Obama's Abortion Extremism

[AFbombloader]

Sen. Barack Obama's views on life issues ranging from abortion to embryonic stem cell research mark him as not merely a pro-choice politician, but rather as the most extreme pro-abortion candidate to have ever run on a major party ticket.

Barack Obama is the most extreme pro-abortion candidate ever to seek the office of President of the United States. He is the most extreme pro-abortion member of the United States Senate. Indeed, he is the most extreme pro-abortion legislator ever to serve in either house of the United States Congress.

Yet there are Catholics and Evangelicals-even self-identified pro-life Catholics and Evangelicals - who aggressively promote Obama's candidacy and even declare him the preferred candidate from the pro-life point of view.

http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/viewarticle.php?selectedarticle=2008.10.14_George_ Robert_Obama%27s%20Abortion%20Extremism_.xml

This is a bit long, but it is worth the read. All I have to say is WOW!

AF:salute:

[theHawk]

Unfortunately there are many Christians who turn a blind eye to abortion in this country.

Obama is the most extreme pro-abortionist politician in history. To block the Born Alive Infant Protection Act several times, and to vote against it, is the single most extreme position a US politician has ever exhibited on the issue. But since he simply says at a debate, "I am not pro-abortion", all is forgiven. Because he is a good liar, the media gives him a pass. All because he said it "cool and calm", despite the fact that his voting record clearly contradicts his claim that he isn't pro-abortion.

[Abbey Marie]

It is hard to fathom. I guess the selfish nature of people wins in the end. Why worry about killing the unborn when I can get a Dem in the White House, and maybe even get a larger share of the Socialist pie?

[April15]

Abortion! Who's choice is it to cleanse the womb? Who's standard of life is to be used in the decision? This really is a personal matter for the female and her maker to wrangle with. Who would be perfect enough to make the right choice? At best it is a crap shoot. At worst it is a quality of life issue for the unborn fetus.
I am not GOD to make the choice for any human, are you?

[avatar4321]

Abortion! Who's choice is it to cleanse the womb? Who's standard of life is to be used in the decision? This really is a personal matter for the female and her maker to wrangle with. Who would be perfect enough to make the right choice? At best it is a crap shoot. At worst it is a quality of life issue for the unborn fetus.
I am not GOD to make the choice for any human, are you?

Why do you people always ignore the fact that they made their choice before they got pregnant?

Its like the guys that kill their parents and then want you to feel sorry for them because their parents are dead.

Stop making excuses. Life is hard sometimes. For everyone. Everyone makes choices that have bad consequences. You dont get to escape the consequences simply because you dont like them. Grow frickin' up

[April15]

Why do you people always ignore the fact that they made their choice before they got pregnant?

Its like the guys that kill their parents and then want you to feel sorry for them because their parents are dead.

Stop making excuses. Life is hard sometimes. For everyone. Everyone makes choices that have bad consequences. You dont get to escape the consequences simply because you dont like them. Grow frickin' upI am terribly sorry for you that being able to terminate pregnancy is such an abhorrent deed in your belief.

[Kathianne]

I am terribly sorry for you that being able to terminate pregnancy is such an abhorrent deed in your belief.

And I'm sorry that you think it's nothing.

[avatar4321]

I am terribly sorry for you that being able to terminate pregnancy is such an abhorrent deed in your belief.

Im sorry you dont think killing children is bad. But feeling sorry for each other really doesnt make my points any less valid. I know you really dont have a response and that's why you are deflecting. But seriously, can you atleast try? Is it really that tough?

[bullypulpit]

Sen. Barack Obama's views on life issues ranging from abortion to embryonic stem cell research mark him as not merely a pro-choice politician, but rather as the most extreme pro-abortion candidate to have ever run on a major party ticket.

Barack Obama is the most extreme pro-abortion candidate ever to seek the office of President of the United States. He is the most extreme pro-abortion member of the United States Senate. Indeed, he is the most extreme pro-abortion legislator ever to serve in either house of the United States Congress.

