  • Kristin Philips

    How sad. What a pitiful rant. My babies bring me joy and peace and have taught me so much about life and love.

  • AirFrank

    I have an idea. You don’t want a baby. Quit having sex, that’s the reason it exists. And if you’re such a narcissistic pig that you can’t help spreading your legs, get your tubes tide. What a deviant you are.

    • Daisygirl

      I am married and I never want kids. Are you telling me to stop having sex with my husband since sex only exists for us to make babies?

      • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

        Procreation isn’t the only reason to have sex. Indeed, reproduction has never been the objective whenever I’ve engaged in intercourse. However, it’s obvious that the potential for conception is both a direct and foreseeable of having sex. Therefore, if one is so horrified by the idea of having a child she feels that abortion would be an immediate remedy, then perhaps it’s prudent for her to disable her reproductive capabilities altogether.

        • Daisygirl

          Oh I plan to either have my tubes tied or my husband is going to have a vasectomy. It is not going to be able to be until next summer (2015) but trust me we are going to do everything we can to avoid a pregnancy.

          • PJ4

            Thank you
            Thank you
            Thank you
            Thank you
            Thank you

            People like you should be rewarded for not polluting the gene pool

            Thank you
            Thank you
            Thank you
            Thank you

            Best news EVER

            Thank you
            Thank you
            Thank you
            Thank you

            Here’s something your husband can do in-between now and 2015. Its 100% effective.

            http://technorati.com/women/article/radical-new-birth-control-for-men/

          • Daisygirl

            Is that actually in the US now? I heard they were developing it but last I heard was that it was still in the testing phase.

          • PJ4

            I’m actually not sure.
            But it’s available I believe in Canada.
            It might be available on line too

  • Crystal Blackwell

    Lol apparently this human isn’t a real woman

    • Daisygirl

      and why is that?

  • genesis667

    Too bad her own mother didn’t take that approach with her…

    • john lind

      So, are you always pro-abortion or only with people like Marcotte?

      • genesis667

        I am completely against abortion, but some people are so evil the world would be better off had they never been born, she is a prime exaple…

        • john lind

          Maybe or maybe not, but basically your first comment just lends support to the argument that pro-aborts use…that there’s always some subjective reason (the kid would have probably been a criminal) to why abortion is acceptable.

          • genesis667

            A. the difference being she is already here so there is no chance of her being aborted..

            B. A baby can never be evil–

            C.I can see she is evil through and through just by her very nasty and hateful comments–

            D. It doesn’t take a genius to see she wasn’t given a heaping helping of compassion and kindness, she is a narcissistic hateful little bitc#, and that is being very kind-

            E. There are far more worthy people in this world you could spend your time defending, like just about ANYONE over her..

          • Rachel S.

            No, you are either 100% for abortion or 100% against it. I am against it, so therefore I am glad she wasn’t aborted, and yes even with people like her. I just wish her parents raised her better. With hatred like hers it seems she was never loved.

          • john lind

            E. At a post above, I called her ” disgusting and reprehensible”, so it’s a leap to say I was defending her. I was criticizing your original comment as it sounds like you’re saying her mother should have aborted her.
            B. Agree 100%, so why advocate that it would have been better if her mother would have aborted her when she was an innocent baby.
            C. See ‘E,’ above…I am not skilled enough into looking into people’s souls to judge whether someone is evil through and through.
            D. See ‘E’ above; As a pro life person, I can’t condone that it would be better if she was aborted.
            A. It is a good thing that she was not aborted as it would have been an unjust act by her mother.

    • Calvin Freiburger

      For the record, I am only letting this (and a couple of other
      gratuitously nasty comments on this thread) stand because the replies
      from LAN regulars standing up to them are such a strong contrast to the way pro-abortion bloggers and readers (fail to) address mean-spiritedness from people on their own side.

  • Richard Loveday

    Talk about having MAJOR anger issues! BTW – How do you “remove a cavity”? Any cavities I’ve had were filled.

  • CM

    I am sorry this woman does not HAVE TO like babies. This is a FREE country. She is entitled to her opinion (on the severe side). I know some women think they are saints because they have a handicapped child or more than 4 kids…GREAT! That is your business. I don’t hate or look down on you….it is just your attitude of self sacrifice gets to be a bit much. Lots of moms have kids and can’t stand them or being a mother, and then they take it out on their kids. It isn’t fair. If you do not like kids do not have them. If you do, great….don’t complain later like all of these STUPID websites where women vent about how difficult motherhood is. Stop whining. You CHOOSE to do that. Unless you are rich and have a live in nanny, it is going to be hard.

    • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

      The main objection isn’t that she has no desire to be a parent (parenting isn’t for everyone, after all). Rather, it’s that she has unmitigated contempt for an entire class of individuals (the very young), and that she advocates for the right to have those individuals sliced up and converted into medical waste.

      • san_ban

        Now you’re lying! Amanda Marcotte is not advocating to have all zefs destroyed. Not at all! In fact, she’s enthusiastically in favor of people who WANT to bear and raise kids having the right to do so. She is also in favor of having the right to NOT do so, for herself and for any other person with a uterus.

        Her opinion of babies is not rare, nor even that rarely expressed. I’ve heard lots of moms and dads express exactly those opinions: babies are smelly, needy, squalling, feeding, puking, pooping machines that ruins figures and sex lives. Why is it that when a woman voices those same opinions in a pro-choice context it makes her a monster? hmm?

        • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

          I’ve heard lots of moms and dads express exactly those opinions: babies
          are smelly, needy, squalling, feeding, puking, pooping machines that
          ruins figures and sex lives.

          And should the law permit those moms and dads to dismember their children when they’ve become tiresome? Because that’s essentially what Ms. Marcotte is arguing for.

          Why is it that when a woman voices those same opinions in a pro-choice context it makes her a monster? hmm?

          It really doesn’t make her any different than men who voice that view. And if you would like to read more about my thoughts on those men…
          http://liveactionnews.org/tucker-max-and-meghan-murphy-when-opposites-attract/

          • san_ban

            I would no more visit that hate site than I would give you power to decide how I should allow my body to be used!

            That is what Amanda Marcotte is arguing for – the right to her own body. You are deliberately and dishonestly conflating infanticide with abortion when you KNOW that in only one case (abortion) is the dependence upon another’s body the salient issue.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            I would no more visit that hate site than I would give you power to decide how I should allow my body to be used!

            You’re actually on that “hate site” so what’s the harm? That was link to an article I wrote attacking pro-abortion men, which shows that I have no interest in singling out women for their views.

            You are deliberately and dishonestly conflating infanticide with abortion when you KNOW that in only one case (abortion) is the dependence upon another’s body the salient issue.

            To me the salient issue is that there is essentially no physiological difference between a newborn and a fetus in the later stages of development, including the ability to feel pain. In fact, as I pointed out in another comment, research by Dr. Kanwaljeet Anand seems to suggest that a fetus can feel pain at as little as 20 weeks gestation. Given this, doesn’t it seem odd that you support the right to dispose of unwanted children in a manner that we couldn’t constitutionally use to dispose of convicted murderers? http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/10/magazine/10Fetal-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

            This isn’t to say that I support abortion even before a fetus can feel pain, but it does show that the infanticide comparison isn’t off base.

          • san_ban

            Touche! I don’t generally follow links to abortion ban sites (they’re usually infested with stalkers and malware – I’ll have to do a good scan and cleaning after this session!)
            And at least you’re honest in admitting you’re against all abortion, not just the very late term ones your lot always seem to obsess over. Btw, ability to feel pain is not THE defining feature of humanity, you know. And it is not the only thing the zef any many stages shares with a neonate or even a toddler. The only thing that makes sense in this context is the location of the zef.

            But you disagree, of course. You demand the right of the zef to use of a uterus to sustain itself, regardless of the consent of the person in whose body it is. Location is immaterial, you say. Really? If the zef is in a petri dish, is it entitled to use of a uterus? Are you campaigning to have every person with an empty uterus host a snowflake? Are you campaigning for the prosecution of every person involved in flushing embryos down the drain? What about a person who engages in activities that render hir uterus hostile to a zef? Are you in favor of prosecuting those who have miscarriages or stillbirths? Do persons with uteri need to account for the countless dead zefs they’ve flushed with their tampons? How many medical examiners are you willing to have your tax dollars fund to examine the effluent of every uterus in America in order to determine if a death certificate, inquest or prosecution is indicated?

            Come now, you fearless defender of the zef, why aren’t you addressing the issues relating to the deaths of far more zefs than are medically terminated?

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Come now, you fearless defender of the zef, why aren’t you addressing the issues relating to the deaths of far more zefs than are medically terminated?

            Mostly because I was busy attending to other matters. Being a fearless defender is certainly rewarding, but unfortunately it doesn’t pay the bills.

            Touche! I don’t generally follow links to abortion ban sites (they’re usually infested with stalkers and malware – I’ll have to do a good scan and cleaning after this session!)

            Yes, I’m sure your browser was immediately filled with dozens of pop-ups as soon as you came on this site. Scan thoroughly–you can’t be too careful.

            And at least you’re honest in admitting you’re against all abortion, not just the very late term ones your lot always seem to obsess over.

            Yes, I’m opposed to the killing of children as a general rule, but I (and large sections of the public) am especially disconcerted by those killings that are particularly gruesome in nature. This really shouldn’t be surprising since the legal system takes aggravating factors into account when assessing the severity of an offense. That’s why more brutal crimes are typically met with harsher sentences. Since it’s difficult to imagine a more brutal way to die than being pulled apart piece by bloody piece (as happens in a D&E), I think it warrants special attention.

            You demand the right of the zef to use of a uterus to sustain itself, regardless of the consent of the person in whose body it is.

            I think that a child is entitled to a bare minimum of care from her or his parent or guardian, with the form of care dependent on her or his level of development. Since a pre-born baby needs her or his mother to gestate in, yes I think there is right to have that need met, just as I think that the right to clothing and food must be met later on. Lilian has given a far more eloquent explanation of this principle than I have, so I refer you to her comments for follow up.
            http://liveactionnews.org/amanda-marcotte-babies-are-time-sucking-monsters-abortion-like-removing-a-cavity/#comment-1303225816

            Btw, ability to feel pain is not THE defining feature of humanity, you know.

            Very true–that’s why we have animal cruelty laws. Under those laws, you wouldn’t be permitted to put down a stray dog via the methods that we use to put down a child in the second or third trimester.

            If the zef is in a petri dish, is it entitled to use of a uterus?

            As a rule, we expect parents to provide a minimum level of care to their children. This duty doesn’t typically extend to the general public, however. That’s why you won’t face legal consequences for failing to provide food and shelter the children living two blocks away. That’s also why there is no rationale for conscripting random women into gestating children who aren’t biologically theirs (although I have the utmost respect for those women who take on such a task).

            Are you campaigning to have every person with an empty uterus host a snowflake?

            No–see my answer above.

            Are you campaigning for the prosecution of every person involved in flushing embryos down the drain?

            Not particularly. The state is an institution that possesses finite resources, so I think that those resources are best focused on addressing the most egregious wrongs as a matter of first priority.

            What about a person who engages in activities that render hir uterus hostile to a zef?

            No.

            Are you in favor of prosecuting those who have miscarriages or stillbirths?

            No.

            Do persons with uteri need to account for the countless dead zefs they’ve flushed with their tampons?

            No.

            How many medical examiners are you willing to have your tax dollars fund to examine the effluent of every uterus in America in order to determine if a death certificate, inquest or prosecution is indicated?

            None.

            Are there any other questions I can answer for you?

  • Spanky9

    If Amanda Marcotte wants to cop a belligerent attitude, I’m up with that and ready to return the favor. She looks like a dyke and sounds like a militant feminist. She obviously harbors a lot of hostile feelings and resentment, which may be a byproducts of her gender attraction and unreconciled feelings of inadequacy. “Natural Selection” has a way of weeding out Ms. Marcotte’s imprint on humanity.

    • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

      We need to draw attention to the fact that Ms. Marcotte’s worldview is repulsive. However, I’m really not sure how arguing that she “looks like dyke” fits with that goal.

    • Mary Lee

      Your “dyke” comment is unnecessary and just as repulsive. We should never fight hatred with hatred. Never.

    • Calvin Freiburger

      For the record, I’m only letting this (and a couple of other gratuitously nasty comments on this thread) stand because the replies from LAN regulars standing up to them are such a strong contrast to the way pro-abortion bloggers and readers (fail to) address mean-spiritedness from people on their own side.

      • genesis667

        Yes, it would be ridiculous to leave the comments alone under the rights of freedom of speech, that is so 5 years ago…You are a legend in your own mind!

        • john lind

          I doubt Calvin considers himself a legend in his own mind. I’m a libertarian and Calvin is one of my favorite conservative commenters, even though there are certain areas that he and I disagree on. For example, I think all drugs should be decriminalized, he definitely doesn’t. I think prostitution should be legal, I doubt he does. I refuse to say the pledge of allegiance, my guess is that he doesn’t refuse to say it. However we may disagree, he and I are in definite agreement, that when pro life people make comments of the nature of “too bad her mom didn’t abort her”, it does the pro life cause no good.

          You mention rights of freedom of speech, and as a libertarian, I’m against government infringement of any speech or communications including hardcore porn, which I find morally objectionable. However, nobody has the right to free speech on another person’s property.

          LAN is not the government and is under no obligation to allow any speech that it does not want on its website. As a moderator, Calvin presumably has authority by the trustees of LAN to keep speech against their guidelines off the website. So you and I have no free speech rights on this website.

          If somebody wanted to picket me on a public sidewalk outside my house and call me an SOB, I couldn’t care less and would probably even compliment them on exercising their constitutional right. However, if that same person came on my property and tried to assert a free speech right on my property, they would quickly find out how seriously I believed in private property rights.

          • genesis667

            Cool story bro…

          • john lind

            Thank you. What does genesis667 represent?

          • genesis667

            Genesis 6…

            6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

            7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

          • john lind

            Got you…I’m definitely fortunate that John 3:16 came later!

  • Carol

    Just in the tone of her writing, you can tell she is full of anger. Maybe she had a bad experience with babies in the past and that is why she hates them so much. Maybe a little brother or sister that stole mom’s attention away? Anyway, I hope she gets some counseling to get her issues worked out. Otherwise, I think she might explode someday.

    • Mindy Robinson

      Maybe she is just evil.

  • Trulee

    I get the part where children are smelly and ridiculous. I did not want children at all, but I always said if birth control failed it’s literally not in the cards for me to kill my own offspring. I don’t understand how it isn’t that simple. Wouldn’t it be better to give the baby to a couple who wants a child than to kill one and give it zero chance. It’s unfair that only some fetuses are important when they should ALL be. Now that I have experienced how fertile I am and I have a child, I am SO thankful I am a parent. It is very rare for a parent to regret having their child and if they have a child and they still regret being a parent all together, they are very unfit. If someone gets an abortion and have zero remorse about it they are simply an unfit parent if you ask me. If your child asks you one day “Hey mom how do you feel about abortion?” would a pro choice person be so bold as to tell their child “yeah, It’s a good thing, I wasn’t ready when I was pregnant with your sibling 5 years ago so I aborted it. But not you.” I hope every woman that has one feel ashamed at some point in her life. I hated being pregnant. Every single minute of it. I was big bertha for a minute there. But now that I have a child I love my life 10 times more than I ever imagined I could. I will be adopting or fostering sometime in the next few years. Along with my man getting a vasectomy. Contribute to society by loving a child that someone else didn’t love. The fetuses that these women abort would be a lot better off in a loving family. The only reason someone justifies an abortion is so that they can have sex in every room of the house, or because they don’t want to get stretch marks and gain weight just go give a child to someone else. Blah blah blah. These would all be legitimate complaints about pregnancy or motherhood if you weren’t willing to kill a human fetus for these selfish little wants. Shouldn’t someone who willingly had sex and understands how reproduction works be more responsible than that?

  • Maggie Oelfke

    Who peed in her Cheerios?

  • Andrew J. Corrales

    Okay, the matter I inquired into is cleared up. I’m sufficiently answered now.

  • Mindy Robinson

    “I don’t particularly like babies”, well primordial ooze, I don’t paricularly like you, you are a parasite, all the same it doesn’t give me the right to torture and murder you does it? Everything you described about being pregnant, it’s going to happen to you, but, not because new life is growing.

  • Andrew J. Corrales

    Remember the irrefutable argument for any abortion supporter who displays this much lack of value for human life (whether by ranting about personal problems with babies or the lovely charming “YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABORTED!”): your value of human life. ” You should have been aborted, anti-choice scum!” “You shouldn’t have been. Good thing you weren’t. You’re a person who is intrinsically valuable.” Some other things you can add on, in the order that they occur to me, are: “You were designed by God Almighty himself for a purpose only you can serve, and he will never give up on you,” “You deserve to be alive, until you become a mass killer or serial killer, and you’ve deserved to be alive since conception,” and “There never has been, isn’t, and never will be, anyone like you.” It’s important to respond this way because if we try any line that amounts to “Right back at you!” then we’re no better than such a hateful abortion supporter ourselves. The number one rule of debating ethics, law, and morality: be morally and ethically better than your opponent.

    • DianaG2

      Thanks so much for this, Andrew.

      • Andrew J. Corrales

        NP. :)

    • Lilian Stoltzfus

      Bringing it away from ad hominem and coming across as kind and levelheaded while turning the jab around. Good strategy!

  • Mindy Robinson

    Reading thru the comments here I wonder, how is it possible that parasites like “amanda” exist when there are so many of us that love all life? Is the thing that is the topic of this article human? I don’t think so.

  • Mindy Robinson

    You need to seek help, seriously.

    • Old Testament Rockstar

      Show me the light and educate me then if you think you have all of the answers.

  • Jennifer Archambault

    Yes, because she’d much rather murder someone then to take responsibility for my own actions. Keep going in with that AWESOME life of yours lady. It must be so fulfilling! Did anyone else notice how many times she wrote “I” or “me?” Wow, I, I, I, me, me, me….yeah, those babies are the real time suckers. Not you at all!

    • PJ4

      Don’t be surprised Jen.. this is typical pro abort narcissism … it’s almost clinical.

      • JDC

        Almost?

        • Andrew J. Corrales

          Well, nobody can legally force her to get help until/unless she presents an immediate obvious threat to self or others. As long as she’s only ranting about little bitty babies and using contraceptives, there’s nothing anyone can do. Abortion doesn’t count yet. :(

          • Lilian Stoltzfus

            Right. It should be illegal to kill people before they are born. It shouldn’t be illegal to be abrasive or unsettling. Or wrong.

  • MamaBear

    Yet you have repeatedly stated things without citations and used Michael Moore’s “Sicko” which has been repeatedly shown to be biased? And you want the right to pick and choose other’s sources? Do you know the word “hypocrite?”

    • Old Testament Rockstar

      I USED A .EDU SOURCE FOR THAT STATEMENT! So I make one slip up and I’m suddenly a hypocrite. I guess all humans are destined for hypocrisy.

      • Andrew J. Corrales

        I’ve always personally believed that all humans are hypocrites. We want to seem good but actually being good is pretty frequently too much of an obligation for most. All this while holding others to standards we ourselves don’t want to conform to. However, I also believe that humans can be made sincerely good by living and learning. I don’t think one slip-up makes you too bad though. Wait. That was an emotionally-charged rhetorical question, wasn’t it…? Can you stop misinterpreting and misrepresenting your opponent’s ideas? You bumped into an integral part of human nature on accident! Now cool down and don’t react, I’m mostly serious and I’m not trying to make fun. Forgive me if I came off that way.

        • Old Testament Rockstar

          I got mad because I did use a .edu source in place of Sicko, but Mama’s either too lazy to see that or Mama’s running out of ammo. I have seen Sicko and I heard Michael Moore talk about how we spend a lot per person on healthcare. I checked for a source to confirm that after watching the documentary and I found it, however, I could not remember the site I found it on, which is why I said it was from Sicko. Pardon me…

          • Andrew J. Corrales

            Well, she asked for a better source. She seems to doubt the credibility of Michael Moore (in her defense, he is the guy who made the unproven conspiracy theory that Bush started the war for oil).

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I know that, so I gave it to her in a different reply, yet she keeps replying to a bunch of my posts about it even after I sent her the source. It’s the post-facto, unnecessary source pecking that ticks me off. She knew the correct source (the .edu source) before she made all of the stupid replies about it.

          • Andrew J. Corrales

            She might not think the .edu source is too credible either. It’s difficult to know what’s credible these days, with so many people saying so many different things and such difficulty proving anything. A website extension doesn’t make a source credible or not.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            She didn’t reverence the credibility of the .edu source in her post, so it’s fair to say she’s more interested in slandering me than in getting to the root of this debate. Mindy is guilty of the same thing. It’s sad, really.

          • Andrew J. Corrales

            I don’t know much about Mindy, but MamaBear is normally a better arguer than you report. I wouldn’t suppose it’s fair to say she cares more about slandering you than about the debate yet. You don’t know her personally, to my knowledge. I think what really got her was when you said the American media is not reliable after the Sicko ref. It is kinda inconsistent.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I included another source and explained myself, yet she continued to harass me about it (the Sicko reference, not the .edu reference) even after I included a new source…

          • Andrew J. Corrales

            I reiterate that it probably seemed inconsistent to her (and does so to me, too) to ref Sicko and then imply that American media is unreliable. Also, occasionally us pro-lifers who frequent this website will occasionally find some glaringly idiotic thing some non-pro-lifer says and it surprises us. I mean, in an argument, you can expect each set of proponents to think the other set(s) is/are dumber/crazier/less just, but each side will occasionally be shocked by the perceived idiocy/depravity of something the other side says. And it has effects on how they treat the other side. You can hardly blame MamaBear for finding something you said surprisingly inconsistent and having difficulty forgetting you said it. You yourself have probably found something said by someone you were debating with surprisingly idiotic/unvirtuous, and wouldn’t let that person forget it. It happens frequently. If both sides don’t watch it, it becomes standard operating procedure for the rest of the discussion. Also, this seems consistent with MamaBear’s personality. She tends to point out what debating techniques she thinks is wrong, to people on both sides of a given discussion, even her own, in my experience.

          • MamaBear

            Andrew,
            Thank you so much for sticking up for me. It hurts to be judged by a someone who automatically assumes the worst. Perhaps before making assumptions again, our Old Testament friend should read Amos 5:13 and Ecclesiastes 3:7.
            I had a bad reaction to my monthly treatment and was/am feeling pretty lousy! I just could not take anymore intense debating so I just decided to stay away from this site for a few days and stuck to less stressful ones. You all have done well without me, BTW.
            Now, I’m going to finish scanning the rest of what I missed, then take my daily anticancer med, plus my dozen or so for side effects, then go to bed.

          • Andrew J. Corrales

            NP. :)

  • Joy

    Maybe Amanda should have her uterus removed…Problem solved! (added benefit…she won’t procreate…EVER)

    • san_ban

      It’s pretty chilling, all of you people advocating radical surgery for a stranger on the internet who dared to suggest a person with a uterus can live her life without allowing a fetus to occupy her uterus and use her body for sustenance. I guess you’re all in favor of forced organ donations, too! And of course, every one of you is lining up around the block to donate tissue that your bodies will readily regenerate, to save the lives of living, breathing, learning, laughing, loving, hurting children with devastating illnesses.

  • Laura Hintzke

    AND WE DON’T WANT HER TO HAVE A BABY….IF SHE DOES’NT SEE THE JOY IN HAVING A CHILD THEN HER LOSS…PLEASE AMANDA DON’T EVER HAVE CHILDREN….DON’T GET PREGNANT…IN FACT WILL YOU PLEASE DO US ALL A FAVOR AND HAVE A TUBAL LIGATION.

  • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

    Humans should not be punished for wanting to have sex without having kids..

    Has Live Action ever taken the position that they should be?

    It’s not our fault that our sexual and reproductive organs are used for pleasure and procreation.

    Who is contending that it is?

    If humans could have sex in pleasurable ways that would not result in having children (or STDs), I’m sure they would.

    Well yes, and I’ve always had sex with the objective of maximizing pleasure while minimizing the potential for negative consequences. How is this observation relevant to Mary Lee’s argument?

    I also don’t understand how, ideologically, Republicans are supposed to be opposed to government intervention (much like libertarians), however, by supporting laws against abortion, you are allowing the government to intervene in your life as a woman.

    Speaking as an honorary Republican, I can tell you that my rationale for opposing abortion comes down to my belief in individual rights, particularly the right to life. This is the same reason why I support laws prohibiting rape, child abuse and theft as all of these activities involve one person arbitrarily depriving another of her or his rights. Since abortion also involves one person (a fetus) being arbitrarily deprived of something (her or his very existence), I’m only being logically consistent when I oppose that as well.

    Also, most pro-lifers are Republicans, Christians, and/or Muslims.

    Some of the ones that you’ve been arguing with here are agnostics and atheists.

    Also, the fact that a higher percentage of men than women are pro-life scares me.

    Pro-abortion men aren’t always the nicest bunch–something that I wrote about in an article last year:

    A successful military campaign usually involves demoralizing the enemy, and the War on Women is no different. In an article called “The Ten Slut Commandments,” abortion enthusiast Christian McQueen demonstrates how to capitalize on
    emotional damage when one is exploiting, mistreating, and generally dehumanizing “sluts” (sadly, the article contains no Douchebag Commandments).

    After reviewing the various methods of playing on a woman’s pain and insecurities, McQueen addresses the possibility that a reader may very well impregnate one of his targets. “In a perfect world,” you wouldn’t need to deal with this hassle, but McQueen acknowledges that
    it’s just one of the dangers associated with “f*cking a slut.”

    Thankfully, it’s not too big of an issue if you follow McQueen’s helpful advice and “convince her to have an abortion.” Of course, McQueen isn’t unique in demanding that his children be sliced, ripped, or poisoned to death when he’s finished denigrating their mothers. Tucker “Baby Killer” Max has made a career out of it, writing that, “Due to the potent combination of my sexual recklessness and the slutty nature of some of the girls I have slept with, I have accumulated enough stories and anecdotes about abortion that they could
    name a Planned Parenthood clinic after me.”

    http://liveactionnews.org/how-to-wage-a-real-war-on-women-lessons-from-the-pro-abortion-crowd/

    I was a victim of rape a few years ago…

    I’m sorry to hear that (and I’m sincere in that sentiment).

    I knew that if I chose to have the child, I would have to drop out of school with $70,000 in student loans (which turns out to be about $1000 a month in repayments after college for 10 years at my interest rates) and no full-time job guarantees until I am able to graduate.

    I’m curious, why do you believe that giving birth to a child would also mean dropping out of school and sacrificing your career? One of my friends who became pregnant under difficult circumstances chose to arrange an open adoption and she was still able to graduate on schedule. Having a baby and raising one are two different things.

    The rapist should’ve had to pay the $50 for what he did to me.

    I submit that he should have had to pay a significantly steeper price than that.

    Basically, we are not given the choice of whether or not we become pregnant (raped or not), therefore, we should have the choice to end a pregnancy before the first trimester if we want to do so.

    If you weren’t raped, then yes, you do have a choice in the matter. If two people choose to engage in sexual intercourse then they are choosing to engage in activity that could foreseeably result in the creation of a new life. The only party who really had no choice was resulting baby. As such, they owe a subsequent duty of care to that new individual. Similarly, if you drive a car, you are choosing to engage in behavior that could forseeably result in accidental injury to a pedestrian. Now, hitting a pedestrian certainly wasn’t your goal, of course, but it was a consequence of your actions and you now owe a duty of care to the party who has been involuntarily affected by them.

  • Jodi Cathorall

    Amanda, you must have had a horrible childhood or you were just born without a heart, but no one is saying that you should get pregnant and have children! We are ONLY saying that this is a living human being and you were once in the same position as they are..and like you were allowed to be born, they have a human right to be born too! If you don’t want children, then get yourself fixed so that isn’t even a possibility! you don’t HAVE to give up sex.You can spread your legs to every man you see, we don’t care! BUt assuming that you are not completely insane or mentally challenged, you have every right to have a simple surgery that will give you the peace of mind knowing that you will never have children! Listening to your way of thinking, I am happy that you don’t want children because you don’t deserve a child! So if you still choose to kill innocent children then it is on you and someday it will come back to you. thats life…

    • san_ban

      “…like you were allowed to be born, they have a human right to be born too!” That is a most stupid fallacy advanced as argument. A zef’s hypothetical “right to be born” surely cannot supersede a woman’s right to bodily autonomy, any more than a diabetic’s right to live can supersede a potential donor’s right to refuse to donate a kidney.

      • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

        Well, if the diabetic was put in the position of needing a kidney by the voluntary actions of the potential donor, then it makes the diabetic’s claim to that kidney a good deal stronger.

        • san_ban

          Really? The distracted driver owes the accident victim his heart? And the government has the right to commandeer the organs of fast food chefs, bartenders, gun dealers, car rental clerks? Or maybe parents can be forced to donate their organs to their children. That’s a pretty chilling world you’re mapping out there.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            No, the distracted driver doesn’t owe the accident victim his heart (just as a pregnant woman who is in mortal danger doesn’t owe her baby her life either). That driver does, however, owe the victim a reasonable degree of aid in proportion to the harm that his or her actions caused.

          • san_ban

            Bullshit! There is no such obligation to use one’s body in an objectionable way to compensate another for harm caused (deliberately or by chance).

          • Coyote

            “There is no such obligation to use one’s body in an objectionable way to compensate another for harm caused (deliberately or by chance).”

            Yes, there is no such obligation, but this does not necessarily mean that there *shouldn’t* be such an obligation.

  • Jenn

    Amanda needs to get a life…she must also remember that her parents were kind enough to choose life for her…she should be greatful for that…she was a demanding baby just like the rest of us when we were born…kind of makes me wonder how she will take care of her parents when they get old and needy…apparently she has the “me” attitude and that is no good….she also says that if her birth control doesn’t work then she will get an abortion…so she is not even willing or able to take responsibility for a child…wow…she really needs to get a life…A REAL LIFE..

