I have known a few atheists and I think for them it was more of a incident that turned them off to the church, or all churches, and therefore god. I am not speaking for all atheists, but for some its as much as a non belief in god, as it is a revulsion for organized religion. “if god was real, how could he let this happen…. He must not be real…” I am at a loss to see how its so difficult for people to have tolerance of other’s choice in faith. Whatever a person believes, its their choice and their right. Now to the subject of these babies, until I see the entire bill I will not agree nor disagree with Obama’s decision. One article or a 15 sec. tv or radio ad can not give us the entire picture.

The US should immediately pull out of Chicago !
Body count -- In the last six months 292 killed (murdered) in Chicago , 221 killed in Iraq .

Sens. Barack Obama & Dick Durbin, Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., Gov. Rod Blogojevich, House leader Mike Madigan, Atty. Gen. Lisa Madigan (daughter of Mike), Mayor Richard M. Daley (son of Mayor Richard J. Daley).....our leadership in Illinois.....all Democrats.
Thank you for the combat zone in Chicago . Of course, they're all blaming each other.
Can't blame the Republicans, there aren't any!!!!

State pension fund $44 Billion in debt, worst in country. Cook County ( Chicago ) sales tax 10.25%highest in country. (Look'em up if you want). Chicagoschool system one of the worst in country.

This is the political culture that Obama comes from in Illinois .
He's gonna 'change' Washington politics?

God doesn't believe in atheists.

Well bibledude you seem a lot more educated than someone else on here. har de har har

clouds555 or obama2008 whoever I'm talking to..No I don't claim to know everything about the subject (the more I learn the more I realize I don't know as the saying goes) I was just mentioning that for one of the degrees I have I had to learn Greek. Since you seemed to be presenting this cup as some sort of concrete evidence that Christ was a magician of sorts so I was pointing out that the experts I looked at concluded differently. It actually pointed to the supernatural qualities of the historic person of Jesus rather than denegrate Him. I was mentioning that the title Christ was not spelled correctly on the cup and that the word the man said was magician was not the normal word for magician, which is magus, from which get the name Magi from. None of them seemed to know what the word really was. This is not evidence for what you purport. That's the only point I was trying to make.

By he way, it was 30 pieces of silver, not 13. It seems that atheists may have trouble reading as well, when they bother to read at all.

It is amusing to read the rants of atheists. They claim that God is fake yet they get quite hostile toward anyone who disagrees. Why the hostility? If all who believe in God are fools, what is that to you? You claim no heaven, no hell and yet you seem to become greatly vexed whenever the subject arises. Why? Why get so agitated about superstitions you claim to be immune to? What is it about this belief that drives you not only to condemn the belief but also the believers? Could it be that you are not as sure as you would like to believe? Perhaps the abyss you believe lies at the end of life lacks the assurance that you seek. Maybe you can’t quite drive out of your mind the suspicion that death may be a doorway. Modern science offers no comfort, it cannot detect beyond what it can observe, it can only speculate.
I think the claim made by an atheist that Christ was a magician is the most ridiculous thing I have read yet. If one denies the existence of God, and all gods, then one also denies the existence of the supernatural and the miraculous as that is what God is. Yet a magician is one who manipulates the supernatural to perform tricks or miracles. So which is it atheists, is there a God, and the supernatural, or not. To claim both is nonsense. Sometimes, in their zeal, atheists expose their own intellectual dishonesty, such as when they proudly proclaim they don’t read books such as the bible and they ridicule those who do, yet they state with pretentious authority their opinions on what is written there, perhaps relying on the opinions of other atheists whom the usually can’t even name.

Oooh, Clouds/Obama2008, after looking back at previous posts and how you use capitalization and question marks, it's pretty obvious you're one and the same. I will refrain from making any snarky comments, although after all the insults you've thrown, it's pretty tempting.

www.nrlc.org. so this is what they put at the end of the article. why not just state the facts in the story ???

here are the facts on where the candidates stand on abortion. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27035396/

in my haste to answer you i see my husband was still logged in by mistake,oops. i'm sure i will not here the end of it from all the god/bush lovers on here. i should stop listening to them anyways (rock county) is full of haters and blog where people have half a brain. the gazette has poorly written articles and all of the blogs do not even answer questions or debate. it is all one sided conversation. i have argued abortion/bush/religion until i am dead and the conversation would never advance any farther. plus Obama will be president in less then 3 weeks !!!!!

Obama2008-Thank you for sharing the article on the cup. The first thing I noticed was the Greek word that was supposed to be Christ has no "i" in it and is therefore not the title Christ (Christ means Anointed one and is not a name). Also the word for magician is magus not the word on the cup. I have my degree in this field and can read and write Greek and have never seen that word before. I then went to see the other sites and what non-Christian experts had to say about it. Most were skeptical as to its authenticity and doubted that it meant Christ the Magician. If it did they interpreted that to mean a magician who was invoking the Power or name of Christ in their magic. This was a common thing in the books of Acts if you recall the Sons of Sceva attempting to use the power of Jesus name to cast out demons or Simon the Magus (Magician) attempting to buy the power of Spirit of Christ for his own gain. As to the religious cultic practices you mentioned syncretism was a common practice in the 1st century and something the church battled. These myths are simply that, stories with no validity. The story of the gospel unfolded in space and time, in history, with names of Kings, Governors and places we can go and see. As I said I would be happy to give you a lengthier response using the anonymous system the Gazette has. Do I believe the miracles of the scripture recorded regarding Jesus? I do. I do because I believe the God you say does not exist stepped into time, spoke as no man has ever spoke, lived as no man has ever lived and performed miracles no eye had ever seen. If God had truly become man I would expect nothing less.

Obama2008-"do read anything but this blog and the bible?" Was this directed at me? I don't recall attacking you, I thought we were having a friendly discussion. Actually I read quite a bit of other material but thank you for asking. I can address the points you raise. May I email you using the Gazette's email system? The answers are quite long if I go into detail.

"It should be remembered that in Alexandria, paganism, Judaism and Christianity never evolved in isolation. All of these forms of religion (evolved) magical practices that seduced both the humble members of the population and the most well-off classes." "It was in Alexandria where new religious constructions were made to propose solutions to the problem of man, of God's world," he added. "Cults of Isis, mysteries of Mithra, and early Christianity bear witness to this."

do read anything but this blog and the bible ? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26972493/ at least Jesus existed unlike God. at the same time you expect us to believe his mother was a virgin and he turned water into wine. how about the 13 pieces of silver he was betrayed for just like every other myth. they were all betrayed for 13 pieces of silver. it's the same story line again and again. give me some facts that you can back up with evidence and i will waste some more time explaining basic knowledge to you that you continue to ignore.

Obama2008-What source are you reading that is telling you
Jesus was a magician? Is that your own theory or is it from a book? I'm not being argumentative here just curious.

who is the fool ? the one that worships a magician that's who !

Obama2008 - Only a fool says there is no God... Only a fool...

Angelwings: I am sorry for the pain you have endured. It must be heart-rending. I hope will be able to find peace. Hugs to you across the wire.

your the one that commented on it when you had not even taken the time to read what had been said. so i guess you need to ask yourself, why ? you ask me where i get my information and i provide it for you but then you say other politicians have done the same thing and provide no information to back up your claim. why don't you provide this information like your always asking me to do? your double standards are typical of republicans.

Read the article. Last paragraph sums it up. Why just pick on Palin? What about the other politicians? How many of them have not used taxpayer money to attend such functions. Now then, what does this have to do with Obama running from his stance on the abortion question, which I thought was the purpose we were to make comment on?

you still missed the comment. it is 3 below the link. we were not even talking about the palin affair anymore you were. you should try catching up before you post.

Clicked on, read, still no mention of Palin extramarital affair. So have to assume you either sited wrong site or based it on the NE headline. Whatever, no sense dragging this on. Your mind is made up. Have a nice day and Good-bye.

you need to read, like always. the msnbc comment is below.

What was the source of MSNBC'S report? Was it the NE report? If this was so factual, why wasn't it reported in the NEWYORK TIMES, WASHINGTON POST, LA TIMES, CHICAGO TIMES. Just maybe they require substanciated sources. But don't let a little thing like facts get in your way.

look like i said it was good enough of a source for Edwards, so deal with it ! i don't care about Palin's life i am not voting for her. you all claim she is just a joe six pack and pure as the driven snow. she is far from it ! are you now going to say msnbc is a poor source too ? or are you just going to over look that like everything else ?

Also, just Google (Palins extramarital baby affair). All based on the scandel rag NE. Do you trust the source?

Palin accused of steamy extramarital affair.Yep, it was from the great National Inquirer.
This was in an article by Annie Davis, Washington correspondet in St Paul, Minnestoa, 04/09/08 located in the Hawksbury Gazette.
Interesting read. Can't wait to read Obama2008's take on it.

bunnies lay eggs ? republicans read ?

Thank you for the link. That wasn't so hard was it? It saves me the trouble of an easter egg hunt and it raises my opinion of you as not just another rumor monger.

republicans are so lazy , here : http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27134586/

Obama2008, you have a wealth of information about Gov. Palin. Source, please?

MadeinUSA:
You wrote "Next thing you'll want is to tell us men when and where WE'RE supposed to have children in our families!" The state already does regulate your "right" to procreate. It's called "no means no". You may procreate whenever you want to, provided your wife (or girlfriend/significant other)consents. Attempt to procreate without her consent and, if she is so inclined, its off to jail you go. Furthermore, if she later changes her mind, she may kill your child and pretty much all you will be able to do about it is howl at the moon, which just about sums up the choices the baby has as well.

"As governor, Palin at times links church, state Records show she used taxpayer money to promote religious causes."

Palin was baptized Roman Catholic as a newborn and baptized again in a Pentecostal Assemblies of God church when she was a teenager. She has worshipped at a nondenominational Bible church since 2002, opposes abortion even in cases of rape and incest and supports classroom discussions about creationism.

since she took state office in late 2006, the governor and her family have spent more than $13,000 in taxpayer funds to attend at least 10 religious events and meetings with Christian pastors, including Franklin Graham, the son of evangelical preacher Billy Graham, records show.

Typical lefties like Obama2008 wants to pawn off the work onto others and then take credit for it.

lakenneddy-I've attended church my whole life (and I'm old) and I've yet to run into the church you are talking about. Are they out there? Yes they are but they are the exception not the rule.

Looks like we have drifted away from the purpose of the article. This is suppose to be about Obama and his answers regarding abortion.

The NI got one right. How many have they gotten wrong?
So again, Obama2008, what is your source. I don't need a lacky what I and the rest of us need is fact. Prove or retrack! Is that so hard to do?

Oh, I see now. We should rely instead on a set of rules established by an institution created thousands of years ago intended to extort money and secure power by preying on fears and ignorance of man. Your right, bibledude, that makes much more sense.

Obama2008- We see design in the world, there must be a designer. We see order in creation there has to be a law giver. We see cause and effect, there has to be a 1st cause as Aristotle said. Life from nothing, order from chaos? I have faith but not that much to believe everything we see is a product of time plus random chance.

so it was a good source for Edwards but not for Palin. plus how is it any different from Fox news other then they have more facts. i don't read the magazine but they did find out about Edwards before anyone else and were able show up all the news outlets. you believe the bible, so who is the idiot here. the "chalk artist" can be found and identified, you can not do the same.

From what i can find the alleged Palin Affair was an article in the National Enquirer... That's a pretty reliable source isn't it??? ha

Obama2008:Whybesad makes more sense then you. My comment was ment as sarcasm. Have you met Clouds555? Beides, you brought it up, why can't you prove it?