Yet there are Catholics and Evangelicals-even self-identified pro-life Catholics and Evangelicals - who aggressively promote Obama's candidacy and even declare him the preferred candidate from the pro-life point of view.

http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/viewarticle.php?selectedarticle=2008.10.14_George_ Robert_Obama%27s%20Abortion%20Extremism_.xml

This is a bit long, but it is worth the read. All I have to say is WOW!

AF:salute:

Easily impressed...aren't you. Of course, the religious right wing-nut base of the GOP will drag out any hot-button issue, from abortion to same-gender marriage, to trigger an emotional response to imagined problems rather than a rational response to the REAL problems we face as a nation.

:coffee:

[AFbombloader]

Easily impressed...aren't you. Of course, the religious right wing-nut base of the GOP will drag out any hot-button issue, from abortion to same-gender marriage, to trigger an emotional response to imagined problems rather than a rational response to the REAL problems we face as a nation.

:coffee:

How is this issue any less important than any other? Maybe you don't care, but many of us do. And no, I am not easily impressed, if you had read the article you would see that it was a well written piece that went into great detail about the history of one of our presidential candidates on a topic many feel is important, but you would rather impune me for posting it.

I am not a right-wing religious nut. But this is a topic I feel strongly about. If you don't care, than that is your right. Murder any children you happen to create before they are born, it is also your right. I feel it is wrong, and Mr. Obama takes his stance to the most extreme I have ever seen.

AF:salute:

[Immanuel]

Easily impressed...aren't you. Of course, the religious right wing-nut base of the GOP will drag out any hot-button issue, from abortion to same-gender marriage, to trigger an emotional response to imagined problems rather than a rational response to the REAL problems we face as a nation.

:coffee:

At least the GOP discusses issues.

The only issue the Obama campaign is willing to discuss is the lie that anyone that won't vote for him is a racist.

Immie

[April15]

Im sorry you dont think killing children is bad. But feeling sorry for each other really doesnt make my points any less valid. I know you really dont have a response and that's why you are deflecting. But seriously, can you atleast try? Is it really that tough?I don't think or believe abortion is killing a human. That is my position so you have yours and never the twain shall meet. Cause if you think the glob of tissue called a preborn child is life then you had best recall what any growing matter is! You will never pluck a flower as that is killing a living growing entity. You could not eat meat as that might have been some ones baby! And most likely is or was until killed by man for man. And to what purpose? Food!? Why not let the animal live and kill your child for the animal? Or at least terminate ( kill) the child so it is one less mouth to feed and one less human to destroy what is on this great big ball we call earth?

[stephanie]

I don't think or believe abortion is killing a human. That is my position so you have yours and never the twain shall meet. Cause if you think the glob of tissue called a preborn child is life then you had best recall what any growing matter is! You will never pluck a flower as that is killing a living growing entity. You could not eat meat as that might have been some ones baby! And most likely is or was until killed by man for man. And to what purpose? Food!? Why not let the animal live and kill your child for the animal? Or at least terminate ( kill) the child so it is one less mouth to feed and one less human to destroy what is on this great big ball we call earth?

it's too bad you can't have an abortion..

[gabosaurus]

it's too bad you can't have an abortion..

It's too bad others did not.

[stephanie]

It's too bad others did not.

same to ya dearie:cheers2:

[April15]

it's too bad you can't have an abortion..I don't need one.

[stephanie]

I don't need one.

then you could experience what it would be like to flush or suck your globs of tissue from your body..

[bullypulpit]

At least the GOP discusses issues.

The only issue the Obama campaign is willing to discuss is the lie that anyone that won't vote for him is a racist.

Immie

Really?

<blockquote>"This election <b>is not about issues</b>. This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates." - Rick Davis, McCain campaign manager</blockquote>

Now, what evidence do you have to support your silly assertion? The GOP and it's right wing-nut base are grasping at any straw they can.