    • Daisygirl

      At least she uses birth control. I honestly don’t see what is so wrong with what she said. She might have taken the view to the extreme but there are a lot of women out there who don’t like babies and would have an abortion if their birth control failed. They just aren’t vocal about it as this woman was.

      • Andrew J. Corrales

        What’s wrong is that she’s maligning little babies. I don’t mind people complaining, but I really think you shouldn’t knock something ’til you try it.

        • Daisygirl

          I know for a fact I would hate having kids. I don’t need to try out parenting to know it is not for me. That would be an unhealthy relationship for me and the child.

          • Andrew J. Corrales

            I’m not necessarily talking about parenting. I’m talking in the least about being in the same room as one and forcing herself to not get upset about it as long as possible and then a few minutes longer. That’s the bare minimum this gal can do.

          • Daisygirl

            OK I misunderstood what you were saying. Well I can tell you I have been around kids and I know without a doubt parenting is not for me.

          • san_ban

            Why? Why must a person subject hirself to situations ze finds unpleasant? Because ze happens to possess a uterus?

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Why must a person be subject to dismemberment and death simply because ze happens to be very young?

          • san_ban

            Because it is using a person’s body without hir ongoing and explicit consent. If an adult did that, it would be assault, and ze could use deadly force to stop it.

          • Lilian Stoltzfus

            Some people believe that people who are against abortion should also be for the forced use of organs. In other words, if I believe a woman should be forced to yield her uterus for pregnancy, why can’t I be forced to give my kidney to a stranger?

            Why being against abortion cannot be compared to supporting forced organ donation:

            A. The uterus is unique among organs. My kidneys exist to filter my blood and create urine, among others things. That is the purpose of my kidneys – they primarily serve my body. My uterus is different. The primary purpose of a uterus is for the nourishment and live expulsion of a baby… it’s major reason for existence is not for the maintenance of my body, but for the harboring of another person’s body.

            B. Organ donation (excepting liver/skin donation) is
            final. You give up a kidney, you never get it back. You lose the function of that organ. Pregnancy is temporary. An unplanned yet completed pregnancy does not rob me of my uterus or of the function of my uterus.

            C. An organ donor has no impact on why the recipient comes to need an organ. I did nothing to bring a random stranger into existence, let alone renal failure. However, I did an awful lot in bringing a fetus to the point of utter dependence on my uterus! (excepting rape)
            a. Patients needing organs may’ve done it to themselves. Some people have destroyed their own organs. An embryo never chooses to exist inside a woman’s uterus.

            D. You don’t refuse to donate an organ because you want someone to die. The death of someone on the organ waiting list is an indirect result of the lack of available organs.
            The death of the unborn is a much more direct result of the abortion. An induced abortion requires some form of, well, induction. There has to be aggression and action taken for the abortion to happen. Abortions aren’t really done because a woman doesn’t give consent for the use of her uterus, they’re done to end pregnancy is such a way as to prevent the birth of a live, term baby. In other words, elective abortion is done with the intent to kill what would mature into a newborn.

            E. Organ donation is between strangers. Pregnancy is a
            parent-child relationship. Parents have more legal, moral, and societal obligation to their children than they do to strangers. We are expected to look after the needs of dependents while they reside with us. Those rights can be relinquished, but not if relinquishing them means allowing one’s children to starve to death.

            “Leave the person waiting for a kidney alone, and someone dies. Leave a pregnancy alone, and someone is born.”

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Leave the person waiting for a kidney alone, and someone dies. Leave a pregnancy alone, and someone is born.

            Nice.

          • san_ban

            A. Irrelevant. By that faulty logic, anyone could commandeer the use of another person’s gametes, as they do not “serve” the donor’s body. Sex organs could also be seen as having a “primarily purpose” to mate with another sex organ, so those could be commandeered into service against the person’s will also.
            B. You’re ok with the commandeering of tissue that’s not “final?” So forced blood, skin, liver, gamete donation is ok with you. How about commandeering a person’s whole body for a temporary period of time? That’s what rapists do, isn’t it? But that’s ok with you, because it’s only temporary use of another person’s body against hir will.
            C. It’s ok with you if a person is forced to use hir body if ze is the did something to bring it about? More rapist’s reasoning, and a chilling argument for forcing parents to donate organs to their offspring.
            D. It may be hard for you to understand, but people who choose to terminate a pregnancy does not do so out of malice, just like you have no malice toward patients dying on transplant lists. They make a choice, just like you make a choice, that they value their own lives, or well-being, over the lives of the other/s who have need of their tissues.
            E. Organ donation is from any suitable donor to any needy patient, regardless of prior relationship. I have no more right to the use of my parents’ bodies than the stranger in the next hospital bed. They have the right to donate their organs to a stranger or not at all, as they wish, my needs notwithstanding.

          • Andrew J. Corrales

            More specifically, why must Amanda Marcotte try to at least tolerate at least one baby for a few minutes longer than we all thought was possible? I already, in fact, said the answer to this. Because she’s maligning little babies with zero (0) provable excuse. I think I said that people shouldn’t knock something until they try it (and I think that babies especially deserve that). Then when somebody misunderstood me, I clarified that by “trying it,” I mean that even bare minimum counts.

            I see that you have taken it upon yourself to accuse me (groundlessly) of misogyny by implication. Rest assured that I extend the same moral obligation of trying to not hate babies to males as well. Now if you decide to rebut me, be sure to A. quote me correctly and B. not draw ungrounded, unjust conclusions from my words. I say what I mean, neither more nor less, and I mean what I say, neither more nor less. Every conversation with anybody always does better when you keep your head cool and avoid slandering.

        • PJ4

          No no no!
          Andrew…women like her should never reproduce
          They should never get pregnant
          The last thing this world needs are more daisy girls and marcottes running around
          These women do not deserve the immortality and legacy of having children
          They would only be polluting the gene pool
          Liberalism is, as you know…a disease that can be passed from person to person but especially from parent to child

          • Basset_Hound

            I say we should take up a collection to buy dear sweet Amanda a gift certificate for Condom Sense, so she could buy a hellacious vibrator. That way she wouldn’t have to worry about getting pregnant, and no man would have to put up with her totally noxious personality. Problem solved.

          • PJ4

            Yes!!!
            I’d go one further to take up a collection to offer a reward to any doctor who would sterilize her :-)

          • san_ban

            You just don’t get the idea of bodily autonomy, do you? You’re against women having sex, using contraception, having abortions, but all for forced sterilization, mandated by some internet troll like you. See, people, not every zef is destined to be Einstein.

          • PJ4

            I’m against contraception?
            Wow that’s news to me

            I’m against women having sex?
            I’ve enjoyed sex with several women and men (sometimes at the same time) so…again News to me

            You don’t understand bodily autonomy

            When did I talk about forced sterilization?

            While you’re not terribly good at arguing you’re quite adept at straw manning and putting words in my mouth

          • Andrew J. Corrales

            Good point…I guess the only solution in which everybody wins is for Marcotte to stop talking.

          • Arakiba

            Progressives generally don’t care what someone’s person beliefs are – if they’re liberal or conservative – as long as that other person doesn’t try to force their beliefs on them. Conservatives are the opposite. Not only do they want everyone to have to do what conservatives say, they want everyone to believe what conservatives do. Why do you people care so much if one woman doesn’t like kids or doesn’t want to have kids?

          • PJ4

            I think you have it the other way around.
            The progressive seeks to censor anyone that disagrees with him/her.

            Tolerance does not exist to the progressive
            They generally take the My way or the Highway attitude

            Why do we care that one blogger hates kids?
            Same reason we’d care and be as equally outraged if someone were to say the same thing regarding minorities or gays.

            The last thing we want is for someone like Marcotte to spawn. We’d even help support a fund for her sterilization.

          • Kinsey

            Lol. You could be the propaganda poster boy! PS…trolling websites all day does not make you informed. Lol again. I swear you people have the exact same playbook, word for word damn near. Now if I asked you for resources to back up your argument you’d call me a racist….you’ve met one liberal, you’ve met them all.

          • PJ4

            Yes!
            Thank you!

          • Kinsey

            It’s funny…women like her probably don’t get propositioned a lot anyway. Have you ever seen a liberal woman? Amanda is a perfect representation.

          • PJ4

            I know.
            I know.

      • Jenn

        so what it appears to me that you are saying it is ok to have sex with anybody you want as long as you are protected???…what the hell planet do you live on???….you are no better than Amanda!!!

        • Daisygirl

          I don’t think a woman should have sex with anybody. Hopefully she will have sex with her husband or boyfriend.

          • Arakiba

            And hopefully, if she doesn’t want any kids, she will use birth control.

          • Daisygirl

            I hope so as well. I can’t understand why a woman who doesn’t want kids would ever have sex without it.

        • Arakiba

          Yes, it is ok to have sex with anybody you want. Whether you use protection or not (provided you’re not carrying a disease that can be transmitted by unprotected sex).

          • Jenn

            you are sounding like all those morons out there who support Planned Parenthood….or you are one of the many illegal aliens that are happy to have your “anchor babies” so you can suck the life out of true Americans…

          • PJ4

            Now you’re bigoted towards people with transmittable sti’s? Who are you to push your morality on them or even have an opinion on it?
            Shame on you.

      • Jenn

        birth control should never have been invented…it literally kills….what you are saying is that its ok to have sex with whoever you want and if you end up pregnant then don’t worry about it because you always just get an abortion…that is just sickening…

        • Daisygirl

          Birth control is a great thing. It allows the woman the freedom to have sex with her husband or boyfriend without having to live in constant fear that she will end up pregnant. Birth control doesn’t kill it prevents pregnancy.

          • PJ4

            Ok I agree with you there
            I’m in favor of birth control for those who want it
            Just not in favor of having up pay for it for others

          • Coyote

            I certainly support contraception, but this statement of yours would not be true unless this contraception being used is exactly 100% efficient/effective:

            “It allows the woman the freedom to have sex with her husband or boyfriend without having to live in constant fear that she will end up pregnant.”

          • Daisygirl

            Women should be smart about how they use contraception. They should take the time to educate and learn to make sure they aren’t taking any unnecessary risks.

          • Coyote

            Agreed, and for the record, this statement of yours likewise applies to males as well (males don’t get pregnant, but unwanted pregnancies and births can also affect males’ lives, such as through the loss of large amounts of money on child support payments).

          • Daisygirl

            Yes a man and woman should discuss this issue before it becomes a problem.

          • Coyote

            Agreed, and in addition, males should take as much precautions of their own if they are sleeping with cis-women (thankfully, cases of males sleeping with trans-women do not allow for the possibility of accidental pregnancy occurring). After all, after sex, while abortion remains/is legal, males literally have no say in this whatsoever, and if an accidental pregnancy occurs and the woman changes her mind on this afterwards, then this could be an unpleasant situation for the male involved (either by having him be forced to lose a lot of money paying child support for 18+ years, or by having him be emotionally traumatized by having his prenatal offspring be aborted/killed).

          • Coyote

            Out of curiosity–if you don’t mind me asking, are you politically pro-choice or politically anti-abortion, and why (what is your rationale for your position on this issue)?

          • Daisygirl

            I am pro-choice but I think women should be responsible and always use birth control if they wish to remain child free.
            My rationale for this is because I do not think it is right to force someone to use their body against their will to sustain the existence of another.

          • Coyote

            “I am pro-choice but I think women should be responsible and always use birth control if they wish to remain child free.”

            What about if the contraception fails?

            “My rationale for this is because I do not think it is right to force someone to use their body against their will to sustain the existence of another.”

            Thanks for explaining this.

            If you don’t mind me asking, what are your positions on forcing males to pay child support and on when you think (legal) personhood/rights should begin?

          • Daisygirl

            I think a man should first make sure the woman shares his views on kids and if he doesn’t want kids he should always use condoms. It would actually probably be better for him to leave if this is the case.

            I am honestly unsure of my position on men paying child support. I can see both sides.

            A woman pokes holes in a condom or lies and says she is on the pill and gets pregnant. Then I would have a hard time forcing that man to pay child support.

            A man who says to the woman have the baby and I will always be there for you. He leaves as soon as the kid is born. I would have no problem forcing him to pay support.

          • Coyote

            “I think a man should first make sure the woman shares his views on kids and if he doesn’t want kids he should always use condoms. It would actually probably be better for him to leave if this is the case.”

            Agreed, and from a pro-child support choice perspective, the same things here (making sure that a man shares her views on kids and child-raising, et cetera before she sleeps with him) can apply to females as well.

            “I am honestly unsure of my position on men paying child support. I can see both sides.

            A woman pokes holes in a condom or lies and says she is on the pill and gets pregnant. Then I would have a hard time forcing that man to pay child support.”

            While abortion remains legal, I partially agree with you here. Condoms are not 100% efficient, so I don’t think that males should automatically get a child support opt-out if women ruin their condoms. That said, if these males consented to sex only on the condition that protection is used and if these females ruin their condoms, then I would probably think that this would be an example of non-consensual sex (in order words, of rape); in cases such as this, these males should get a full, complete opt-out from paying child support. After all, if they didn’t consent to having unprotected sex, then they shouldn’t be held responsible for its consequences.

            “A man who says to the woman have the baby and I will always be there for you. He leaves as soon as the kid is born. I would have no problem forcing him to pay support.”

            Agreed.

            For the record, while abortion is legal, I support allowing males and females to sign a legal contract in front of a lawyer and/or a notary before they have legally consensual sex together which would give these males a full, complete opt-out from paying child support if these females get pregnant, give birth, and decide to raise these children themselves afterwards (on the condition that these males will have no parental rights to these children at all). Also, females shouldn’t sign such legal contracts unless they are pretty sure that they will either get abortions, utilize safe-haven laws, or give their offspring up for adoption if they will get pregnant as a result of this sex. This option, as opposed to giving *all* males a full child support opt-out, will still protect and preserve males’ rights and allow them to know what they are getting into, and in addition, it will also be more practical than a full child support opt-out for *all* males. This option wouldn’t be completely convenient, but it will still be much easier to prove than things such as condom sabotage. What exactly are your thoughts on this proposal of mine?

            Also, as I previously asked, when exactly do you think (legal) personhood/rights should begin?

            Finally, I want to point out that I myself lean politically anti-abortion (for now, at least). However, here is why I don’t buy the absolute bodily autonomy argument–I certainly support the right to bodily autonomy, but I don’t think that it should be absolute. Why? Because I would probably consider things such as forced blood transfusions to be a lesser/smaller sacrifice than things such as losing $100,000 or more in child support payments over an 18+ year period. Thus, why exactly should the latter be acceptable in cases where one is responsible for creating such a situation while the former should not be acceptable in such cases (as in, for instance, if someone stabbed someone else in the kidney and thus caused this other individual to need a new kidney)?

          • Daisygirl

            I like your idea of having males and females sign documents before having sex. Although I am not sure if that would work in all cases. (As in a drunken hookup- which I don’t think is the smartest thing to do in the first place)
            Although if a committed or even dating couple could do that I think it would save both sides a lot of trouble.

            I think legal person hood rights should start at the point of viability because at that time the woman’s body is no longer needed for the growth and development of the fetus.

          • Coyote

            “I like your idea of having males and females sign documents before having sex.”

            Thank you very much.

            “Although I am not sure if that would work in all cases.”

            It wouldn’t, though it might still very well be better than the alternatives.

            “(As in a drunken hookup- which I don’t think is the smartest thing to do in the first place)”

            Yeah, honestly, I don’t think that people should have sex at all while they are drunk. Otherwise, they might have much more to worry about besides unwanted pregnancy and child support payments–after all, I don’t think that people want to risk being accused of rape (since if one is drunk, then this individual might be incapable of consenting to sex).

            “Although if a committed or even dating couple could do that I think it would save both sides a lot of trouble.”

            Agreed, and for that matter, this proposal can also apply to people who want to have casual one-night stands or whatever but who are willing to plan this out in advance and to wait a little.

            “I think legal person hood rights should start at the point of viability because at that time the woman’s body is no longer needed for the growth and development of the fetus.”

            OK; now, here is a question: What about:

            1. Viable and sentient non-human animals
            2. Human beings who are on dialysis and/or who need a new kidney or whatever in order to survive
            3. Non-viable embryos and fetuses which are located in an artificial womb (this one relates to possible future technology)

            Which ones of these would you consider to be persons/worthy of having (legal) rights, and why? And Yes, this is a completely serious question.

            Also, if you don’t mind, could you please respond to what I said in regards to absolute bodily autonomy in my post right above this one. I am re-posting it here for convenience:

            “Finally, I want to point out that I myself lean politically anti-abortion (for now, at least). However, here is why I don’t buy the absolute bodily autonomy argument–I certainly support the right to bodily autonomy, but I don’t think that it should be absolute. Why? Because I would probably consider things such as forced blood transfusions to be a lesser/smaller sacrifice than things such as losing $100,000 or more in child support payments over an 18+ year period. Thus, why exactly should the latter be acceptable in cases where one is responsible for creating such a situation while the former should not be acceptable in such cases (as in, for instance, if someone stabbed someone else in the kidney and thus caused this other individual to need a new kidney)?”

            Finally, if you have any questions to ask me, please go ahead and do so. I will try my best to answer them. I apologize for asking you so many questions, but I honestly enjoy hearing what other people have to say on various issues.

          • Daisygirl

            1. Viable and sentient non-human animals

            If I am understanding you I think you are asking about if they should be able to perform abortions on animals once the puppy or kitten could survive outside. No I don’t. I think at that point they could just wait till the animal gives birth and adopt out the babies.

            2. Human beings who are on dialysis and/or who need

            a new kidney or whatever in order to survive

            I would consider this person worthy of person hood rights. Yes they are not technically surviving on their own but the kidney they receive will be from someone who donated it willingly since at this time we don’t have forced organ donation.

            3. Non-viable embryos and fetuses which are located in an artificial womb (this one relates to possible future technology)

            If they are non viable I don’t think they should have full legal person hood rights. Although since they are in an artificial womb I would not see any reason as to why they could not stay there and develop since they aren’t infringing on a person’s body and life.

            Which ones of these would you consider to be persons/worthy of having
            (legal) rights, and why? And Yes, this is a completely serious
            question.

            Also, if you don’t mind, could you please respond to what I said in
            regards to absolute bodily autonomy in my post right above this one. I
            am re-posting it here for convenience:

            “Finally, I want to point out that I myself lean politically
            anti-abortion (for now, at least). However, here is why I don’t buy the
            absolute bodily autonomy argument–I certainly support the right to
            bodily autonomy, but I don’t think that it should be absolute. Why?
            Because I would probably consider things such as forced blood
            transfusions to be a lesser/smaller sacrifice than things such as losing
            $100,000 or more in child support payments over an 18+ year period.
            Thus, why exactly should the latter be acceptable in cases where one is
            responsible for creating such a situation while the former should not be
            acceptable in such cases (as in, for instance, if someone stabbed
            someone else in the kidney and thus caused this other individual to need
            a new kidney)?”

            I don’t think forced anything should be allowed when it comes to the use of another person’s body. A person’s body is their own and they should be able to decide what risks they feel is acceptable to put it through. Forcing them to do something they don’t want to do with their body violates their rights as a person.

            Which is why again with the with child support issue I think the ideas you came up with were great.

            Finally, if you have any questions to ask me, please go ahead and do
            so. I will try my best to answer them. I apologize for asking you so
            many questions, but I honestly enjoy hearing what other people have to
            say on various issues.

            I guess my only question to you is are there any circumstances where you would support a woman’s decision to abort early in the pregnancy?

          • Jenn

            Birth control is NOT a great thing…you obviously have no idea what birth control actually does…yes it does prevent pregnancy but some actually do kill….one only uses birth control to enjoy the sex and not have to deal with the consequences of getting pregnant…its no wonder women are viewed as toys….

          • Daisygirl

            So what exactly do you suggest? Women only have sex when they want kids? That sounds like it would be a sad way to live.

            Women use birth control so they can prevent pregnancy. There again is a difference in preventing pregnancy and an abortion. Birth control just prevents pregnancy.

      • PJ4

        You most likely wouldn’t see anything wrong with the hatred the KKK have against blacks and gays then either.
        You’re in good company.

        • Daisygirl

          Actually I don’t hate blacks or gays. It is my experience that the conservatives are the ones who dislike gay people.

          • PJ4

            Wrong again
            I’m bisexual and a member of plagal (pro life LGBT’s)

          • Daisygirl

            You are in the minority then. Every conservative I have ever known in my life thinks gays are all sinners.

          • PJ4

            You’re extremely sheltered
            There’s about 4 million of us secular pro lifers

          • Ivy Shoots

            Sure, you’re most accurately called “misogynists.”

          • PJ4

            Sure you’re most accurately called
            “Moron”

          • Kinsey

            What I find interesting is how closely your constant victimizing of yourself and those like you (you do not speak for all women nor do feminists defend women, ever, except those who subscribe to your political agenda) resembles the Al Sharpton’s of the world. I’m an independent woman, never a victim. Where are you all protesting for those women who have been forced to live under Sharia Law…we Conservative women are not sitting quietly by. Just like all liberal “platforms”…total selective outrage.

          • san_ban

            Glad to hear you oppose “sharia law” like those that strip women of human rights, like the right to bodily autonomy. Even corpses are afforded more control over their bodies – i.e., their wishes expressed while are respected after death, and their bodies are still inviolable if no wishes were expressed, except by their surviving kin. No matter how many lives could be saved, the docs cannot take the organs without explicit consent.

          • PJ4
          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            I can’t say that I know any lesbians or gay men, but I do have the pleasure of knowing a number of bisexual women. My experiences with them have been quite positive.

          • Lilian Stoltzfus

            Actually, if these conservatives you speak of claim to be Christians, they *should* think *everyone* is a sinner, and everyone is of great value.

          • Kinsey

            Keep believing the propaganda. After all, it’s much easier than actually taking all that awful time and energy to become informed. Sheep.

          • Daisygirl

            I follow my own beliefs and my own convictions. I live my life by my own values. I am not being a sheep by being pro-choice and thinking it is conservatives that dislike gays. I guess I should add religious conservative to that. I have actually meet a few sensible conservatives who aren’t like that.

            It is just that most conservatives are religious so most of them are like that.

    • MamaBear

      I can tell you how she will take care of her parents. They will be the ones in a nursing home or assisted living that someone pays the bills for, but never visits. I saw so many like that when I finally had to put my dad in an assisted living. I was there almost daily. Took him to church as long as he was able. Took him to all doctor’s appointments. He still spent each holiday at my house. And I still felt guilty he was there.
      Yet, so many others had not had a single family member visit for several years.

  • KingMeIam

    I’m about 99% positive that Amanda Marcotte is man. Look at that jaw line.

  • Mari

    Oh yeah, I agree with KingMelam. My first thought was that Amanda (man-da) is actually a man! Very few women are as cold, unkind, and uncaring as this ‘person’. It seems to me that her mother must have been a monster! Or her father was, or both! She should have sex with an animal or a device (probably what her partner(s) think about her) – that would solve her ‘problem’ of a possible baby! A-man-da is a very life-unaffirming individual. Creatures like her are exactly why we humans must be vigilant and firm about the limits of the use of abortion.

  • Michael Ejercito

    Clearly, she adopted the mannerism and grace (if not the ideology) of the recently departed Fred Phelps.

  • Alexxthegreat

    This is one angry, hostile feminazi…Too bad HER MOMMY made the wrong choice….

    • Arakiba

      I’m guessing you’re the result of a broken condom, and that’s why you want to save TEH BABIES! And punish TEH SLUTZ!!11!!!

      • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

        As I’ve said before, I’ve spent a good deal of time in the pro-life movement, I have never
        seen as much contempt for ”sluts,” “whores,” or (most creatively) “slutty whores“ as I’ve observed among the ”bro-choice” crowd:

        Writer Christian McQueen blessed society with his “10 Slut
        Commandments,” which serves as a how-to guide on using and denigrating women. After reviewing the various methods of exploiting a woman’s insecurity and emotional pain for your own advantage, he then explains how it’s important to take “a slut” in for an abortion should she have the gall to get pregnant on you. The website that Christian writes for, Return of Kings, features another fellow by the name of Emmanuel Goldstein. He generously offers advice on ”5 Ways To Bully Fat Sluts On A Date” and instructs men to “Act As If Every Girl Is A Slut” (or a “whore,” “bitch,” or “skank”). When it comes to dispensing misogynistic wisdom, these men truly know how to give.

        http://liveactionnews.org/dazed-and-confused-misunderstanding-the-pro-life-message/

        • Ivy Shoots

          Return of Kings is an anti-feminist, anti-woman website. They have much more in common with YOU than with pro-choice women.

          • john lind

            I would say the affinity that bro-choicers and pro-choicers have for killing human offspring makes them birds of a feather.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            They have much more in common with YOU than with pro-choice women.

            Yes, because we here at Live Action constantly offer tips and suggestions on how to pressure a woman into having an unwanted abortion. We’re almost identical, really.

    • Ivy Shoots

      Oh, so you believe in abortion if the fetus will grow up to hold different opinions from yours? Wow.

      • Kinsey

        Aren’t you a mother? Would you have aborted them if they decide they’re anti abortion? I have a child. I’m a good mother and teach her right from wrong, including basic human rights and dignity. An unborn baby is human so they fall into this category. When my daughter leaves my nest she’s free to follow her convictions. She’ll answer to God for her actions and I will answer for mine. As will you.

    • idahogie

      You are the only angry, hostile one here. And anyone using the term “feminazi” is probably one ignorant, hateful Limbaugh clone. How embarrassing it must be to be you.

      • Kinsey

        Did you read her comments? She’s clearly angry and bitter. I highly doubt she has as much sex as she portrays…not surprised after seeing her face, pitiful thing. Maybe that explains her rotten disposition.

        • idahogie

          More misogyny on display. Congratulations for demonstrating why anti-abortionists are just out to control women. Shallow and pathetic.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Congratulations for demonstrating why anti-abortionists are just out to control women.

            Yes, antiabortionists like the woman who write this article, or the woman who founded Live Action or the many women who work for it.

      • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

        So can you offer any facts to buttress your childish insults, or is that beyond your capabilities?

  • TheMagicRat

    My wife and I are in total agreement with this woman. Babies are the worst. We use birth control, but we’ve had a conversation about what would happen if she somehow became pregnant, and we would be obtaining an abortion so fast it would make your head spin.

    • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

      Would you consider it to be a good thing that your mother didn’t take the same approach?

      • TheMagicRat

        Who cares? She wanted children. I don’t. She had the choice to have kids, and so do I.

        • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

          Who cares?

          Well, the salient point is that if she had thought the same way that you do, you would have ended up being killed and your dismembered corpse then deposited in a large vat bearing the label “Medical Waste.” Or, if you had been lucky, you might ended up surviving the procedure and left with a life-long disability like Gianna Jessen. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPF1FhCMPuQ

          Most people would find either of these fates to be unappealing.

          • TheMagicRat

            If I had been aborted, I would never have had the ability to care.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Giana Jessen was aborted and lived to tell the tale. The same was true of Melissa Ohden. http://liveactionnews.org/abortion-survivor-melissa-ohden-tells-courageous-life-story-to-crowd-of-six-hundred/

          • TheMagicRat

            Makes for a titillating read, but it’s hardly the norm (90% of abortions take place in the first 12 weeks).

            Looks like Giana’s mother was 8 months pregnant when she had an abortion and actually didn’t WANT an abortion, ironically.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Actually, Gianna’s mother was seven months pregnant and she had another (successful abortion) after Gianna.

          • TheMagicRat

            7 or 8 months is still third trimester, which is extremely rare. What point are you trying to make? You’ve presented anecdotal evidence about abortion, and I don’t even know why.

          • Kinsey

            Extremely rare…unless the pro abortion crowd had their way.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            You said that abortion wasn’t something to be concerned about (“Who cares?”) and that if you had been aborted, then you wouldn’t have had the ability to care. My point is that it isn’t always a quick and easy experience for the one being aborted and that some of the victims of this procedure do survive (albeit with lasting pain).

            And speaking of pain, research by Dr. Kanwaljeet Anand indicates that a fetus may be capable of experiencing pain as early as 20 weeks of gestation. Given this information, it strikes me as odd that you’re fine with disposing of an unwanted child in a manner that we couldn’t constitutionally dispose of a convicted murder. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/10/magazine/10Fetal-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

          • Lilian Stoltzfus

            Adam, whether or not the human embryo/fetus “cares” isn’t really relevant, is it? You’d be better to pursue different points. :)

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            That’s certainly true in part. After all, in one sense it doesn’t matter if a murder victim was awake and aware of her killing or was shot in the back of the head while she slept and was thus completely unaware of the crime. Either way, her life has been taken.

            But in another sense it does matter. Our justice system takes aggravating factors into account when we evaluate the severity of offenses–that’s why a brutal torture killing is usually punished more harshly than a relatively painless death. While I agree that all taking of innocent life should be condemned, I also think it’s appropriate to highlight when it happens in a particularly gruesome fashion. And, a late term abortion is one of the most gruesome forms of killing that I can think of.

          • Lilian Stoltzfus

            Em, if you shot me through my brain stem where I sit or gassed me in my sleep, I would no longer have the ability to care either.

            Whether or not the aborted party can or does care is irrelevant.

      • graciebaddog

        So what if my mother didn’t take the same approach, what if my great grandfarther died on Ormandy Beach. I still wouldn’t be here.

        We are married, we have sex. And we dont want children. Are you saying that should contraception fail we must have the child? Is that how small government works? Forcing my wife wife to carry a child for 9 months at the point of a gun or jail. Or since we are married we should not have sex because contraception may fail and because of that possibility it would be irresponsible to risk pregnancy.

        So to be clear you want married couples who do want children not to have sex?

        • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

          So to be clear you want married couples who not do want children not to have sex?

          So to be clear… No–that’s not what I’m saying. I’ve had sex on many occasions, never with the intent to procreate.

          What I’m saying is that you don’t have the right to kill an undesired child simply because his or her existence is inconvenient for you. This doesn’t mean that you have to raise a child that you don’t want (there are long lines of couples seeking to adopt after all), just that you can’t pay to have your son or daughter sliced up or sucked out.

          • graciebaddog

            Help me out here. When did it become a child? Are you changing the definition of child? OK.. then every women who uses the a daily contraception is potentially killing a child because a fertilized egg (a child in your world) will be flushed out of the womb due to the chemical actions of the contraception. This is not just a plan “B” type, it’s every form of daily contraception. And IUDs.

            You need to be consistent right? A child is a child, dead is dead. No slice or dice or flushing.

            Ok, so now in your world NO hormonal contraception can be allowed. Hope your loved ones are being consistent. Along with your friends there are over 40 mil women of child bearing age who have use those type of contraception, all of them now child killers.

            See what happens when you change definitions?

            http://www.abort73.com/abortion_facts/which_birth_control_methods_cause_abortion

            You want the government to enforce your belief a zygote is a child. Take control of my wife’s womb and life for 9 months. Forcing her to undergo a pregnancy which is way riskier than an abortion. Your flip answer is then she can put it up of adoption. Yes,, that will go well..with everyone at work. It’s not like she can hide the fact she’s PG. My guess is you didn’t think it though.. cause you ain’t never going to get pregnant.

            What you really want is to take away our rights to have sex, or not have children.

            My guess is you would also describe yourself as small government guy….

  • Arakiba

    Who cares if some women don’t want kids? Or that they use birth control or have abortions? It’s not your body and it’s not your decision, so it doesn’t concern you.

    • john lind

      So if you had a kid that I saw being assaulted, you would want me to say, “not by body, so it doesn’t concern me”, rather than try to assist your kid?

      • idahogie

        You seriously think that children should have no more rights than a fetus? You are not very smart.

        • john lind

          You don’t think all humans are entitled to equal rights under justice. You are definitely not very smart.

          • idahogie

            No. All humans are not entitled to equal rights under justice. That is an asinine comment. I can’t imagine how stupid one would have to be to make it.

            Children have fewer rights than adults. Therefore, not all humans have equal rights.

            You are seriously stupid.

          • Kinsey

            “Children have fewer rights than adults”? And you think you’re intelligent? We’re not talking about the right to buy alcohol, we’re talking about basic human rights, the right to life and the right to NOT be torn apart limb by limb or be burned to death. An unborn baby IS a human. Just because you’ve been brainwashed into believing otherwise doesn’t change that fact.

          • idahogie

            Yes. Children have fewer rights than adults. That’s a simple fact. And I was responding to an ignoramus claiming that all humans have equal rights. Interesting that you object to my correct statement of rights, but not to the ignorant claim that all humans have equal rights.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Yes. Children have fewer rights than adults.

            That’s true certainly true. In this country, one doesn’t have the right to purchase alcohol before the age of 21 (I had the benefit of living in a jurisdiction that took a more relaxed approach to such matters). But can you please explain to me when a child outside the womb (or an adult for that matter) doesn’t have the legal right not to be killed aside from in self-defense? A single example is good enough.

            And I was responding to an ignoramus claiming that all humans have equal rights.

            Excellent–you’ve graduated from “stupid” and “moron” to “ignoramus.” Good show! Pretty soon, you’ll be hurling invectives like a proper grown-up.

          • john lind

            Sweet, yet silly and simple idahogie, under justice, if an innocent human is killed, it does not matter if they are a child or an adult, they are entitled to equal justice.

            Your anger is cute. You’re also adorable when you make comments like “I think abortions are great” and “They should be plentiful”

            You sound just like the cute, little toddler that says, “We should have cookies every day for breakfast, lunch, and supper.”. You’ll grow up.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Children have fewer rights than adults. Therefore, not all humans have equal rights.

            Can you give one example of a child or adult who doesn’t have a legal right to life based solely on an immutable characteristic? (Just one will suffice).

          • Basset_Hound

            So I guess by your “logic”, we can graph a person’s “rights” with age on the X axis and “right to live” on the Y axis.

          • idahogie

            No. Don’t be a moron. It is a simple fact that adults have more rights than do children. I’m stumped as to why such a simple and observable fact has you so flumoxed.

        • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

          You seriously think that children should have no more rights than a fetus? You are not very smart.

          Given that a fetus in the ninth month of gestation is essentially identical to a newborn, could you please explain then why one should have rights and other shouldn’t? Please try to use as many monosyllabic words as possible–as you pointed out, we’re not very smart.

      • san_ban

        Protecting an abused child does not strip away the bodily autonomy of another person. The same way that helping a cancer patient to change hir catheter doesn’t strip the bodily autonomy of another person as would forced organ donation to that cancer patient.

        • john lind

          So abortion doesn’t strip away the bodily autonomy of the fetus?

          • idahogie

            Yes, exactly. So glad to see you finally waking up to reality.

          • john lind

            You are a cutie. The little circly thing with the dot under it is called a question mark. It means I was asking a question, not making a statement.

            I think you have to be a plant from some right wing fundamentalist church acting like a radical pro-abort so you can really sway undecided people to the pro life side.

            Are you really the ghost of Fred Phelps, you silly trickster, you?

          • san_ban

            If a zef is able to live without using the body of an unwilling person for its sustenance, it should be delivered to a willing person (as are infants whose birth parents do not want to keep them). Otherwise, it is violating the bodily autonomy of the person whose body it is using. It has no more right to use that body than does a rapist (and stopping a rape with deadly force is permissible).

          • john lind

            The fetus’ body has been imprisoned by no fault of its own. He or she is entitled to safe passage until he or she can be presented to a caretaker.

          • san_ban

            A person on organ transplant list “by no fault of its own” is still not entitled to my organs even if I am the only viable match in the universe. The zef is not entitled to use of the body without hir consent and you are not entitled to commandeer a body in the name of the zef.

          • john lind

            Duh,,,unless you are responsible for putting them in the position that they are in that requires them to use your body.

          • Coyote

            “A person on organ transplant list “by no fault of its own” is still not entitled to my organs even if I am the only viable match in the universe. The zef is not entitled to use of the body without hir consent and you are not entitled to commandeer a body in the name of the zef.”

            However, if it is *your* fault that a situation with a dependent individual exists, then you *should* (based on what the ideal law should be) either be forced to let this individual use your body or be prosecuted/held liable if you refuse to do this.

  • vexorian

    Hey, let’s force people who don’t want to have children to have children. I bet they would make GREAT parents! Go society!

    • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

      Hey, let’s force people who don’t want to have children to have children. I bet they would make GREAT parents!

      Or we could ask them to give their child to one of the many couples who are hoping to adopt. Some of my friends have done that, and I would recommend it to anyone who doesn’t wish to be a parent.

    • PJ4

      Hey let’s force death on people whom we deem to be unwanted and of much lesser value
      Great!
      Go society!

      • vexorian

        Yeah, the death penalty sucks.

        But please stick to topic. Whether or not it is a good idea to force people to have children. And whether or not Women are “people” rather than children factories.

        • PJ4

          Yes the death penalty sucks…especially for the children in the womb

          Women who don’t want to be mothers have the option of not getting pregnant in the first place.
          Women are people, and our unborn babies are people

      • vexorian

        I agree with PJ4 that death penalty is unethical and that we need decent welfare, universal health insurance and good quality public schooling so that death is not forced on people the rich might deem unwanted.

        Although I understand that we better stick on topic. Just because your body allows you to get pregnant it doesn’t mean you are a child factory and every people should be allowed not to want or to want to have children.

        • PJ4

          hmmm…. so if the government was to create a welfare system (dependency) and then suddenly and without notice “pull the plug” on said welfare system, you’d be ok with it?
          I mean is that what you think government is? A factory for supplying food and shelter to people who would rather not work for it?

          Ah yes… the rich… they too support not allowing the poor to breed. You’re in good company.

  • idahogie

    I think abortions are great. They should be plentiful. As plentiful as women desire.

    You have zero right to tell women that because they have sex, they have to put up with pregnancy (if it happens). They don’t. And you are immoral for suggesting otherwise.

    • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

      I think abortions are great.

      Well then why stop at abortion? After all, there are many parents who also kill their newborns and toddlers–would you like to see more of these deaths as well?

      As plentiful as women desire.

      Should they be as plentiful as their abusive partners desire too?
      http://life.nationalpost.com/2010/12/04/why-we-need-a-public-debate-on-roxannes-law/

      You have zero right to tell women that because they have sex, they have to put up with pregnancy (if it happens).

      Actually, we have a right to say whatever we want–it’s laid out in the 1st Amendment, and we plan to continue exercising it.

      They don’t.

      For now…

      And you are immoral for suggesting otherwise.

      Well, you’re certainly free to believe that. You’re wrong of course, but you’re still free to think it.

      • idahogie

        Nothing you said is either moral or sensible. Are you seriously claiming that children have no more rights than fetuses? You are not very bright.

        And I specifically said “as plentiful as WOMEN want.” So obviously I did not include abusive partners, didn’t I? You really are not bright at all.

        Ignoring the rest of your stupidity.

        • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

          Nothing you said is either moral or sensible.

          So you managed to assert a thesis–very good. The next step of constructing an argument is to present some sort of evidence in support of it.

          Are you seriously claiming that children have no more rights than fetuses?

          I’m arguing that a fetus has the same general right to life as that held by a child outside of the womb. Seriously.

          “You are not very bright.”

          I’ve noticed that you rely on that phrase quite a bit. The good news is that there are remedial materials that are available to aid in expanding your vocabulary (it seems to be somewhat limited).

          • idahogie

            You still have no right to demand that a woman surrender her bodily autonomy based on your wish. And I would bet money that your wish is based on mythology.

            I would hate myself if I were as narrow-minded and stupid as you.

          • john lind

            Idahogie, please feel free to become a prostitute, a porn star, snort coke, mainline heroin, get your breasts enhanced upward or downward, walk around town naked, get tattoos all over your body, wear a shirt that says “Anti-choicers are scum”, wear a shirt with obscenities, sell your kidney, get a sex change operation, pierce your vagina, have sex with men, women, or dead donkeys…in other words, do whatever you want to do with your own body.

            We simply ask that you don’t kill your own offspring while imprisoned in your body or when outside your body.

            Get it….pretty simple and not based on any mythology.

          • idahogie

            And you feel free to do the same. And as long as you don’t tell women that they HAVE to go through pregnancy just because you want them to (most likely based on mythology), then we won’t tell you what to do to violate your bodily autonomy.

            That is simple — and absolutely NOT based on mythology — unlike your position.

          • john lind

            The breast enhancement and vagina piercing might be hard to accomplish.

          • idahogie

            Same here. But that didn’t stop you from making ignorant assumptions, did it?

          • john lind

            Sweet, angry idahogie doggy, no ignorant assumption big fella. When reading through the comments, I misread a comment by Ivy Shoots mentioning her motherhood and attributed it to you.

            Women certainly do not have exclusive license to angry, vitrolic , yet silly comments about prolifers wanting to control women, and relying on myth to oppose slaughter of humans.

          • Faye Valentine

            “And you feel free to do the same. And as long as you don’t tell women that they HAVE to go through pregnancy just because you want them to (most likely based on mythology), then we won’t tell you what to do to violate your bodily autonomy.”

            I’m an atheist. I tell women that we HAVE to go through pregnancy “just because” the only other alternative at this time is killing the child contained within us while we are pregnant, and killing our children to avoid having to parent them is not a legitimate course of action to maintain our “bodily autonomy” (which is never absolute in any other regard which causes harm to others, by the way).

          • idahogie

            Of course it’s a legitimate course of action. Why would anyone say otherwise?

            Just because you personally think that embryos are people with rights doesn’t make it so. Further, I doubt you are an atheist. I think you may call yourself that, but you have deep-seated mythological beliefs.

          • Faye Valentine

            “Of course it’s a legitimate course of action. Why would anyone say otherwise?”

            Because many people don’t think killing their dependents to get themselves out of a sticky situation is justified? Just a hunch.

            “Just because you personally think that embryos are people with rights doesn’t make it so.”

            I don’t personally think embryos are people with rights. “Embryo” is not an organism type. There are many different kinds of embryos from many different species of animals. I don’t think they should *all* be entitled to basic human rights starting with the right to life.

            Furthermore, why would I think that human beings in their embryonic stage of development have rights? We kind of wouldn’t be having this discussion if that were true, eh?

            “Further, I doubt you are an atheist. I think you may call yourself that, but you have deep-seated mythological beliefs.”

            Yeah. Those “deep-seated mythological beliefs” I picked up in my college Biology class. Aw shucks, you’ve found me out. *snaps fingers defeatedly*

          • Coyote

            “you have deep-seated mythological beliefs.”

            I know that you are not talking to me here, but I myself am an agnostic who leans politically anti-abortion. Thus, there is no mythology whatsoever on which my views on this issue are based on.

            Not all politically anti-abortion people believe in God/gods, so yeah.

          • PJ4

            She’s just going to come back at you with “you’re not a real agnostic”
            She told Faye that Faye wasn’t a real atheist because of her pro life beliefs.

            Idahogie thinks embryology is mythology

          • Coyote

            But how exactly can I not be a real agnostic if I don’t know whether or not a God/gods exist(s)?

            After all, I don’t think that I have seen any conclusive evidence yet either one way or the other.

          • JDC

            Well, the sort of people who make claims like that are generally accusing someone of lying about their beliefs. Without evidence, of course.

          • Coyote

            Yes, but why exactly would I say something which makes so much sense if I don’t believe in it? After all, I try hard to follow logic and reason.

          • JDC

            It’s an interesting question. I must say, I don’t think the sort of people who make such accusations share your love of logic and reason.

          • PJ4

            Don’t ask me.. ask Idaidiot…er Idahogie…
            She’s the one saying that crazy stuff.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            You still have no right to demand that a woman surrender her bodily autonomy based on your wish.

            We’re demanding that everyone refrain from killing innocent people. And yes, we do have a right to demand that (it goes back to that 1st Amendment thing I mentioned earlier).

            And I would bet money that your wish is based on mythology.

            You’re not a good gambler, are you?

            I would hate myself if I were as narrow-minded and stupid as you.

            No, you’re much better than that. You would rather spend your time making childish insults that are devoid of facts or logic. I’m sure that you’ll look back on this time when you’re a grown-up and remember it as the high point of your life.

          • idahogie

            I’m a great gambler. If your point is that it is not true that the vast majority of anti-abortion proponents aren’t motivated by mythology, then you are the failed gambler.

    • Lilian Stoltzfus

      Not a very thorough argument. I can easily throw it back:

      “I think not aborting is great. Live births should be plentiful. As plentiful as women desire.

      You have zero right to tell individuals that because they came to exist within someone else’s body out of no choice of their own, they have to put up with being destroyed. They don’t. And you are immoral for suggesting otherwise.”

      ^See? I attacked the party behind the opposing argument. Ad hominem logical fallacy. I expressed an opinion, “I think”, and that doesn’t seem relevant to whether or not abortion should be legally protected. I made sweeping statements about what should and should not be, but I didn’t really back them up.

      It’s the kind of stuff people in general are guilty of, regardless of where they stand on contentious subjects. We can both do better than that.

      • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

        That’s an excellent summary, Lilian.

      • PJ4

        Well at least now we know that when pro aborts make the claim that “no one likes abortion” they’re either flat out wrong or lying We can quote “idahogie” and a few others on here directly

        I for one am grateful that people of their ilk are finally showing their true colors If they had done this earlier we would have already won the war they’ve waged against our children in the womb They are helping us now and I thank them for it
        No sane person would associate themselves with this heinous ideology

  • Ivy Shoots

    Look at “About Cassy Fiano” – she has NOTHING to say about herself whatsoever. Her entire sense of identity begins and ends with her relationship to her husband and children. She is jealous of Amanda’s independence and self-determination, and is furious when another woman flaunts the fact that she decided to be more than just a baby-making machine.

    I too am a mother and the wife of a US Marine, and proud of it. But my family doesn’t define who I am. Fulfilled, self-actualized women don’t need to tear down other women who make different choices, much less try to take their right to bodily autonomy away from them.

    • Old Testament Rockstar

      Amen.

      • Ivy Shoots

        ps She sure doesn’t look very happy in that picture, either. A young Gladys Kravitz.

        • Kinsey

          You must be speaking of Amanda. You’re right. Hideous is the word you’re looking for. Her outward appearance clearly matches her inward. As for Cassy..beautiful and well spoken. BTW…tearing someone down while complaing about someone else doing it??

          • PJ4

            Typical hypocritical narcissistic pro abort behavior
            Should not surprise you

    • PJ4

      Fulfilled, self-actualized women don’t need to tear down other women who make different choices, much less try to take their right to bodily autonomy away from them.
      You mean the way you just tore down Cassy for having a different opinion and view than you?
      Yup.
      Fulfilled, self-actualized women don’t need to tear down babies much less try to take their right to bodily autonomy away from them in their mother’s womb

      • idahogie

        You are aware that there is a battle in the US created by anti-abortionists, right? This column is a shaming of women who don’t want to have children, right? You are making zero sense.

        • PJ4

          You are aware of how deluded you are, right?
          The only battle created is by pro aborts against children in the womb

          We’re quite happy that some women won’t breed
          They should just so humanity a favor and just get sterilized
          That way no abortions would have to happen

          • Ivy Shoots

            Your raw, exposed hatred of women is disgusting. You should do humanity a favor and try becoming a member of it.

          • PJ4

            Your raw hatred of women who oppose your opinion and babies is a good tool for us
            Please keep it up you’re doing humanity a favor helping pro lifers win

          • idahogie

            “Pro-lifers” are losing! Are you really that stupid?

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            “‘Pro-lifers’ are losing! Are you really that stupid?”

            Really? Last year we we passed restrictions on abortion in multiple states. Can you explain how that amounts to “losing”? (Please use small words in your explanation–as you’ve pointed out, we’re stupid)

          • idahogie

            Abortion used to be unpopular and illegal. It is now legal and popular. That’s losing.

            Looking at the “last year” is just as bogus and climate change deniers looking at a snowstorm.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            In most wars, the battle lines tend to be fluid–this means that they can move back and forth in different directions over time. Now it’s certainly true that the pro-abortion movement occupies considerably more ground than they in the 1950s when killing pre-born children was heavily frowned upon. However, it’s important to not just look at the position of the lines, but to also note which direction they’re moving in. That direction is in our favor.

            First off, opinion polls indicate that support for abortion-on-demand has been declining for a number of years. http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2014/01/31/269557336/abortions-reportedly-drop-to-lowest-rate-since-1970s

            This has allowed us to pass a plethora of abortion restrictions, including sonogram requirements, parental notification requirements, born-alive laws, the Partial Birth Abortion Ban, prohibitions on gender selection, and, most recently, fetal pain laws.

            Incidentally, that last bit of legislation has come up thanks to evidence that a fetus can experience pain as early as 20 weeks gestation. That is especially important in light of the fact that late term abortions typically involve the child being pulled apart one piece at a time. Given that your country doesn’t even execute convicted murderers this way, the thought is somewhat unsettling to most people.
            http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/10/magazine/10Fetal-t.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&amp;

            I would compare abortion supporters to slavery proponents in the 18th and early 19th centuries. Both involved the systematic destruction of one group of people for the benefit of another. And, both had large, well funded political interest groups in support of them. In the end, however, slavery was rejected as a disgusting crime against humanity that was finally wiped away for good. Your side can look forward to the same fate.

          • idahogie

            You are wrong on fetal pain. There is no strong evidence for fetal pain at 20 weeks. But that doesn’t stop immoral propagandists like you. Your type will use all the false information that you can. You’ll wave fake abortion pictures outside of clinics — since you think you’re “saving lives” anything goes.

            And you are the one demanding actual slavery — not some stretched analogy for it. You are demanding that women be slaves to their embryos. I’d be careful floating that idea if I were you.

          • PJ4

            Meh… the South thought it was winning too.
            The KKK was a very popular movement in it’s day too
            How does it feel to be on the wrong side of history?
            I wouldn’t know.

          • idahogie

            You are the one demanding actual slavery — not some stretched analogy for it. You are demanding that women be slaves to their embryos. I’d be careful floating that idea if I were you.

          • Faye Valentine

            “You are the one demanding actual slavery — not some stretched analogy for it. You are demanding that women be slaves to their embryos. I’d be careful floating that idea if I were you.”

            Once again, calling parenthood slavery is quite possibly one of the most ignorant things I’ve ever heard in my life.

          • idahogie

            And once again, I did not equate parenthood with slavery. You are really, really insistent on making that very dumb point.

          • Faye Valentine

            “And once again, I did not equate parenthood with slavery. ”

            Only if you totally ignore the genetic parent/child relationship shared between the pregnant woman and her gestating offspring. Or, I dunno. Maybe you were just never told about it. But ignorance of the law is no excuse. In this case, the Law of Biogenesis.

          • idahogie

            Nonsense. Genetics has nothing to do with it.

            If a woman going through surrogacy with an unrelated embryo were denied the right to an abortion — that would be close to slavery, too.

          • Faye Valentine

            “Nonsense. Genetics has nothing to do with it.”

            To someone very interested in denying the basic facts of the matter, maybe.

            “If a woman going through surrogacy with an unrelated embryo were denied the right to an abortion — that would be close to slavery, too.”

            That would be *closer* to slavery, but still not slavery, since there is such a thing as “duty to render aid” in life-and-death situations.

          • PJ4

            You claim i’m the one demanding slavery…yet you’re the one who seems to not realize that the unborn child involved was the one placed there without any say, without any recourse, and without anyone other than the mother specifically to care for him/her in that instance.

            Yet, conversely, 99% of the time, the woman acted entirely of her own volition, with her bodily autonomy securely in place, which created the situation to begin with. Exactly, then, who is the slave to whom in this case?

            The child in utero is no more the property of the mother as the black man was to the white man.
            I’d be careful floating that idea idea if I were you… of course I’d also try to be more logical and less emotional if I were you too… but.. it doesn’t seem as though you’re capable of much more than a few outrageous claims you cannot back up and name calling…in short… you’re a typical pro abort bot.

          • idahogie

            Back up your ludicrous claim. Prove that I hate women.

            Moron.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Back up your ludicrous claim. Prove that I hate women.

            Moron.

            Actually, it looks like Ivy Shoots was attacking PJ4, not you. I’m surprised you didn’t understand that given how bright you are.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Your raw, exposed hatred of women is disgusting.

            If PJ is a hater of women then why has she spent so time dating them?

          • PJ4

            You can’t expect pro aborts to make sense
            You can expect them to make wild accusations, be completely judgemental and beyond reason
            This Ivy believes herself to be some sort of self righteous clairvoyant

          • PJ4

            Actually my raw exposed passion for other beautiful women is quite strong and amazing.
            Do society a favor and indulge in making love to another women. I promise you’ll love it.
            Women know what women want.
            You sound cranky
            Do us all a favor and go have an orgasm.

          • Ivy Shoots

            Cool story bro.

          • PJ4

            Oh sorry….If you can’t find anyone willing to give you an orgasm(no surprises) try doing it yourself
            I recommend ejaculation
            It’s a bit hard at first but if you have strong PC muscles you can acheive ejacilation in mere minutes…

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            You know PJ, I chuckled the other day when I saw a t-shirt that said “Liberals Fuck Better.” Ah, those poor, poor deluded souls. Oh well, I guess they can’t miss what they’ll never have ;)

          • PJ4

            Hahaha! Yes!
            They’re such a bunch of narcissists
            If only they knew how wrong they were

            Ah well…I prefer my liberals as ignorant as the pro aborts on here (especially idaidiot….now there’s a special kind of dumb)

            Have you noticed how angry the pro aborts are?
            They need to get laid
            All they can do is spew insults
            It’s very heart warming

            The only one slightly worth while is OTRockstar
            But that’s not really saying much

          • idahogie

            Not deluded at all. There has been a battle against abortion for the last 50 years. I am right, and you are very stupid.

          • PJ4

            I am right and you are very stupid

      • Ivy Shoots

        Oh please, not another “you’re intolerant of my intolerance!” straw man argument.

        And thanks for admitting you believe an embryo has rights but the woman it’s in does not.

        • PJ4

          Oh please another straw man that pro lifers don’t think women have rights
          The are equal
          Sorry you don’t understand such a simple concept

          • Ivy Shoots

            I responded to YOUR denial of a woman’s bodily autonomy, which you admitted to. So there was no straw man on my part, Pee Wee.

            Sorry you don’t understand such a simple concept as bodily autonomy: a woman has the right to empty her uterus. Simple as that.

          • PJ4

            The child has a right to live too
            I never denied a woman has bodily autonomy
            I never admitted anything
            Mother and child are equal

            You sound angry and unstable
            I’m quite enjoying this
            However
            I may not be able to answer for a while
            We’re having another house party

          • idahogie

            A fetus has no right to live inside another person. You proclaiming such a right does not make it so. The majority of Americans, and the SCOTUS, agree with me. Only those deluded by mythology (and a very few others) are on your side.

          • Basset_Hound

            The “majority” of Germans in the late 30’s and early 40’s agreed that the Jews were human weeds that needed to be eradicated. So according to your “logic”, that made the Holocaust moral and ethical. After all, only those “deluded by mythology” disagreed with it.

            I DO hate to burst your “mythology” bubble by pointing out that PJ4 is agnostic. Several of the posters and featured writers are atheist.

          • idahogie

            Did you see where I said “(and a very few others)”? Moron.

            And nice job Godwining.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Did you see where I said ‘(and a very few others)’? Moron.

            It’s clear that you’re struggling with inferiority issues right now, and that’s quite understandable. However, the good news is that there are healthier ways to deal with your feelings of inadequacy than harassing strangers on the Internet. For example, you might try learning what a cogent argument is, or discovering how to cite facts in support of one. Expanding your vocabulary beyond childish insults like “stupid” and “moron” would also be a positive step.

            I know that growing up is a challenging process, but if you work at it, I’m sure that one day you too might be able to lead a productive life.

          • idahogie

            I see. You made a stupid and wrong-headed point (that I somehow assumed everyone opposing abortion was a mythologist) — and when I point out what you missed, you simply switch to insult mode.

            You are a moron. You failed in your point. Now your avoiding addressing your failure. What a loser.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Basset has no logic. I killed her “German citizens knew about the atrocities of the Holocaust, yet did nothing to save the Jews” argument a few days ago.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I already negated your false assumptions about German citizens who lived during the Nazi regime in another post. Stop spewing lies once again.

          • PJ4

            You are truly a legend in your own mind

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I use sources in a lot of my arguments rather than false accusations about a large population of people. Basset’s accusations were offensive and false.

          • PJ4

            I didn’t find then offensive or inaccurate
            Using “sources” make you feel like an expert, doesn’t it?

          • MamaBear

            I just gave her plenty of sources defending Basset. See above!

          • MamaBear

            Basset is not the one lying.
            There is a difference between awareness and responsibility, however, if more Germans had acted on their awareness early enough, the Nazis could have possibly been overthrown.
            From what I have seen from you, you will want proof:
            1933: Jews were barred first from jobs with the government, then positions as professors, dentists, lawyers, etc. Very few people even spoke up.
            1933: Boycotts of Jewish businesses. This depended on the cooperation of the majority of the population.
            1933: Dachau was open. It is only a short distance from Munch (Munich), not off in Siberia like Stalin’s death camps.
            1934: Barman Declaration of the Confessing Church which included denouncing of anti-Semitism. (By 1938, over 800 leaders of the Confessing Church were jailed by the Nazis.)
            1938: Kristallnacht – perpetrated by both SS and German civilians
            193? – 1939: Kindertransport, approximately 10,000 Jewish children out of Germany and other areas at risk were taken to homes in Great Britain – would you send your child to live with strangers in another country unless you knew he/she was in extreme danger?
            People who have written or told about the Nazis and Jews:
            Albert Einstein – he fled the Nazis in 1933
            Dietrich Bonhoeffer – look at his essay, The Jewish Question and the Church, 1933, among other writings. He was eventually executed by the Nazis.
            Maria Von Trapp – wrote in her autobiography about their awareness (and fear) of concentration camps and arrests of Jews after Germany annexed Austria.
            Corrie ten Boom – Dutch woman who with her family, hid Jews. They were caught and only she survived.
            Then, two people who have told me their personal stories – one of my high school teachers who grew up in the Netherlands during Nazi occupation and my German friend and neighbor who has told me her mother and grandmother’s experiences. (Nazis killed her grandfather and told her grandmother to join the party and keep quiet or they would send her and her children to concentration camps.)
            The Holocaust did not appear overnight, there were warnings, there was some resistance, but the majority, out of a mixture of fear in some cases, pre-existent anti-Semitism in others, allowed it to happen by failing to resist at the beginning.
            All that being said, I have absolutely no intention of arguing with you, for that is what it is, not debate. You are pompous enough to believe you have the right to set evidence used and then you use such utterly ridiculous things as Michael Moore’s movie. You skip over posts that ask you a specific question that you don’t want to answer, or make fun of them in some cases, yet then lambaste others because they missed answering to one point out of half a dozen as you did Mary. You change the subject when you don’t have an answer. An example of that was euthanasia where you expanded it to over diagnosing and overpricing because you had no on topic rebuttal. Sorry, but unless the med kills you, it is not even in the same discussion. Euthanasia kills!
            You need some lessons in compassion and empathy. And a few in humility. Your frequent putdowns of others are very telling of your attitudes.
            I strongly doubt you are getting all those degrees you claim unless you are on the ten year plan. I know exactly what is involved in music performance majors and minors, even though I was more practical and went with music education instead. And you sure are not doing all that AND working 30 hours a week!
            Life is too short to waste with someone who has no desire to discuss, but only show off her own discordant “brilliance.”
            You wish to be wise? You are studying the Old Testament? Read Proverbs. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.”

          • PJ4

            oooh… you just gave that little girl a whole lotta homework.
            Maybe she’ll try writing a bad poem about you too!
            She wrote a poem disparaging motherhood…. you know because being a mother is something evil and awful to the average pro abort… and she’s proving herself to be less than average.
            I’m starting to feel sorry for her… but then.. when I do… I remember what a pretentious pseudo intellectual she is.

          • PJ4

            So because you proclaim that a child in the womb has no rights, that makes it so?
            The majority of people and SCOTUS also upheld slavery at one point in US history so I guess you’re in good company
            Your sophistry and mythology might work on your radical pro abort sites where you and other under educated leftists frequent, but it doesn’t work here
            Take your ignorance somewhere else
            You’re embarrassing yourself and you’re getting boring
            You’ve almost lost your entertainment value
            Almost

          • idahogie

            Not because I claim it, moron. Because it is so.

            The term for when someone is required to live for another person is SLAVERY. You are the one that is proposing that women are slaves to their embryos. Funny that you brought up the analogy. You are the one with that ideological relationship to slavery.

            And you were never even slightly entertaining.

          • Faye Valentine

            “The term for when someone is required to live for another person is SLAVERY. You are the one that is proposing that women are slaves to their embryos. Funny that you brought up the analogy. You are the one with that ideological relationship to slavery.”

            Unless the person being required to fulfill obligations to the other person is the latter’s PARENT, and the latter is their MINOR CHILD. You poor-choicers really love trying to equate parenting to slavery, when it’s quite obvious that due to familial ties, that equation really doesn’t balance out AT ALL.

            Oh, and biological ignorance is another reoccurring theme I see in poor-choice writings. The embryonic stage of development in placental mammals ends relatively early on in gestation, around the 9 week mark. So we are talking about children in the embryonic AND fetal stages who are being killed, not just embryonic human beings.

          • PJ4

            well.. to be fair.. Idohogie considers embryology mythology.
            I think most pro aborts do.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Well.. to be fair.. Idohogie considers embryology to be mythology.

            You know I was wondering what that “mythology” business was all about–thanks for clearing it up.

          • idahogie

            I didn’t equate parenthood with slavery. Read more carefully. I equated forcing a woman to host another person as slavery.

          • Faye Valentine

            “I didn’t equate parenthood with slavery. Read more carefully. I equated forcing a woman to host another person as slavery.”

            When the “woman” we’re talking about shares a genetic parent/child relationship with the “another person” to whom she is “host”, that means she is-*GASP*-a mother, and that through continued gestation she is-*GASP AGAIN*-parenting, her offspring who is-*FINAL GASP*-her child.

            Not super-big on Biology, are you?

          • Coyote

            Do you equate the draft with slavery as well?

          • DianaG2

            LOL

          • Coyote

            Weren’t the majority of Americans and the U.S. Supreme Court also previously against gay rights and/or gay marriage?

          • PJ4

            Yup. Did not make right

          • Coyote

            Exactly. Frankly, gay sex, “sodomy”, and gay marriage should have *never* been illegal to begin with. Don’t like these this? In that case, don’t do them.

          • PJ4

            Exactly.
            Gay marriage never killed anyone.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Yes, and in 1857, SCOTUS decided in the case of Dred Scott v. Sandford that a former slave never could never have the full legal rights of a white person. Was that proclamation right just because the Supreme Court made it?

          • idahogie

            No matter how you try to twist it — and no matter how many times you try to link abortion to slavery when forced pregnancy is MUCH closer to actual slavery — you are wrong. People have differing rights at different ages. Only a complete moron would argue that either wasn’t the case, or shouldn’t be the case.

            Are you trying to make such a stupid argument?

            Further, just because the SCOTUS was racist, conservative, and wrong back then, does not call into question every other decision that the court has ever made. In the case of abortion, it rightly decided that medical decisions made between a woman and her doctor are none of your damn business.

            You can keep crying about it all you want. You’re still wrong.

          • MamaBear

            You have absolutely no idea what slavery is! Go to SE Asia where little girls are forced into prostitution – sex slavery. Go to parts of Africa where women and children are drug off into real slavery while their men are killed. Read your history about blacks taken away from their homes to be slaves, medieval serfs, slaves in the Roman Empire. Slavery is 180 degrees away from 9 months of pregnancy.

          • PJ4

            She has no clue on most things.
            I’m willing to bet she’s really some 24 year old male in his mother’s basement.

          • idahogie

            For the last time — I’m not the one making the very stupid comparison of abortion to slavery. You ignoramuses are the ones that do that. Stop arguing with me about how inappropriate it is to do that.

            The reason your analogy with slavery is bogus is because it applies more appropriately to the opposite position. Can you not see the similarities between girls forced into prostitution and women forced to continue pregnancy?

            That may not meet your strict definition of “slavery,” but it’s a heck of a lot closer than what your compatriots keep using it for.

            When I see you berate the people on your side for comparing abortion to slavery, then I’ll believe that your anything more than a hypocrite.

          • MamaBear

            Then according to you pregnant women are in daily forced labor, beaten, repeatedly raped, denied food and medical treatment, sold at auctions, and permanently taken away from family by force?
            Got it!
            You are in the same level of intelligence and compassion as one of your fellow pro-abortionists who a few months ago posted to a metastatic cancer patient that her nausea and hypertension during pregnancy (long past) was equal to what the cancer patient had and was going through.
            Normal people of good character would be totally shocked by both you and her!

          • PJ4

            BOOM!

          • idahogie

            NO. What is is about anti-abortionists that make them unable to follow a simple discussion?

            YOUR SIDE BRINGS UP SLAVERY. YOUR SIDE SAYS ABORTION IS AKIN TO SLAVERY.

            So I await your comment berating YOUR SIDE for using the asinine slavery comparison.

            All I said was that if someone is going to use the stupid slavery analogy, then it applies more appropriately to those who want to force a woman to incubate another human.

            Please tell me you understand. Please tell me that you are smart enough to follow a simple discussion.

          • MamaBear

            Please keep it up! You illogical bitter vitriolic rants and extremism are winning more and more people who are fence sitters over to the pro-life movement every day.

          • idahogie

            And another one who won’t admit her error. Do any of you have any personal integrity at all?

          • MamaBear

            You have not said one thing that would convince a person of integrity to support your side. Zero logic. Lots of obvious lies and exaggeration. And verbal abuse!
            A person of character would not even want to be associated with any “cause” supported in such a way.

          • idahogie

            And now deflecting. Along with the avoidance. Bad indicators of your personality.

          • MamaBear

            Oh so typical, most abusers and narcissists love to play psychiatrist when people catch on to them.
            Actually, most genuine mental health professionals advocate avoiding any unnecessary association with abusive people with out-of-control anger. So I shall take their advice and quit feeding your sick desire for negative attention.

          • PJ4

            I love how idahogie accuses others of not having integrity after calling a Faye a monster for questioning her Idahogie is just very talented at projection
            She also didn’t like that I referred to her as a woman

          • idahogie

            I’m not angry at all. You anti-abortionists seem to be really big on projection. PJ4 is the same as you.

            You refuse to admit that you object to my using the slavery analogy WHEN IT IS YOUR SIDE THAT BRINGS IT UP.

            I really don’t care at all if you haven’t any personal integrity. Or if you lie constantly but consider yourself a Christian (evidenced by the prayer comment you made).

          • MamaBear

            What a very odd thing to say! Not only do Christians pray, but so do Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Bahais, etc.
            You mean you did not know that?
            How very odd?

          • DianaG2

            <>

            ~~~~~

            If that were true, then why would you be so worried as to come to this thread and argue in favor of abortion? — Since there are so few of us, and all?

            Good one!

          • idahogie

            I didn’t say that there were only a few of you. Please read again.

            I said that most of the opposition to abortion was made up of theists, but that there were also a few others.

            Now, if my experience here is any guide, you will fail to acknowledge that you misread my post. Nobody here EVER corrects themselves. I have witnessed no personal integrity on display.

            (And the idiot PJ4 automatically “Liked” your failed point. PJ4 doesn’t think at all — he/she just emotes.)

          • Coyote

            “The majority of Americans, and the SCOTUS, agree with me.”

            This might be an example of argumentum ad populum fallacy and/or of an appeal to authority fallacy.

          • DianaG2

            Is this one — like your previous house party — also in celebration of new pro-lifers who were converted by the nasty pro-aborts on this thread???

            Hey, WTG!!

            Party on!

            Lovin’ it.

          • PJ4

            hah! no.. not this time
            We have a lot of promo parties for my hubby’s work.
            This one was for an exec for the ad agency that does the commercials for a specific car company. =)

          • DianaG2

            Nice :-))

            Before Mad Men — there was a segment called “Willoughby” on Twilight Zone.

            That’s about my entire knowledge of ad agencies.

            LOL. — Except I also know that ad agencies have the very best talent in ALL the arts — music, voice, graphics, etc.

            So, nice work for you and family, kiddo. You guys deserve it.

          • PJ4

            Thanks.
            We do the music for commercials and tv shoes.
            I do a lot of voice overs.

          • DianaG2

            Yes, you were telling us about that before, I remember.

            Very nice, kiddo!!

          • PJ4

            for sure! I do a lot of pilots.

          • Basset_Hound

            My daughter in college has a new passion. She wants to be a sound designer.

          • PJ4

            Ooooh
            That’s actually a lot of fun
            She may have to move out here if she’s really serious about it

          • Basset_Hound

            She did a couple of projects for a class, and “zenned out” on trying and mixing different effects. She wants to take more classes to see where it leads….

            Having her “out here” would be a little hard to take for us. We’d miss her, but that’s why God made Skype, isn’t it???

            Seriously, though…my husband and I attend a “megachurch” that has a high end auditorium with cameras, lights and sound. I got involved with running the lighting computer about a year ago (I just push the buttons, I don’t do the design work). I LOVE it, and It’s given me a LOT of respect for what goes on “behind the scenes” at a concert venue, during a TV show or on a movie set. From what I understand, running a sound board takes a TREMENDOUS amount of skill and training. I don’t even BREATHE on the sound board at church…

          • Basset_Hound

            I guess my original comment disappeared. I belong to a “megachurch” that has a fancy sound and lighting system in their main auditorium. They even have three cameras. Our services have a producer and a director. I run the lighting computer about once a month as a volunteer. I do NOT do the lighting design. I know the sound board requires a lot of specialized training and skill. One of the guys who can run it told me it would take him almost a year to bring me up to speed on handling it. This volunteer job has given me a LOT of respect for what goes on behind the scenes at a concert venue, a TV show or on a movie set.

          • DianaG2

            . . . as well as her brain.

            Simple as that.

            It doesn’t mean she SHOULD, though, or that it’s a good idea. What if someday, that same woman wants to actually form a thought?

            Alas! She finds herself in quite the pickle, said brain having been already emptied.

          • idahogie

            They are not equal. Women have many more rights than do fetuses. That’s one really ignorant comment on your part.

          • PJ4

            Of course they are
            We are all equal

            Sorry that you espouse the mentality of the KKK

          • Basset_Hound

            Wow! So according to your “logic”, a person’s right to live is defined by his size, age and level of development.

          • idahogie

            No. Don’t be a moron. It is a simple fact that adults have more rights than do children. I’m stumped as to why such a simple and observable fact has you so flumoxed.

          • MamaBear

            Intelligent people do not go around calling others “moron.” You have done this multiple times. Do you need a dictionary so you can have an adult vocabulary?

          • PJ4

            She emotes too much too.
            Notice how she over reacts to Faye’s calm cool logic.
            All Idaidiot sorry, Idahogie does is overreact and call Faye a monster.
            It would be funny if it wasn’t so pathetic.
            I’d feel sorry for her if she wasn’t such a cold hearted pro abort who believe that the science of embryology is mythology.
            She would;t last a day in the most basic class… just like OTRockstar

          • idahogie

            People with arguments present them. People without one complain about “tone.”

          • MamaBear

            People with arguments do not resort to grade school type name calling!

          • idahogie

            I do both. When your dealing with people (like you) who are deceptive and dishonest, then the invective comes out as well as the arguments.

          • MamaBear

            By their fruits you shall know them. Pro-murder or helping women and children in need? Vicious name-calling or calm discussions? People of logic and morals are seeing through you more every day as you continue to resort to uncontrolled anger and juvenile mudslinging!
            There is help for your anger. There are places you can go for anger management. I’ll pray for your soul.

          • idahogie

            Pray all you want. Another useless activity. Funny that you think it does anything, though.

    • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

      She is jealous of Amanda’s independence and self-determination, and is
      furious when another woman flaunts the fact that she decided to be more
      than just a baby-making machine.

      I prefer not to cast aspersions on how individual women choose to define themselves or seek fulfillment. Women have the intelligence to decide for themselves what is most important, and I’m very skeptical of those who contend otherwise. In fact, I’ve found such an judgmental attitude to be most common among the sort retrograde slut-shamers that I see to avoid.

      • san_ban

        Awesome! Now try to understand that women do not need you (or anyone else) telling them they must continue an unwanted pregnancy. You do not own another person’s body and have no right to make decisions about it unless you are hir legal guardian and the person not able to make such decisions hirself.

        • Basset_Hound

          Wow! Why stop with pregnancy! Why should anyone tell them they can’t kill a crying baby or toddler as well.

          • idahogie

            Because we have laws. Duh.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            And why should we? If it’s fine for us to kill an unwanted child when she’s in her womb, then why should we care if someone kills a newborn for the same reason?

          • idahogie

            Because civilized people don’t kill autonomous people. It’s something that we as a society have chosen to do. Just like we’ve chosen to respect women’s bodies and not force them to be slaves to someone else.

          • Faye Valentine

            How autonomous *is* a newborn, exactly?

            Being a parent is not slavery, even though society enforces certain obligations that parents have to their minor children of whom they have default custody. A pregnant mother parenting her gestating child should be no different.

            “The other ‘person’ is a fetus, not a person.”

            “The other ‘person’ is a jew, not a person.”

            “The other ‘person’ is a negro, not a person.”

            Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

          • idahogie

            Exactly. Being a parent is not slavery. We do not have a law that says a parent must donate a kidney to their child — even if it would save the life of the child.

            Anti-abortionists want slavery.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            You know, I met a former slave from the Sudan once. Your understanding of what it means to be slave seems to differ quite a bit from the experience that she described.

          • idahogie

            And I’ve met people with rights and lives. They don’t look like fetuses.

            Your desire to force people to live for another person is very much like slavery. It’s MUCH more like slavery than the ignorant claim that abortion is like slavery. Your side brought up that very stupid analogy, not me.

          • Faye Valentine

            “And I’ve met people with rights and lives. They don’t look like fetuses.”

            I’ve created two people with rights and lives. They actually were both fetuses at one point in their lives. They should have had rights back then, just like they do today. They didn’t, and that was wrong.

            I should never have been allowed by law to dispose of them as I saw fit just to make my life easier. They were not my property.

          • idahogie

            You are perfectly within your rights to give up your options. You are not within your rights to force others to give up their options.

          • Faye Valentine

            “You are not within your rights to force others to give up their options.”

            I am when one of those options is killing their children.

          • idahogie

            No … you can force people to do what you want. But you are not right to do so. You are immoral for doing so.

          • Faye Valentine

            “No … you can force people to do what you want. But you are not right to do so. You are immoral for doing so.”

            I suppose I’ll just have to live with the burden of my immorality as I see all those children spared from the suction machine live and grow. *yawn*

          • idahogie

            Some of us care if what we do harms real people. Not you, apparently.

          • Faye Valentine

            “Some of us care if what we do harms real people. Not you, apparently.”

            Yep. And the children who get to live instead of being aborted are not “real people”, merely hallucinations. Everyone knows the only “real people” in the world are pregnant women, and nobody else actually exists.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Gianna Jessen’s mother tried to abort her seven months into her pregnancy. Gianna survived but is disabled as a result of the abortion attempt. Do you care about the harm that was done to her?

          • Faye Valentine

            Of course not, silly! She’s not “real people”! 9_9

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Just as an aside, what exactly is your standard of morality? If we’re being immoral then exactly whose moral law are we breaking?

          • idahogie

            The only place morality comes from: individuals and society.

            Your use of the word “whose” makes me think that you suspect that there is somebody other than us doing the moralizing.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            I see then. You know, in the 1950s, American society was generally of the opinion that abortion was terrible. Would you have gone along with that view because it was the moral will of society? After all, morality is just what society says it is, right?

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            And I’ve met people with rights and lives. They don’t look like fetuses.

            Have you ever met a newborn? The resemblance to a nine month-old fetus is quite striking.

            Your side brought up that very stupid analogy, not me.

            You know, you were being so creative before when you disparaged us with words like “ignoramus,” so it’s a pity to see you fall back on such a common invective as “stupid.” Why are you letting your standards slide? Please, we both know that you’re better than this.

          • idahogie

            And again you’re going to dodge your own failure by resorting to insult.

            You made a stupid point — that a former slave from Sudan described her situation differently than a woman forced to go through pregnancy.

            I’m not surprised that you’re avoiding it. Not very bright.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            And again you’re going to dodge your own failure by resorting to insult.

            Please cite the words that I used to insult you. Indeed, I apologize if I insulted you. I do my best to avoid using insults during a debate as they’re a sign that one is incapable of making an intelligent case.

            You made a stupid point — that a former slave from Sudan described her situation differently than a woman forced to go through pregnancy.

            I made the point because it’s true. She was someone’s property, had no rights, and was beaten mercilessly for any reason or no reason. That experience bears absolutely no resemblances to being pregnant, but it is somewhat like the way that you view a fetus: devoid of rights and an acceptable target for appalling violence.

          • idahogie

            Of course it doesn’t bear a resemblance to being pregnant. But it might bear a resemblance to being forced to continue a pregnancy without your consent.

            Again … I’m not the one who made the idiotic comparison to slavery. The anti-abortion people here did that.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Of course it doesn’t bear a resemblance to being pregnant

            No, but your view of a fetus is very similar to the way that a master views his slave. Like a slave, you feel that the fetus should have no legal rights. Also like a slave, you believe that a fetus should be subject to horrible violence if his or her “owner” desires it.

            I’m not the one who made the idiotic comparison to slavery. The anti-abortion people here did that.

            You know, if an idea is idiotic, then it should be quite easy for you to give a fact based explanation as to why it’s idiotic. Do you think you’re up to doing that?

          • PJ4

            She cannot comprehend logic reason or science
            Therefore any reference or use to/of them is insulting to her

            Funny she says your insulting her when all she’s capable of is hurling insults at people who disagree with her

          • Faye Valentine

            “Exactly. Being a parent is not slavery. We do not have a law that says a parent must donate a kidney to their child — even if it would save the life of the child.

            Anti-abortionists want slavery.”

            Except that pregnancy/gestation/birth is in no way analogous to donating a kidney. I should know, since I’ve done the whole process twice. It’s more like having a job, buying rice cereal, then coming home and feeding your baby. Except that the latter is FAR more physically taxing than the former…and yet, the latter is STILL required by law.

          • idahogie

            No — it is not required by law. You can get others to do that if you want. You can give up your baby to adoption. You have other options. Just like pregnant women. Only you want to take away their options.

            Stop being so dramatic.

          • Faye Valentine

            “No — it is not required be law.”

            Yeah, it actually is. If you have default custody of your child, you are forced by law to provide care and sustenance to that child until such time as you secure someone else to care for that child. If something happens to the child due to your negligence before such time as you have transferred care of that child to someone else, you can and will be held legally culpable for the harm caused to your child. Same should go before birth, which would entail continued gestation until such a time as your child could be cared for safely by someone else.

            I’m all for “other options”, AS LONG AS A CHILD IS NOT KILLED AS AN EXERCISE OF THAT OPTION.

          • idahogie

            You said this was required by law: “It’s more like having a job, buying rice cereal, then coming home and feeding your baby.”

            Not true. You are not required by law to have a job, to buy food, or to feed your baby. You do have other options. I listed them.

            Your mistake. I can’t help it if you are exaggerating things to make your case.

          • Faye Valentine

            “Not true. You are not required by law to have a job, to buy food, or to feed your baby. You do have other options. I listed them.”

            False, as any number of people going through family court with child neglect charges can attest. The court might not care *how* you obtain food and feed your baby, but once it is clear that you are not obtaining food and feeding the baby of whom you have default custody, you’re in trouble.

            “I can’t help it if you are exaggerating things to make your case.”

            And I can’t help it if your method of “debate” pretty much consists of nothing but jamming your fingers in your ears while screaming “NUH-UH! YOU’RE WRONG! LALAALALALALALALALALA!”

            So, good day, sir. :)

          • Faye Valentine

            Oh, and you still didn’t answer my question:

            “How autonomous *is* a newborn, exactly?”

            You used the ability to be autonomous as your yardstick for when it’s not okay to kill other human organisms, yet I don’t think you’ve completely thought this through, since that would allow for the legal killing of a great many human organisms who were well past the stage of gestation and post-birth.

            So please, explain to me exactly why it is we shouldn’t be allowed to kill a newborn, and try not to use “Because autonomy!” as the reason, since newborns don’t really have any ability of autonomous motivation.

          • idahogie

            “You used the ability to be autonomous as your yardstick for when it’s not okay to kill other human organisms,…”

            No I didn’t. Try again.

          • Faye Valentine

            “Nuh uh!” is not a viable retort. I can copy/paste the relevant parts of the exchange, if you’d like:

            Adam: “If it’s fine for us to kill an unwanted child when she’s in her womb, then why should we care if someone kills a newborn for the same reason?”

            idahoagie: “Because civilized people don’t kill autonomous people. It’s something that we as a society have chosen to do.”

            But you totally ignored the fact that newborns are actually *not* autonomous, as I stated above. And then when I pressed you to address that fact, you continued to ignore it, and now you deny having said it at all.

          • idahogie

            You claimed that I said it was my yardstick. I never made any such claim. I only said that we as a society have decided that we don’t kill autonomous humans. I never said that we use that as a yardstick to decide when it’s OK to kill other humans.

            You’re wrong. I guess I had to spell it out more clearly.

          • Faye Valentine

            Yes. Now it’s clear as mud.

            Anyway…now that we’ve gotten that all done with, can you please tell us why it’s not okay to kill newborns, even though they’re not autonomous?

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            You claimed that I said it was my yardstick.

            Then what exactly is your yardstick? As you’ve pointed out, we’re not very bright, so you need explain your answer thoroughly in a lot of detail so we can understand.

          • Ivy Shoots

            It can breathe air, all organs essential to life are developed, it’s a completely formed organism. That’s what makes it autonomous.

            Before the 24th week, its lungs are not developed enough to survive outside the uterus, that’s what makes it NOT a human organism yet. This really isn’t that hard to understand.

          • Faye Valentine

            That’s completely arbitrary. You might as well have said, “Before the second year of life, a child cannot independently engage in bipedal locomotion, which is an essential trait of a developed autonomous human being, and therefore NOT a human organism yet.”

            Also, your definition of organism is just flat-out wrong.

            In biology, an organism is any contiguous living system (such as animal, fungus, micro-organism, or plant). In at least some form, all types of organisms are capable of responding to stimuli, reproduction, growth and development, and maintenance of homeostasis as a stable whole.

            The gestating human being/human organism fits that definition.

          • Jay

            Autonomous
            Biology .
            a.
            existing and functioning as an independent organism.

          • Faye Valentine

            Then newborns AND human beings in the embryonic and fetal stages would be autonomous, and the argument still is null and void.

          • MamaBear

            I never heard of any pregnant person who ever had to donate a kidney to their baby.
            Maybe you need to study how it works. The fetus (Latin word for offspring) is in the uterus. Nutrients are supplied through the umbilical cord. The offspring (to translate the Latin) has his or her own organs and biological systems.

          • idahogie

            Not very bright, are you? I never referred to a pregnant person donating a kidney. I said that a PARENT isn’t required to donate a kidney.

            Interesting that you heard “pregnant” when I said “parent.” It’s like the two are synonymous in your head.

          • Lilian Stoltzfus

            …o-okay. I don’t think you believe that the presence of absence of legislation make something immoral or moral.

            Also, tell me how the existence laws against infanticide or homicide have erased the need to tell people that infanticide and homicide shouldn’t be committed.

          • john lind

            Sweet, silly idahogie, there were laws permitting slavery and denying women the right to vote. Bad laws change. Legal doesn’t mean just.

          • idahogie

            Did I make such a stupid claim? Stop fighting strawmen.

            I was asked why people shouldn’t kill toddlers. I gave one reason. Nobody made the claim that legalilty equaled morality.

            Try again.

          • tatoo

            Because a fetus is not a person.

          • PJ4

            That’s your biased opinion
            The KKK still don’t refer to blacks as people so you’re in very good company

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Because a fetus is not a person.

            And why is that? After all, a nine month-old fetus is essentially identical to newborn.

          • Ivy Shoots

            A nine month old fetus would be delivered alive, not aborted. Now please tell us your rationale for calling a fertilized egg a person. Please, do.

          • Andrew J. Corrales

            A zygote has unique human DNA, different from that of the mother, and half of which is derived from the father. Inasmuch as one’s personality is partly determined by genetics, one has a unique personality right from conception. Furthermore, the zygote has potential to help the universe because he or she may grow up to become a doctor, a scientist, a philanthropist, or a firefighter (or similar).

            And finally, if a zygote isn’t a person, then what is it? It’s not just another organ, because it has different DNA. Also, if a zygote were just another organ, then abortion amounts to self-harm, and death from abortion is suicide.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Really? Gianna Jessen’s mother tried to have young Gianna aborted at 7 1/2 months. Melissa Ohden’s mum attempted much the same thing. Thankfully both ladies are alive today–I guess the “choice providers” in those cases weren’t especially adept at inflicting those choices.


            http://www.liveaction.org/inhuman/melissa-ohden/

            Now please tell us your rationale for calling a fertilized egg a person. Please, do.

            Well, that fertilized egg has all the genetic information that he or she will need to develop–and development is a continuous process. Just six weeks after fertilization happens, a heart beat can be observed. At 17 weeks, she or he has a set of finger prints that are completely unique. And according to research by Dr. Kanwaljeet Anand, the fetus experience pain by week 20.

            http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/10/magazine/10Fetal-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

            This growth will continue right up until birth and (of course) for years to come after that. So, given how each phase blurs into the next, it seems that the most sensible juncture to say when human life (and thus personhood) begins is at the earliest point.

        • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

          Now try to understand that baby girls and boys don’t need you (or anyone else) telling them that they need to be cut up or sucked through a tube. You don’t own another person’s life and have no right to end it. Further, that person’s guardian has a duty to make decisions in his or her best interest (hence the “guard” in guardian). That guardian cannot make decisions at the child’s expense simply for her own convenience.

          • tatoo

            The other “person” is a fetus, not a person. Until it is a person, the mother is in control. It is up to her if she will nurture it or get rid of it.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            The other “person” is a fetus, not a person.

            And why would that be?

          • Ivy Shoots

            Because it isn’t developed enough to live outside the uterus. Until it is, the woman’s right to bodily autonomy takes precedence over any presumed rights of a merely potential person.

            There is not a single other instance where people are forced to use their bodies to sustain the lives of someone else against their will. That degrading treatment is reserved for women, and the invention of “personhood” for the fetus is the basis for justifying that degradation.

          • Coyote

            “There is not a single other instance where people are forced to use their bodies to sustain the lives of someone else against their will.”

            What about cases where someone’s kidney was accidentally transplanted into someone else without his or her consent in a hospital mix-up?

          • Ivy Shoots

            So you can’t think of a single other instance where anyone supports forcing a person to have their body deliberately used to sustain the life of someone else. Because there are none. Accidents happen, and if this one ever did, no one would defend it as being proper and just.

            Not only do we never advocate for forcing a person to donate a kidney against their will, we don’t even force a family to donate the organs of a DEAD loved one. So even the bodily autonomy of CORPSES gets more respect than what you are willing to recognize for living women. Think about it.

          • Coyote

            “So you can’t think of a single other instance where anyone supports forcing a person to have their body deliberately used to sustain the life of someone else. Because there are none.”

            I never said that there are any no other cases where anyone *supports* forcing someone to let someone else use their body in order to survive. In fact, there are some cases where I and some other people would support this.

            You previously asked about the current reality in regards to this, not about what the ideal law in regards to this should look like. These are two different things.

            “Accidents happen, and if this one ever did, no one would defend it as being proper and just.”

            So you support allowing the unwilling kidney donor to get back his or her kidney from the recipient in such a scenario?

            “Not only do we never advocate for forcing a person to donate a kidney against their will, we don’t even force a family to donate the organs of a DEAD loved one. So even the bodily autonomy of CORPSES gets more respect than what you are willing to recognize for living women. Think about it.”

            Actually, my political views on this issue are not limited to living women. They equally apply to living men, and Yes, to corpses as well.

    • Basset_Hound

      Hmmmmm….let’s see….

      You proclaimed that “Fulfilled, self-actualized women don’t need to tear down other women who make different choices, yet you turned around and called Cassy “just a baby-making machine”. How classy!

      It is an insult to me, as a woman to tell me that I can’t be “fulfilled”, “self-actualized”, and that I can’t “have a sense of identity” unless I have the “right” to treat my unborn children like chattel and property. That sounds like tyranny to me.

      BTW, Amanda Marcotte doesn’t have a damned thing that makes me “jealous” of her. In fact I pity her bitterness.

      • Ivy Shoots

        Your reading comprehension could use some improvement. I never called anyone “just a baby-making machine;” I said it made Cassy mad that Amanda “decided to be more than just a baby-making machine.” My position is that all women are more than that, while yours treats pregnant women as nothing more than incubators for fetuses.

        Anti-choicers, by trying to deny pregnant women the right to their bodily autonomy, reduce them to nothing but baby-making machines for the duration of their pregnancies. There is no way around that fact, however strenuously you try to ignore it.

        When you tell a woman it’s not her choice to terminate her pregnancy, when you irrationally insist that a “person” exists at conception, and that its rights are to be respected over hers, you send a loud and clear message that you believe a woman can be used against her will as a baby-making machine.

        Cassy says it quite plainly: “The problem with that is that no one made it to where women are the ones
        who carry babies. It wasn’t something that men engineered. It’s called science, Amanda. It’s just the way it is, fair or unfair.” Except, of course, science also informs us that spontaneous abortions happen quite frequently. And science has made elective abortion a very safe procedure for women. It’s not science which fights against women’s rights, it’s misguided people like you and Cassy.

    • Andrew J. Corrales

      Neither Cassy Fiano nor anybody else that writes for this site, or frequents the comments, has any problem with either independence or self-determination. We just don’t think any person has the right to have their kid poisoned, dismembered, and ripped out–and incinerated, in the UK–for any reason save medical emergency that leaves literally no other choice (and if you don’t want to raise a kid, put him or her up for adoption, or take advantage of safe-haven laws). Cassy Fiano wrote this article because Marcotte hates babies and Cassy thought that her fellow pro-lifers might like to know. It could be argued that Marcotte’s political support of abortion is indistinct from her hatred of babies (there’s certainly enough evidence).

      And she says she’s a blogger. That’s what she says about herself apart from mentioning her family. What if she doesn’t consider anything else about herself particularly important? She prioritizes her husband that she loves and pledged her life to, and her kids she brought into this world. Whatever she does besides blogging, they’re apparently her main motivation. You see something wrong with that? You think she’s not self-actualized because she has different subjective values than you? She can’t be fulfilled by loving her family?

      And can you say where precisely in the article there is any evidence indicating that Mrs. Fiano is, indeed, furious? Just curious.

      • Ivy Shoots

        “And can you say where precisely in the article there is any evidence indicating that Mrs. Fiano is, indeed, furious?”

        Sure can. When she says, “rabid fanaticism… femisogynist extremist… narcissistic, self-absorbed pro-abortion extremist…In order to win this war, we have to know who we’re fighting.”

        Them’s fighting words, literally. Not exactly My Little Pony, is it?

        • Andrew J. Corrales

          “Rabid fanaticism… femisogynist extremist… narcissistic, self-absorbed pro-abortion extremist… In order to win this war, we have to know who we’re fighting.” The first three were said not about herself but about Marcotte. It’s not furious language, it’s calling apples apples (as it were). Can you prove that she’s factually incorrect? The last one, which had the words “fighting” and “war”, were using such words figuratively.

          Apparently you missed the last paragraph–“While it’s easy to get outraged and angry about the vile she spews, don’t be. Pity her, or pray for her. It must be hard to live each day filled with so much anger, hatred, and misery.”

          • PJ4

            Drew, it’s kind of you to be this patient with special-needs-liberal-pro-aborts… but it’s not going to help with her. She’s just too special and too caught up in emotion.
            I think we should just try to ignore them.
            It’s almost mean to try to challenge them in anyway
            Pro aborts are clearly not capable enough to move beyond ad hominems and idiot rants.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Hey, you’re back! Did you kill any children or adults while you were gone? What, with your texting and driving? Must be nice to be pretentious enough to risk other people’s lives while on the road, while maintaining a false sense of moral fortitude on the pro-life platform. Like I said before, there are nuts in every bunch. And by golly, I found it.

          • PJ4

            You’d wish that wouldn’t you?

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Nah, I just wanted to make you feel bad for the choice you made. Just like you rely on guilt to get your point across about abortion. How does it feel to risk the lives of grown children and adults while people like me are pro-choice so potential children don’t have to risk neglect and abuse (and deaths from distractive drivers)?

            You’ve just proved my earlier point that we have problems with our current society that need to be fixed before we add 56 million potential children to the mix.

          • PJ4

            You are indeed a legend in your own mind dear

            If bodily autonomy is end all with you people then what I choose to do at a red light shouldn’t have irked you Nice of you to try to cover your outrage with “teaching me a lesson” though Good one

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Sent you another link earlier about how texting at red lights is still dangerous. And who cares? You still did it. And you continue to be a hypocrite by trying to justify it while you get mad at pro-choicers for trying to justify abortion. Now you’re guilty of what you say pro-choicers are guilty of doing.

          • PJ4

            Didn’t get the link
            I love how you’ve fixated on the texting while driving bit
            Good deflection
            You’re getting to be a pro

            And I haven’t had an accident ever.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            “And I haven’t had an accident ever.”

            So you’re an ace at texting and driving? Nice. You must have lots of practice.

          • PJ4

            Such assuming is very apropos for you

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            “She’s just too special and too caught up in emotion.
            I think we should just try to ignore them”

            Should we ignore your texting and driving? Hell no.

          • PJ4

            Meh…I was at a light

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            And also, might I remind you that you got unnaturally pissed off at me for using Sicko as a source, yet you’re able to risk lives on the road by texting and driving. I’ll take hypocrisy for $100, Alex.

            Adam was right. I’m going to be making a lot of money today.

          • PJ4

            I didn’t get unnaturally pushed off
            I wasn’t even angry silly girl

            I was just enjoying your hypocrisy

            I’ll take pro abort hypocrisy for $1200

            See how you don’t like it when people choose to do what you’re against?

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Please see my previous post. Kthxbai

          • PJ4

            No thanks
            Your drivel is only stomachable one time around

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            And I corrected it. :) The only way you’ll be able to correct your hypocrisy is if you start thinking about the quality of life of others outside of the uterus…

            And, oh, dear, you were hunting down almost every comment I made to shout the “H” word from the rooftops. Now it’s my turn and it’s funny because it’s actually true. You’re a hypocrite and you hate that word. You care more about the quality of life for those in a uterus than those outside of a uterus. Case closed.

          • PJ4

            Funny you like to judge other people

            Apparently to you feeding the homeless, adopting children conceived in rape, and housing pregnant women and helping them go back to school after their babies are born isn’t your idea of “thinking about the quality of live outside the uterus”
            Now you’re losing your entertainment value
            And to think…I was just telling someone else you were the only pro abort worth while to debate (not that that’s saying much) Thanks for proving me wrong on that point
            Last time I’ll ever vouch for you

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            “Apparently to you feeding the homeless, adopting children conceived in rape, and housing pregnant women and helping them go back to school after their babies are born isn’t your idea of “thinking about the quality of live outside the uterus”

            Do you spend a lot of your time feeding the homeless, adopting children conceived in rape, and housing pregnant women during or after your pro-life online rants?

          • PJ4

            I’m only on when the kids are in school or at night when everyone’s asleep I take my phone with me wherever I go so it’s not too hard to drop a line when we’re volunteering Interesting that bc you cannot fathom doing more than one thing at a time you project it on to others
            Nice try though

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I’m the queen of multi-tasking. As we speak, I’m writing my analysis paper on the Nobel Peace Prize Forum I attended this month for BLAW and I’m working on a group project for MGMT to study the effects of the data breach at Target and how Target’s style of management and communication led to the delay in discovery of the breach. I’m also trying to fix some bugs in the PHP coding for my textbook cooperative and I’ll probably start my online German language midterm and feminist criticism of the Bible essay for THEO later tonight. I would say I spend 30 hours a week in class or studying and about 35 hours a week working, give or take a few hours. I’m holding out on motherhood (if I decide to be a mother) until I’m about 30 due to the costs involved with caring for a child. Need to make enough money here to be able to live in Germany till I am eligible to work there (they have tight work visa restrictions like the U.S.).

            This summer, I’ll be taking four college courses in one month so I can graduate sooner and not pay $4300 per class (highway robbery if you ask me), but it’s all about the damned piece of paper you get when you graduate. -.-

          • PJ4

            So you’re so full of yourself that you believe you’re the only person in the world capable of multitasking?
            Awesome

            Typical for a pro aborts… you guys are very narcissistic.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Oh, yes, I’m narcissistic for wanting to be able to support a child before I have one. *yawns*

          • PJ4

            Not what I said.
            You just read what you wish I said, don’t you?

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            You said, “So you’re so full of yourself that you believe you’re the only person in the world capable of multitasking?
            Awesome

            Typical for a pro aborts… you guys are very narcissistic.”

            I responded to you about the multi-tasking. And I gave a reason for why I’m not narcissistic. You said I’m narcissistic. That’s what you said and that’s what I read.

          • PJ4

            Right.. but I never said you were narcissistic for wanting to be able to support a child before you have one. In fact I really hope you don’t have one.

            You’re just narcissistic on face value. Every pro abort is.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            And no, I was just pointing out that multi-tasking isn’t just attributed to nor reserved for mothers. I’m sorry it pisses you off that I’m not a mother-woman who defines themselves by whether or not they have children to protect and care for.

            I’m not sorry that I’m choosing to work on my education and a job instead of having a child right now. Wanting to be financially stable before bringing new humans into the world is responsible and its common sense.

            As someone who has a college education (still don’t believe you do), I would think you would understand that rather than bashing women who choose an education over having a child right here, right now.

          • PJ4

            I’m sorry it pisses you off that I’m not a mother-woman who defines themselves by whether or not they have children to protect and care for.

            I’m sorry you’re so deluded that you think I’m pissed off that you’re not a mother.
            As a matter of fact, I really hope you don’t spawn. It would be a travesty if you did.
            I’d even pitch in for sterilization if you wanted to do that.. that way no babies get hurt.

            Interesting that you disparage women who are mothers and who define themselves by their families.

            I’m not sorry that I’m choosing to work on my education and a job instead of having a child right now.

            Neither am I…

            As someone who has a college education (still don’t believe you do),

            Just like I don’t believe for a second that you’ve made it past the 10th grade… but I digress…

            I would think you would understand that rather than bashing women who choose an education over having a child right here, right now.

            Please post back to me my exact words that were bashing you for choosing education over having a child right now?
            I’ve encouraged many young girls to finish their eduction (or succeed in their acting career) before embarking on family life.

            Of course it’s ok for you to bash mothers who define themselves by their family. Nice double standard. Another pro abort trait.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I once met a mother-woman,
            Who lived a life full of chagrin,
            From pedestal she judged,
            Those beneath her who trudged,
            As they sought an education.

            (Yay for limericks!)

            It’s fun using poetry to mock you.

          • PJ4

            I once met a mother-woman,
            Who lived a life full of chagrin,
            From pedestal she judged,
            Those beneath her who trudged,
            As they sought an education
            clever on the 3rd and 4th lines.

            It’s fun using poetry to mock you

            Clever rhyme on line 3 and 4
            But your 1st 2nd and 5th don’t rhyme.

            Woman, chagrin and education don’t really rhyme. It’s sloppy at best.

            Redo

            Oh.. who is it that you’re trying to disparage /mock this time?

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Actually, the rhyme scheme for A depends on how you pronounce woman (from where I’m from, we pronounce woman wuh-min) and the rhythm does work. You were just out of rhythm. :P

          • PJ4

            Still doesn’t work
            Last line is out of rhythm

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Alright, alright, replace “sought” with “pursued.”

            Sheesh. Creativity killer. :P

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            “Edit: good thing you’re not a Literature major.. major fail.
            Poetry isn’t your strong point.”

            Ha, it’s been a few years. :) I was published a few times in middle and high school in a young writer’s poetry anthology. Free-verse and sonnets are more my style and I love haiku. Haven’t had a lot of time to write lately, but here is one of my favorites. My boyfriend and I wrote sonnets to each other for Valentine’s Day last year (we’re still together, so my “major fail,” as you put it, at poetry must not have harmed his views of me too much). :P

            Here’s the one I wrote for him (with names altered in place of “Cupid” and/or “lover”):

            Cupid, the lover I desire to possess
            vanquished my hard heart through the strength of ice.
            The eternalized sheen retained in his eyes
            shall I ever be worthy to access?

            Sacred lover, my sentiments you see.
            Exhort me to unleash them, to reveal,
            once my heart will be too wan to conceal,
            how it can be fond and bland, keen and free.

            Lover, you feel how deep is my affection,
            of my new life you know the plenitude.
            Once at your shape I have a closer glance

            I can’t but contemplate your lovely complexion,
            I can’t deny a quake of lassitude:
            Cupid, you’re my lover in human semblance!

          • PJ4

            I give credit where credit is due.

            We may not agree on many things, but I like that poem. It’s very good.

            Was it published?

            I’d hope though that even if your bf didn’t like the poem (but I’m sure he did) it wouldn’t effect his feelings for you.

            just a tip though: Don’t try so hard to try to impress people you don’t know. It’s not worth it.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Thank you, and no, I haven’t had it published.

            I don’t refer to my achievements to impress, I refer to them to defend them against people who don’t believe them to be true. I wrote the limerick because I was bored and when you said that poetry is not my strong point and that I failed at literature, I had to defend my poetic skills with the sonnet. The haiku for Faye was just out of fun, too.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            That actually is a lovely poem.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Dankeschoen (since my keyboard has no umlauts, sadly)

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            :)

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            “I’m sorry you’re so deluded that you think I’m pissed off that you’re not a mother.
            As a matter of fact, I really hope you don’t spawn. It would be a travesty if you did.
            I’d even pitch in for sterilization if you wanted to do that.. that way no babies get hurt.

            Interesting that you disparage women who are mothers and who define themselves by their families.”

            I’m against the mothers (and sometimes fathers) who feel the need to place themselves and/or their children on a pedestal to make the mother and/or father feel better about the lives they’ve lived. That their life now has a purpose because their live revolves around their children.

            If I become a mother (and I want to), I will give my child(ren) the best damn love and care he or she would ever have (8 years of babysitting and/or nannying experience), but I will not use them as a tool to show others that my life gravitates around them like you have done (i.e. after the kids go to sleep, while the kids are at school, the kids and I volunteer).

          • PJ4

            Wow.. you’re more pathetic than I thought.

            You asked me how I had time for writing on here.. I answered you.
            You asked what we did to make life better for being who are out of the womb.
            I answered you.

            I don’t use my babies as tools. The fact that your sick little mind thinks that is what’s really telling.

            You should have stopped at the first half of your first sentence: You’re against mothers.

            I seriously hope you don’t spawn.
            It sounds like you wont be able to handle not being the center of your own world.

            When you have kids, you’re priorities change.
            It’s no longer me, me, me, I, I, I,
            My life is good and of course it has to do with my family.

            But you want to shame me for loving my family and making them the center of my life. Why? Because that’s what pro aborts do. Pro aborts are narcissists.

            My life goals have shifted to include my babies.
            You seem incapable of that task.

          • Faye Valentine

            They have to be allowed to get out of the uterus before they can experience much quality to their life at all.

    • Old Testament Rockstar

      Reminds me of the women in The Awakening who defined themselves by their children. “Pontellier was not a mother-woman. The mother-women seemed to prevail that summer at Grand Isle. It was easy to know them, fluttering about with extended, protecting wings when any harm, real or imaginary, threatened their precious brood. They were women who idolized their children, worshiped their husbands, and esteemed it a holy privilege to efface themselves as individuals and grow wings as ministering angels.”

      • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

        You ascertained all that about her merely by looking at her picture and the mini-bio beside it? My word. You should seriously consider seeking employment as an FBI profiler–your country desperately needs men and women with such skills.

        On another note, I’ve looked into the 56 million+ abortion number that you asked for a citation on. It seems that there is no single government publication listing all of the abortions performed up to date. However, I found a report from the CDC giving the total number of abortions that they documented from 1970 to 2005 and another giving the numbers from 2001 to 2010. The aggregate number for the abortions that they recorded up until 2010 was time roughly 41 million. No CDC statistics were available for 2011 to the present, but if the number of abortions continued to decline at the same pace, then we can estimate that an additional 2.2-2.5 million abortions were performed since.
        http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5713a1.htm#tab2
        http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss6208a1.htm

        However, the CDC indicates that these are just the abortions that were reported to them and that complete numbers were not provided from all states, which means that the figure is an under representation. According to estimates made by the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute, the total number of abortions from 1973 until 2011 amounted to approximately 53 million. If these numbers are correct, then it seems that a present total of 56 million abortions is a safe estimate.

        http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html

        • Old Testament Rockstar

          Yep, that’s my word, and I’m sticking to it. :) I’m allowed to assess someone’s character through what they’ve written about themselves, aren’t I? You guys think I’m pretentious and I think she’s a mother-woman. Your assertion may be no more true than mine until you’ve actually met me, but I have the right to make that character assessment.

          I thought the pro-lifers said the Guttmacher Institute was bias. Now, all of a sudden when you need it to make up for the abortion total, it isn’t?

          A pro-lifer using the Guttmacher Institute as a source…Never thought I would live to see the day that would happen. That gives me one free “Pass Go and Collect $200″ from a Guttmacher source, you realize?

          • Faye Valentine

            “I thought the pro-lifers said the Guttmacher Institute was bias. Now, all of a sudden when you need it to make up for the abortion total, it isn’t?

            A pro-lifer using the Guttmacher Institute as a source…Never thought I would live to see the day that would happen. That gives me one free “Pass Go and Collect $200″ from a Guttmacher source, you realize?”

            Okay, now please actually address the content of what was being said instead of just making snide remarks about the citation. Thanks.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Says the person who used WIKIPEDIA as a source (hypocrite).

            And don’t worry, I’m crafting my response right now.

          • Faye Valentine

            Because no Wiki article is ever sourced or anything.

          • PJ4

            She’s very impressed with herself
            In her own mind she “killed Basset’s German citizens” argument. hahahhaha

          • Faye Valentine

            Yeah. A very simple google search was able to debunk her victory.

          • PJ4

            I know!
            Her greatest victories are in her little head

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            And I’m very impressed with your ability to text and drive. Nice trait to have when you talk about dead babies a lot.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Made the response a few minutes ago. The only reason why Adam provided sources for a previously stated assertion of 56 million “dead babies” (can’t remember who came up with that number in this long debate, but it was someone from the pro-life community on here) was because I called the pro-life community out on that statistic since they provided no sources for it. Adam, a pro-lifer, finally was able to provide sources for the statistic on their behalf. I don’t count the Guttmacher statistic as reliable, however, since it’s from a SIG site. I would say the same for statistics from pro-life SIG websites, as well.

            I respect Adam as a debater for the pro-life side because he is able to provide good citations for most of his assertions. The same cannot be said for other people on this page…

            Furthermore, let’s say there really are 56 million “dead babies” from abortion. If those 56 million “dead babies” were alive today, what is your (Faye’s) solution for providing adequate and loving care for those children?

          • Faye Valentine

            False dichotomy. I don’t think the 56 million children would have been created only to then be killed at a very early point in their lives in the first place. It’s not a matter of “either they die in abortion or they live and place a burden on everyone”, I think it’s more a matter of people adjusting their sexual habits and becoming more responsible out of necessity so that nobody has to die or suffer in the first place.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            “I don’t think the 56 million children would have been created only to then be killed at a very early point in their lives in the first place. It’s not a matter of “either they die in abortion or they live and place a burden on everyone”, I think it’s more a matter of people adjusting their sexual habits and becoming more responsible out of necessity so that nobody has to die or suffer in the first place.”

            I never said those children would have been created only to be killed, but thank you for making a false assumption of me.

            Once again, I will use China’s one-child policy to showcase what they’ve had to do to deal with overpopulation. I do not commend the one-child policy, but this makes the statement, “more a matter of people adjusting their sexual habits and becoming more responsible out of necessity so that nobody has to die or suffer in the first place” false.

            Depending on the economy, people are still going to have kids and they’re going to have as many as they want (relative to the availability of contraceptives, sexual education availability, and their socioeconomic status).

          • Faye Valentine

            “I never said those children would have been created only to be killed, but thank you for making a false assumption of me.”

            You misunderstand me. I’m not saying that *would* happen, I’m saying that that is what is happening now, with abortion being legal. That is what abortion *does*-it kills a very young child at a very early point in their life.

            “Once again, I will use China’s one-child policy to showcase what they’ve had to do to deal with overpopulation.”

            That is absolutely false. China’s societal/governmental structure is what creates the “need” for them to kill off certain elements of their population. It’s a societal/economic thing, not an environmental “overpopulation” thing. If they changed their societal structure, they wouldn’t “have” to kill off huge segments of their population. Hell, as they’ve adopted more and more elements of capitalism, they really don’t actually “need” to enforce the one-child laws like they do-at this point it’s mostly just due to convention.

            “Depending on the economy, people are still going to have kids and they’re going to have as many as they want (relative to the availability of contraceptives, sexual education availability, and their socioeconomic status).”

            Umm….you realize in China, women are being FORCED into abortions to kill very wanted children, right? :/

            But, I think people will care more about the proper use of contraceptives once abortion is not readily available as a fall-back measure for irresponsible people. I say this from personal experience with my ex-husband.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Once again, I will use China’s one-child policy to showcase what they’ve had to do to deal with overpopulation.

            I don’t think it’s appropriate to compare a largely agrarian society with a Confucian influenced cultural need for sons (and thus a perceived need to keep conceiving until a male child is born) to the United States in the 21st century. In America (like much of the Western world) there is neither a practical benefit nor a cultural preference associated with with large families. In fact, there is just the opposite.

            While this isn’t exactly germane to the point, I think that had the economic reforms of Deng Xiaoping been originally instituted in place of Mao Zedong’s vision of bastardized Marxism, then the country would probably now be on the same economic footing as Japan or their brethren across the Taiwan Strait.

            And thank you for your words of respect. I appreciate the fact that you don’t begin every comment with “stupid” and conclude it with “moron.” That’s a nice contrast to one of your co-belligerents here.

          • MamaBear

            Faye, you are absolutely right. I grew up prior to abortion being legal. Single parenthood was rarer because most people waited longer to have sex. Usually until they were (gasp) married, or at least until they were with the one they would marry. Although, they did marry a little younger, too.Typical families were 2, 3, or 4 kids. I actually knew a number of families that were “complete” and several years later had a “surprise,” but nobody was aborting them. (Used to be a joke, don’t give away the baby furniture before menopause unless you want one more.) Not perfect, but contrast to today.
            Almost half of children are born to single mothers. Marriage is later and divorce is epidemic. Over a million babies are aborted a year. People seem to actually expect teens to be sexually active and they do their part of living down to our expectations. STIs are epidemic.
            And people have the nerve to look at this as liberation.

          • PJ4

            There’s a new strand of ghonorrea that’s immune to antibiotics

            http://www.cdc.gov/Std/Gonorrhea/arg/default.htm

          • MamaBear

            Not surprised. It was only a matter of time before one of these STIs developed an immunity to treatment. Look at all the other antibiotic resistant infections we are developing. We play with fire, we will eventually get burned.

          • PJ4

            I think you hit another never with Idaidiot idahogi.. she’s emoting out of control again… this time she’s making less sense than usual.

            We really need to stop frustrating her like this.

          • MamaBear

            :-)

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            If you had paid any attention at all to this debate, you would find that I provided viable sources about how there are not enough adoptive parents to fulfill the need for adoptive parents and lots of people use surrogacy or artificial insemination nowadays because of the cost and it doesn’t take as long to have a child.

            Someone argued that a higher influx of children in the adoption system would decrease the cost and time for adoptive families, which would influence families who would otherwise seek artificial inseminations or surrogacy to change their minds and seek adoption; however, the costs and time length associated with adoption are associated with agency fees, background checks and in-home visits to ensure the children are placed in good homes. If the number of children who enter adoption increase, the cost of adoption may increase in the form of human resources for the adoption agencies to handle the placement of the children. This may make adoption an even more expensive alternative to surrogacy and artificial insemination than it already is, therefore, you still have the issue of where these children would be placed.

          • Faye Valentine

            Well, I’d suggest reforming the adoption system as it is rather than…the option…of…killing…the children. Call me “unreasonable”, if you must…

            9_9

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Step right up and reform the adoption system, then, if you have all of the answers.

          • Faye Valentine

            It’s on the agenda.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I’ll use PJ4’s “the check is in the mail” argument here.

          • Faye Valentine

            Okay. But it’s right up there with Rebecca Kiessling’s (A pro-life activist!) fight against paternal rights for rapists. I still don’t understand how acting like killing the children instead of sending them into foster care/adoption systems is reasonable.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Correct me if I’m wrong, but are you against abortion because you can sleep better at night knowing that you saved lives, yet once those future children are born, it’s not your problem anymore? As long as everyone has an equal chance at being born into poverty, neglect, or abuse?

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            As long as everyone has an equal chance at being born into poverty, neglect, and abuse?

            Some of the people you’ve been arguing with here have been born into one of those conditions. While those things are certainly problems, a violent death is worse.

            Correct me if I’m wrong, but are you against abortion because you can
            sleep better at night knowing that you saved lives, yet once those
            future children are born, it’s not your problem anymore?

            It’s not fair to say that we feel that once a child is born “it’s not our problem anymore.” Again, some of the people that you’ve been arguing with donate their time, money, or both to help vulnerable children. Why do you assume that we simply write these children off the moment that they’re delivered?

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Once again, I can’t reply directly to you because it’s telling me that your comment is still under moderation. I’m sorry that keeps happening and I really don’t know why. Anyway….

            Right now, most abortions occur at or before the 8th week and a majority of the abortions that don’t occur during that time occur at or before the 13th week. Late-term abortions are increasing and shifting to the pre-8th week area of the gestation period. Not a lot of abortions occur by the time fetuses can experience pain.

            Sure, but what are you getting at exactly? Is it in response to something that I said? I’m not trying to be difficult, I just really don’t see what you’re replying to.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I think I was responding to two of your comments at once and it went to the wrong one. Sorry, Disqus isn’t very mobile-friendly. -.-

            Anyways, I was getting at the fact that fetuses cannot feel pain until well after most abortions currently take place and that less late-term abortions are taking place as time goes on.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            That’s all right (and sometimes Disqus isn’t friendly in general). As to your comment–it’s certainly good from a humanitarian standpoint that fewer children are being subject to torture killings (which is essentially what a late term abortion amounts to).

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Damnit, you’re getting money from everywhere today, aren’t you?! First you receive $200 from Guttmacher and now PJ is sending you a check as well? This is absurd!

            (Sorry, if you’re not laughing–the Percocet is proving it’s efficacy to me right now ;)

            Seriously, though–the pro-life movement is concerned with a number of issues aside from just abortion. Several years ago, we exposed how figures within the abortion industry were willing to aid child sex traffickers: http://www.liveaction.org/traffick/

          • PJ4

            So your solution is to kill them?
            Good one

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            “While I don’t agree with late-term abortions, they are far and few between.”

            You only read and interpret what you want to hope I’m assuming, don’t you?

          • PJ4

            I made no mention of late term abortion
            What are you talking about???

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Sorry, I thought you were replying to what I said about late-term abortion.

          • PJ4

            No worries
            I’ve made those mistakes too

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Not feeling pain versus living a life of poverty, neglect, or abuse? I would choose the first option rather than the second, third, or forth options.

          • PJ4

            You are free to chose that for yourself not others…that includes babies in the womb The cure for poverty isn’t abortion

          • Faye Valentine

            “Not feeling pain versus living a life of poverty, neglect, or abuse? I would choose the first option rather than the second, third, or forth options.”

            You seem to have missed your calling as a suicide hotline counselor.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            If you knew anything about my past, that statement is highly offensive.

          • idahogie

            Well — you’re past birth, so they don’t care about you.

          • Faye Valentine

            OH NO, SOMEONE IS OFFENDED BY HAVING THE LOGICAL CONCLUSION OF THEIR OWN POSITION POINTED OUT TO THEM! HEAVENS, NO!

          • PJ4

            “It’s now very common to hear people say, ‘I’m rather offended by that.’ As if that gives them certain rights. It’s actually nothing more… than a whine. ‘I find that offensive.’ It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. ‘I am offended by that.’ Well, so f*&^ing what.” —Stephen Fry

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            God knows I’ve defeated your allegations multiple times. I’ll let you have one small victory.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            You guys think I’m pretentious and I think she’s a mother-woman. Your assertion may be no more true than mine until you’ve actually met me, but I have the right to make that character assessment.

            I don’t believe I’ve ever accused you of being pretentious, but I’m sorry if I did.

            I thought the pro-lifers said the Guttmacher Institute was bias. Now, all of a sudden when you need it to make up for the abortion total, it isn’t?

            They do have a pro-abortion bias, which is why I used them in my response to you. Unlike us, they have no motive to skew their numbers in pursuit of any kind of pro-life agenda.

            A pro-lifer using the Guttmacher Institute as a source…Never thought I would live to see the day that would happen.

            I suspect that you also didn’t think you would end up arguing with atheists, agnostics, immigrants and bisexual women when you came to this site, but that’s what you ended up doing. Surprises happen, after all ;)

            That gives me one free “Pass Go and Collect $200″ from a Guttmacher source, you realize?

            If that’s the case, then I think it’s only fair that you split the $200 with me. Or, at the very least, help me out if I’m ever struggling in a theology class. I doubt I’ll ever find myself in one of those but, as I said, surprises happen.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            “They do have a pro-abortion bias, which is why I used them in my response to you. Unlike us, they have no motive to skew their numbers in pursuit of any kind of pro-life agenda.”

            So you agree that pro-life websites have a motive to skew their numbers in pursuit of a pro-life agenda? Amen. Pro-choice websites may also skew numbers to a higher amount in order to support the argument that adoption isn’t a viable option for a large amount of children, so that’s why I don’t use SIGs as sources. I want to stick to the facts.

            “If that’s the case, then I think it’s only fair that you split the $200 with me. Or, at the very least, help me out if I’m ever struggling in a theology class. I doubt I’ll ever find myself in one of those but, as I said, surprises happen.”

            That’s alright. I’ll need the $200 to support my education as an agnostic at a Christian university. Surprises happen.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            So you agree that pro-life websites have a motive to skew their numbers in pursuit of a pro-life agenda? Amen.

            We have a motive, but it doesn’t mean that we act on it. Surly they speak about the concept of resisting tempting where you’re being educated. And if you’re not going to share the money, can you at least provide your Old Testament expertise should I have need of it?

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            “Surly speak about the concept of resisting tempting where you’re being educated.”

            ???
            Are you texting while you’re driving too? Now, that would be funny. Lol

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            No, I’m typing while under the influence of oxycodone. It has a tendency impair one’s powers of cognition.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Sorry, PJ4 was “texting” (well, writing electronic messages on here) while she/he was driving. :P

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Not me–I’m just in a fight against the painkillers to stay cogent. I suspect that the painkillers may be winning this particular bout.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            I know what you mean. I’ve been on a mix of Mucinex, Benedryll, Amoxacyllin (sp?), and vitamin D pills (for my depression) to get through this sinus infection/mono super bug. -.- Ironically, the Mucinex has gotten rid of the tiredness from mono, but it’s also led to insomnia.

            Good luck with your bout.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            I hope you can find respite from that. How long have you been under the weather?

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Thanks – since February 25th. I’ve been tracking the pestilence with a vengeance. :P

            And yourself?

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            That’s difficult :( You can read about my experience with the Korean medical system here if you like (it might provide some levity even though you don’t agree with all that I have to say): http://liveactionnews.org/dazed-and-confused-misunderstanding-the-pro-life-message/

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            And yourself?

            I have a couple discs in my spine that sometimes choose to be uncooperative. This is one of those times.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Yep, our grades should be out this week – I have an “A” right now since our last test and group projects and it’ll be on paper by Friday. :)

            Tried posting Dropbox links to portions of my tuition bills, yet the posts were not approved, so I have no idea if the Dropbox link I post for my semester transcript will appear or not.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Yep, our grades should be out this week – I have an “A” right now since
            our last test and group projects and it’ll be on paper by Friday. :)

            Congratulations.

          • DianaG2

            “Character assessment” has nothing to do with the article, or the thread.

        • DianaG2

          Very nice work, Adam.

          Can I please copy and paste this into my email or Word, so that I can refer back — just have it handy?

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            By all means :)

          • DianaG2

            Thanks, Adam. Very good information.

      • DianaG2

        Because what could possibly be more EMPOWERING than cheating on your husband with two separate guys, and then committing suicide? —- as Edna Pontellier did.

        And, of course, how could any woman possibly become awakened to her own sexuality unless a man guides her?

        DOH.

        Ah, yes — the pro-abort lifestyle has so much to offer.

        • Old Testament Rockstar

          “And, of course, how could any woman possibly become awakened to her own sexuality unless a man guides her?”

          Well, when a man and a woman love each other (or each other’s bodies) very much… *eye roll*

          Unless she’s taking up the art of “self-stimulation” (and if I remember correctly, she actually did at one point in the book, though it was implied) another person, man or woman, is needed in order for someone to have sex. She could’ve chosen a woman instead of a man (or both) to achieve a state of sexual awakening, but she chose a man.

    • AmyE

      I don’t understand why it’s okay for a woman to choose not to have a family or not to be defined by her family, and yet it’s not okay for a woman who chooses to be defined by her family. The feminist movement paved the way for many women in different career fields and any woman who wants to take advantage of feminism should. But any woman who doesn’t feel interested to take advantage of choices she couldn’t make a hundred years ago, shouldn’t be put down for that. She shouldn’t be called weak or jealous. Some women just want to be moms. To put them down for that would be the equivalent of putting down a single, childless, ambitious woman as cold, lonely, or a workaholic.

      • Old Testament Rockstar

        “Some women just want to be moms. To put them down for that would be the equivalent of putting down a single, childless, ambitious woman as cold, lonely, or a workaholic.”

        I don’t think that’s what IvyShoots was getting at. I think they were pointing out the fact that Cassy Fiano should not judge Amanda for her choice to not want or like children just because Cassy did not make the same choices as Amanda.

        • AmyE

          She wasn’t judging her for the choice of not wanting children. She was judging her for her choice in language.

          • Ivy Shoots

            She objected to Marcotte’s language by calling her “rabid fanaticism… femisogynist extremist… narcissistic, self-absorbed pro-abortion extremist?” Huh.

          • AmyE

            I’m not sure if your “huh” was a question as to what this means or a “huh” as to you considered this negative language and wanted my opinion. This is a blog or “opinion.” Fiano’s opinion is that Marcotte is narcissistic. Personally, I don’t see a problem with narcissism, but I have to agree with Fiano that the straight out “f you” and other cuss bombs make Marcotte seem angry and hateful. I understand what she is saying, but the anger she writes with makes it hard to sympathize with her.

      • Ivy Shoots

        She wasn’t put down for her personal life choices, but for attacking another woman who made a different choice. Some women just want to be moms? Does this sound like the language used by someone just being a mom: “rabid fanaticism… femisogynist extremist… narcissistic, self-absorbed pro-abortion extremist…?” My mom never talked like that!

        And when someone says, “In order to win this war, we have to know who we’re fighting,” that sounds like a military general, not a mom. Sounds like she’s confusing her job with her husband’s.

        I hope that helps you to understand.

        • AmyE

          So we should no longer use the term “war” for a movement? Ex: War on Poverty. War on Drugs. War on Women. War isn’t always used a military command in today’s media.
          What do you mean by “language used by someone just being a mom.” My mom follows politics and she’ll use the words “extremist,” “fascist” and “neo-Nazi.” I sometimes disagree with her use of these terms, but her choice to become a mother doesn’t mean she should zip her mouth closed of any negative words.

    • DianaG2

      <>

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      In that case, I guess Marcotte is neither fulfilled nor self-actualized, because, the article says that the first post of Marcotte’s two-part article on Raw Story —

      ” . . . shows a picture of a happy, smiling pregnant woman with the caption, This is what my version of hell looks like. “

  • KietaZou

    What an ugly-spirited, sad person you seem. Ms. Cassy Fiano. And what an awful place you present your utterly personal, and not interesting or insightful, views.

    Two grown sons, handsome and good-natured, but by no means perfect have me as their father. You are not special, and your views are those of someone who wishes others to be forced to live by your rules.

    No.

    • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

      What an ugly-spirited, sad person you seem.

      She’s calling attention to the way that the most vulnerable segment of our population is being inhumanly killed simply because their lives pose an inconvenience. Yes, she seems utterly horrible.

      And what an awful place…

      Indeed, this is an awful organization that does such terrible things as opposing the killing of babies as well as seeking justice on behalf of abuse victims and the disabled. Reprehensible.

      …you present your utterly personal, and not interesting or insightful, views.

      Her views are completely uninteresting. Why, her article has only generated 3100+ “Likes” on Facebook, so clearly no one finds her thoughts to be insightful at all. I’m sure that there’s literally ten times that many people waiting to read your words, right?

      You are not special…

      That’s true, we’re not special. The reason why we’ve been able to pass as many restrictions as we have on abortion is because plenty of others think like we do.

      …and your views are those of someone who wishes others to be forced to live by your rules.

      Yes, we wish to force child abusers to stop abusing, rapists to stop raping, wife beaters to stop beating, and abortionists to stop aborting. What we’re not willing to do is to make children die because of our views–it’s your side that has a monopoly on that.

      Yes.

      • Faye Valentine

        The scary thing is, this person has begotten 2 sons and raised them to adulthood under the pretense that killing our offspring is a perfectly acceptable course of action. I’d hardly count that as “good-natured”.

        • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

          Yes, it seems a little odd to on one hand praise your children while insisting that it would have been perfectly acceptable to have paid someone to rip them apart should the fancy have struck you.

          • Faye Valentine

            Yeah. The poor-choice attitude towards (their) children and humanity in general seems schizophrenic at best.

  • peteykins

    Wow, you really sound like a bitch.

    • Faye Valentine

      Yeah. Expecting people not to kill their offspring and stuff. What a hardass.

    • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

      Wow, you really sound like a bitch.

      Not really up to job of composing an intelligent argument, are you?

  • tatoo

    So, people who hate kids should have them? We already have lots of bad mothers, and you want more?

    • Faye Valentine

      No, but they also shouldn’t *kill* children they happen to create by having them aborted, either.

      Killing your child before they have the chance to even draw their first breath is kind of the epitome of bad parenting.

      • NathanExplosion

        Yes, killing is wrong. Killing is murder and that is bad.

        But aborting a fetus is glory!! I heart them. :)

        • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

          Wow, can you convince other abortion supporters to sound more like you? It would definitely help us out from a PR standpoint.

          • NathanExplosion

            Have you tried them BBQ style?

            Your opinion means zero until you have.

            Also, in your next response, please include the total number of children you have adopted as that is used in the Official Abortion Scorecard© tally. Gotta keep the numbers accurate! ;)

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Also, in your next response, please include the total number of children you have adopted as that is used in the Official Abortion Scorecard© tally.

            Well, many of us would like to adopt children, but unfortunately that’s something of challenge as there is currently a shortage of adoptable infants and long lines of couples waiting for them. As I’m sure you’re aware, a lot of this has to do with the fact that a good number of children are aborted (apparently for culinary reasons).

            The good news is that we’re helping to address this problem by passing laws that restrict access to abortion (thank you Texas!). The even better news is that you’re going to help us do even more :) You see, whenever moderate, nominally pro-choice people come across hardcore pro-abortion rhetoric like yours, they tend to react negatively and are less likely to be bothered when our agenda moves forward. So carry on–you can rest assured that you’re playing a small but important role in that process.

          • NathanExplosion

            I have posted this elsewhere, but this spot looks appropriate too as your comment here doesn’t address my needs…

            Hey Adam Peters, since I have a few moments, I am going to update the Official Abortion Scorecard© tally right now… and given you commitment to the cause, I am assuming that you have adopted 3 children?

            Is it 3??

            Or is it 4?!? Wow. Good for you. 4 is a good number.

            Or maybe 5?!? Holy Moly you’ve adopted 5 children!! You are surely getting into Heaven now!!!

            6?? No way… 6?!?! You have adopted 6 children!?! That is the best thing ever!!

            I only have only adopted 2 children myself. :(

            Please confirm your tally. Thanks!

          • Faye Valentine

            Wow. Do they know that their birth mother(s) could have walked them into any abortion clinic when she was pregnant with them, paid a little money and had them killed, and you would have <3'd the whole transaction? Must just make them happy as little clams to know their savior would have been just as happy (if not more so?) with their premature demise as they are tucking them in at night and kissing their boo-boos.

          • PJ4

            He claims to love to BBQ aborted babies and eat them
            Pretty gross
            Not sure he should have custody of 2 kids
            What if wants to eat them too?
            I think we should alert child care services
            He may be stuffing feeding them the BBQ’d babies

            He tops Gosnell in gruesomeness
            I bet he’s started a “free Gosnell campaign”.

          • NathanExplosion

            Jesus says it is ok.

            Why do you hate Jesus?????

          • PJ4

            Wait a second… are you talking about my friend Jesus Martinez???
            wow.. this guy gets around… Holy Shnikees! Do you play sax too?

            I’m confuse though on what you think he thinks is ok.

          • NathanExplosion

            Me too!! Jesus rules!! (literally)

          • NathanExplosion

            Ok. Good info. Thanks Faye!

          • john lind

            Did you eat them?

          • NathanExplosion

            Only of the swine variety. Use a bit of molasses. You won’t regret it!

          • john lind

            You adopted a pig?

          • NathanExplosion

            No, you eat pigs silly. That is what the BBQ is for (and don’t forget the molasses).

  • Faye Valentine

    That doesn’t negate the facts from the article I posted earlier.

    • Old Testament Rockstar

      I think I would trust what a Holocaust Museum has to say about the Holocaust then Wikipedia. Didn’t even bother clicking on the link, btw. Find a better source.

      • Faye Valentine

        So you don’t know that the article talked a lot about a book that was chalk-full of historical documents and pesky little facts about exactly how many German citizens were employed doing things like collecting the gold from fillings that were in the teeth of Jewish Holocaust victims, and moving them around on the trains to the camps?

        I didn’t realize that if I didn’t like someone’s argument, I could just choose to ignore their sources.

        • Old Testament Rockstar

          Did you not see my sources about the punishments Germans faced for going against the government or by speaking out against what was going on at the time?

          I didn’t realize that if I didn’t like someone’s argument, I could just choose to ignore their sources.

  • PJ4

    *Gasp*
    Did you just list a .org as a source????

    Hypocrite

    • Old Testament Rockstar

      Wow, that “H” word is just flying now that I’ve proven how you’re a hypocrite. I thought we established that some .org websites are reliable sources, as long as they’re not a SIG. That was a precedent set a few days ago, in fact (or maybe yesterday).

      Old news.

      • PJ4

        You’ve established nothing save for you’re own grandeur in your own mind
        So cute that you’re your biggest fan

        • Old Testament Rockstar

          Nah, you’re just mad you’ve cornered yourself into a wall you’ve created and now you can’t escape from your mess.

          • PJ4

            Nah… I just love seeing you in a tizzy

  • NathanExplosion

    Like many folks, I, too, love abortions. LOVE them. So convenient and all that.

    And they are also so yummy for my tummy! Put a little BBQ sauce on the runny bits and you are good to go!

    Abortions are for lovers. And for the hungry. And for good chefs. And for you, too!

    • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

      Well, if this is how our opponents are going to “argue,” then I would say that we have a bright future ahead of us :) Thanks for the good work, Nathan.

      • NathanExplosion

        I think you are confused as this is a foodie discussion. By the way, here is a little pro-tip for you… Sweet and Sour is a good flavor enhancer too.

        • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

          Well, you’re certainly free have whatever sort of discussion that you like, but we’re going to use your comments to illustrate how truly steadfast abortion supporters sound when they’re being honest. After all, nothing helps to mobilize support more than that. By all means, continue–every word is an asset.

          • NathanExplosion

            Please correctly attribute my comments to “NathanExplosion, baby eater and holy abortioner” — I am a bit of a snit when it comes to protecting my name and have been known to be very litigious over minor slights. :)

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Ok, I’m just crossing my fingers on this one, but you wouldn’t happen to hold an executive position with Emily’s List, NARAL, Planned Parenthood, or the DNC would you? (Please say yes! Please say yes! Please say yes!)

          • NathanExplosion

            lol… you use anonymous comments for marketing material… as only the most upstanding of folks do!!

            So is your number 4? Have you really adopted 4 babies?!?

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            lol… you use anonymous comments for marketing material… as only the most upstanding of folks do!!

            Anonymous? What are you talking about? You’re “NathanExplosion, baby eater and holy abortioner” and you’re not only giving voice to the sentiments of pro-choice America, you’re doing it well ahead of November (Definitely appreciate the early start on things, thanks)

            So is your number 4? Have you really adopted 4 babies?!?

            No, at this point I only sponsor a little girl in Thailand (my sponsor baby) and her mother (my sponsor baby mama). It would certainly be nice to adopt an American infant, but as I said, there’s a shortage of them owing to the current situation as it pertains to abortion (which I did not know involved cannibalism–seriously, that’s new one).

            By the way, you’ll certainly be among some good company–I got Tucker Max to help out a while ago, and we’ll gladly find a place for you too: http://liveactionnews.org/tucker-max-and-meghan-murphy-when-opposites-attract/

          • NathanExplosion

            How dare you call me “pro choice”. What is wrong with you??!? I am pro BBQ. Get it straight.

            And I don’t know, nor care, who this Tucker Max character is. Does he have as many adopted children as you? No?

            Oh wait… so you haven’t adopted any children?!?

            What the heck Adam.

            Over one hundred million children (conservative estimate) without parents and you can’t be bothered to adopt a single one?!?

            Very VERY disappointing. Shameful even.

            You are just a big phony.

            Adam Peters is just a big phony.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Tucker Max is a very honest fellow who says insightful things that you would probably appreciate, such as, “Due to the potent combination of my sexual recklessness and the slutty nature of some of the girls I have slept with, I have accumulated enough stories and anecdotes about abortion that they could name a Planned Parenthood clinic after me.

            http://books.google.com/books?id=deaRm0KqhhsC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q&f=false

            Oh wait… so you haven’t adopted any children?!?

            No, I’ve been tardy on that project, I’m afraid. However, I am helping to shelter a rape victim right now. Speaking of rape, did you know that Planned Parenthood, America’s largest abortion provider and the recipient of $300 million in federal funding has a history of helping rapists? It’s true. In 2007, Ohioan John Blanks Jr. was convicted of raping his teenage daughter. This resulted in her getting pregnant, but thankfully (for him), a local Planned Parenthood clinic was willing to help hush things up by performing a no-questions-asked abortion on his little girl. His daughter, however, was less than impressed with the reproductive health care services that she received and sued Planned Parenthood for failing to report the event.
            http://www.lifenews.com/2007/05/10/state-2279/

            And then there was Adam Gault. The 41 year old Connecticut man was convicted of kidnapping and raping a teenager who he also managed to impregnate. This wasn’t a problem, though, because once again Planned Parenthood was there to answer the call. Gault brought his victim in, the child was aborted, and she was returned to his waiting arms.
            http://www.lifenews.com/2007/08/02/state-2393/

            But it’s not just amateurs that Planned Parenthood staff are willing to work with. No, they’ll team up with pros, too. In 2011, Live Action obtained footage of New Jersey Planned Parenthood staffer Amy Woodruff offering to arrange involuntary abortions for underage prostitutes. The fact that these abortions were being preformed on “young girls” who “can’t speak English” and weren’t “going to know what’s going on” was apparently not a problem.
            http://liveaction.org/blog/full-footage/

            So there you have it, NathanExplosion, baby eater and holy abortioner, these are some of the things that your tax dollars are helping to pay for when they’re given to Planned Parenthood every year. I wrote about their achievements here if you would like to read more: http://liveactionnews.org/how-to-wage-a-real-war-on-women-lessons-from-the-pro-abortion-crowd/

            Thanks for giving me the opportunity to go over this information again–you’re doing a stellar job here.

          • NathanExplosion

            You apparently read past the part where I stated “And I don’t know, nor care, who this Tucker Max character is”. So I didn’t get past the first word in your above comment as it looks to be addressing some other fella. :(

            But hopefully you found a moment to address the shameful part of your life where you can’t be bothered to adopt a single child.

            Not a single adoption.

            Or, as it is noted in the Official Abortion Scorecard©:

            Adam Peters: Children Adopted 0

            *psssst: The “0” stands for the number Zero. As in, Adam Peters cares so little for babies-in-need that he has adopted zero of them.

            I am going to pray for you, but I gotta admit that this doesn’t look good.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            You apparently read past the part where I stated “And I don’t know, nor care, who this Tucker Max character is”. So I didn’t get past the first word in your above comment as it looks to be addressing some other fella. :(

            Well, the truth is that those comments weren’t really directed towards you–they were directed to anyone else who might come across this page. You see, you’re opening comments about loving abortion and cannibalism were laden with shock value (this what’s known as “a hook”). After you’ve caught their attention (better than I could of, I’ll admit), readers are going to scroll down too see what outlandish comments you’ve made and how I’ll respond. As they do, they’ll see that tax dollars are supporting an abortion conglomerate that is willing to help pimps and child abusers cover up their crimes.

            What’s especially advantageous is that you’re brand of gross-out rhetoric is likely to catch the attention of younger teens. This is important since we’re seeking to welcome youth into the movement and help build the foundation of a pro-life America. So again, keep doing what you’re doing :)

            But hopefully you found a moment to address the shameful part of your life where you can’t be bothered to adopt a single child.

            Yes, I’ll start dealing with that shame as soon as we’re done here. Now please continue.

          • NathanExplosion

            Ah, you must not have had a parent to teach you proper commenting etiquette. That sucks. If only you had been adopted. :(

            Thankfully, you are a grown man(?) now who will surely adopt several of the 100,000,000+ children that are currently in need!

            And good luck with your youth-movement!!! Although it might ring a bit hollow for these kids you are chasing to know that you only want to use them for your political ends but can’t be bothered to actually adopt and care for one. Or several. So you might want to keep that bit under wraps. ;)

            Also, chasing kids is a bit creepy. You should stop doing that.

            That said, let me know when I can update this…

            NathanExplosion: Children Adopted 2
            Adam Peters: Children Adopted 0

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            All right, I’m sorry Nathan, but that was just sub-par. You were pretty strong in the beginning, and you gave me a lot of opportunities to respond, but you started to run out of steam a little while ago. I’m afraid that I’m going to have to let you go. There are other trolls out there for me to egg on and take material from, and I’m working within a limited time frame here. I’ll pick through your stuff and see what I can use (you’re early lines about loving abortion are probably the best in terms of being attention getters).

            Thanks again for your help–I hope things go well for you.

          • NathanExplosion

            Peace out Adam!

            Have fun chasing those little children!!

            Adam “I love abortion and chasing little children” Peters… that has a nice ring to it. ;)

  • Old Testament Rockstar

    I would like to take a poll to see how many pro-lifers text and drive or who drive while they’re distracted. Now, don’t all jump at once. While more abortions take place per day than deaths or injuries due to distracted driving, it’s safe to say that pro-lifers who are alright with driving in a state of distraction care more about the quality of life for those in a uterus than for those outside of the uterus.

    • PJ4

      We need to destigmatize texting and driving
      Stop the shaming! :-)

  • NathanExplosion

    Hey Adam Peters, since I have a few moments, I am going to update the Official Abortion Scorecard© tally right now… and given your commitment to the cause, I am assuming that you have adopted at least 3 children?

    Is it 3??

    Or is it 4?!? Wow. Good for you. 4 is a good number.

    Or maybe 5?!? Holy Moly you’ve adopted 5 children!! You are surely getting into Heaven now!!!

    6?? No way… 6?!?! You have adopted 6 children!?! That is the best thing ever!!

    I only have only adopted 2 children myself. :(

    Please confirm your tally. Thanks!

    • PJ4

      We’ve adopted 3!

      • NathanExplosion

        That is a good number!! My number of 2 is a bit less. :(

        This Adam Peters is a better person than both of us tho… have you heard that he has adopted 6 children?!?

        • PJ4

          No…that’s just you putting words in his mouth

          So what if he hasn’t adopted any kids?
          It doesn’t negate any of his points

          • NathanExplosion

            No I have heard he has adopted 6 children!!! Or maybe it was 4. Either way, both are great numbers!!

            I’m sure he will get into heaven with numbers like that!

          • Faye Valentine

            What if you’re a pro-lifer who doesn’t believe in heaven? I’m an atheist. Should I still adopt children?! PLEASE, TELL ME, NATHAN!

            Also, Toki Wartooth > Nathan Explosion.

          • NathanExplosion

            I’m sorry, but Hell be thy destiny.

            Sucks to be you. :(

          • Faye Valentine

            Oh well. At least I can die happy, knowing that I didn’t kill anyone, and that I didn’t support the legality of other people killing their children, either.

          • NathanExplosion

            Awesome Faye!

            Adopt any children yet?

          • Faye Valentine

            Yep. Five, just while we were having this conversation.

            /skepticism

    • JDC

      Just a tip, if you want to address a comment to Adam Peters it may be helpful to click the reply button on one of his comments. On a thread this size, there’s no guarantee that him or anyone else will see any given comment.

      • NathanExplosion

        Don’t you diminish Adam’s ability to see everything!!

        Anyone who has adopted as many babies as he has can do anything!

        • JDC

          But if he’s really adopted so many babies wouldn’t he be too busy taking care of them to spend time reading every last comment on this thread?

          • NathanExplosion

            You are correct. Adam just broke the news to me that he can’t be bothered to adopt any kids.

            Adam Peters is just a phony.

      • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

        Thanks JDC, it always great to coach the new comers. And you can check out my latest answer below.

  • RaBo

    “It’s called having sex. You choose to have sex, you choose to open the door to having a baby, no matter what kind of birth control you’re on. Every time a person has sex, there is a possibility that they will get pregnant.”

    After having my daughter, I had a copper tipped IUD placed inside my uterus 4 years ago. I have an IUD in place because I am responsible enough to know that I cannot afford to be pregnant, let alone have a baby in my current situation. However, I enjoy having sex with my fiance (you would too if you had ANY idea how incredible it is!!). While it is extremely unlikely, there is a chance that I could develop an ectopic pregnancy. By you’re logic, (consent to sex= consent to pregnancy), I should stop having sex if I can’t afford the life-saving abortion. Or perhaps I wouldn’t “deserve” that abortion. I’t comparable to medical professionals only treat males for STDs & not women after all, consent to sex is consent to STDs.

    “No one really cares what you do with your life, Amanda, shocking as that may be.”
    That’s surprising, it seems that you people care a great deal. Enough to be utterly gobsmacked by her voicing her thoughts about how to live her life. Newsflash: not all women want to be mothers & yet they enjoy sex because sex is enjoyable and good for emotional/ psychological well-being (not that that matters to most of you). Also, women have opinions about motherhood that don’t jive with yours. If you don’t care how she lives her life, they you shouldn’t give a shit about her having sex or abortions. And would you really want her raising her children to be pro-choice? Seriously, you should be thanking her for not reproducing.

    • Faye Valentine

      “If you don’t care how she lives her life, they you shouldn’t give a shit about her having sex or abortions.”

      See…we *don’t* care, though. At least not about the sex part. We care about the “abortions” part, because every abortion is a living child that she helped to create that is being killed. That is not *her* life being taken, that is the life of her child being stolen. *That* is why we care.

      • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

        Faye, I’ve never understood why it is that abortion supporters seem to think we have some sort of objection to sex. Do you have any theories on this?

        • NathanExplosion

          Sadly, your objection to adopting children is mildly inconvenient. :(

          BTW, Jesus hasn’t gotten back to me yet on my prayers for you… but I will let you know. Fingers crossed!!

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Look, Nathan, I’m not trying to be a jerk here, but I expect you to come up with some additional comments on that other thread soon. If you don’t write some higher quality material than this, then I’m going to have to stop responding to you and move on to somebody else. I’d like to see everyone succeed here, but you need to put in the effort, ok?

          • NathanExplosion

            Hey Adam Peters, while I am aware that folks who are caring for zero adopted children have tons of free time to interwebz, please know that Jesus is busy and that you shouldn’t rush Him. Cheers!

          • PJ4

            How do you even know he believes in Jesus or heaven?

            Just because you do, doesn’t mean we’re all like that.

            BTW, don’t be surpassed if you get a visit from child services concerning your cannibalism

            Feeding bbq’d aborted babies to your adopted kids is pretty bad. It’s just as a precaution really… I mean who knows.. you could be getting ready to eat your adoptees as well… so.. we can never be too cautious. Always err on the side of life, right?

          • NathanExplosion

            Eating pulled pork is cannibalism? lol!! Good one!

            I will have to tell Jesus that one. He has a great sense of humor.

            PS, Be careful with you love of cannibalism as that might be seen as kind of weird by the proper authorities.

          • PJ4

            No dear… you claimed you BBQ aborted babies.
            I’ve gotta screen shot

          • Faye Valentine

            Maybe his family taught him some sort of f’d up religion instead of actual science, and he thinks there is some sort of species switch between conception and birth?

          • PJ4

            That would make sense.
            Haha.. he’s trying to deny that he said he BBQ’s aborted babies… thankfully I’ve gotta screen shot of it .

            He’s bout to get S.W.A.Ted

          • NathanExplosion

            Please tell them to bring some beer! (Domestic is fine, I’m not beer snob).

          • PJ4

            Will do! Would you like a chianti as well?

          • NathanExplosion

            Nope, beer is fine. :)

          • NathanExplosion

            Jesus for the win!

            I’m sorry your parents did show you the way. :(

          • NathanExplosion

            You eat BBQ aborted babies?!? What is wrong with you?!?

          • PJ4

            oh good.. now you’re pretending you can’t read.
            awesome.. might come in handy as a good defense.

          • NathanExplosion

            FYI, you shouldn’t eat aborted babies. :(

            Try Taco Bell as they have value meals that are rather inexpensive!

          • PJ4

            oooh someone’s scared.
            So glad I got that screen shot

      • Daisygirl

        The aborted “child” doesn’t have a life yet so nothing is being taken away from it. It first has to have a life before its life can be stolen from it.

        • Faye Valentine

          “The aborted “child” doesn’t have a life yet…”

          That’s weird. My college biology book says differently:

          “Each of us began life as a single cell stocked with DNA inherited from our parents.” – Biology, 8th Ed., Campbell, Reece, pg. 8

          “Began life…”-that means from that point, we were living human creatures. Learning is fun!

          • Daisygirl

            Sperm is alive and it has DNA but it is not human just because one second earlier it magically joined with an egg and morphed into a human being.

            It has to develop into one. Just because something is alive doesn’t mean it has a life. It also doesn’t mean that someone the woman’s life suddenly has no meaning and all that matters is she carries to term. I will never understand the anti choice view. A fetus> everything else> women.

          • AmyE

            Can you please explain to me the difference of being alive and having a life? Do you mean “having a life” as in a purpose to life or having a soul or something else? When you say it has to “develop into one” do you mean develop into a person and when do you consider the fetus to develop personhood? Just comparing various pro-choice viewpoints. :)

          • Daisygirl

            . By having a life I mean being able to function without living inside another human. Until that time it is just existing and developing.

            I consider a fetus to develop into person hood when it no longer needs the woman to exist and is able to stay alive if removed from her body.

          • AmyE

            So you would support abortion at any point of the pregnancy, right?

          • Daisygirl

            No I would support abortion up until the point of when the fetus no longer needs the woman’s body to live. (unless it is to save the woman’s life then I would support it at any point)

          • AmyE

            So then you do not support abortion at 22 weeks or above (the youngest premature baby) unless to save the woman’s life?

          • Daisygirl

            I would be fine with an abortion ban that late. If a woman is having trouble deciding by 5 months if she wants to be pregnant or not then she probably shouldn’t be having an abortion because she would probably regret it.

            5 months is more than enough time for a woman to decide what to do.

          • AmyE

            Okay, thank you. :)

          • Faye Valentine

            “By having a life I mean being able to function without living inside another human.”

            Okay. So your definition is completely unscientific and absolutely arbitrary.

          • Daisygirl

            Only by the anti-choice point of view.

          • Faye Valentine

            “Only by the anti-choice point of view.”

            ….aaaaaand Biology. But we all know that Biology has an anti-choice bias.

          • Daisygirl

            Funny… I remember my biology professors point of view as different than yours.

          • Faye Valentine

            No wonder you seem so ignorant of the basics. When supposed educators allow their personal opinions to infiltrate their teaching of the facts, all they do is propagate ignorance and slap the label of “knowledge” on their garbage product.

          • Daisygirl

            Actually what she said made perfect sense. I wish I could remember the way she said it but that was a few years ago. The fact is a embryo/fetus isn’t a fully developed viable human being and it is not alive in the same way you or I am.

          • Faye Valentine

            Then that was just inaccurate and she found pushing her agenda more important than actually educating you. She did you a disservice and you should ask for your money back.

          • Daisygirl

            Why would I ask for my money back when I already agreed with her point of view 100%. I don’t think a sperm and egg suddenly become a human being the second they touch. They have to grow into one and that was basically her point.

          • NathanExplosion

            I don’t think a sperm and egg suddenly become a human being the second they touch

            You monster!!!

            :)

          • Faye Valentine

            Eh. Just being ignorant of basic Biology doesn’t make someone a monster.

          • Faye Valentine

            “Why would I ask for my money back when I already agreed with her point of view 100%”

            Because we don’t pay educators to simply tell us what we want to hear. We pay them to inform us as to what is real.

            “I don’t think a sperm and egg suddenly become a human being the second they touch.”

            Well, it takes a little while for amphimixis to complete, so it’s not “sudden”, but once it has, there is indeed at least one new human being/human organism present, barring anything abnormal like gestational trophoblastic disease.

            “They have to grow into one and that was basically her point.”

            Well, put that one away with Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy.

          • Daisygirl

            What are you not getting about that I agreed with her. I don’t consider a developing clump of tissue/cells to be human. It is the woman’s body and she should be able to decide what happens to it.

            There is no other instance in life when someone can be forced into using their body against their will.

          • Faye Valentine

            “What are you not getting about that I agreed with her.”

            I get it, it’s just that you’re both wrong, is all.

            “I don’t consider a developing clump of tissue/cells to be human.”

            Your considerations are irrelevant to the facts of the matter, and if a new human organism in the embryonic/fetal stage(s) of life is merely a “clump of tissue/cells”, then so are you and so am I. And, a simple genetic test would show that we are *all* human, so you’re just plain wrong. Own your incorrectitude!

            “It is the woman’s body…”

            False. A genetic test would indicate that fact, as well. How did you pass your classes?! :/

            “…and she should be able to decide what happens to it.”

            Great. But nobody is trying to decide for a pregnant mother what happens to HER body. I am merely attempting to enact legislation to prevent a pregnant mother from having harm brought to her gestating child’s body.

            “There is no other instance in life when someone can be forced into using their body against their will.”

            False. The draft is a thing. Also, there’s this thing called “Duty To Rescue”. You should inform yourself.

            In the common law of most anglosphere countries, there is no general duty to come to the rescue of another. Generally, a person cannot be held liable for doing nothing while another person is in peril. However, such a duty may arise in two situations:

            A duty to rescue arises where a person creates a hazardous situation. If another person then falls into peril because of this hazardous situation, the creator of the hazard – who may not necessarily have been a negligent tortfeasor – has a duty to rescue the individual in peril.

            Such a duty may also arise where a “special relationship” exists. For example:

            Emergency workers (firefighters, emergency medical technicians, etc.) do not have a general duty to rescue the public within the scope of their employment. The District of Columbia Court of Appeals ruled in Warren v. DC that the police have no duty to protect any citizen not in custody, and cannot be sued for their failure to protect.

            Parents have a duty to rescue their minor children. This duty also applies to those acting in loco parentis, such as schools or babysitters.

          • Daisygirl

            We are all human. If someone cut their big toe of it would be human but it would not be a human being. There is a difference in being human and being a human being.
            You are trying to decide what happens to a pregnant woman’s body. You want to force her to stay pregnant. You want to force her to go through whatever changes the pregnancy may cause to her body and her life. So yes you are trying to decide what happens to her body.

            The draft is a thing- really please do tell me the last time it was actually used.

          • PJ4

            Wow

            You can’t be that ignorant of biology.

            I mean you just can’t!

            Ok.. maybe you can be….most pro aborts are.

            You don’t even know that babies in the first trimester have already formed 10 little fingers and toes and their brian and spinal cord have fully formed.

            This 12 year old knows more biology and has more sense than you. She is smarter than you and she is better than you in just about every way.
            You anti-lifers are a sick cold evil disgusting bunch.

            Really.. you should be ashamed of yourself for being on the wrong side of history.

            This is about the baby on which the pregnant woman would try to force death.

          • Daisygirl

            Really so when I went with my friend who had an abortion at 5 weeks and there wasn’t a heart beat yet you are going to tell me that was a human being?

            No one should force a woman to use her body against her wishes to allow a pregnancy to come to term. Pregnancy by itself is a health risk and can lead to all other kinds of problems and unless a woman wants a kid she shouldn’t have to experience that.

          • PJ4

            If there was no heart beat then she was lied to
            You know nothing about fetal development

            No one should force death on the child
            The spinal cord and circulatory system are forming at week 5
            The heart beat starts at 4 weeks

          • Daisygirl

            I was in the room with her when they did the ultrasound. True 5 weeks was an estimate. She could have been earlier than that. She does have very irregular periods. All I know is that two different ultrasound techs could not find a heart beat.

            No one should force pregnancy on a woman.

          • PJ4

            How are you sure there was even a baby then?

            No one should force death on a developing child in the womb

          • Daisygirl

            She had two positive tests at home, one at the clinic and then they made her take a blood test to conform she was pregnant since they couldn’t find a heartbeat. Everything came back showing positive.

            Abortion doesn’t force death it just stops fetal development.

          • PJ4

            Stoping development is the same as forced death

            Your sorry justification is tantamount to when a pedophile says: “I’m not doing anything wrong I’m just loving this child”

          • Daisygirl

            It is not the same at all. If it cannot survive outside the woman’s body then it does not yet have a life and should not be given the same rights as the living pregnant woman.

          • PJ4

            No matter how many times you repeat that it doesn’t make it true
            Liberal think that if you tell a lie often enough it will become the truth
            My son had a life from the moment he was conceived
            Nothing you say can negate that
            No he was not wanted
            No he was not planned
            And yes, killing him would have made my life a hell of a lot easier
            But I did not have that right

            The more science I studied the more pro life I became
            My real turning point was when I heard his beating heart at 4 weeks
            I was actually pro choice when I was “religious”… or being raised by my religious parents

            Your friend was most likely not even pregnant
            Tests can sometimes be wrong

          • Daisygirl

            You are not going to ever convince me that women are nothing more than walking baby incubators. Women have a choice if they carry to term or not. Women have the freedom to control their body.

            Maybe my friend wasn’t pregnant, but somehow I don’t think three tests and a blood test could be wrong. Plus she had lovely pregnancy symptoms happening.

          • PJ4

            Oh dear sweet Daisy… did you really think this was all about you?
            *sigh*
            More pro abort narcissism on display.

            No dear… I’m not trying to achieve the impossible…I can’t teach an old dog new tricks… (or in your case, I can’t make a true believer see the science–and ethics–in front of them… like when the church refused to believe Galileo)
            My main angle are the fence sitters. The whole point of my correspondence with you (and other hard core pro aborts) is to draw out your ignorance of basic biology and your callousness towards babies in the womb.

            When fence sitters see your tripe (vs real science) they’re not going to want to associate themselves with people as ignorant and callous as you.
            Not more than once pro aborts have inadvertently (by their callous dehumanization and mischaracterization of babies in the womb, ignorance and anti-science) helped to convert fence sitters.
            As a matter of fact, some of your pro abort cohorts helped to covert 3 of my friends who were fence sitters very recently. I am forever in the debt of the pro aborts for this.

            It took a long time to finally make slavery illegal.
            It’ll take some time to do the same with abortion.
            I thank you for your inadvertent participation.
            You are greatly appreciated.

          • Daisygirl

            I see that it is not ethical to force a woman to be pregnant when she doesn’t want to. It is HER body and she should be able to decide what happens to it.

            I don’t have callousness towards “babies” in the womb. You or any other woman can have all the babies you want. I just don’t want one for myself.

            What is going to help a fence sitter decide is when this somehow effects their life of the life of someone they know. That is what is going to convince them not some anti-choice talk about how women should have no control over their body.

          • PJ4

            You can go ahead and think what you like
            No one is forcing you to get pregnant
            No one cares what you do with your own body

            We care about the body of the child that would be killed
            Anti-lifers can talk all day long but it will never create a right to destroy babies in the womb

            My life experiences have led me to be more pro life
            But it’s people like you that help the pro life movement the best

            Please stay as ignorant as you are
            I appreciate
            The pro life movement appreciates it
            You’re one of our biggest tools

          • Daisygirl

            You can continue to think as you like. You can disagree with abortion all you want, but if I ever do end up pregnant nothing you can say or do will prevent me from making my own choice.

            You think the anti-choice movement is winning but I could go to any pro-choice website and everyone there would be in agreement that pro-choice is winning.

            Each side is always going to think they are winning. Seems to me since abortion is legal pro-choice are winning.

          • PJ4

            And you’re a useful tool
            Thank you for your selfish narcissistic ways

            You’re helping to change hearts to the pro life side with your every empty word

          • Daisygirl

            And in my point of view your cold and careless attitude about the woman with the unwanted pregnancy is helping convert people to the pro-choice side.

          • PJ4

            And when the Gosnell movie comes out it’ll convert even more people to our side I just donated to the film fund

            Pro aborts should be scared of that film

            No dear we are very loving towards women facing crisis pregnancies Several of us have taken them in to our own homes
            We adopted their babies
            We help pay their family’s bill
            We help pay their medical bills
            We help feed them
            Give them shelter
            And help college students go back to school
            What part if that is cold and callous?

            Pro aborts do nothing for women save for brain wash us into believing that we are too weak to bare children and live out our dreams too

          • Daisygirl

            Again no one supported what Gosnell did. If anything I think it will make people want to try to make abortion safe and easy accessible to women so there is no need for more people like Gosnell.

            You are not loving toward the pregnant woman. You want to force her to stay pregnant despite what it may do to their life.

            Pro-choice tell women that they don’t have to give up their dreams to have a child. They tell them it is fine to not want to be pregnant. They tell them their is nothing at all wrong with putting their health and their life first.

          • PJ4

            Nope wrong again as usual

          • PJ4

            Again no one supported what Gosnell did.

            Where to begin with this one?
            How about with the fact that the local PP knew about all the complaints about Gosnell and did nothing to help? They never bothered reporting him.

            http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/346429/planned-parenthood-pa-knew-about-gosnell-wesley-j-smith

            If anything I think it will make people want to try to make abortion safe and easy accessible to women so there is no need for more people like Gosnell.

            Gosnell happened in a post Roe era in a state with little to no abortion restrictions.
            The Grand Jury even admitted that it was “pro choice” policy that led to his clinic not being inspected for over 17 years.
            From the Grand Jury report:

            “The politics in question were not anti-abortion, but pro,” the report says. When Gov. Tom Ridge, a Republican who supported abortion rights, took office, “officials concluded that inspections would be ‘putting a barrier up to women’ seeking abortions.”

            http://www.phila.gov/districtattorney/pdfs/grandjurywomensmedical.pdf

            Read the whole thing and see what pro “choice” led to

            Gosnell had no admitting privileges at a hospital and met no standards of cleanliness.

            PP of Az is now fighting surprise inspections of abortion clinics. Every other medical facility in the state faces surprise inspection except abortion clinics. PP wants exceptions for abortion mills.

            You are not loving toward the pregnant woman.

            The women I’ve helped and counciled will tell you a very different story.

            You have no idea what we’ve done for these girls. How would you even know if I’m not?

            Are all pro aborts this vile and judgmental towards women who disagree with them?

            My husband and I have housed pregnant women, helped them place their babies up for adoption and sent them back to school. We’ve paid their medical bills.

            CPC’s raise money for families of expectant mothers to help pay bills to help pay rent.

            What have you done?

            What has PP done save for brainwashing girls into believing they have to kill their babies to live out their dreams.

            No one is forcing anyone to get pregnant. Ever.

            Do you ever tire of being wrong?

            You want to force her to stay pregnant despite what it may do to their life.

            No. The pro life movement is about chaining hearts.

            It’s not about force.

            It’s about changing laws to make criminal abortionist like Douglas Karpen (Pro aborts defend him) accountable for their crimes.

            Pro-choice tell women that they don’t have to give up their dreams to have a child.

            No. Pro aborts pit mother against child.

            Pro aborts brainwash girls into believing that if they get pregnant by accident we are so weak that we have to kill our child in order to fulfill our dreams.

            Pro life says women are strong enough to do both.

            They tell them it is fine to not want to be pregnant.

            So does the pro life movement.

            They tell them their is nothing at all wrong with putting their health and their life first.

            Can you name one pro life policy that wouldn’t make exception for the life of the mother?

            Pro aborts preach selfishness and narcissism

          • PJ4

            Seems to me since abortion is legal pro-choice are winning.

            Seems to me that you don’t even know what other pro aborts are saying.

            http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2132761,00.html

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            You are not going to ever convince me that women are nothing more than walking baby incubators.

            An incubator is an inanimate object that is incapable of thought, speech, emotion, or independent action. When did PJ argue that women possess those traits?

          • Daisygirl

            That is how anti choicers view women. They don’t want them to think for their own life and they don’t want them to make an independent choice about what to do with their body.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            That is how anti choicers view women

            Really? Then why did so many “anit-choicers” want to see Sara Palin or Michelle Bachmann run for president? Why did “anti-choicers” in South Carolina help Nikki Haley get elected as governor? Doesn’t it seem strange that these “anti-choicers” would be so intent on putting “walking baby incubators” into positions of power?

            Indeed, if you don’t want a woman to be able to to make meaningful decisions, then putting her in the White House or the governor’s mansion seems like an odd course of action, does it not?

          • Daisygirl

            Well when it is a woman who submits to the way of thinking that it is a woman’s job to pop out babies then anti-choicers are probably going to like them.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            That doesn’t address the issue–if “antichoicers” really believe that women are incapable of making important decisions, then why would they have wanted to put a woman in charge of running the country? While I may not be a US citizen, I do live in America, and from what I
            can tell the president’s duties extend seem involve more than popping
            out the occasional baby.

          • Daisygirl

            Because the anti-choicers know they have brain washed these women into their line of thinking. They know that these women will support the anti-choice agenda.

          • PJ4

            It’s the anti-lifers who are brain washed

          • Daisygirl

            Nope pro-choice people understand that a woman who is alive and living has value and she doesn’t lose all value and freedom just because she is pregnant.

          • PJ4

            You’re probably the most uninformed pro abort/anti-lifer with whom I’ve ever had the misfortune to encounter

          • Daisygirl

            You need to get out more. I have met some people who are way more pro-choice then I am and have actually called me anti-choice since I said I would support a ban on abortion ofter the point when the fetus can survive on its own-(except to save the mom’s life.)

            Its a sad day when thinking a woman’s life has more value than making babies makes her uninformed.

          • PJ4

            It’s a sad day when I realize there are others as ignorant misinformed Anti-science whiny and brainwashed as you

          • Daisygirl

            What is even sadder is that you actually believe the anti-choice way of thinking.

          • PJ4

            What’s even is that have no clue about what the pro life movement stands for You only have your bigoted misinformed views on it

            What’s even sadder than that is that you’re so brainwashed and influenced by anti-life propaganda you can’t even bother to get informed (or study biology)

          • Daisygirl

            Pro-life stands for making women carry a pregnancy to term whether she wants it or not. Pro-life does not care about the consequences that the pregnancy may have on the woman’s life they just want the “precious baby” born so they can start to whine about how the single mom is taking their hard earned money.

            I don’t need to study biology to know that an clump of cells/embryo/fetus all have to develop over time to become a viable human being. It doesn’t magically happen over night.

          • PJ4

            Thank you for proving my point: you know nothing about the pro life movement
            All you know is anti life propaganda

            Do you think it behooves you to be so ignorant?

          • Daisygirl

            I know the anti-choice movement wants to make abortion illegal which means women would either be forced to carry to term or seek out unsafe ways to end the unwanted pregnancy.

            I am actually not ignorant and the fact that an anti choicer thinks that doesn’t really bother me since I consider a lot of them to be the same way.

          • PJ4

            Of course you do you’re brainwashed
            And you keep proving it over and over
            You cannot even think for yourself

          • Daisygirl

            I do think for myself. I know that I don’t want kids and I know that if I ever was to become pregnant it would be my choice 100% because it is my body.

          • PJ4

            Thank goodness you don’t want kids
            Do the world a favor and get sterilized
            That wAy no baby will be hurt

            You people are all vile and selfish
            It’s always me me me
            I I I

          • Daisygirl

            No baby would be hurt if I had an abortion because there would be no baby. It would be done the soonest moment possible.

            I am also not vile or selfish I just don’t think I should have to risk my life and health for an unwanted pregnancy.

          • PJ4

            You’re embarrassing yourself with you’re lack of knowledge
            But I think it’s funny and entertaining to see to pro aborts so misinformed So please keep up your mythological beliefs

          • Daisygirl

            I am not embarrassing myself. I know that my life is more important then the developing the embryo. A woman should be able to put herself first.

          • PJ4

            You’re the type of person who would let someone die to save yourself

            And yes you are most definitely embarrassing yourself
            Especially with my embryology colleagues

            You’re very entertaining to them
            We’re getting a very good laugh
            So by all means keep it up

          • Daisygirl

            You can think what you want. If I give anti-choice people a laugh that is fine because you guys sure give me and my friends a laugh with how little you think of women.

            By saying let someone die to save myself you need to be more specific. I would certainly risk my life to save the life of one of my loved ones but if you are talking about other circumstances it would depend.

          • PJ4

            Sure you do.
            Only the joke is on you since we have a very high regained for both mother and child
            Of course it depends on circumstances for people of your ilk

          • Daisygirl

            You don’t care about the women. (who BTW is not a mom she she has not given birth yet) You only care about her since she has the developing fetus inside her. You don’t care at all about what the pregnancy may do to her and her life and what it may take from her.

            Yes it does depend on the circumstances because there are certain instances where I would probably do more harm then good trying to save someone and I am not going to put myself in that position.

          • PJ4

            The only thing you are good at is jumping to conclusion
            Your wild accusations only make you look like the delusional person you are
            Of course I care about women pregnant or not
            You don’t care about women or babies
            You’re cold and callous
            All pro aborts are

            I was a mother when my babies were in my womb
            I was a mother when I heard their little beating hearts
            I was a mother when I first felt them moving around
            I was a mother when I felt them hiccuping
            I was a mother when I then sucking their thumbs on the screen during the sonogram I was a mother when I saw my middle child smiling during an 18 weeks sonogram He still has that same smile
            I wish I could post the picture

            Nothing you can say will take motherhood away from women…even if they opt to kill their child
            I’d say your ignorance is astounding…but it’s what I’ve come up expect from you and people of your ilk
            You can’t even get then and than straight

            Smh

          • Daisygirl

            You do not care at all about the pregnant woman. You do not care how the pregnancy may effect her life and cause her all kinds of hardships. All you care about is convincing her to carry to term.

            I care about women. I care about them enough to know that they know their life and body enough to know what is best for them.

            Nothing you can say will convince me a woman is a mother just because she is pregnant.

          • PJ4

            I have an idea! Let’s go back an forth all day accusing each other of hating women.
            The only thing you can do is mimic my words…. which is another reason I can say you cannot think for yourself.

            Nothing you can say will convince me a woman is a mother just because she is pregnant.

            That’s ok.. nothing Galileo said could convince the Church that the earth wasn’t flat or the it wasn’t the center of the universe.
            In other words… it’s ok that you’re as backwards as the middle church…. that’s really how I prefer my pro aborts… thank you again for showing your complete lack of knowledge and your unwillingness to see the truth or science or reason.
            Good job and keep it up… you’re only helping my side.
            LOVE IT

          • Daisygirl

            Loving women does not mean you force them into an unwanted pregnancy that could have horrible consequences on their life. It means you let them make their own choice without your beliefs getting in the way.

            Again I disagree that I am helping the anti-choice side. I think what helps MY side is how women see that your side wants them to have no free will and wants to turn them into baby machines.

          • PJ4

            Again you’re wrong (of course and as usual)
            We don’t want women to be “baby machines”
            That’s a phrase the pro aborts made up to demean women who “chose” differently from them No one is forcing anyone to get pregnant
            Women have all the free will in the world to not become pregnant
            None of your whining will take that away

          • Daisygirl

            I don’t care what a women may or may not decide to do with her body. She is free to have all the kids she wants or she is free to be child free. You anti-choicers are the ones who want to take away a woman’s choice.

            Yes women do have free will to not get pregnant but things happen.
            Rape
            Birth control failure
            And I don’t think either one of those reasons is enough to punish a woman with a pregnancy.

          • PJ4

            I don’t think either one of those reasons is good enough to force the death of an innocent child
            That you feel it’s fine is a reflection on your poor morals and lack of education in fetal development

          • Daisygirl

            If you claim a woman has free will to become pregnant how does that include rape? She had NO free will in that.

            I feel it is fine because I value a living woman over a potential life.,

          • PJ4

            Again you show your ignorance and lack of understanding
            You fully demonstrate what the Scarecrow said to Dorothy:

            “Some people without brains do an awful lot of talking.”

          • Daisygirl

            I notice you didn’t answer my question about a woman who was raped and her free will of her being pregnant.

            Again it doesn’t matter to me if some anti-choicer thinks I am unintelligent. I don’t need your approval and I don’t need you to think I am smart. The people whose opinion I value know the truth.

          • PJ4

            Of course…go ahead and make yourself feel better
            That’s what liberal pro abortion is all about:
            Feeeeeelings

            And I know women have no free will in rape
            But you’re talking about 1% of the reason of why women get an abortion
            If that was the only reason, we most likely would not be having this conversation
            (I’d call it a debate but you’re not debating, you’re whining and I’m wasting my time)
            Now your even asking dumb questions

            I noticed you skirted around my question: I asked you to prove to me your claim that 99% of pro aborts believe as you do: that a baby in the womb is not really a life

          • Daisygirl

            Well I could have all my friends create accounts on here and all my pro-choice coworkers and they could tell you they agree with me.

            Also you could go over to mommishy and read some of their abortion threads.

            The developing fetus in the uterus is a potential life because until the time it is born/removed from the woman’s body anything could happen. There is no guarantee that it will develop into a fully viable human being.

          • PJ4

            I was wondering where to got your anti life propaganda from
            But a blog doesn’t prove your point
            You didn’t go to college did you?
            Or maybe you just never learned how to support your claims

            The developing fetus in the uterus is a potential life because until the time it is born/removed from the woman’s body anything could happen. There is no guarantee that it will develop into a fully viable human being.

            No matter how many times you repeat your sad cult-like myth/mantra, it’s not going to make it come true.

          • Daisygirl

            Actually I did go and still am in college.

            You could also go over to CNN and read the abortion threads there. Most pro-choice people say the same things I say.

          • PJ4

            Perhaps you should take an English course that teaches you how to support your claims (not via blogs) and that also teaches you the difference between then and than

            It’s too bad universities don’t teach people how to think anymore… now they only teach what to think.
            Unfortunately, people like you are too weak-minded to tell the difference, you’re only concerned with feeeeeeeeeelings

          • Daisygirl

            I did take two English courses. I made an A in both of them.

            I am not weak minded at all. I know that women deserve better than to be forced into pregnancy and I know a woman will always find a way to end an unwanted pregnancy even if abortion was illegal.

          • PJ4

            I did take two English courses. I made an A in both of them.

            That’s quite surprising

            I am not weak minded at all

            You’ve proven that you are.

            I know that women deserve better than to be forced into pregnancy

            Yes, we both agree that no one wants to force women to get pregnant… although Denmark is staring to offer incentives…

            I know a woman will always find a way to end an unwanted pregnancy even if abortion was illegal.

            Again… having laws against rape won’t make rape disappear either.

          • Daisygirl

            Not sure why you find it surprising. I actually do very well in school. Just because someone doesn’t share your point of view doesn’t mean they would deserve a zero on a paper.

            How exactly have I proven I am weak minded? Is it because I won’t conform to the anti-choice way of thinking that women should have no control over their body if they get pregnant?

            If a woman decides the incentives Denmark offers is worth it that is her choice. She should not be forced into it.

          • PJ4

            How are you weak minded?

            Let’s start with
            1.You have nothing original to say.
            2.You have not been able support even one of your claims
            3.You believe women are so weak that they need to kill their babies in order to fulfill their dreams.

          • Daisygirl

            Oh I know the difference between then and than just when I don’t go back and proofread what I wrote I don’t catch my mistake.

            For the reasons you gave me as to why I am weak minded I could say the first two for you. For the third you believe women are so weak they have to carry pregnancies to term because all they are good for is popping out babies.
            Another reason is you can’t handle people who disagree with your view that women aren’t baby machines.

          • PJ4

            The only thing of which you are capable is taking my argument and poorly trying to make it yours.

            I’ve supported my arguments with actual science.
            All you have are your feeeeelings.
            That’s all any pro abort ever has really…

            No.. I never said women are only good for popping out babies… another 2 things at which you excel: putting words in my mouth and straw manning

            Pro aborts have made up the term “baby making machine” in order to demean women who don’t agree with them.

            Your attempts at arguing are pathetic. You’re making your side look so bad that I want you to keep going.
            Please.

          • Daisygirl

            You argument just spews the typical anti-choice lines over and over again.

          • PJ4

            oooh… so clever of you.

            This is coming from the chick who admitted that she copies other pro aborts.

            Of course.
            Like I said.. keep it coming.

            Please.

            Side note: It’s heroic to give or save a life. It is cowardly to take a life.

          • Daisygirl

            And you are trying to tell me every single anti-choice argument you have used is 100% your own? Each side has their same arguments they use.

            It is heroic to save a life and cowardly to take one.

            But one must first have a life before a life can be taken from them.

          • PJ4

            Not 100%
            I’d say a lot though

            Again with the anti science arguments
            I think you guys should change from pro abort to anti-science

            So sad
            Please keep it coming

          • PJ4

            My personal favorite because she still does abortions to this day:

            “We – in the states – have dealt heavily, up to now, in euphemism. I think one of the reasons why the “good guys” – the people in favor of abortion rights – lost a lot of ground is that we have been unwilling to talk to women about what it means to abort a baby. We don’t ever talk about babies, we don’t ever talk about what is being decided in abortion. We never talk about responsibility. The word “choice” is the biggest euphemism. Some use the phrases “products of conception” and “contents of the uterus,” or exchange the word “pregnancy” for the word “fetus.” I think this is a mistake tactically and strategically, and I think it’s wrong… It is morally and ethically wrong to do abortions without acknowledging what it means to do them. I performed abortions, I have had an abortion and I am in favor of women having abortions when we choose to do so. But we should never disregard the fact that being pregnant means there is a baby growing inside of a woman, a baby whose life is ended. We ought not to pretend this is not happening

            —-Judith Arcana “Feminist Politics and Abortion in the US” Pro-Choice Forum (Psychology and Reproductive Choice) Sponsored by The Society for the Psychology of Women.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Well, a president has to do more than simply implement an “antichoice agenda.” She has to negotiate treaties, select cabinet appointees, nominate federal judges, and decide whether to sign or veto legislation that affects all manner of issues. How could we expect an unthinking incubator to do all of these things? The simple answer is that we couldn’t.

          • PJ4

            There no reasoning with her Adam
            She’s a predictable brainwashed shill

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            I read about North Korean escapees when I lived in Suwon, and it seems that even the most brainwashed citizens of the DPRK can change their minds when confronted with the facts. I think that principle could apply here, too :)

          • PJ4

            That’s really sweet of you to think that Daisy girl is capable of reason… but, I think you’re wrong.
            If I were a betting woman… and I could be… I’d bet an entire year’s salary that you’ll never be able to educate her. She’ll never understand.
            She doesn’t want to.
            She think Gosnell happened because abortions weren’t legal safe and rare.
            That’s what the kid of stupid with which we’re dealing

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Actually, the word “rare” was removed from the Democratic Party’s abortion platform. (I suppose that you just can’t have too much of a good thing).

            http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/15/democrats-push-envelope-on-abortion-drop-insistence-that-it-be-rare.html

          • Basset_Hound

            Or Mary Fallin of Oklahoma who had to deal with tornadoes that ravaged her state last spring. Or Susanna Martinez of New Mexico, or Nikki Haley of South Carolina.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Yes, and don’t forget Jan Brewer of Arizona. All nothing more than unintelligent incubators…who we for some reason trust to run the country.

          • PJ4

            That’s not how pro lifers view women.
            Again… you keep proving me right..
            Do you ever tire of being so wrong all the time?

          • Daisygirl

            I am not wrong. You want a woman to decide to carry the pregnancy to term. You don’t want her to consider any other option.

          • PJ4

            You’re terribly wrong
            But you seem to also suffer from the Dunning Krugger effect
            All pro aborts do

          • PJ4

            Wow you can be taught!
            Thank you for admitting it’s not about force!
            Finally
            Yes, we want women to decide for themselves against killing their offspring
            Just like we want men up decide for themselves against raping women

            There should never be any other option for either crime

          • Daisygirl

            You want to take away all her options so she doesn’t really have a choice. So she is forced to carry to term because that is her only option. Or I guess she could seek out illegal and unsafe abortions and risk her death.

          • PJ4

            And now you’re just exaggerating and lying
            But I’ve come to expect such behaviors from you
            It’s typical pro abort MO

          • Daisygirl

            OK so do you or do you not want to make abortion illegal?

            If abortion is illegal a woman’s only choice will be have the kid or have an unsafe abortion.

            You will NEVER convince every woman on this planet to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term.