Obama2008- Obama is sure God exists, why do you doubt His existence when you can see evidence for the Creator all around you? I'm not talking about religion now. When I see a chalk artist's work displayed on the concrete but do not see the chalk artist I do not doubt he exists because I see his work.

bibledude, i don't care what religion obama is. just like i don't care what religion you are. god is not the issue and never is in my opinion. how can someone who doesn't exist matter ? you don't answer questions at all and until then i will not answer anymore of yours.

Obama2008-Doesn't your candidate claim to be a Christian? He may DeBama you.

no one said to get rid of the undesirables! keep spinning words pro-lifers. god doesn't exist, so he is welcome to leave America anytime as far as i am concerned. plus according to the believers i thought Jesus (the magician) died for our sins ? in that case we have been given a free ticket to sin. just say your sorry and everything is forgiven. plus i find the believers to be the biggest sinners of all. you only have to look as far as the current white house to know that.

usaret, have you met whybesad ? you can do your own research, i'm not your lacky. try reading !

If a woman doesn't want a retarded child then they should have the right to abort the pregnency no matter what. It's her body and her CHOICE!!!

Woman who want or need an abortion should have the right to do so. If they have a child that is retarded or has other birth difects who is going to take care of that kid? The mother didn't want the kid in the first place and then the kid will be abused and who really wins? Keep abortion legal. Obama '08

OMG! Obama2008, what a revelation. I never knew about the Palin affair you mentioned. Where did you get your info from? What other facts do you have that we don't know about? Come on, spill out all the dirt now. Can't wait. What do you have on ACORN???? We need more people like you to provide us with such truthful and factual information. Be sure you provide information as to where we can read all about it. Have you met Clouds555?

Wow you are lost

Palin had an affair with a car wash owner around the same time she became pregnant. she is so full of lies and is a typical republican. i remember when Clinton had an affair and republicans would not shut up about it until, Larry Flint offered 1 million for republicans affairs and there were many many of them. once again your character judgment is way off base.

(Headinthe)clouds555 - You state, "she is classic joe six pack, can't close her legs." Can't close her legs!? Are you serious? This is HER HUSBAND in case you didn't know. This would be language you would use for a women who sleeps around not for one who has sex with her own husband. If they chose to have a child in their 40's last I knew that was not unethical. Then you call the infant a retard. I would think that anyone on either side of this issue could see that you have no class.

It is sad that our country has come to even need this discussion. We have moved so far away from morality to immorality. The legalization of SIN in our country will be it's demise. If we keep asking God to leave our country at some point he will and we will be left to fend for ourselves. It is clear that Obama wants to lead our people toward this path of destruction openly. When you go to vote in November, are you voting for a candidate, or vote against God?

hey petcat if Roe vs wade were ever overturned (which is very unlikely), abortion would not automatically become illegal. Many states have trigger laws that will kick in and still allow you to "take care of it". Do a little resarch so you know what your talking about.

Oh yeah,give up for adoption? Could you? Try living with either one of those choices every day and see how YOU feel!!!! Can you live with it??

I dont normally let ppl into my life but,YOU ppl are so fast to hate someone who had an abortion.I was 17,no job,no husband.....was an accident.Should I have giving birth to a small human just to make that human suffer my child-like issues,same as my own?

Ethics report is just out on Palin --- she screwed up.

Very interesting comments.
I am wondering as abortion is legal will it cease to be ---- all that use that form of contraception erase their heirs?

Sorry about the repeat. I don't know what happened there...

Redder, did you recently watch Platoon? Because clouds is not Private Pyle, and you are not the drill sergant.

Redder, did you recently watch Platoon? Because clouds is not Private Pyle, and you are not the drill sergant.

I am sorry I did not get on here sooner and won't make that mistake again. Clouds555, you are an idiot. How dare you say Palin had no right to give birth to her child and then call that baby a retard. What the hell is wrong with you. Did your mommy not give you any love as a child. I think not. Yes was she a little old to have a baby, maybe but that was her choice not yours jerk. Maybe the baby was an ooopsy. I have a 2 year old whom we love and adore as do her 5 brothers and sisters, she was an oopsy and guess what, she brings more joy into our lives than anything. You argue the right to choose well that goes for having a baby too you moron. I really do not believe in abortion, thats me, you baby killer, also have the right to kill, thats what the law allows, and really I dont think it will ever change. I have heard this for my 42 years of life, and nothing has changed. I only wish that biggots like you would shut up, its to bad your mother did not exersise her right to choose.

Why does Obama always have a look on his face like someone has peed in his cheerios?

republicans could not survive another term in office. they have put us so far in the hole only a democrat could get us out of it ! you know just like Clinton did when the first Bush left office. when will republicans stop voting for god and start voting for AMERICA ?

I like Obama's presence and speaking ability. However, he has some rough patches I'm having a hard time getting over. He snorted cocaine(which is a far cry from weed), was friends with and attended a church with Wright, who is a racist and anti American, and launched his campaign from the home of a former domestic terrorist William Ayers who also happens to be his friend. In addition, his stance on abortion while in Chicago is a bit sketchy. I just can't justify those things. Now I'm not being an apologist for the Republicans or pretending like politicians don't all have issues. However, I don't want to go from a radical right winger in Bush to a radical left winger in Obama. What we need is a moderate. Now McCain may not fit the mold to perfection, but at least he has a history of working with both parties and breaking party lines. The problems our country is facing require both parties work together and a balanced government. I fear if we have liberals in both the legislative and executive branches, that we'll shift too far the other direction. If you look at recent successful presidents like Reagan and Clinton, they both had something in common, which was balanced government. Reagan had a Democratic run congress and Clinton had a Republican run congress. The Republicans will lose more seats this election, so the Democrats will have a stronghold on congress. As a result, I think the President should either be Independent (which we don't have) or Republican. Just my observation. Personally I've grown very cynical of our entire system and politicians in both parties in general, but it is what it is.

I agree Rich

I am middle of the road and therefore not acceptible to either side of the debate. In that light, I see Obama very much on one side of the debate. He never seems to have the courage to stand up to his supporters and seek the middle road. In the case of abortion he has a record virtually supporting "the sanctity of abortion" over any realistic approach.

I don’t normally respond in such forums as there are others who articulate what I believe better than I could but I thought I would take the opportunity to offer another perspective.

First, in the spirit of full disclosure I am Pro-Life. I’ve always been Pro-Life but I also believe it is a person’s right to choose as we all have free will. There are consequences for choices but there is also forgiveness.

For me the basic question is “How much do you value life?” The question of when life begins is obviously up for debate. For me the best answer to the question is that if life doesn’t begin at conception then why do people use condoms?

Whether it is a married couple who do not want to have a child right now, a couple of teenagers who gave in to the heat of passion, or a woman who was raped there is now a life. What if child will be born disabled? It now becomes a question of convenience. A child, wanted or unwanted, is a major change or disruption to our current lives. I believe a choice to have an abortion is a choice of convenience. By their actions those who support abortion, for whatever purpose, deem the convenience of our current and future lives more important than protecting a life with no voice, “My life if more important than anyone else no matter how the life began or what kind of life they will live.” Is this what we as a society truly believe? Probably not but we are letting some determine that for us.

OK, let’s take it a step further. If we hold this young life with such disregard how about those who are living? We as a society have already allowed a young life to be declared inconvenient, how about someone at the end of their life? Is the next step for someone to decide that a parent incapable of taking care of themselves due to age or illness is now inconvenient? Are we prepared to determine their life inconvenient and take action? Are we prepared to allow that State to make that choice? We have started down a very slippery slope.

All life matters no matter how inconvenient.

petcat, you describe a very real problem. at the same time i find your humor to be very funny and much like my own. this topic is not funny but you have made it a little more palatable, thanks !

billnewbie- I appreciate your answer and I do agree for the most part. However, if abortion were made illegal women would be doing things on there own to end pregnacies. They would need to be prosecuted. These things could range from the morning after pill to a garage out in the country. But there are many things in between that could either intentionally or unintentionally harm the fetus during pregnancy. Some of those things may be judged by some as being malicious while others may feel it isn't. I guess my point is with abortion being legal this is a non-issue with the exception of those late term obvious cases of neglect. If abortion is made illegal this opens the door to interpretation of what is malcious and what it not during all stages of pregnancy.

Curlrock:
I answered your question. Here it is verbatim.
“Do the police attempt to track down anyone who may be thinking of buying an illegal drug, an illegal weapon, stolen property or the like? Only when they have probable cause, such as when a co-conspirator calls the police or an informant tells them. Our laws do not allow the police to surveil people they only suspect may be considering an illegal act without probable cause. Pregnancy is not probable cause just as drug addiction is not probable cause. Even convicted felons who have been released cannot be surveilled without other probable cause as a criminal record itself is not probable cause. Sure, the police may question a woman who lost her baby under suspicious circumstances (it stretches credulity to assume falling on ice, for instance, is an attempted abortion, after all many people fall on the ice), but medical records and personal data such as blood tests are untouchable without a court order. Consider how difficult it is to prosecute criminals as things stand today. I think your concerns are unrealistic and unnecessary.”

buckyfan- What if the women does something on her own to cause the abortion? Who decides if what she did was voluntary or malicious? I alluded that yesterday but never got an answer as to how and when she would be prosecuted.

whoanellie: How is my comment "selfish", I merely asked you to actually take the risk of exploring something other than your own opinion. I think it's pretty selfish of you to not even consider any other opinions/evidence other than your own. I also think it's presumptuous of you to think that the bloggers here would steal your personal information. I, personally, can promise you that yours isn't an identity I'd be interested in.

Petcat: One would think it's not the mothers who would be penalized, but the abortion doctors.
---
And not all pro-life advocates are in favor of the death penalty.

I can accept late term abortions. It's just that I (in my opinion) think that it is only justifiable in certain circumstances, which I explained in my earlier post. I feel, personally, that unless needed to protect the health of the mother, or because of a serious health problem with the baby, third trimester abortions aren't necessary. I'm not sure how many late term abortions there are, but I'd bet that the vast majority of them are carried out because of health complications.

Of course, petcat, if the Republicans and Christian take over and then catch rapists like you (hypothetically), death row and the gallows may await you. Will you still love them then, or will you wish the democrats had taken over so that rapist like you (hypothetically) will be treated and released back into society with a government stipend and free health insurance? You can’t lose!

Lakennedy:
You asked “why is abortion legal?” I’d like to take a crack at that question if you don’t mind.
It’s a matter of philosophy. Abortion supporters invariably express the opinion that the life in the womb is not human life. That it is just tissue and as such it can be treated as any other tissue in the body. They say that it bears little resemblance to a human. I’ve even heard it said that a human embryo is indistinguishable from a chicken embryo. Someone who posted here even stated that it is just a leach on its mother’s body. As justification for that belief, Abortion supporters claim that if the baby can’t survive on its own (viability) then it’s not human and therefore abortion is not murder.
There are many problems with that philosophy. For one, the viability argument is relative. The age of viability has dropped over the years due to medical advances. Babies that were considered unviable 30 years ago survive today. Those babies now grow to be normal human beings. Were those babies aborted 30 years ago that were unviable then just as human as the surviving babies of today? What has changed? Only our conception of viability. In the future (or maybe even today) babies may be able to survive outside the womb from conception. Will this change our assessment of the humanity of the conceived? If not, why not. The argument of the acceptability of abortion has always hung on the assessment of when life begins for almost every abortion supporter. My philosophy has been that life begins at conception. As medical science push viability back farther and farther, it brings the starting point of human life closer and closer to my position and farther from the original philosophy that made abortion legal in the first place.
Of course, as the viability rationale becomes less supportable, some new rationale will arise to replace it. After all, rare is the mother who can kill her child without some good reason. That is why even you cannot embrace late term abortions, isn’t it?

Execution is legal murder but, you don't care about that. i guess criminals (some innocent) are not as cute as a fetus.

Someone wondered what would be done with the millions of babies that would live if abortion were illegal? So, by implication, we need abortion for population control. That sounds like Hitler's final solution to me. So we say to the aborted "We find your lives to be too inconvenient and too expensive, therefore your lives are hereby forfeit for the good of the state and its narcissistic citizens who have no resources that they are willing to divert from their pursuit of self-fulfillment."
When you find ways to reduce consequences, you increase risk taking. Promiscuous activity has always had risks associated with it. In times past, such activity was considered unacceptable in open society. Those who indulged in such activity did so in private. STD’s were either not treatable or the treatment was ineffectual for many. Illegitimate pregnancy was shameful and its occurrence was uncommon. Times have changed. The stigma of promiscuity has all but been removed. Illegitimate pregnancy is socially acceptable and abundant. Birth control is readily available without cost but frequently unused, as if there were some other alternative (abortion), just in case.
What would we do with all the millions of babies should abortion become Illegal? Perhaps, without the added safety net of abortion being available, the sexual risk takers would be less inclined to take so many risks and avail themselves of other risk mitigators such as birth control and abstinence.
Is it really so much of an imposition to ask people to take more care to prevent procreation so that their babies need not be killed? If abortion were not available I suspect that many would, perhaps most would. In any case babies would not have to die.

I'll state it again, People in this country do not Value LIFE!!! That is how lakennedy can say such a selfish comment! We need to stop being so selfish and Growup! Yes i'm willing to adopt no matter what,but I will not put out my info here for someone to steal it.I beleive in adoption and wish more people would consider it.

Oh, and whoannellie: Just wondering, why is abortion legal? I mean, how can a country allow women to choose to have an abortion if it is nothing more than "legal murder"?

whoanellie: Perhaps you should review military history, more specifically statistics of civillians murdered during a time of war. Ever read "One Night In Thanh Phong"? I suggest you read that depiction of Robert Kerrey, former Governor of Nebraska. Let me know how you feel about that. My point is that part of the cost of being free is indeed "legal murder". You can call it anything you want, but that's what it is.

billnewbie: you've always had the right to state your opinion. I think it's awesome that you're family was both fortunate enough to be prepared to adopt children, and that you would be selfless enough to do so. I really mean that. I hope that you realize that not all people should adopt, and that not all people are qualified to adopt. Your story is indeed unique. I think that it is also amazing, and I'd like to wish you and yours good luck in the future. I'd also like to say that "your stock just went up in my book" lol. Keeping on topic, to answer your question: Again, you've always been able to express your opinion. I hope that you realize that, although others may not have adopted for various reasons, their opinions don't carry any less weight than yours. Do you agree?

Well I will state the obvious, The woman made a choice when she slept with the guy! Very rarely does a pregnancy occur from a rape. Let's be grownups when we make grownup decisions such as having sex with someone!!Either don't sleep around or give some loving family a baby that would not be an inconvenience to them!!Take responsiblity for your own actions-- oh that's right some people don't beleive in that! Let's just murder the baby,it's the only act of murder that is legal!!!

sportthewar:
Already have, 2 in fact, twins, cocaine affected. Best decision I ever made. You would do well to consider likewise.
Now do I have a right to state my opinion in your eyes?

Sportthewar: What did they do with the unwanted children before abortion was legal? Frankly, if abortions were illegal, I think we'd probably see a lot fewer accidental pregnancies. And, many of the other "inconvenience" children would actually be kept by their mothers (like my friends who didn't want a baby at that point in their lives but were perfectly capable of caring for one).
---
There are many, many couples who would love to adopt children but can't due to cost and unavailability. And, yes, I would be thrilled to adopt, have researched the possibilities and am seriously considering an older child in the foster care system. I'm not sure why I have to reveal my name and address to you to do such a thing.

This article is not about a woman's right to choose this is about Obama voting for a law that would allow Doctors to ignore the basic needs of a child. Argue and say what you want but once the Embryo, Zygote or whatever term you want to use is out of the womb then it becomes a human being and to lay it off to the side and do nothing? Well then I guess it is time for us as humans to let the next dominant species have a go at this planet because we don't deserve to be here.

I beg you please give me hope that we are better than this.

I never thought I'd write this, whybesad, but I do agree with your view. There is an exception to this, though. If in the third trimester, the woman finds out that she could die if the pregnancy isn't terminated. Or, if she finds out that her child will have very serious health issues, in these circumstnaces, I support it. I do agree that a woman should (and does) know that she is going to choose abortion before the third trimester, unless it is a health related (either her or the baby) issue.

It's the late term abortions that Obama supports that I have a problem with. If you choose to have an abortion after you consider all the other options. You should know if your going to abort the p regency well before the third trimester. That is just plan brutal what the due to get that fetus out of the woman's body.

Sport, lots of people who talk the talk, not to many who truley walk it!

Wow. Okay, I have a question. To the people-of-faith-you-killed-a-future-Lincoln(s): if the government bans abortion, what do you plan to do about a million unwanted children each year?
Wait, I already have any easy solution that doesn't require anyone else except the pro-lifers.
Are you willing to adopt a child, regardless of the circumstances of it's conception, and known physical/mental defects? Anyone can have an opinion, but can you stand behind it? Lovestocrap, you willing to adopt one child, without conditions? If so, state your real name and address. Truth1, how about you? Nurse? Bill? Bible? Oh yeah, I forgot, that's a million unwanted children A YEAR, so you may have to agree to adopt more than one.
If any of you post anything other than "I agree and here's my real name and address...", then really all you're doing is pretending to have a belief.
The things I believe in I would die for, fight for, sacrifice everything for.
Are you willing to adopt a child for your beliefs?

Lovetoscrap

I can't believe you are carrying on this argument. The republicans being in the minority by 1 is almost meaningless, when they have the President to veto anything they aren't in agreement with.

The troubles in the financial markets had more to do with a policy by the republican administration, of little to no regulation on the banks and free markets. It had nothing to do with congressional action or lack of it. The end result was greed and out right fraud flourished, leading, eventually, to the collapse of the financial markets and a huge bill to the taxpayers.

The war in Iraq was the result of an intentional miss leading by the Bush administration. Bush and Cheney acted as quasi con-men to intentionally take advantage of a country, stunned by the events of 911 and led them off in the wrong direction to Iraq.

Invading Iraq was a high priority on Bush's agenda long before 911. 911 was the catalyst that allowed him to get his wish. Much exaggeration and outright fabrication occurred during this period. Most of it won't be public until after President Bush leaves office.

To summarize, the last 8 years, yes all 8 of them have been an accident about to happen and last week it happened.

The republicans were in the minority for the last year and half as the bottom fell out. It is you who should dream on.

I apologize fot the post that was too graphic and removed by site staff. I was just trying to share my knowledge that I knew about abortion techniques. An individual who had questioned what I posted needed clarification.

Lovetoscrap:

So it was the democratic congress to blame for it all......that's a bit like blaming the undertaker for the death.

Dream on my friend.........

biggirl- Rumor has it I was once a fetus. I was domiciled in my mothers womb while I formed but I was never a part of her body nor were you. Thank God your mother didn't feel that way about you.

Curlrock- I hear how you are feeling. Your daughter would be looking to you for guidance. I am sure you and your daughter are very close.
Some people find an understanding about the aftereffects of an abortion, by applying a scientific approach. To make a real informed decision, a person should really conduct thorough research. All life changing decisions and major milestones should be evaluated before an individual determines their life path.

Scary how many people want the government controlling women's bodies. Sorry folks: It's my body. You can do whatever you want with yours.

Devilsadvocate so the Republicans ran this country in the ground during the last eight years? This sums it up well! Facts are facts!!

This has to make you think a little bit, if not then just keep your blinders on!

George Bush has been in office for 7 1/2 years. The first six the economy was fine.

A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) the unemployment rate was 4.5%.
4) the DOW JONES hit a record high--14,000 +
5) American's were buying new cars, taking cruises, and vacations overseas, living large!

But American's wanted 'CHANGE'! So, in 2006 they voted in a Democratic Congress & yep--we got 'CHANGE' all right.

In the PAST YEAR:
1) Consumer confidence has plummeted ;
2) Gasoline fluctuates between 3-4 dollars a gallon & climbing!;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $12 TRILLION DOLLARS & prices still dropping;
5) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.
6) As I write, THE DOW is probing another low ... about 9000. $2.5 TRILLION DOLLARS HAS EVAPORATED FROM THEIR STOCKS, BONDS & MUTUAL FUNDS INVESTMENT PORTFOLIOS!

Buckyfan:
To amplify your point, if I may, not only does government claim the authority to regulate what choices we make with our own bodies, it also claims authority over what choices we can make with someone else's body, particularly without their consent. Pregnant women who choose to have abortions aren't just making choices for control of their own bodies but are also making a choice, life or death, for their child. Government never allows us to make a choice for our own benefit that results in someone else's death unless our own lives are also in peril under any other circumstances.

Clouds: The point I was trying to make (and something I respectfully think you understood but still felt the need to challenge...semantics, semantics, semantics) is that there are laws made every day about what I can and can't do with my body.
---
I cannot go outside right now and legally sell my body for money. I cannot possess illegal drugs. And like you said, I cannot parachute without being properly trained (or without the proper equipment). And it is illegal for me to sell my organs, dead or alive (google it if you don't believe me). So, my point still stands, we don't always get a "choice" with our bodies.

As a point of fact, anyone who says, "It is wrong to make judgements" has just made one.

Devilsadvocate-It's Bibledude. A Bibledue is actually a hairdo from the Biblebelt.

Spunkmeyer- Wow, those magic words were spoken and you were transformed from your mother into you! Sounds like a good Jerry Springer episode, it could be called "I Used To Be My Own Mother."

I think Curlrock makes an excellent point. Just because you are pro-choice does not mean you would have an abortion, nor does it mean you think it's morally right. Being pro-choice simply means you believe the decision should be left to the woman.

Bibledue

You make my point exactly...all the abortion talk appeals to the emotional/religious side of people, not the common sense side. The Republicans hope, by appealing to that side of folks, they will be voted back in, in spite of the fact they ran the country into the ground for the last 8 years.

ncpanfan - My apologies. What I should have said is MOST pro-lifers.

Thank you. Your answer was not very specific, but I think you mean you don't mind pro-life groups going after women who are not doing the right things during their pregnacies. I couldn't be sure through your smugness. Most Americans are afraid of that sort of thing, which is why the majority don't want the court ruling to change.
For the record after many years of going back and forth struggling with the issue, I am pro-choice. I hate abortions just as much as people who are pro-life and wish that they were not so prevelent. Ultimately, what made my decision is the thought of my daughter coming to me after being raped and telling me she thinks that she is pregnant and that she doesn't want to have that mans baby. I could never tell her she should. Maybe you could.
So what it really comes down to for me is; if I cant tell my own daughter she is comitting murder, why should I be able to tell someone elses daughter.

There are many choices we are not allowed to make regarding our bodies. We can't, for example, perform sex acts for money, sell our organs, parachute without the proper safety equipment/training or possess/do drugs to name a few. So why is abortion different?

Devils: Like the fact that the government used our tax dollars and bailed out AIG so that they could take their executives on a a half million dollar retreat for a week?? Then turned around and gave them more this week? Someone said well what they did isn't really illegal, they didn't break any laws BUT they should have known better...

bibledude - When the doctor said "It's a girl."
Devils - Amen.

Devilsadvocate-The subject matter of abortion is about human life. The economy is about money. When did money become more important to you than human life?

Spunk: You are correct that is a scary thought. Is it possible to be done?, yes I think the way our government is run it could be done which is why it is such a hot topic. Like I said I don't think it will be made illegal and even if it is I don't think they would devote any more time to it than other crimes that happen. It would be more of being turned in by someone or perhaps a sting operation, etc... such as with drugs, guns, etc... I think our government can do like any other government and cover up crimes, cover up things they don't want the people to know about, spy on citizens, etc...-
I am pro-life and even though I wouldn't have an abortion doesn't mean I condemn those who do. I feel that it is wrong and that is my opinion. We are all entitled to our opinions. As I stated before I agree we all should be allowed to make our own decisions without the government doing it for us. Like someone posted just because we are allowed certain rights doesn't mean it is the right thing to do. (something to that effect)-
But to assume that because I am pro-life that I am condemning others is wrong. I have said before we all make choices and sometimes those choices are hard but in the end we have to live with our own decisions. I am far from perfect and never claimed to be. I make mistakes just like anyone else. I live my life trying to be a better person and make the right calls and live with the results from my decisions.In the end I hope that for anything I have done or said that has hurt someone that I have been forgiven.-
I would like to pose a question to those who are pro-abortion. (I didn't say pro-choice because I think you can be for anyone's right to make their own decision but still be against or for abortion)The question is in regards to late-term / partial birth abortions. If a woman ,carries her pregnacy 7,8, or even 9 months and then decides to abort (for other than medical reasons)why not just carry the baby another month or so and give it up? It isn't like you just found out you were pregnant because obviously at this point most of the signs are there and you have already went 2/3 of the way?-
I am not trying to be difficult or anger anyone, it is just hard for me to understand some of these things because of the way I feel. (Yes I know those are only my feelings)As I stated before I know people who had convenient, multiple abortions and I don't understand why they find that such an easy birth control option. I feel they should be making better choices to begin with.

DEVILS...I love your point!!!!!!! SO true.

The economy is falling down around our feet, we are involved in a war we never should have started and all we can worry about is abortion? Changing the "topic", so to speak,from what's happening now, to hot button issues such as abortion and flag burning is an old republican trick. Don't fall for it.

Spunkmeyer: You stated, "I don't believe I have the right to tell a woman what she should do with HER body." So by using your logic you were once a part of your mother's body. When then did you cease to be a part of your mother and become you?

and as for the '100,000 people die in American hospitals every year' comment. (sigh) a lot of people die in hospitals, a few due to medical/human error because medical personnel are human, not God. But the majority of people who die in hospitals die because they are dying, not because they are in a hospital. Good grief, maybe you should launch an investigation of Hospice Centers: 100% of their admissions die.

Curlrock:
I fell fairly comfortable. How do you like my answer? Any follow-ups?

clouds555: well, a lot of people mourn the death of a baby via natural miscarriage: the mother, the father, other family, friends. What a cruel, heartless thing for you to suggest otherwise.

Spunkmeyer:
Do the police attempt to track down anyone who may be thinking of buying an illegal drug, an illegal weapon, stolen property or the like? Only when they have probable cause, such as when a co-conspirator calls the police or an informant tells them. Our laws do not allow the police to surveil people they only suspect may be considering an illegal act without probable cause. Pregnancy is not probable cause just as drug addiction is not probable cause. Even convicted felons who have been released cannot be surveilled without other probable cause as a criminal record itself is not probable cause. Sure, the police may question a woman who lost her baby under suspicious circumstances (it stretches credulity to assume falling on ice, for instance, is an attempted abortion, after all many people fall on the ice), but medical records and personal data such as blood tests are untouchable without a court order. Consider how difficult it is to prosecute criminals as things stand today. I think your concerns are unrealistic and unnecessary.

The answer is they don't have one. The other fact is it will not be outlawed in my lifetime anyway so this is really a moot point. This article is about a woman who survived an abortion attempt. If that is a possibility then our laws need to be changed.

How does the government get this list of women looking for illegal abortion?

Spunkmeyer- I don't think they are comfortable answering specifically the questions that we are posing. I don't pose these questions because I know I'm right. I just think about the ramifications if the court ruling is changed.

also, a follow up on police charging for rape evidence collection kits...now this sounded suspicious to me. Like if my house is robbed, police charge to dust my house for fingerprints?

So I just checked with a cop I know (bachelor degree, criminal justice; & Master's degree, public administration, accredited police academy, & also certification for Crime Scene Investigator) He said: "police departments do not charge for evidence collection. Some hospitals might assess an insurance company for the service. Hospitals cannot, due to privacy laws, contact a police department if a rape victim comes to the hospital for medical help. The victim must authorize police contact."

billnewbie & ncpanfan - I appreciate both of you at least attempting to answer my question. Maybe I'm not making my point clearly enough. Pro-lifers are quick to condemn women for having abortions. But, unless the goverment is going to hunt down every pregnant woman considering an abortion, lock them up and FORCE them to continue their pregnancy, there is nothing you can do about it. And really, honestly, THAT scenario scares me more than a woman choosing to have an abortion.

I know a pro-life atheist who finds this discussion interesting. He hopes that some day science will prove to everyone that God does not exist and that life beings at conception. He certainly does not consider abortion a civilized act!! I certainly agree that this issue should be more about science and what civilized societies should do. Abortion is just wrong whether you believe in God or not. We should move this issue away from being a religious question.

I need to correct something I said. I stated in an earlier post that I don't agree with partial-birth abortions. That's not altogether true. It depends on the circumstances. However, I still don't believe I have the right to tell a woman what she should do with her body. I think it's a decision best left to the woman and her doctor. And by the way, partial-birth abortions are RARELY performed...
"The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that 60.5 percent of legal abortions occur within the first eight weeks of gestation, and 88.2 percent are performed within the first 12 weeks. Only 1.4 percent occur after 20 weeks (CDC, 2006)."
"D&E — dilation and evacuation — is another kind of in-clinic abortion. D&E is usually performed later than 16 weeks after a woman's last period. Less than 1 out of 10 abortions in the United States happen during this time. After 24 weeks of pregnancy, abortions are performed only for SERIOUS HEALTH REASONS."

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/issues-...

Spunk: In regards to your question: First of all I really don't think abortion will ever go back to being illegal. However if it did I would imagine it would be the same as any other law and our system fails miserably now with the different crimes going on. Unless there was a "big brother" specifically looking for pregnant women who were having abortions what would happen is that it would be like before with them being done illegally. This would result in more deaths but I also suspect that it would result in less late term abortions for reasons other than medically necessary as women would not want to wait that long and start showing their pregnacies and take the chance that they were being monitored. They would do them at the beginning before outward signs of pregnacy would be easily noticed. However this is only a theory, I have no facts just possible scenario...

billnewbie- As I mentioned before I respect your view. In fact we may have the some of the same views, but please answer the tough question about how and when do we prosecute the woman. Should we have pro-life spies following women we suspect. If abortion is made illegal there will legal action against women who do things which some feel might be harming the baby. (I'm not talking about drug addicts.) I have given you examples below(i.e iceskating) but you haven't addressed them. You are naive if you don't think this would be the next step of the pro-life movement. If you think we should go after all these women then say it. I may not agree but will accept that.
But don't avoid the ramifications of what you are striving for in the courts.

Spunkmeyer:
I'd like to answer your question. I hope you don't mind.
If the option of abortion is legally removed, the nature of a woman's body forces her to carry her baby to full term. That is accomplished naturally. No one else needs to be involved.
Maybe the better question is, if you allow abortion, who forces the baby to die?
With no outside interference, a pregnancy results in a birth. Only abortion requires forceful interference.

Lakennedy:
Legal or not I advocate for life. Yes, it's true that those who are intent on having an abortion can do so. I hope you don't mind if I try to change some minds. I recognize that many don't want to hear it, or read it, but in our country we can still advocate what we think is right. After all, just because we have the right to do something doesn't mean its the right thing to do.
I still can't get you to admit my assumption about how you will vote is right, can I?

By the way, I'm still here, timidly standing up for my viewpoints, cowardly cringing behind my monitor fainting at the thought that people will call me names, so frightened that others will disagree with me yet too stubborn to be intimidated.
Woe is me.
On the other hand, it will be a cold day in hades when I let some inarticulate critic intimidate me.

tjncj - I believe it should be up to the woman and her doctor. I may not agree with late-term abortions, but I don't believe I have the right to tell a woman what she should do with her body. That's what this whole argument is about. It isn't about republicans or democrats. It's about choice.
Now that I've answered your question, how about you answer mine? If abortion was illegal, would you force a woman to carry her pregnancy to full term? And how would this be accomplished?

Is it just me or is comprehending cloud's grumblings really an act of futility? Oh well, I'll just consider the source, or is it sources? Are cloud's postings the ramblings of multiple persons or multiple personalities? Which ever, it's apparent that they are all interrelated. Same style, same nonsense, same tasteless propensity for name calling.

clouds555: you need to follow the money, honey. and BTW, on the news earlier this morning, ACORN (that would be the community organizing group Obama has worked with and for)officials have conceded to voter registration fraud in several states. As in duplicate registrations, fake addresses & forgery. Google 'Obama ACORN connection'

Why has Obama refused $$ from the McCain-Feigold legislation? because of the paper trail

A question to the pro-choice crowd. Is there any stage of pregnancy that an abortion should be illegal?

The problem in this country is that people do not VALUE life! If you can just murder a baby just because it's "inconvenient", why isn't it ok to do mercy killings? Or euthanize those that some people feel have no value???? It's starts with Abortion and leads to these other things. Our society is on the downhill slope to hell and going fast!Eveyone has value wether it's an unborn baby or any other person. You can explain away and try to say it's ok with facts and figures but all in all it is still murder of a CHILD!!!! But then again, I don't have to answer for you in the end,YOU DO!!! May God have mercy on your soul!

iguernsey - I couldn't have said it better myself. Seriously. I really couldn't have. So thanks for takin' the words right outta my head and postin' them here for all to see. :)

of course we make 'judgements' all the time. that's what laws are: decisions which judge behavior and provide for consequences for what we've decided is a wrong. Otherwise, there is anarchy. To those who think it is wrong to impose our morals on others: with your logic, the Columbine killers were only expressing their own moral beliefs, and therefore their actions were fine. NOT!!

as for the baby is a leach thread...so if the mother gives birth, but decides the baby is still a leach for still needing care, is the mother/other care giver guiltless for ignoring the baby & letting him or her die?

and those late term abortions to save the mother...c'mon labor is hard, stressful work. BTDT so how is still going thru labor, to abort the baby at the end of labor & partway thru birth, saving the mother? The actual birth is the easier part--remember: BTDT

lovetoscrap, nurse4u, billnewbie: While I think it's great that none of you are ever going to have an abortion, the fact that there are woman who are having one as I type this. You know what, it's a troubling thought. I do support her right to choose that abortion, and your Gods, and your senses of decency, and you definitions of when you believe life starts is never going to change that. Just as my views will never change yours. I am fine with the state of affairs right now because women currently enjoy the right to choose. Apparently there must be something to this pro-choice argument, huh? I won't sit here and tell you that your views are ignorant or that they don't matter. I believe that they do, and that you're each entitled to them. I hope that you can afford the same respect to us who don't share them with you.

whybesad: Taken from your post from 8:08 on 10/8: "Lakekennedy you won't allow the government to tell you the choices to make about having an abortion. But, you will let them run your health are?"
My post that you were apparently responding to, but had failed to actually read: "I don't support government controled healthcare, just for the record."
If you want to question/attack something, try reading the post.

billnewbie- I agree, the methods of abortion that you refer to would be fairly easy to regulate. My point is that if abortion becomes illegal, every pregnant woman needs to be held to a higher standard to make sure the baby reaches full term. I know that currently, women can be prosecuted for not caring for the unborn, but it is only prosecuted in fairly obvious cases. Doesn't making abortion illegal increase the chance that a 10 week pregnant women, who, decides to have a drink with her meal, go ice skating, skydive, run a greater risk of prosecution. A pro-life advocate can say that she is endangering her child. You may think that these are unrealistic examples. But really isn't that the next step if we want to protect the unborn. I think this is what makes many women nervous about losing their personal rights. These are the tough issues that people dont discuss. If your answer making abortion illegal will help and you don't worry about the other consequences I can accept that. However, I look like to look past the obvious and see how our decisions affect the not so obvious.

And I don't know about YOUR GOD, but MINE doesn't judge. God is all knowing, and understands why we make the choices we make, he knows the choices we are going to make before we do. And I also wouldn't surround myself with judgmental people, without trying to figure out why they are as they are, as there is a reason for EVERYTHING. Yes, it is human nature to initially think someone is doing something wrong, but it is the CHRISTIAN way to realize that we must love all no matter what.

AND I WANT TO STRESS....it is NOT our job to judge. Just because one thing doesn't work for you doesn't mean it doesn't for another. Sounds like some of you want to live in a country ran by Sadam.

And I am just wondering...do you ever engage in sexual activitie for mere pleasure? And not only to reproduce? If you want to get technical, that could be a sin. And where in the TEN COMMANDMENTS does it say 'Thou shall not abort an unborn fetus'?

LOVETOSCRAP...and who's decision is it to determine what is a sin or not? If you are saying someone is sinning, aren't you saying "without" saying they are going to hell? Unless of course you are one of those that demand repentance...then you would be a hyprocite. It is NOT OUR JOB to JUDGE or to determine sin by man made laws!!!!!!!

clouds555 - one minute you are telling people that a woman should be able to make decisions about her body, and that is her right. The next post you are telling Palin she had no business getting pregnant at that age. Which is it? Make up your mind what a woman is allowed to do, and make sure it is consistant. It reminds me of the flip flopping, double talk of the political party who's mascot is a donkey.

Optimism, where do you get the idea that it's not our job to judge? Of course it is our job to judge. We are capable and expected to say that sin is sin. If you are referring to the portion of the Bible that is so often misquoted, then I will clarify that portion of scripture for you. We are not to judge whether or not someone is going to heaven or hell. That is what we are not to judge. Sin is to be judged.

Jguernsey, you are either pro-life or pro-abortion. There is no sitting on the fence on this one. It's either wrong or right. It's not about the traditions of religion, it's about the sanctity of life. Life to every person world wide should be precious. It's not just Christians that value human life. To think that all of you can read what nurse has written and still say and think that this is okay makes me sick to my stomach. Of course you make yourselves feel better by expressing how you personally would never do this horrible act. Give me a break!

Curlrock:
In answer to your question “how to we prosecute the offenders” and the others, we have those same problems with all our laws. Some people break the law as a matter of desperation while seeking a solution to personal problems all the time and in many ways. Our legal system is set up precisely for those reasons. After all, not everyone who kills is a murderer, and not all murders are cold blooded premeditated acts. Who decides? Juries and judges. Besides, with the millions of abortions performed, the mothers are not the ones who actually kill the child. Some professional actually does the deed. If abortions were illegal, the professionals would stop their services except for the abortions that would be allowed under the law as all abortions were never totally banned. Then abortions would nearly stop. Prosecutions would be rare without the participation of the professional as well as due to the fact that most people obey the law. After all as some keep writing, no woman wants to have an abortion and few would risk her own life such as intentionally falling on ice in spite of what we have been told. And few mothers would want to commit their abortions personally anyway, as it gets tougher to rationalize the deed when you actually kill the baby yourself. Doesn’t legal abortion, readily available and performed by professional proxy, sanitized if you will, multiply demand for abortion? How many fewer abortions would there be if the mother had to guide the suction tube to its target personally such as in a D&C abortion? Or inject the poisoning saline solution into her baby’s environment? I suspect it is the rare woman indeed who could actively take the life of her own child particularly for the sake of convenience.

i see nurse4u did not answer any of clouds questions about hospitals killing more then 100,000 people a year. then you post a comment from another blog but you didn't read it ? clouds said "IF I COULD FIND SOME" another fact you missed nurse4u. clouds also never said you did not have a degree, another fact you missed. do you make this many mistakes at the hospital you work at too ?

Generally, people are against abortion because of their religious view. Not all of them, but I would venture to guess that at least half are. How about this, I won't impose my religious beliefs on you, if you don't impose yours onto me. Sound fair? This country was not founded so that every religion could strive to force their agenda into the government. There is a very important reason for this. We all have the choice of what God we worship, you can even be ordained the minister of your own fake religion if you want. How would you feel if a band of Jewish people got together and lobbied congress to ban all slaughter and consumption of all "cloven footed animals"? Or what if Buddhists band together and try to get the killing of insects and spiders and other living things banned because it could be one of their reincarnated loved ones? Those may sound minor but just think if all religions started to get some of their beliefs ingrained into law. Fines for adultery? Fines for taking the Lords name in vain? And at that point we cease to be a democracy and become a theocracy.

Being pro-choice does not mean that your are for abortion, pro-choice simply means that you are for people being able to make that choice for themselves. The opposite of pro-choice is not pro-life, it is anti-choice, you don't believe that a woman has the right to choose. I would consider myself pro-choice/pro-life, because while I believe that every woman has the right to decide for herself, my wife and I have both decided that we could never have an abortion.

As I mentioned before, the whole rape and incest issue is a joke. In my opinion your either all in or all out. I may not agree with it but I respect the all in stance more than the stance that most so called pro-life politions give. If abotion would become illegal how to we prosecute the offenders? A trial to determine if they took the morning after pill? A investigation to see if that fall on the ice was on purpose or not? I'm sorry billnewbie if this is one of those gray areas that you hate but I am being very serious. Isn't making abortions illegal really a moral victory? How would it ever be prosecuted? Who picks and chooses which women we prosecute?

Oh wah! All you pro lifers open an orphanage then. It is disgusting to sit here and see how judgemental you all are. And you know what I meant when I said IUD...it was an example, excuse me, let me correct myself, diaphram, is that better? Go ahead and drive yourselves nuts thinking just how developed a fetus is at 1 day 1 week or 1 month, if it is the person's choice, it is their right. Not all can deal with disabled children, not all can deal with children period. And I don't agree with abortion being used as birth control either, but it is not my place to judge. If we really want to get technical, birth control also kills children. It destroys or blocks eggs from doing what they are suppose to do...if we really wanted to, we all could tear eachother apart for any belief. People need to stop judgeing and if you truly feel terrible for the fetus' that are aborted, then I suggest you donate your time to children that have no family. That can be your way of helping an 'unwanted' child. Just stop the judging!!!!!! It isn't any of our jobs to judge.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/abortiontype...

www.lifesitenews.com/abortionsites.

At eight to nine weeks the eyelids have begun forming and hair appears. By the ninth and tenth weeks the preborn child sucks her thumb, turns somersaults, jumps, can squint to close out light, frown, swallow, and move her tongue.

At this early stage of development, suction abortions are performed using a smaller tube, requiring little dilation of the cervix. This is called "menstrual extraction." However, if all the fetal remains are not removed, infection results, requiring full dilation of the cervix and a scraping out of the womb.

Suction Aspiration
This is the most common method of abortion during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. General or local anaesthesia is given to the mother and her cervix is quickly dilated. A suction curette (hollow tube with a knife-edged tip) is inserted into the womb. This instrument is then connected to a vacuum machine by a transparent tube. The vacuum suction, 29 times more powerful than a household vacuum cleaner, tears the fetus and placenta into small pieces which are sucked through the tube into a bottle and discarded.

Dilation and Curettage (D&C)
This method is similar to the suction method with the added insertion of a hook shaped knife (curette) which cuts the baby into pieces. The pieces are scraped out through the cervix and discarded.

It continues....How tragic.

Some of you that are pro-abortion are using the whole back alley abortion being unsafe to women as a reason to keep abortion legal. I say, if a woman is stupid enough to have an abortion in a back alley, then she is giving herself a death sentence. At least she is deciding for herself, unlike an innocent baby that she is murdering with no chance to take it's first breath. Which makes more sense? Kill an innocent child or make a selfish and convenient decision to rid yourself of any responsibility for your own actions? And yes, we have had the whole rape and incest discussion before and as I have stated in the past...the number of abortions that are done for these reasons are miniscule compared to the ones done for convenience sake. And for the record...I am against abortion in all cases, even rape, incest and the baby being a developmentally disabled child.

oh and by the way you don't PUT an IUD in. You have to have that surgically inplanted by a OB/GYN.

Clouds-Your ignorance is showing. Again. Why don't you look up your facts about Nursing qualifications before you try to belittle me? It is regulated by the State. You need a License to practice. AND a college degree. The hospital that I work for does NOT perform abortions.
Strike one, strike two.Strike three. You're OUT.
Please contact me if you would like some assistance in obtaining drug counseling. I am here for you. Because I care.

optimism, do you really think I was talking about rape and incest victims? You're a big moron for your sarcastic twist on my comment about using condoms. I'm talking about the common teenager or woman who gets pregnant without thinking of the consequences of their few minutes of "fun". A rape or incest victim gets pregnant at the time of the act. If they have the courage to tell someone they should by all means have the right to abort. Just don't wait 4, 5, 6..9 months to do it! I know a woman who aborted at around 6 months due to the baby's SEVERE BIRTH DEFECTS (the baby would NOT have survived). In truly extreme medical cases it's the mother and doctor working together to make the decision. I would not hold that agaisn't any woman. I'M AGAINST PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTIONS!

I make great assumptions, just ask Lakennedy.

I’m gone for a while and when I get back I’m called a Democrat (Jacka--) and a coward! It’s true, I can’t have a baby, but it’s not for lack of courage. It seems I lack something else, instead. Yet another name slinging self-righteous feminist (nothing personal) who thinks that men should just shut up. No chance, clouds. You’re just going to have to tune me out just like you do everyone else who tries to reason with you. By the way, I prefer to be called Knuckle Dragging Neanderthal.
So, Lakennedy, I see you’ve ignored my post where I quoted what you wrote in July. You misled many people then, myself included, and now you’ve dropped your “victims of rape” defense in favor of a change in subject ( War). I could turn that around and say that if you oppose the killing of innocent war victims, why are you in favor of the killing of innocent abortion victims, but one really doesn’t have anything to do with the other I suspect that you would say.
Will you also ignore that you’ve admitted that my assumption about how you will vote was right?
Gray areas are an interesting subject. And since I’ve been accused of being too stupid to understand just what they are, I’ll offer my opinion. A gray area is what those who need an excuse, or rationalization, to do something they know they shouldn’t do cite when they manufacture that excuse, such as “I got pregnant and then my boyfriend ditched me so I’m having an abortion”, or “I got pregnant but I can’t interrupt my career just now so I’m having an abortion”. Both examples are perfectly reasonably sounding excuses to not inconvenience oneself with a pregnancy. That is what a “gray area” is, an excuse, and if one tries really hard to believe their own excuse, one can convince oneself that the bad action that one seeks to do that they felt the need to excuse can appear to be good if they are gifted self-deceivers. Lakennedy gives away the game when she states “No one wants to have an abortion”. If no one wants to have them and so many are being done, then their must be a lot of people talking themselves into calling it good. Would Lakennedy see gray areas as clearly as they might pertain to spousal abuse? I’ll bet that, like me, she wouldn’t see quite so much gray area there. And yes, I do oppose spousal abuse and all instances where the strong abuse the weak, just in case a few spin meisters try to make of my argument that I don’t.

'Wait daddy, before you molest me...please put on this condom so I don't have to justify my decision to terminate the child I may get pregnant with out of insest'. or Wait man with gun and aids, please let me put in my IUD before you rape me...for I wouldn't want to walk through a line of picketers to terminate a pregnancy that would haunt me for the rest of my life'. You people that think these people don't have the right to rid themselves of the evil are cold and heartless, you may as well have raped or molested them yourselves!

BN1967..........you are an absolute nieve individual. Do you really think it is that simple? Get a clue.

Nurses also know NO contraceptives are 100% (especially the common Pill which can be affected by something as simple as taking an antibiotic)...and you also know that the right-to-life is pushing "conscience clauses" for health professionals so women would be denied complete, factual information and access to LEGAL medications. These issues are not black-and-white for everyone, every time no matter how much some would prefer them to be. Choice means exactly that. It does not mean women are forced to do that with which they do not agree. Some remember when we had no choices and we certainly do NOT want to return to those days. Today, you have the right to YOUR own choice. Please work to keep the choices of others safe and legal with comprehensive information and access to medical professionals.

As a nurse, I have the freedom to decide if I would ever participate in an abortion. My choice is No I would not. Just because abortion is done as a medical procedure does not make it justified.
Just because it is not against the law does not make it Right.
That is my opinion. Do I personally hold it against those that have had an abortion? No, but my heart aches for that baby and I wonder what could have been..

Here's a thought...don't want to have a baby...USE BIRTH CONTROL! Abortion should not be used as such. And I imagine that a box of condoms is a heck of a lot cheaper.

Women are too immature, irrational, ignorant, and/or immoral to make their own health care CHOICES about their OWN bodies without politicians interfering but then ironically are judged wise and mature enough to carry a pregnancy to it's term and raise children for 18+ years? Those who propose to keep government out of our lives in every other way should also keep it out of our bodies in the most intimate and personal ways.

NURSE4U - I would think with you being a nurse, you would know that "ripping a baby from the womb before it has even had a chance to be born" is not exactly how the procedure is done.
NCPANFAN - I appreciate you answering my question, but I'm not really satisfied with your answer. I know about adoption as an option. A woman has that now. But what if she doesn't WANT to continue the pregnancy, for whatever reason she has? Should she be forced to continue the pregnancy against her will? And how exactly will that be accomplished? Will she be locked up and monitored until after the baby is born? Prosecuted if she refuses to have it? I'm just trying to understand a pro-lifer's position here. Anyone else?

Cloud555 is a true loony from the FAR left. WOW and that's right people there are people that actually think this way and are in our community. Scary isn't it?

Lakekennedy you won't allow the government to tell you the choices to make about having an abortion. But, you will let them run your health are?

meinelkm20, in your case, you said you were raped 2 weeks ago...any doctor can give the "morning after pill" to prevent a pregnacy. I'm not attacking you (you said you wouldn't get an abortion) but in cases of incest or rape these women should seek out help from their doctor before they are very far along. I know, most are afraid to say anything.

I'm not for abortion (but will give a woman her rights). It's these late term or partial birth abortions I have a major problem with. Giving birth is no easy thing. Then to have doctors (or politicians) saying these are done to save a mothers life is just too hard for me to understand. Let me see, it's going to kill the mother if they have the baby (and the baby lives) so let's instead induce labor, turn the baby breech, pull it out except for the head, make an incision, suck out the brains and then procede to pull the dead baby out. HOW IS THIS SAVING THE MOTHER'S LIFE? How can a woman carry their baby for months and then decide to abort it? When I was pregnant and had some test to see if the baby had Down's Syndrom I left the doctor's office thinking I was stupid for having the test since at that point I wouldn't have done anything about it. I didn't care at that point since I had carried my child for months, she was my baby and she was a gift.

It's just a sick though having an abortion that far into a pregnancy. Obama should be running from that because that just isn't normal thinking. But, again this is a guy who sat in the pews of a radical American hating preacher for 20 years so, I guess it's not out of the norm of this radical named Obama.

Lovetoscrap: if your question is do I think that an abortion is a good thing? No. I don't recall having ever met a woman who said "Gee, I'm feeling up to a nice abortion today, I think I'll go get me one." No one wants to have an abortion. You make it sound like people enjoy them, for Christ's sake. What I do support is women having a choice in the matter, I cannot and will not ever support the government telling them that having a safe alternative to a back alley abortion is wrong. Believe me, I've known several women who have had abortions. The guilt that they go through is far worst than any sort of hell you and other pro-lifers condemn them to. Again, I don't support government controled healthcare, just for the record.

Clouds- I get it now! Cut and pasted form a previous blog:
clouds555
Oct 8, 2008 at 3:45 p.m.
boy you people need smoke one. if i could find some i would be smoking right now : )

Definition of murder: to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously.

What is more barbarous than ripping a baby from the womb before it has even had a chance to be born?

WHOANELLIE...you claim abortion is murder. That in and of itself is not true. But you are entitled to your opinion, but I at least ask you to realize that you feel so strongly about this because of YOUR misfortune. I feel for you and your loss, but a woman who isn't emotionally stable who decides against abortion and gives that baby to someone such as you who wants the chance to adopt a baby, may very well snap because she is unable to cope with the fact that she gave up her baby. There are plenty of kids in the system that need homes, PLENTY, and to treat pregnancy like a puppy mill, and add more population to an already over poplulated orphanage is just as inhumane as you are saying abortion is. It is just terrible to think about what the children who have been in foster care their whole life and are not 'favorable' because they are too old, must feel like. So, see your conclusions on this are strictly based on emotions NOT FACTS.

clouds- You have shown your ignorance once again, and I personally take offense. A "retarded" baby? Nice! It is people like you that I feel so sad for.

How dare you say what you said? My daughter might be behind cognitively, but she is the sweetest little girl in the world that would NEVER intentionally hurt another human being with ignorant, thoughtless remarks. I can NOT say the same for you!

Curl: I would agree that it is a dangerous line when it comes to prosecuting mothers for behaviors that might harm their fetus. And, like other areas in this debate, it's gray.
--
I experienced one of those situations only a couple years ago. One of the women who played soccer in a soccer league with us was VERY pregnant (7 months, if I recall, and her stomach protruded greatly). It was terrifying for the rest of us. No one wanted to accidentally hit her in the stomach with the ball, and we all shied away from playing hard against her for fear she might fall or we might accidentally hit her in the stomach. Every other woman who played in that league (that I spoke to, and it was at least 10) thought it was absolutely wrong for her to be playing soccer that late in her pregnancy.
---
So, should she have been charged? I don't think so. But it was wholly unfair of her to put the rest of us in that situation. We would have been horrified if we would have been the ones responsible for hurting that baby.

clouds555 - my Grandmother was a English/French teacher at Milton College and decided to focus on her career first, and at 41 to have my Uncle and at 45 to have my Mother. Neither of them she had in order to "make a point".

Regardless of the risk, you think she really had a baby at that age to prove a point?

I am really for attacking a point, and not a person, but your attack at Sarah Palin's choice to have that baby enforces your post name - clouds555; it shows the position of your brain.

buckyfan-Thanks for the links. I was pretty sure there were some obvious examples (i.e drugs, intentionaly injesting alchohol). As with anything where do we draw the line when it's not so obvious or intentional. Who decides what is prosecuted. I think that is what makes many women nervous about abortion becoming illegal. The idea of their personal rights to do what they want with their body (i.e. skydiving, having wine with dinner, taking a medication) while pregnant.

lakennedy, I notice you didn't answer my questions. Just did a lot hemhawing and accusing. So? Are you or what? You did a fine job of assuming what I think, so it doesn't go both ways? yeah, I forgot. That's how democrats work. Oh, another question for all you who think the government shouldn't have any say over your's or a woman's body. How is it then, that you are wanting national health care so bad? I will never understand you guys!

I am pro-choice not pro-abortion. I actually hate the idea of abortion but because of rape and incest I have to be pro-choice.

Mark Chumura is the main reason why I agree with those who want to make abortion illegal except in cases of rape/incest. The young lady who accused him of rape, had she actually beomce pregnant, the baby would have been multiple months old by the time the decision about rape had been made.
The courts are too slow and no women should be forced to be on trial before getting an abortion is she was a victim of rape or incest. If rape/incest is the only legal cause for abortion the victims of those crimes would again be on trial before being able to terminate their pregnancy.

As for late term abortions, again I hate the idea of abortion period, but that decision should be trusted to the women and her dr. and hopefully the father.

Curl: People already ARE being charged for endangering their fetuses:
---
www.boalt.org/bjcl/v4/v4costello.htm
---
www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/313/7058/64...
---
Hope these links work. Otherwise, search for "endangering fetus."
---
Also, for those who claim women don't use abortions for birth control, I had two roommates in college. When I got pregnant a couple months before graduating, one of my roommates confided in me that she had two abortions after accidentally getting pregnant. The other roommate told me she also was pregnant and encouraged me to go with her to get an abortion. She aborted her pregnancy (baby, fetus).
---
I now have a 13 year old son who I love dearly, and I'm so thankful I chose life. It's been hard being a single mom, and I wouldn't wish it on anyone, but the joy outweighs the sorrows.
---
The girl who had two abortions is now married and has been attempting for years to get pregnant. My heart aches for her.

I do not know a lot about politics, but I do know that people-first language is important. Please, in the future think about and refer to the baby/child/person first, not the disability. Instead of saying "downs baby," please say "a child with Down's syndrome." If I were diagnosised with cancer, I certainly would not want someone to call me "cancer lady." Please be considerate of all people, children, and families. Thank you.

Yes, I agree your question is ironic. Another that I find interesting is someone who is pro-life with the excpetion of rape or incest. Is that embryo (fetus, baby) any less of a person if it comes from rape or incest. I really think that this a position that republican politicians take who have to be pro-life for their party but don't want to upset the majority of their constituents. I can respect someone who has pro-life views but they have to be all or nothing in my opinion. Also, as you noted I don't think abotion will ever be made illegal. The majority of Americans don't want it change and it would be impossible to enforce.

Curl: I will say that as messed up as our government and judicial system is that the question you posed could become a reality in the near future. Scary isn't it? -
This is a little off topic but the reason I say that is look at what happens when you have an accident. Did you know that no matter what happens you are still considered partially at fault even if you are sitting at a red light behind traffic and a car come up and hits you from behind? Or if you pull out on a main road and there is a truck in front of you that is stopped and has a left turn signal on; and he decides he doesn't want to wait so he throws it in reverse to back up and take the first drive and runs all over you but because you had the audacity to be foolish enough to think that because he was stopped it was safe to pull out behind him and he wasn't actually in the process of making the turn when he threw it in reverse you are 50% at fault?-
So if they can do that despite what the handbooks tell you (laws) then it only follows suit that worse is yet to come..

Clouds555 -how can you know that Palin had a downs baby just to prove a point? That is a pretty rude statement since you know nothing about her personally.