[bullypulpit]

then you could experience what it would be like to flush or suck your globs of tissue from your body..

A woman flushes out "globs of tissue" from her body on a regular basis from the onset of menarche to menopause. Never mind that some 50% of fertilized eggs never implant in the uterus and are "flushed" out with the next menstrual cycle.

[stephanie]

A woman flushes out "globs of tissue" from her body on a regular basis from the onset of menarche to menopause. Never mind that some 50% of fertilized eggs never implant in the uterus and are "flushed" out with the next menstrual cycle.




maybe you can let it grow a few months and just suck the head out and shoot something into the brain to kill it..that sounds more pleasant anyway..

[AFbombloader]

A woman flushes out "globs of tissue" from her body on a regular basis from the onset of menarche to menopause. Never mind that some 50% of fertilized eggs never implant in the uterus and are "flushed" out with the next menstrual cycle.

That is true, and those are not abortions. That is the natural cycle of things for a woman. What this is about is the unnatural cancellation of a viable pregnancy. The ending of an either potential life, as some see the early stages; a glob of cells, as some others see things; or a human bieng, as many others see it. Call the baby what you will, a zygote, an embryo...whatever. It is human life.
An to compare the early stages of human life to a plant or vegetable it rediculous. There isn't anycomparison.

[bullypulpit]

That is true, and those are not abortions. That is the natural cycle of things for a woman. What this is about is the unnatural cancellation of a viable pregnancy. The ending of an either potential life, as some see the early stages; a glob of cells, as some others see things; or a human bieng, as many others see it. Call the baby what you will, a zygote, an embryo...whatever. It is human life.
An to compare the early stages of human life to a plant or vegetable it rediculous. There isn't anycomparison.

Birth control pills, other hormonally based contraceptives and the "morning after" pill...ALL prevent implantation of a fertilized egg in a woman's uterus. They constitute an "...unnatural cancellation of a viable pregnancy...". Are they then abortifacients? Should women even be permitted access to these medications? Aren't condoms and spermicides an "...unnatural cancellation of a viable pregnancy..."? Should ALL forms of birth control be illegal? Ridiculous as it sounds, it is after all, the extension of your argument to its logical conclusion.

And you're right, there's no comparison between an undifferentiated mass of cells and a baby in it's crib. The former is not a human being, the latter is.

[stephanie]

I guess you have to convince your self that you are only aborting a mass of cells instead of a baby... in order to stand yourself for the killing of your own child..

how sad is that.

[AFbombloader]

Birth control pills, other hormonally based contraceptives and the "morning after" pill...ALL prevent implantation of a fertilized egg in a woman's uterus. They constitute an "...unnatural cancellation of a viable pregnancy...". Are they then abortifacients? Should women even be permitted access to these medications? Aren't condoms and spermicides an "...unnatural cancellation of a viable pregnancy..."? Should ALL forms of birth control be illegal? Ridiculous as it sounds, it is after all, the extension of your argument to its logical conclusion.

And you're right, there's no comparison between an undifferentiated mass of cells and a baby in it's crib. The former is not a human being, the latter is.

Birth control prevents the pregnancy from happening. It is not the same thing. Very weak argument. The only one that might be close id the morning after pill, but the rest do not apply to this conversation. A condom! Next thing you will argue that self gratification by males is the same!

A mass of cells in a womans uterice is different than a baby in a crib, it is the beginning of the same baby. You compared it to a plant, not me.

[April15]

Birth control prevents the pregnancy from happening. It is not the same thing. Very weak argument. The only one that might be close id the morning after pill, but the rest do not apply to this conversation. A condom! Next thing you will argue that self gratification by males is the same!

A mass of cells in a womans uterice is different than a baby in a crib, it is the beginning of the same baby. You compared it to a plant, not me.I compared a fetus to a plant. Given your position and direction bullypulpit is not wrong in the presumptions made.

[bullypulpit]

I guess you have to convince your self that you are only aborting a mass of cells instead of a baby... in order to stand yourself for the killing of your own child..

how sad is that.

