Comments on: Barack Obama: The Most Anti-life Candidate Ever

By: Darius

Darius — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 02:56:43 +0000

Actually, Jo, you are somewhat incorrect. A huge percentage of women in Russia and Eastern Europe are infertile because they’ve had multiple abortions. Perhaps those abortions aren’t as “modern” as those in this country, but they are also not the “coat hanger” variety.

Also, safe for whom?

By: Jo

Jo — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 18:26:34 +0000

…many women end up infertile as a result of having one.

That is a lie. Modern abortions are one of the safest procedures. Carrying a child to term is far risker than having an abortion.

By: Darius

Darius — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 15:11:33 +0000

And Scott, not everyone agrees that we shouldn’t murder children. Peter Singer, a renowned philosopher and bioethics professor at Princeton, believes it is logically and morally justifiable to kill young children (up to the age of 10 or so, I think). And what is funny, he is just as logically and morally consistent as you are.

By: Darius

Darius — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 15:06:28 +0000

Does anyone else find it inconsistent that people can be pro-choice on murdering a baby but if those same people said they were pro-choice if a mother wanted to kill her ten year old son, they would be considered crazy and de facto pro-murder? There is NO SUCH THING as pro-choice. You’re either pro-abortion or you’re pro-life. Some might think they are pro-choice and in many ways they may be, but if applied to any other type of murder, they would still be morally reprehensible at best, and legally guilty of being an accomplice to murder at worst.

And DJ, you are correct. It’s morally disgusting to say that one group of people is worth less because they die more frequently.

By: CH

CH — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 20:48:08 +0000

For all you “pro-choicers” consider that not even Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, believed in abortion. For all of her eugenic and racist rhetoric, she still found abortion to be a brutal and barbaric practice.

By: Lucas Knisely

Lucas Knisely — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 14:14:43 +0000

This is by far some of the most devastating information against those who support abortion.

Thank God for Gianna!!!

By: Adam Omelianchuk

Adam Omelianchuk — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 02:54:56 +0000

TUAD, thanks for the link. I will give it a read.

By: Joshua

Joshua — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 02:37:25 +0000

Paul,
I appreciate your reply. I must say that honestly thats why I read here, to hear other opinions, or just really to just give me some information.

Unlike some Christians (and one who lives in the Bible Belt, this is going to be a odd statement as well), I agree about sex ed. It seems like some people see Sex Ed as porn that kids get to see at school. When I was in High School, I know the kids treated it like that, as well as the parents. The key I think is, it needs to be done by the parents. Parents need to quit giving their responsiblities to the government. Not to start another discussion, but thats called Socialism.

Also, unlike others, I don’t believe that we will really ever overturn Roe v Wade. Should we not work toward it? Yes we should. However, we should also learn to work within the problems we have. Educate our children, staying away from sex, or at least whatever form of birth control.

But, I am still pro-life, pro-adoption.

By: D.J. Williams

D.J. Williams — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 22:41:23 +0000

Scott said…
“The trouble with D.J.â€™s analogy is that it takes something that everyone would agree on (we shouldnâ€™t murder children), and applies it to the matter of dispute (Is a fetus a child?).”

I’m not sure I see your point, Scott. What do miscarriages have to do with whether or not a fetus is a human person? Since when does relative ‘survivability’ dictate personhood? I’m no statistician, but I would wager that in the middle ages the death rate in children before the age of 18 probably wasn’t too far from the miscarriage rate today. Since these kids often died from medical conditions (much more often than, say, a 30 year old), does that make them less of a person than an adult? Less worthy of protection?

I’m not trying to be glibly dismissive (and I mean that in all sincerity) but I really do see as nonsensical the idea that because a category of people dies of natural causes more frequently than another that their life is somehow of less value – that they are less of a person.

By: Truth Unites.. and Divides

Truth Unites.. and Divides — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 19:41:17 +0000

Adam O., You might enjoy this debate on male eldership by Centuri0n: DebateBlog: Male Eldership