Curl: No I didn't answer your question I only pointed out another question. I said I wan't sure on yours. I wouldn't think she would be charged for something that was an accident? But if you look at it that way an abortion isn't an accident?? I also stated that I don't think they will ever reverse the decision and make abortion illegal again. I am against it and that is my pro choice to be pro life as there are others who have commented that are pro choice and also choose to not agree with abortions either but they give that choice and decision to each individual person as their choice... Like I said before we all make our choices and we all have to live with our own decisions.-
Now as far as what I questioned, don't you find that ironic?

ncpanfan- So your answer is the woman should be charged with reckless homicide? Is that what you mean? If so, who decides what constitutes reckless homicide? Should women be worried about what they do while pregnent, in fear of being charged with this? I think you can see what I'm getting at. If abortion is made illegal, we are opening up a huge can of worms. I think you noted that already. I make this statment as niether pro-life or pro-choice, but blanket statements that people make on this blog and other sites are easy to make, but are not so easy to accept if you look a little harder.

Curl: Not sure on this one but how can someone kill a pregnant woman and be charged with murder for her and her unborn baby but yet if someone aborts the baby it is only considered a fetus and not murder? That one doesn't make sense either.

Spunk: Like someone mentioned on here there are so many gray areas... I don't think they will ever go back and make abortion illegal again. I am against it yes but I do understand that there are times when hard decisions must be made such as mother in danger, etc... but what I don't understand are the ones that are not done for those reasons, the ones that have multiple abortions instead of using birth control in the first place, the partial birth abortions??:
As far as your question, there are people who want children that can't have them, there are also people and places that pay the birth mother's expenses and a fee so that she can have the baby, give it to someone who wants a baby so there is one option...

Clouds: I beg to differ. Maybe not all the time but in both the cases I stated those women did it as an oopsie afterthought. Instead of using birth control in the first place they got pregnant and had multiple abortions...

Ok. I know I going to be pain in the behind but I'll throw this out there just to create controversy. Let's say a woman is 2-3 months pregnant and decides to go skydiving. She falls a little hard and has a miscarraige. Should she be prosecuted for reckless homicide. What about iceskating? When is ok to prosecute her for this? Who decides?

To all you pro-lifers: I'm just curious. Let's say you get your way and abortion is made illegal. A woman gets pregnant. She used protection but it wasn't effective. She doesn't want kids. So would she be forced to continue a pregnancy she doesn't want? And how exactly would that be accomplished?

So I've read all the post and feel so sad! I agree, abortion is not only wrong, it is murder. You can try to explain it away but when it comes right down to it, IT IS MURDER!!!! I don't know what will become of a nation whose people kill their babies because it's inconvenient! God will judge us all in the end, I hope you will repent! I've had 4 miscarriages and would have loved to have those babies. It's nice to know they are with their Grandma up in heaven. I don't care how you try to justify it, there are other alternatives out there. Let the children live. God have mercy on the united states!

mymaro - Amen! I could not have said it better.

A true story on our soldiers and the mass enlistment that occured on the 4th of July in Iraq.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/military/re...

Truth1, you are REALLY getting my blood boiling. You said, "Some people will justify it for "psychological health" reasons or calling "rape" only after pregnancy was discovered which are mostly just baloney excuses." That is possibly the most offensive thing I've ever heard. As someone who was raped 2 weeks ago, the thought of being pregnant has crossed my mind. I would never get an abortion, but that should be MY choice. Maybe some people have claimed rape when it wasn't, but don't you DARE make the ignorant statement that most claimed rapes are "just baloney excuses."

Or for the death penalty.

Just because someone is pro-life does not necessarily mean they are republican...

clouds555 - I know this might be a shock to you, but everybody in the military is there because they WANT to! It is thier job to protect and die for their country if needed. That choice was not the fault of Republicans or President Bush. Freedom comes with a price, and for that price, it sometimes includes death, Anyone who serves, understands this scenerio, and still continues to fight for your freedom. If you are not willing to fight for your country or the freedom of others, you are welcome to leave this great nation, which will mean you are ungrateful for the sacrifices of your forefathers. Canada is a short drive, and I suggest you pack up and head off there.

To die honorably in the military is not the same as an abortion.

yeah clouds555 - I've always thought that quite ironic about the republican party and people who call themselves "pro-life." I think they should be forbidden to use that, and switch to the more appropriate term "anti-choice." Because I have yet to see anything "pro-life" about the republican party which is hightly pro-military = dead soldiers, the republican party is pro-death penalty = dead convicts and often innocent people. Just remember, when you cast that "pro-life" vote, you're also condoning the use of the military however McCain will see to use it even to "bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb bomb Iran." or stay in Iraq for 100 years. And of course for the use of the death penalty which hundreds of people have been released through the Innocence Project. To paraphrase George Carlin: There's a reason why republicans are pro-life, they want live fetuses to grow up to be dead soldiers.

Actually, bill, the Framers were not the same group of men as those who wrote the Declaration. All were of a larger group of patriots, of course, but not the same people in each group. When the Declaration was decided upon, the rebels wanted a very forceful and almost threatening voice to let King George and his British cronies know that thay were very serious in their claims against the Crown. As a result, they chose Thomas Jefferson, known for his fired-up pen and his rambunctiousness. But when it came time to focus on the Constitution, they wanted a more reasoned, less inflaming voice, so they chose the much milder mannered James Madison to do the construction. While the early patriots were (generally) on the same page politically, there was great divisiveness, there were vast differences of opinion, and they did not share as many of the same ideas amoungst themselves as you assume they did.

Thank you LakeKennedy. There never is a right or wrong answer unless a mathmatically equation can be worked. As far as all other issues in the world, there is never a definition of what is right or wrong because really, who makes the definition of right and wrong? Just because they are man made laws doesn't make them right. Evolution of time has proven that. In the past there were many "laws" that at the time seemed "right" but with time and experience they were proven "wrong".

People aren't only killed in the flesh, there are many ways for a person's identity to be terminated.

I gave birth to that 15 year old, why isn't his well being just as important as an unborn fetus'? He was in fact an unborn fetus at one time as well.

NICE TJNCJ....my son was used as an example of a society as a whole. If he felt that way, at 15, when it shouldn't even be an issue, how do adults with proper cognative abilities handle the same situation with a fragile emotional state? There are always ways for people like yourself to twist things to fit your own logic, but for the respect of others, not all are mentally capable of handling high need children, or giving them up after birth. So, shouldn't the rights of a human being that has already been born ALIVE be protected as well? It sounds as if you are willing to place an unborn fetus' right above and beyond the health of a individual's that already breaths oxygen...how is that any better than pro-choice?

So lets kill a baby so a 15 year old doesn't feel bad?

Good post, optimism. Everyone needs to know that there are these gray areas in the world, not every decision is either right or wrong.

Although the belief of abortion will never be changed by one's soapbox speech, I think it is very important to understand EACH CURCUMSTANCE is unique, and how a woman chooses to deal with that curcumstance needs to be left for her and God to deal with. Until you yourself are in the actual situation, you will never be able to say what you would do. You can think you know, but you truly never will know until you experience the situation for yourself, and you never will because each person is unique and their coping mechanisms are unique. So, maybe you could live life with knowing that there is a child out there that you gave life to and gave up for adoption, but the next person may end up in an institution because they can't cope. So, for pro-lifers to tell pro-abortionists that their choice is wrong is really none of their concern....and vice versa. My son who was 15 at the time of my last pregnancy was adimant that I have the test done on the baby because I was over the age of 35, to be sure the baby didn't have downs. HE was almost in tears because he was so scared that a baby would have to come into life and live a life of ridacule. He came to this conclusion because of the way he sees children with disabilities treated at his school. He sticks up for them, but it breaks his heart to see them go through that. So, there is a prime example of why a person may choose to abort, his heart is so sensitive it would kill him to see his brother or sister not be treated as a "normal" part of society. So, all I ask is please have the respect for parents who may not have the emotional strength you do....

lovetoscrap: You have no idea how I feel. So don't assume things. That's what you do when you have no other way to point out your argument. You just can't seem to stand the fact that you help fund the process of taking away someone's right to life. You're also realizing that you're a hypocrite for being against a woman having the right to choose what to do with her body, but okay with helping fund thousands of terminations of others right to life.

I knew Nurse4u would be in here somewhere! I also feel abortion is wrong. But otherwise I don't feel like opening up this giant can of worms. I'll just listen to everyone else's posts.

The death penalty kills people to teach that killing people is wrong.

If someone harms a mother and her unborn baby dies, that person can be charged with murder.
If this same mother would have choosen to abort the baby, it is her right.

What about the unborn baby's right to experience life?

lakekennedy- I am devastasted to hear about your pregnancy and possible complications. I know a beautiful 17 year old whose mother found out she had a brain tumor while she was pregnant. This courageous woman chose to give birth to her daughter. She died soon after.
My daughter was born with severe heart defects. I watched my little girl go through five open heart surgeries. She has a long tough road ahead of her, more surgeries and possibly a double lung transplant. My daughter is my strength and inspiration. I wish every day that I could take away her pain that she has had to endure.
I became pregnant with her sister, after having to take antibiotics that decreased my birth control pills' effectiveness. My daughter's father pushed me to have an abortion. I called a facility in Beloit. I do not know who this woman was and I have never had the opportunity to thank her, but she touched my life with her simple words, "Your daughter with all of her medical issues, is she not a blessing to you?"
I left her father and gave birth to a beautiful healthy daughter.
Even if I would have known about my daughter's condition before she was born I would not have had an abortion. She deserves a chance at life and I will do my best to ensure she has all the miracles medicine has to offer to her.
I hope that you find peace and strength.

lakennedy, lets reverse things for a minute...so you think that the innocent civilians getting killed is terrible but it's okay to kill 3000+ innocent babies per day? Wow! You do have an interesting way of looking at things!

clouds555- "An undead corpse"??? What does that even mean? One, it is an oxymoron and two, there is no such thing.
A baby is conceived when a sperm meets an egg. When fertilization takes place, a baby has begun to form. That is not my opinion, it is a medical fact.
Your logic, as always, baffles me.

billnewbie:
The fact that you refuse to consider is that there are these gray areas, both of which I had pointed out in earlier posts, which you so astutely researched. The bottom line is that you, or other pro-life supporters have no respect for the fact that there is a gray area in this world. It seems as though everything is black or white with this decision, and sorry to say, but that isn't the case.
Your argument regarding the constitution, and what you interpret the framer's intentions to have been doesn't begin to address the fact that our country and our service men and women (who I have nothing but the upmost respect for) take away someone's right to life everyday. That is a fact. No argument there. It never explicitley says in the constitution that it is okay under any circumstances, you are choosing to interpret it in a way that furthers your argument. When we bomb a country, and there are civilian casualties, who were posing no threat to us or our cause, aren't we taking away a right to life?
Crafty, you have no idea where I've been or what I've seen. I ask you to answer the question I posed to billnewbie. What, then, of the innocent lives that are taken when a bomb is dropped and civillian casualties are inflicted? Do they not have the same right to life as an "innocent baby"? Also, believe me, I'd love to sit and make assumptions about you and what you've seen. I don't though. I ask you to please stick to the argument at hand, and try not to take it personally, as I'm not interested in what your personally think about anything.
Lovestoscrap. You want to talk about desperate? The fact that you can even write that my argument is "desperate at best" is in fact a desperate response to the fact that there are women who live in these gray areas, women who became pregnant not of their own will, but of rape. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge them is ridiculous, but not as ridiculous as the fact that you think you have the right, or the intelligence, to tell them that they are wrong for wanting to have the choice to terminate the pregnancy. The reference to the military isn't nearly as ridiculous as you arguing that there is this natural right to life, and damning women who chose to exercise their RIGHT (remember it is their RIGHT to abort) when we support a military that has taken away that same right to life that you fight so hard for from thousands of innocent civillians. Everytime we pay taxes that fund our military efforts overseas and if even one innocent life is lost in that effort, we take away someone's right to life. The only difference between that and abortion is that you're okay with the latter.