So, does this mean that ALL IVF clinics are to be shut down for tossing out "babies" with other medical waste? Because that's what happens to the fertilized eggs which are not used.

Do give a bit more attention to the consequences and fallacies your particular brand of logic gives rise to.

[bullypulpit]

Birth control prevents the pregnancy from happening. It is not the same thing. Very weak argument. The only one that might be close id the morning after pill, but the rest do not apply to this conversation. A condom! Next thing you will argue that self gratification by males is the same!

A mass of cells in a womans uterice is different than a baby in a crib, it is the beginning of the same baby. You compared it to a plant, not me.

It's EXACTLY the same thing when asserting that human life begins at conception. Your argument is not only weak, it utterly fails as an argument.

[AFbombloader]

It's EXACTLY the same thing when asserting that human life begins at conception. Your argument is not only weak, it utterly fails as an argument.

It begins AT conception. If there is not a conception then there is no pregnancy, right? How does that apply to the abortion issue?

[AFbombloader]

I compared a fetus to a plant. Given your position and direction bullypulpit is not wrong in the presumptions made.

You are right, sorry for not giving you the credit for the plant remark, and sorry bully for incorrectly saying it was you.

[April15]

You are right, sorry for not giving you the credit for the plant remark, and sorry bully for incorrectly saying it was you.You are forgiven.

[Missileman]

It begins AT conception. If there is not a conception then there is no pregnancy, right? How does that apply to the abortion issue?

Birth control pills don't prevent fertilization(conception), they prevent uterine implantation. His point was if your argument is that a fertilized egg = a human being, that birth control pills are performing abortions the same as an abortion procedure, only much sooner in the cycle.

[AFbombloader]

Birth control pills don't prevent fertilization(conception), they prevent uterine implantation. His point was if your argument is that a fertilized egg = a human being, that birth control pills are performing abortions the same as an abortion procedure, only much sooner in the cycle.

Since I have never had to deal with birth control pills, I admit I didnot know the exacts of how they work. I never imagined I would need to consider if an unimplanted fertilized egg or an implanted egg was where life started. I have no problem with birth control. I do not consider them to be a form of abortion and I don't believe any of you do either. Does pregnancy begin when the implantation begins or when the egg is fertilized? That would also decide the issue of the Invetrofertilization clinics that was brought up earlier. This discussion is interesting.

[Yurt]

when did adam become a live human being?

what does pregnant mean?

[No1tovote4]

Birth control pills don't prevent fertilization(conception), they prevent uterine implantation. His point was if your argument is that a fertilized egg = a human being, that birth control pills are performing abortions the same as an abortion procedure, only much sooner in the cycle.
This isn't entirely accurate. Most birth control pills are "combination pills" and prevent ovulation, not implantation. They use a combination of progesterone and estrogen to do that.

The pill also works by thickening the mucous wall at the Cervix preventing sperm from passing into the Uterus and thus decreasing possible fertilization.

http://kidshealth.org/teen/sexual_health/contraception/contraception_birth.html

Here, a link with more information.

[AFbombloader]

when did adam become a live human being?

what does pregnant mean?

according to dictionary.com it means

1. having a child or other offspring developing in the body; with child or young, as a woman or female mammal.

The Adam queston is different. If you believe that God created him from the dust of the earth then he was never in a womb, so there was no pregnancy.

[Yurt]

according to dictionary.com it means

1. having a child or other offspring developing in the body; with child or young, as a woman or female mammal.

The Adam queston is different. If you believe that God created him from the dust of the earth then he was never in a womb, so there was no pregnancy.

ok, so then, hypothetically, when did adam become a living human being?

[AFbombloader]

ok, so then, hypothetically, when did adam become a living human being?

I know what you are looking for, you are looking for me to say when the breath of life came into him from God. I that so the argument can be made that we are not "human" until we take a breath?

Genesis 2:7

7 - And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

AF:salute: