You are right. Birds will destroy bad eggs, other animals will turn away babies that are not perfect, some go so far as to eat their newborn. I wish that man had advanced past that.
posted on January 26, 2001 02:03:58 PM
Isn't the reason for the question based on Bush being in office 24 hours and already implimenting his ridiculous rules?
If he is so "Pro-Life", why is he such an advocate for the Death Penalty?
posted on January 26, 2001 02:32:34 PMRainyBear - it seems to me that because of DNA technology, some of the guilty might be innocent. Sounds like Bush is playing God to me...
posted on January 26, 2001 02:36:26 PMRainyBear - yes, you and I see that, but I hear an awful lot of "a life is a life" going around. "All life is precious". etc. from the pro-life side of things. Don't get me wrong - I'm all for the death penalty. Doesn't thrill me that some scum is living in a dry cell with three squares a day and probably better cable than I can get. But it seems to go against the whole issue of protecting life. JMO.
Off to Friday family dinner. And I'm sure lighter discussion.
posted on January 26, 2001 02:50:41 PMtoke....all I'm saying is that innocent people have been convicted, with only DNA tech. being able to prove their innocence. Without that, these death row inmates would be fried.
I just can't understand how Bush can be Pro-Life for babies, and Pro-Death for adults. It's his position, not mine, and to me, it doesn't make sense.
I certainly understand the difference here, but I'm just talking about the statement "Pro -Life"....you can't have it both ways.
posted on January 26, 2001 02:59:36 PM
I think some criminals should be executed on the spot, without lengthy and expensive trials and appeals. Of course, the reason that can't happen is because of the question of guilt, innocence, and doubt.
posted on January 26, 2001 03:20:50 PM
Well, kraftdinner...
I understand Bush to be a religious Christian. I believe within the tenets of his faith, the preserving of innocent life...which he believes unborn fetuses to be...and the execution of murderers are entirely reconcilable. After all...an eye for an eye...a tooth for a tooth.
posted on January 26, 2001 03:56:42 PM
I agree with you toke, but I have to go back to what I said previously....we all need to be responsible for our own actions. The guy who commits murder knows before he commits the crime what the outcome will be. So he had a "choice" to make.
With Pro-Life advocates, they want to remove our choice, and turn the issue into a political thing.
It kinda comes down to "who owns my body and my right to make my own decisions?".
If Bush is Pro-Life, then I hope he will put aside billions and billions of your dollars to support these "unwanted" babies for the rest of their lives.
If Pro-Life "works", then the advocates should have proof to back up their claims ie: follow-ups on all the babies they've saved and how they've turned out, etc. I've never heard a peep from them except their righteous claims about doing God's work, and doing what's "right".
If Bush is a Christian, then maybe he forgot the part about Adam & Eve. Weren't they destined to have free choice?
posted on January 26, 2001 04:10:16 PM
kraftdinner,
For some who believe in pro-life the issue is also free choice. Free choice for an innocent baby. But since the child can not talk, it can not voice it's choice.
Maybe one day babies will be seen as people instead of property.
posted on January 26, 2001 04:12:44 PM
It's not an issue of an unborn child being considered "property," but rather an organism living within a woman who is acting as a host. Because of that it is a medical decision affecting the woman, and therefore her choice.
posted on January 26, 2001 04:19:06 PM
Blessings upon thee, o wise Antiquary. Mayhap the little people will smile upon this unworthy one, creepy though they be.
Pray thee not be hung over, when next we meet... Let not the spirits wreak havoc upon thy tender liver....
posted on January 26, 2001 04:38:39 PMinside...I'm certainly not knocking your right to think what you want, but you kind of make it sound like abortion is some hobby or something.
Nobody with a brain would want to "get rid" of a baby or fetus, but some have to make that decision based on their own welfare and the future welfare of the baby.
I imagine it to be a gut-wrenching decision to make, but it does boil down to it being MY decision, not yours or anybody else's. It's my body, not the world's and I'll accept the responsibility for my decision.
P.S. As an advocate yourself, have you done any follow-ups??
posted on January 26, 2001 04:55:48 PM
kraftdinner,
By follow ups do you mean like going to all adopted kids and seeing if they were worth saving and asking them if they would have preferred to have been aborted? No, I have never done any studies like that. Have you?
posted on January 26, 2001 04:58:13 PM
My view as a Liberal is I personally think abortion is wrong, BUT if it is illegal they will still do it using coathangers again so its useless to have it legal or illegal. Both political parties use it to their advantage, but abortion isnt going away.
posted on January 26, 2001 05:10:22 PM
Our country is always ready to help the under-dog, send funds, blankets, medication, food and so much more to help those who are not yet self-sufficient. I see this as Unconditional Caring, just like a Mother's Love should be Unconditional Love. Now, we have Poison Ivy Bush sending a message to the world that America's Gifts will no longer be unconditional...If you want to continue receiving, give up your evil ways...contraception, et al, being one of them.
Now, when I send my yearly donation to the American Cancer Society, I do not question the recipient's life style or who should benefit from my donation. He/She might drink, do drugs, heaven forbid! Be GAY... oooooH! It is none of my business, becauseA LIFE IS A LIFE...
I look at the big picture, that a gift is a gift, and because of research, the whole world will benefit.
In essence, that's what bush is doing: hand-picking the recipient of his magnanimous bounty (which is all paid for with OUR tax dollar, thank you very much). By forcing Health Care centers, such as Planned Parenthood, to close for lack of funds, he is punishing the innocent who might go to Planned Parenthood JUST for Medical treatment for their little one. The $*&@~ is cutting off the nose to spite the face.
posted on January 26, 2001 06:22:56 PMinside - Sorry, my P.S. wasn't meant to be aimed at you personally. I just wanted to know how the Pro-Life-ers (like Bush) are handling the "babies" after they've been "saved".
There must be some kind of documentation on how these babies are doing, etc., as saving them is only Step 1. It's the big picture I'm interested in.
Yes, some are adopted, but the majority aren't because they have medical problems, learning problems, or heaven forbid.....they're not white.
So, to all of the Pro-Life-ers, I'm asking...after you've saved the baby, what part are you contibuting to the follow-up part to see if your stance is "working" for the goodness of mankind?
