Say Anything Blog

Tens of thousands of good people would be willing to addopt that child.

She’s dirt.

dd: So, every child born is the mother’s sole responsibility, then.  Fathers have no rights, just obligations.

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

The father has no rights, just obligations and the people have no right to balance the rights thru the political process.

Irrational and unjust.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

If you have no say in whether or not your child is born, the rest is just BS.

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

That makes me sick.

This whole thing is insane. How can this not be murder? How is afull term baby not a human being. and...maybe someone can answer this...aren’t there laws in some states where the mother can be prosecuted for endangering a fetus if she uses drugs or serious alcohol while she’s pregnant? If someone could be prosecuted for that, then how is this not murder?

Election ‘08 - We Are So Screwed

What do you have to do to get committed to a mental hospital these days? I would have thought shooting yourself in the belly to kill an unborn child would easily be enough.

Should have used a bigger gun.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

I don’t understand why y’all don’t get it.  The phrase “woman’s right to choose” must be taken literally, because that’s what it means.  She gets to choose the definition and status of whatever-it-is that’s growing within her womb--and she gets to make that choice on an arbitrary and frequent basis…

If she chooses to carry it to term and does so, it was and is a baby…

If she chooses to have an abortion and does so, it was just a mass of cells (no matter how fully developed)…

If she chooses to carry it to term for part of its gestation period then changes her mind and has an abortion, it was a baby while she ‘wanted’ it and became just a mass of cells when she decided to abort it instead…

This phenomenon sets up a very unique situation.  The woman has the singular, total and irrevocable right to determine the status of the unborn whatever-it-is to the exclusion of anyone else.

At any point in the gestation she can choose to classify it as a baby or just a mass of cells.  She can decide to keep it or void it from her body with no responsibility or penalty in either case.  She can do this right up until the time the whatever-it-is is 4/5’s of the way out of her womb in what will be called “birth” if she chooses to keep it as a baby or “partial birth abortion” if she chooses to void whatever-it-is from her body.  Therefore:

If she shoots herself in the belly then tells the judge she wanted to keep the baby, at that point she could be charged with a felony…

If you shoot her in the belly, whether you are a criminal is determined by her definition of the status of the whetever-it-is.  If she says it’s a baby, you’re screwed.  But if she says it’s just a mass of cells she was gonna get rid of anyway you’re home free because you were just helping her to abort it…

Male sperm donors (they aren’t “fathers” unless and until the female decides she has a “baby” inside her) have no rights relative to determining the status of whatever-it-is.  No rights--none, period.  If the woman decides it’s a baby, then you become the “father” with definite responsibilities and some rights (which vary from state to state).  If she decides to abort the mass of cells, you have no rights because there’s nothing over which TO have rights.  Baby?  What baby?  There’s no baby here…

Finally, it’s true that post-delivery a woman can be charged with having abused the baby thru the use of drugs/alcohol/etc during her pregnancy.  But that is only after delivery.  The act of delivery was the woman’s way of deciding that the whatever-it-was was a baby.  Hence she has retrospective responsibilites for it’s care and good health.  Had she opted instead for a partial birth abortion it wouldn’t matter how irresponsibly she had acted in terms of drug/alcohol use.

In other words boys and girls, “right to choose” means exactly that--absolute right.  See how simple that is?

And don’t you forget it.

Regards…

In other words boys and girls, “right to choose” means exactly that--absolute right.  See how simple that is?

I understand that the courts have ruled that women have an absolute right to choose whether or not their unborn children are actual babies or just meaningless clumps of cells, but that’s only good in the abstract.

In the real world an unborn child, on its due date, is not a clump of cells simply because the mother doesn’t want it...and no tortured interpretation of abortion rights in the constitution is going to change that.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

In the real world an unborn child, on its due date, is not a clump of cells simply because the mother doesn’t want it...and no tortured interpretation of abortion rights in the constitution is going to change that.

Which simply points out the absurdity of the entire issue.  I am constantly amazed by any Right to Choose Advocate’s attempt to keep a straight face while trying to rationalize how the “abortion” dichotomies make sense.  The advocates can’t because the dichotomies don’t.  The longer I let them talk, the more convoluted and tortured their logic becomes.  How pathetic.

Regards…

And what’s the difference between an unborn baby in the womb on its due date and a baby that has been born?

Murdering a child inside the womb or outside the womb is still murder either way you look at it!