          • PJ4

            Of course I want abortion to be illegal
            Just like I always want rape to be illegal
            No one will ever stop all rape either

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            No one will stop rape either.

            Apparently if we can’t stop a form of violence then we should just legalize it and move on.

          • PJ4

            Well.. that’s definitely pro abort mentality

            This applies to abortion too:

          • Faye Valentine

            ” If someone cut their big toe of it would be human but it would not be a human being. There is a difference in being human and being a human being.”

            Yeah, and you don’t seem to understand that. A human organism in the embryonic/fetal stage is A COMPLETE ORGANISM, not just a body part (like “a big toe”). What part of my body are my now-6-year-old-son-once-fetus and my now-11-year-old-daughter-once-fetus?! Do you have many body parts that sprout their own organs and walk away at random? Are you on acid?

            “You are trying to decide what happens to a pregnant woman’s body.”

            Yeah, I don’t think a pregnant mother should be allowed to use her body to kill the body of her offspring. Mother’s aren’t allowed to do that to their children AFTER they are born, and they shouldn’t be allowed to do it before, either. Same goes for men.

            “You want to force her to stay pregnant.”

            Damn, ya got me. Welp, I guess I’m off to the labor and delivery ward to go start shoving the fetuses back into their laboring mothers.

            “You want to force her to go through whatever changes the pregnancy may cause to her body and her life.”

            Sometimes, shit happens in life, and you have to deal with it. Killing an innocent party to avoid having to deal with your hardships or problems is not really a reasonable option. I did not write the playbook that stated conceiving young causes changes to our bodies. I don’t “force” that on anyone, that just comes with the territory of being a mother, whether you wanted to become a mother or not, to bad, so f-ing sad. As far as the changes to our lives, society needs to change as a whole so that becoming a mother isn’t so socially and professional catastrophic for us, but *THAT* end is what we should be fighting for, not some concocted “right” to kill our offspring in utero.

            “The draft is a thing- really please do tell me the last time it was actually used.”

            Vietnam, which actually wasn’t so long ago. I have an uncle that fought in that war. But I like how you dwell on the draft while opting to TOTALLY IGNORE everything I posted about “Duty To Rescue”, which *is* a thing, remember.

          • Daisygirl

            The developing embryo is not a fully developed human. It can’t survive it is removed from its “host”. Just like the toe can’t survive, both have to be attached to something to survive.

            YOU don’t think a woman should be able to control her body by having an abortion. The solution is simple- Don’t have an abortion.

            You are right stuff happens and the person going through it is the one who should decide the best way to handle it. It should not be decided by some anti-choicer who doesn’t even know her or her life.

            Duty to rescue is a thing but from what I just read it says in most cases a person won’t be held liable for failing to come to the aid. So it sounds as if it is a law but it doesn’t really get enforced.

      • RaBo

        My earliest memory is at age 2, most people’s are around the age of 4-6. I’m 100% certain that if my mother aborted me, I wouldn’t know, let alone care. The same would apply to if I were miscarried.

        I’ve taken cell biology & embryology classes in grad school. They made me all the more aware that an embryo/ non-viable fetus are not the same as a living, breathing baby & that anything can go tragically wrong in development that can cause miscarriage or death after birth. Suffering is not absolute, it’s relative. A woman suffering due to an unwanted pregnancy & seeking an abortion trumps someone who lacks consciousness & self-awareness to even suffer. If a woman is carrying a wanted pregnancy, but finds out the baby has anencephaly, she has & should retain the right to chose weather or not to abort to reduce her as well as her doomed baby’s suffering. Suffering can’t be eliminated, but it can be reduced & like it or not, far more suffering is reduced with safe & legal abortion than it was when abortion was illegal.

        • Faye Valentine

          “My earliest memory is at age 2, most people’s are around the age of 4-6.”

          Great. How does that matter at all?

          “I’m 100% certain that if my mother aborted me, I wouldn’t know, let alone care.”

          Also still irrelevant. Killing suicidal people is still wrong, killing people who are sleeping that would never know you did so is still wrong. Killing other innocent people, particularly one’s own child(ren) is absolutely wrong and should not be legally permitted, period.

          “The same would apply to if I were miscarried.”

          Except that if you died naturally in utero, your mother wouldn’t be responsible for your death. There’s a HUGE difference between natural death and actively killing someone.

          “I’ve taken cell biology & embryology classes in grad school. They made me all the more aware that an embryo/ non-viable fetus are not the same as a living, breathing baby & that anything can go tragically wrong in development that can cause miscarriage or death after birth.”

          Okay. So learning more about natural death made you believe that actively killing someone is more acceptable? How exactly does that work?

          Also, if you’ve taken cell biology and embryology classes in grad school, you’d know that putting the adjective “living” in front of the word “baby” doesn’t mean that human beings in the embryonic or fetal stages aren’t also “living”, even though that’s obviously what you’re trying to imply. Disingenuous, much? And I’m sure you also acknowledge that embryonic and fetal human beings also undergo respiration, even if on a basic cellular level? So the “breathing” part becomes moot as well?

          “Suffering is not absolute, it’s relative.”

          Suffering is also irrelevant when it comes to whether or not it’s okay to kill someone.

          “A woman suffering due to an unwanted pregnancy…”

          Can buck up and deal with it without killing the child contained within. I know, I’ve done it, and any suffering I have endured is absolutely nothing when compared to the entire life span my daughter now enjoys, and the same goes for any woman like me, and any child like her. End of story.

          “…& seeking an abortion trumps someone who lacks consciousness & self-awareness to even suffer.”

          False. Nobody trumps anybody else, because there’s this new thing called “equal rights” that the kids these days are oh-so fond of, and I think they’re on to something. Equal rights start with the right to live.
          Everyone should have that, regardless of their abilities (to suffer, or do anything else, for that matter, ableist).

          “If a woman is carrying a wanted pregnancy, but finds out the baby has anencephaly, she has & should retain the right to chose weather or not to abort to reduce her as well as her doomed baby’s suffering.”

          False. Not suffering is not more important than the fact that it is wrong to kill your minor child.

          “Suffering can’t be eliminated, but it can be reduced & like it or not, far more suffering is reduced with safe & legal abortion than it was when abortion was illegal.”

          Sorry. As someone who has suffered a great deal in my life, I’ll have to emphatically disagree and tell you that I’d rather suffer and live (along with all the times that I *don’t* suffer and have a wonderful life, by the way) than have someone kill me and think that they’re doing me a favor because I have suffered and might suffer again in the future. Suffering is NOTHING. I feel sorry for poor-choicers. So defeatist.

        • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

          I’m 100% certain that if my mother aborted me, I wouldn’t know, let alone care.

          Gianna Jessen’s mother attempted to abort her at seven and a half months and she survived (albeit with a life long disability). Messila Ohden’s mother tried to do the same. How do you know that you wouldn’t have lucked out the way that they did?


          http://www.liveaction.org/inhuman/melissa-ohden/

    • Coyote

      Why exactly should you be denied a life-saving abortion for an ectopic pregnancy? After all, for ectopic pregnancies, isn’t the choice generally between saving only the woman and saving no one?

  • NathanExplosion

    I need to open this up as I am getting conflicting information as I update the Official Abortion Scorecard©…

    Everyone, please note the number of children you have adopted by using the phrase “Children Adopted” and then put the number after that phrase.

    For example…

    NathanExplosion: Children Adopted 2
    Adam Peters: Children Adopted 6
    etc.

    Thanks for your help!

    • Faye Valentine

      I prefer to put my scorecard as follows:

      Faye Valentine: Children killed via abortion = Zero.

      And the 11 year old I now have is pretty happy about that, too. Especially since I was poor, homeless, and with her abusive paternal genetic donor who wanted to abort her when I became pregnant with her.

      She also appreciates the fact that I know it wasn’t right that I would have had the legal “right” to have killed her back then had I so chosen.

      • NathanExplosion

        Faye hasn’t murdered any children!!!! Awesome!!

        Me neither high-five!!

        Now, so we can correctly update your entry in the Official Abortion Scorecard©, please reply with the number of children you have adopted, in this format:

        Faye Valentine: Children Adopted X

        Where “X” is the number of beautiful children you have adopted and brought into your home. I’m guessing you are a 3? As 3 adopted children is such a godly number!!

        • Faye Valentine

          Sure. Why not. Not that how many children we have adopted has anything to do with opposing the killing of children in utero via abortion.

          • NathanExplosion

            Just trying to clarify… so you have adopted how many children?

  • JaneE

    I expect that the tone and language Amanda chose was a reaction to people telling her how she was supposed to feel about sex, babies, abortion, contraception and all the other aspects of sexuality that some people believe they have a right to control for every woman in the country.

    But you don’t have the possibility of getting pregnant every time you have sex. Unless you are statistically abnormal, either in the number of times you ovulate each month or the frequency with which you have sex.

  • pokeyblow

    So you delete comments which disagree with your logic?

    Pathetic.

  • idahogie

    As soon as you all put half as much energy into advocating for research into preventing spontaneous abortions (which kills many more children than does abortion) then I will believe that you want something more than to control women.

    Until then, you are hypocrites.

    • NathanExplosion

      No, you got it all wrong!!!

      They don’t adopt any of the 100,000,000 children who are in need because that will take away from their playtime on the interwebz!! And that is super important.

      • idahogie

        You’re right. BTW — I need to update your scorecard.

        I have a godly-righteous 3 adopted kids.

        • Faye Valentine

          Poor kids. I’m sorry they have to know that you would have supported their birth parents had they exercised their “right” to have any of them killed in utero. I’m sorry they have to know that their lives are worth the flip of a coin to the people who supposedly care for them.

          • idahogie

            That takes the cake as the stupidest thing written on this thread. Possibly in almost every thread, ever.

            Logic is not your strong suit. But emotion sure is.

          • Faye Valentine

            Insults are a poor substitute for actually addressing what is said.

          • idahogie

            OK. Try to think a bit.

            Tens of thousands of kids were aborted when I went to adopt. I ended up with the kids that I love BECAUSE OF ABORTION.

            When you try to be condescending while making a completely asinine comment, it sort of backfires. Try to do better.

          • Faye Valentine

            “Tens of thousands of kids were aborted when I went to adopt. I ended up with the kids that I love BECAUSE OF ABORTION.”

            But their lives could have ended in the coin toss of whether or not to have them “choiced” to death, and you never would have known any differently and given their mother(s) asspats and “atta girl!”s for exercising “reproductive rights”. Lol, logic.

          • idahogie

            Exactly. I never would have known any different. Just like I don’t know what kids I would have right now if the troglodytes had continued keeping abortion illegal. Your point is missing. Move on.

          • Faye Valentine

            Wow. You actually made my point for me. Pretty chilling, actually, the way you obviously feel like any child’s life is interchangeable and you can take them or leave them, kill them or keep them, and it doesn’t really matter, because you’ll just pick up the next one that comes along.

            It never ceases to disgust me, the cheapness human life has to those people who cheer on taking it in utero.

          • idahogie

            I love my kids. I would have loved any kids I adopted. That’s the way it works. Are you that cold-hearted that you don’t understand that much?

            Am I to believe that you would love your kids less or more depending upon how they turned out? You are a monster.

          • Faye Valentine

            “Am I to believe that you would love your kids less or more depending upon how they turned out? You are a monster.”

            No. As a matter of fact, I loved them so much by default before I had even met them, that I believed they should have had the right to live in utero no matter how they might turn out, and didn’t feel that just because our circumstances were shitty at any given time, that was an excuse to have them killed and get a “do-over” with a different child at a better time.

          • idahogie

            And I love mine equally. Shame on you for projecting your hatred.

          • Faye Valentine

            “As a matter of fact, I loved them so much by default before I had even met them, that I believed they should have had the right to live in utero no matter how they might turn out…”

            “And I love mine equally.”

            Really?

            So you’re Pro-Life now? Great! :D

          • idahogie

            Please don’t continue being an ignoramus. And you can apologize for being a hatemonger any time.

            Who in their right mind would question the love a parent has for their kids?

            Only a monster like you.

          • Faye Valentine

            “Who in their right mind would question the love a parent has for their kids?”

            Anyone who can see how absolutely idiotic it is to cry about how much you love your children while talking about how their mother(s) should have had a right to kill them when they were a certain age out the other side of your mouth. THAT is what is monstrous here.

          • idahogie

            You truly are too stupid for words.

            I could love ice cream with a passion that exceeds all known desires. And yet still allow others not to like it. I wouldn’t force my views upon you. But you want to force yours on others. Loving something greatly does not translate into a demand that everyone else love it too.

            Then again, you’re a monster.

          • Faye Valentine

            “I could love ice cream with a passion that exceeds all known desires.”

            Sure you could. But we’re not talking about ice cream. We are talking about the lives of children. See why your words about how much you love your children ring kinda hollow? You compare them to something nice but non-essential and rather inconsequential, like ice cream?

            “And yet still allow others not to like it.”

            Okay. And I can do the same, and do so comfortably, because letting people dislike ice cream isn’t killing anyone, especially not children, and especially not *my* children.

            “I wouldn’t force my views upon you.”

            Yep. And that’s great. Unless the views we’re talking about are “Hey, it’s wrong to let people kill their children.”

            “But you want to force yours on others.”

            Yeah. Because that view is “Hey, it shouldn’t be legal for you to have your children killed.”-if this really were just a discussion of no more consequence than someone not being fond of ice cream, I really wouldn’t give two shits. But I think *everyone’s* children-not just mine and not just yours-deserve more consideration when someone is contemplating killing them than any given party’s fondness for ice cream.

            “Loving something greatly does not translate into a demand that everyone else love it too.”

            First of all, we are talking about SOMEONE, not “something”, so it’s good to know how you feel about your fond objects-whups!-I meant children! Silly me.

            Secondly, I don’t care if people love children. People don’t have to love children. They can fully decide that the children scene is not for them and move on and I seriously could not care less. What they *CANNOT* do, however, is decide that kids aren’t really their bag AND THEN KILL THE F-ING CHILDREN THEY JUST CREATED. The lives of children deserve more protection than a shrug of the shoulders and “Meh. To each their own.”

            If you really do have children, I feel very sorry for them.

          • idahogie

            “What they *CANNOT* do, however, is decide that kids aren’t really their bag AND THEN KILL THE F-ING CHILDREN THEY JUST CREATED.”

            Of course they can. What world do you live in?

            “Anyone who can see how absolutely idiotic it is to cry about how much you love your children …”

            I didn’t “cry” about how much I love my kids. I just said that I did, after you LIED.

            I wonder if you have any personal integrity at all.

          • Faye Valentine

            “Of course they can. What world do you live in?”

            One that’s going to see abortion become illegal again in my lifetime. And if not mine, than my daughter’s, for certain. She’s even more adamant about this subject than I am, since she was “an unwanted child” conceived in a “crisis pregnancy” situation who has the audacity to think that the fact people were mulling over whether or not she should have been killed legally was unjust.

            “I didn’t ‘cry’ about how much I love my kids. I just said that I did, after you LIED.”

            Umm…what did I lie about? Also, you say you love your kids, but everything else you say kinda belies that.

          • PJ4

            Faye.. you’ve already shown this one way too much patience.
            I’ve been reading the exchanges between the two of you.

            All she does is emote when faced with your calm cool logic.
            She has nothing else to offer.
            You’re upsetting her with science.
            She believes that embryology is mythology.
            There’s no reasoning with someone as ignorant as Idaidiot Idahogie.

            The only thing she is capable of doing is name calling and emoting…. you know… typical liberal pro abort….
            This one is so ordinary and predictable I lost interest with her a few days ago… of course they all get boring in the end…

            I take that back… this particular one has taken irrationality to a higher level.
            Good job on making her implode.

          • idahogie

            Faye says this: “What they *CANNOT* do, however, is decide that kids aren’t really their bag AND THEN KILL THE F-ING CHILDREN THEY JUST CREATED.”

            … and PJ4 thinks I’m the one that’s imploding! Just goes to show you what people like PJ4 can see when they are just emoting rather than thinking.

            1. I’m doing fine. And I’m calm as can be.
            2. Interesting that you assign a sex to me. Perhaps you should think deeply about why that is. Perhaps you think of women as the weaker sex.

          • PJ4

            Your emoting and name calling is just pathetic and shameful

            And now you’re offended that I think you’re a women?
            Thank you for showing us your contempt for womankind

            You’re really just a waste of time dear
            You’ve yet to present any valid arguments

            But go ahead with your tantrums and name calling
            That’s all pro aborts can do

          • idahogie

            Where did I say I was offended? I said that it was interesting that you did that. Where did you see any offense taken?

            You are quite the emotional person, aren’t you?

          • PJ4

            If you cannot see the misogyny in your own writing, that’s not my problem.

            Emotional?
            You mean like calling someone who disagrees with you a monster or a moron?
            You mean like showing fake outrage at science the way you do?
            No.. I don’t think so.
            Good counter argument though.

            Ok
            Off to the store!

          • idahogie

            PJ4 displaying zero integrity. FIrst, he/she says that I’m “imploding” based on nothing. In fact, the person I was commenting with was displaying evidence of that, but PJ4 ignored that to focus on his/her irrational, unbased desire to claim I was “emotional.”

            Next, he/she called me a woman. I said that was interesting. So he/she then said I was offended, and that it indicated that I have contempt for womankind. (PJ4 still doesn’t know what sex I am.)

            Now he/she’s claiming that I’m misogynistic.

            WIll PJ4 ever tire of making up stupid things to attack me with? WIll PJ4 ever take personal responsibility for being wrong?

            I guess “no.”

          • PJ4

            Will you ever stop emoting?
            Will you ever have a real argument?
            Will you ever stop the pro abort propaganda slogans and lies?

            I guess… “no”.
            Look really close in the mirror (if you can stand it) before accusing others of not having integrity. You’ve displayed nothing but emotional tripe.
            Stop wasting my time.

          • idahogie

            Just as I thought. PJ4 is demonstrably wrong on at least 3 things, but when they are pointed out, he/she just responds with emotions and a plea to leave him/her alone.

            My pleasure. I don’t like morons.

          • PJ4

            I love that you sound like antagonist in Silence of the Lambs (not Hannibal) Lol

            If you’re not going to present an actual argument you can stop wasting my time We’re all tiring of your emotional tripe

          • PJ4

            Just as I thought

            You can’t even name anything on which I’m supposed to be “demonstrably” wrong

            When anyone points out your fallacies and emotional outbursts you get defensive.

            I don’t like morons.
            I’m sorry you don’t like yourself. Must be hard for you to be something you hate.
            Maybe that’s why you’re so full of hate.

            It’s also pretty creepy that you address me in the third person.
            You’re making my skin crawl.
            Eeeew.

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            So he/she then said I was offended, and that it indicated that I have contempt for womankind. (PJ4 still doesn’t know what sex I am.)

            I can verify that PJ is indeed a “she” and a damn fine one at that. Seriously, she looks like some fantasy out of Arabian Nights. Also, she wouldn’t care if you’re a he or a she–PJ plays on both teams, if you know what I mean ;)

          • Faye Valentine

            I’m cool as a cucumber, myself. It’s hard to relay inflection over the interwebs via text, so caps help me do that.

            You still haven’t actually addressed anything I’ve said. You know, deep-down, that your words have given you away and show a very shallow notion of “love” towards the children you profess to care about who could have been aborted and you wouldn’t care, or would have even supported such a decision.

            “Perhaps you think of women as the weaker sex.”

            Do you think you’re being weak? Do you think you’re acting weak? Your statement says more about *you* than it does about PJ4.

          • PJ4

            The alleged children she claims to have
            Pro aborts aren’t really known for their trustworthyness

          • OutWest Landowner

            Oh, they are adopted. It is biologically impossible for him and his ‘wife’ to have children. The poor guy suffers from the Dunning-Kruger effect.

          • PJ4

            Hahaha!!!
            I think most pro aborts suffer from that “disorder”
            I’m a bit miffed that I didn’t think of that first
            Damn!

          • http://liveactionnews.org/author/adam-peters/ Adam Peters

            Charges added in alleged abduction.

            Faye is a rape survivor and a single mother who takes the time to speak out against killing children for convenience. So yes, clearly this makes her a monster of the worst sort.

          • NathanExplosion

            The best part of this discussion is where you talk about your love of children so much that you decided to adopt a few of the 100,000,000+ children that would love to call you their mom.

            I shed a tear. :)

          • PJ4

            You’re wasting your logic and intelligence on this one.
            She’s not capable of rational thought
            All she can do is emote.

          • idahogie

            Further, nobody has touched NathanExplosion’s point. Unless you are adopting some of the thousands of kids that are in foster care in this country — your advocacy of forcing women to give birth is cowardly.

            Put up or shut up.

          • NathanExplosion

            This is a worldwide issue, methinks (esp. given how one can adopt from most parts of the world). As such, using the 100,000,000+ number is appropriate. Although it, predictably, still doesn’t move the needle with hypocrites.

        • NathanExplosion

          Added!

          Thanks idahogie!

  • Faye Valentine

    “I don’t feel like enough is being done to help children who are in abusive, neglectful, or impoverished situations.”

    You’re right. We should really try to kill more of them.

    See, because *that* is what is happening. Not some sanitized version of reality that exists only in your head where abortion is like a Mr. Clean Magic Eraser and “One minute, a growing child/offspring is inside his/her mother, then *PRESTO!*, just wipe the eraser over it, and they’ve never existed!”-they’re not being caused to exist by not aborting them. They ALREADY EXIST, and abortion is KILLING them. When their mothers are pregnant, they’ve ALREADY BEEN ADDED to the full number of children, and abortion doesn’t prevent them from being added to the number of abused children: IT IS THE ACT OF ABUSING THEM TO DEATH. There is nothing better or more acceptable about your death had you been killed at your mother’s behest in utero than had you been successful in ending your own life through suicide. As a matter of fact, quite the opposite, as far as I’m concerned, since your suicide would have been your own choice about your own life, and not a death unjustly forced upon you by someone else. Both, however, would be wrong.

    I’ve been through my fair share of crappy life situations (being raped nearly every day by my now-ex-spouse is the first one that comes to mind), but killing/death is not the solution to anyone’s problem(s). I’m certain there are other people who have it and have had it FAAAAR worse than I, but I would never look down at them and judge their misery as “too bad to live” and say they should have been killed long before their circumstances were able to become so poor.

    Hopelessness shouldn’t be a way of life. If it is for you, I feel very sorry for you.

  • Joy

    san-ban…I’m going to ignore all the gibberish you just spewed here & comment on the first thing you said…”It’s pretty chilling, all of you people advocating radical surgery for a
    stranger on the internet who dared to suggest a person with a uterus
    can live her life without allowing a fetus to occupy her uterus and use
    her body for sustenance”…Radical surgery??? What do you think abortion is??? Grow a brain idiot!

  • PJ4

    bwahahahahahahahahahaaha

  • Old Testament Rockstar

    It’s actually pretty damn good and I have had many teachers and professors (with PhDs relative to Economics, Philosophy, English, Political Science, and History) tell me I’m a great academic writer. My English professor and high school teachers have said my poetry is great, too.
    Let’s see some of your poetry. :P What makes you the captain of creative writing and literature?

    Wow, you can generate memes. That’s so clever. *yawns* If you had half as many of the credentials or experiences as I have had, you would probably have a bit more happiness in your life.

    • PJ4

      Oh sweetie
      Does listing all your supposed “achievements” make you feel better about yourself? You just sound like you’re over compensating for something
      You sound so desperate to prove yourself to a bunch of strangers on the internet I’m starting to feel sorry for you
      Well no…not really

      • Old Testament Rockstar

        It just goes to show what you can do without having kids. :P

        When I was 8, I started blogging, and learning how to code in HTML, PHP, and CSS so I could use that knowledge for WordPress. I wish iPhone app development was around at that time (they now have apps that teach kids how to develop and program apps – it’s amazing). Started a few websites to develop my coding experience, and by the time I was 9, I started an online nationwide sitter referral service that hit 5,000 users when I was 14. I also started an adolescent peer mentoring community when I was 13 and it ended up serving about 2,000 users with a team of 20 peer mentors. I had to shut the sitter referral service and the adolescent peer mentoring community down when I was 15 because they were too much to handle with my AP classes.

        In college, I started a sublet/subleaser matching service with a few friends for the colleges in my area (still operating) and I just started a textbook delivery business last summer that’s doing extremely well ($20,000 in sales revenue in the first two weeks of our first textbook season – paid nothing for advertising). I’m hoping to use the profits from the textbook biz to start the sitter referral service again but on a social networking platform and then I want to start the peer mentoring community again.

        Granted I was a bit too young to have kids when all of my current achievements happened, imagine if I had kids and tried to do all of that at a later age with kids. Wouldn’t work. That’s not being selfish. That’s just common sense. I love kids, but I also like helping the community as well (all of my businesses had or have a philanthropic edge to them) and I want to focus on doing that for awhile. Thanks to mono and my sinus infection and spring break, this is the first actual break from work and school I’ve had in a looooooong time.

        • PJ4

          No dear.. it just shows that you’re insecure and others have done better than you with kids.

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Enlighten me. What achievements have you made with kids? And potty training them doesn’t count. I’ve helped potty train a few kids, and while the terrible twos stage is quite lovely, I didn’t have to be a mom to help those kids achieve a state of sans diapers.

          • PJ4

            Tell you about my achievements with them?

            Why so you can disparage me again and tell me I’m using my kids as tools?
            No thanks.

    • Faye Valentine

      “What makes you the captain of creative writing and literature?”

      I never claimed I was, unlike you.

      “If you had half as many of the credentials or experiences as I have had, you would probably have a bit more happiness in your life.”

      Yes, someone who has to toot their own horn as much as you do seems just brimming with happiness. XD

  • Terri Horn

    I just read today that it is illegal to kill the egg of an eagle. You are facing jail time and HUGE fines. Even though it is not born yet it is still called a baby eagle. Talk about a double standard unborn babies are not yet human and can be killed but unborn endangered species are protected and if you kill one even accidentally you can go to jail. Anymore people care more about animals than humans and that is what abortion is teaching. I have heard some states (their policians) have tried to make laws where a child is not considered their own person until two so if they die it will be oh well.. What is the country coming too????

    • DianaG2

      Wow! That is very, very troubling.

    • idahogie

      Rarely do you see such irrational nonsense packed so densely.

      1. Eagles are endangered, and are a national symbol. It is appropriate to protect their habitat and their eggs. Humans, on the other hand, are very prolific. There is no danger of our extinction, except through ignoring climate change or disease. Comparing the two is asinine. You need to study up on “double standard” before using the term again. It means when I make one rule for you, and a different rule for me FOR THE SAME SITUATION.

      2. Abortion isn’t “teaching” anything. At least not in the same way that anti-abortion nuts and Westboro Baptist Church members are. They are teaching people to be wary of fundamentalists of all stripes.

      3. Your bogus information about what “some states (their politicians)” are doing indicates that your source of news is biased and lying to you. Please educate yourself. You’ll be a better person for it.

      4. “What is the country coming too [sic] ????” I don’t no. Yew tell me.

      • DianaG2

        1. The point was, unborn human babies are a member of OUR OWN species —- unless there are some primates reading this thread?

        (Which maybe doesn’t surprise me, but most primates would probably not be caught dead interacting with the pro-abort trolls here.)

        2. Abortion teaches everybody that it’s okay to kill members of one’s own species, (see item 1), especially the weakest and most vulnerable. That’s why it has no place in a civilized society, which we actually try to pretend to be once in a while.

        3. She said that was what she heard. There’s no way to refute her own personal memory. But, it’s nice to know you are a blowhard.

        4. We all make mistakes. There’s no need to pretend a typo has anything to do with abortion. Pro-aborts make typographical errors, also.

        Also, not very classy.

        5. Where is the “straw man” argument you refer to? Point it out.

        • idahogie

          There are nothing but primates reading this.

          And I already pointed the straw man out: “I don’t know any pro-choice person who says that a fetus or embryo is not human.”

          • DianaG2

            Well, aren’t YOU reading it?

          • idahogie

            I don’t insult people until they deserved it. Apparently, that’s not your rule.

            You are a primate, too. Or don’t you know any science?

          • Old Testament Rockstar

            Lol

          • DianaG2

            My bad. I forgot to say “non-human primate.”

          • PJ4

            D, idahogie is not capable of logical thought or reasoning
            I wouldn’t bother with her if I were you
            She has yet to even present a valid argument
            But she’s good at emoting and projecting

          • DianaG2

            Oh, boy. Thanks, PJ.

            Why am I not surprised?? Sigh.

          • PJ4

            All you need to do is read her anti life anti science rants
            She thinks embryology is mythology

          • DianaG2

            Really?

            Where does she write? A blog?

          • PJ4

            Just the stuff on here
            It’s pure tripe

          • DianaG2

            Oh, gotcha.

            Yes, it’s sad, really :-(

          • OutWest Landowner

            This is idahogie: https://www.facebook.com/idahogie?fref=ts
            He is the local ACLU director that uses out-of-state funding to change laws that don’t follow his warped views.

          • OutWest Landowner

            Isn’t it great to see how many of idahogie’s comments have been deleted.

          • Faye Valentine

            I’m a little sad about that, actually, since his comments cast a very poor light upon him. Does he actually have kids? Do they know he compares them to ice cream? What if he has to go on a diet?!

          • Basset_Hound

            And name calling….

          • OutWest Landowner

            Idahogie is D an Henry. Find him on FB. He is the local ACLU director that uses out-of-state funding to change state laws. Another example of the product of extreme liberal colleges (Berkley) brainwashing kids. Give him your love.

          • PJ4

            That’s really really hard to believe
            How can the ACLU employ someone who can’t even form a coherent sentence let alone a proper argument? I can’t imagine idahogie even interning there much less being the director It doesn’t make sense
            Do they always hire such incompetence?

            I’m not on FB btw

          • OutWest Landowner

            It’s a part time job. The ACLU and the far-left agenda has weak support in this red state. He works for a government contractor. He moved to Idaho to push his LGBT agenda.

          • PJ4