And I am hoping that Obama voted against the aid of born alive abortions because he disagreed with the fact that a baby would be allowed to be aborted at that stage of a pregnancy. But, we will never know his reasoning because that is how these stupid campaign ads work, they distort the truth. I have faith that he is not the type of person who would deny aid to a born alive baby....under ANY CURCUMSTANCES...and for us to fall for this latest tactic would be wrong.

First of all, I would just like to say, abortion is nobody's business but the one personally involved and the Lord. Next, as far as this born alive after abortion, WHY IN THE HE** would there even be an option to abort a child if it is at a stage where life is an option outside the womb? The decision to have an abortion should be made WAY before this stage. That is just plain disgusting. I am not against or for abortion, I just believe that if it is what a person needs to do, it should be done immediately. As far as Obama, of course he is going to try and avoid this, I would too.

Lakennedy, In war lives are taken to save more lives. We are fighting terrorists and criminals, to save you the horror of watching it on your own soil. (though, you might enjoy the horror)We are not killing innocent babies.
I can tell you have never been close to war, or seen an abortion...
There are millions of people waiting, praying, to adopt a baby, so even in cases of rape, abortion is wrong. As for incest, maybe one in a million abortions is the case. That is far better than 3,700 a day!

Lakekennedy, if a woman chooses to have an abortion in a back alley then yes, she might die and so be it. Your reference to rape victims is desparate at best. The number of abortions performed due to rape is miniscule compared to abortions for reasons of convenience. So, please don't go there. It's grasping at straws to make yourself feel better for condoning the murder of innocent children. Even my 16 year old daughter has common enough sense to know that in the case of rape...it isn't the baby's fault, so why kill it. And your reference in comparing our military is out and out hilarious. Again you are grasping at straws.

Cloud...your post brought me so close to being sick, that it doesn't even deserve a reply. The last time I read my Bible, it says that God is all knowing and we are to trust him. Am I really supposed to equally compare a all knowing God with a woman who would choose to kill her own child for the sake of convenience and selfishness? I think not. I'm guessing your mother didn't think of you as a leech when she found out she was pregnant with you, as with most women with they get pregnant, the leech in her womb probably made her happy.

Actually, Lakennedy, the text you cite is found in the Declaration of Independence as follows “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed….”
The preamble to the Constitution says this “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” As you can see, providing for the common defense ( the military) was considered to be a prime function of the framers of the Constitution, the same group that also is responsible for the Declaration of Independence. They saw no contradiction in these statements, why do you?

Lakennedy:
On July 11 you posted the following-
“I immediately regretted posting earlier, as I believe this topic to be of the upmost personal nature and one that cannot given the attention it deserves on a blog, but I just wanted to find out peoples views on this particular scenerio:
I'm a pro-life woman, and my husband and I have one other daughter who is 4. We've been trying for another pregnancy and found out--at long last--that I am pregnant!!! I'm two months along, and up until yesterday everything had been going fine. I found out yesterday at a doctors visit that I have a rare condition and if I do not abort my baby, I myself will die.
What Now?
Me or the Baby?”
I responded with the following posted on the same day-
“It's a difficult choice to die for the sake of another. If a person won't do it, they are in plenty of company as most of us would not as well. That's what makes the difference between a hero and the rest of us.
Similarly, if one is forced into a pregnancy, it takes a heroic person to make the sacrifice to bring forth that life, a sacrifice few would choose to make.
To those who face such choices, I would exhort them to make these sacrifices, but I cannot condemn them if they will not. As the old saying goes, “there, but for the grace of God, go I”. I have the same love of life and human frailties as everyone else. Those that choose to make those sacrifices deserve our admiration.
However, when were talking about abortion, some 99% are not done for such reasons as one must die or the product of rape. Were talking about the “final solution” in birth control. The wanton execution of an innocent life whose sole purpose for dying is that someone isn’t ready, or someone has better things to do, or my boyfriend won’t like it, or that it’s a girl and we really want a boy, or any list of reasons that value the convenience of one over the life of another. In no other circumstance would we as a society tolerate such inconsideration for an innocent life. The fact that we tolerate this is a testament to the ability of people to rationalize the abhorrent to the point of calling it good.”
Do you remember? You later apologized for not making it clear that this posting of yours was a hypothetical story.

billnewbie: you write in your earlier post: "They say that we should trust pregnant women to decide (or choose) what’s right for them and yet they have made many poor decisions to get to the point where they feel the need to consider abortion." Is rape one of those "poor choices"? See, I know someone who was repeatedly raped by her father while growing up. She was eventually impregnated and ended up choosing to abort the baby. I guess she made a poor choice by choosing to be born to that monster, right? Do I really think that you believe that she chose that? No. But you need to realize (and the rest of you Palin supporters do as well), that the world is not black and white...too often it wasn't the "choice" of a woman to become pregnant, yet many don't seem to consider that as an issue. There are too many gray areas in this world that I refuse to dismiss, which is why I'll probably never vote Republican again.

If you think that everyone has got a right to life, you must not support our military or their efforts overseas. You see, the constitution doesn't point out that only American citizens have a right to life, just that there is a right to life. So, every life we take regardless what the motivations are is an infringement on the whole right to life statement, isn't it? Furthermore, you're ridiculous if you think that abortions won't happen if it isn't legal. It's just that more woman will die because of the means they have to go to to have an abortion.
Lovestoscrap: are those "sins of the mother and father" you're referring to the sin a woman committed by having gotten raped? I was just wondering.

Janesgirl:
They say that we should trust pregnant women to decide (or choose) what’s right for them and yet they have made many poor decisions to get to the point where they feel the need to consider abortion. They very often choose the wrong sex partner, either someone who they thought, wrongly, would stand by them and help raise their child but will not or else someone whom they did not know well enough to be able to depend on. Or they choose to take the risk of pregnancy aware in advance that they do not want a child for any number of reasons and knowing that they will abort it should that come to pass. With a history of these kinds of bad decisions, we are now to assume that these women will make good ones? Anyone can see that those who choose abortion under these circumstances do so to avoid the more serious and challenging consequences of their previous series of poor choices. Making a choice based on self-interest at the expense of an innocent life is not something that can reasonably defined as a “good” decision. Obviously, most women do make good choices regarding their own body, but some don’t or they wouldn’t seek abortions as birth control.
By “convenience” abortions, I assume that means those who have abortions because they don’t want to continue their pregnancy for reasons such as,” I can’t afford it”,” it would interfere with my career or school”,” I don’t want to be a single parent”, and the like. According to statistics compiled by the Guttmacher Institute (AKA Planned Parenthood, a group that is decidedly pro-abortion) about 1/2 to 3/4 of those who had abortions cite such reasons. No, not all abortions are done for convenience, just most of them.
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induce...
I grew up a long time ago. When you can accept that others may have different opinions without assuming they have some defect, you will have too.
For those who claim to abhor abortion yet support the right to choose, you might consider this, Being pro-choice really is being pro-abortion. Those in favor of “choice” are in favor of choosing abortion, so the difference drawn is an exercise in semantics. Everyone is in favor of some kind of choice such as pizza or fried chicken for dinner, but pro-choice advocates aren’t talking about restaurants, they are supporting the slaughter of the innocent in the womb. They object strongly to abortion being framed in such terms, but what else can you call the killing of the helpless but slaughter?

I know this is going to sound like I am talking out of both sides of my mouth, but I am pro-choice and against abortion.

What I mean is I am for the choice being completely up to the individual. If in fact it is a sin to have an abortion, that individual will have to answer on judgement day, not me. I personally do not believe in an abortion, so I only have to worry about myself. I am not in a position to be the judge whether it is morally wrong to complete an abortion.

lovestocrap- BRAVO! Well said.

It's the only legalized murder where the victim did absolutely nothing wrong and is paying for the sins of the mother and father. It's getting embarrassing to be identified with the human race. God must be absent in most peoples lives or conveniently put on a shelf to bring out when it feels good to do so.

Janes: I guess I haven't looked at it as blaming the government, I have always looked at it as it was their personal choice but I do agree with you that the government should not be making our decisions. I guess I just wish that more people would make better choices in life so that there would be less abortions especially when so many of them could have been prevented with smarter birth control to begin with...It makes me sad to think of all those babies who didn't get a choice.

So richguy, were all abortions future criminals? I doubt it. How many Einstein's, Lincoln's, Ghandi's etc. were aborted during this time. How many inventions and cures? Maybe Aids, cancer, ALS and a host of other diseases would have been wiped out if there inventors wouldn't have been aborted. Since it is 35 years ago, maybe we would have a real choice for president in the upcoming election vs. the two we have running now.

An interesting correlation to the rise in "legal" abortions in 1973, was the steep drop in crimes rates almost exactly 18 years after Roe vs. Wade.

truth1 ... thanks for sourcing your stats. Maybe the "skyrocketing" occurred because women were going to doctors (not the "back alley" as they say) and actual records were being kept?

ncpanfan ... the ironic thing here is that we agree. I wish more people chose better paths so that they didn't have to choose abortion. I wish they would respect themselves and their bodies more. Abortion should not be used as birth control. I just have a problem with the government interfering in a personal decision. Keep in mind, even though you and I agree that babies are babies at the moment of conception, not everyone believes that. And I don't think the government should be making those decisions for us.

The Freedom of Choice Act only allows for a "choice" to be made by the woman. It does not provide for hospitals, clinics, doctors, or phamacists to make the "choice" for life without repercussions. So it really only leaves but one "choice" - which is really not a "choice" at all

ncpanfan....good call.
.

Less than 2% are actual life/health-of-mother cases.
.
Some people will justify it for "psychological health" reasons or calling "rape" only after pregnancy was discovered which are mostly just baloney excuses.
.
Yes, I got the 95% mostly from "pro-life" sources.
.
I don't believe there is any logical argument that supports it being less than 95% considering the skyrocketing of abortion after "legalization" in 1973.
.

Clouds: You are absolutely correct that both partners should be more responsible and not just because it might prevent an abortion or an unwanted pregnacy. It could also prevent STD and AIDS, etc...

janesgirl" I am not trying to start something but you are for pro- choice even when they do it multiple times and it is obviously not for medical or life threatening reasons? I can't understand why someone would do it over and over for conveniemt reasons??? I have 2 beautiful children myself and to me they were babies the moment they were conceived and that is the way I chose to look at them. I am glad you are pro-choice and choose life but there are many that argue about it and in some cases I just can't fathom their reasoning ( example the multiple abortions, the partial birth abortions?)I think they should be more responsible in their choices to begin with??

The term "pro choice" does not mean you are "pro abortion." I am pro choice. I have not had an abortion, nor would I. I have two beautiful children. I'm all for adoption and birth control as alternatives. I am, however, for the choice of a woman to make the decision herself.

ncpanfan: "After all if your moms weren't pro-life you wouldn't even be here to make that decision." By the way, my mother is also pro choice, and obviously, I'm here today.

Truth1: Can you cite where you get your statistics about "convenience" pregnancies (as we're calling them)? I just said not all abortions are for convenience, but I didn't name any numbers. I'd like to know where you actually got that figure of 95%.

A quarter is the best form of birth control.
.
The user holds it between their knees.
.

Birth control and adoption are great alternatives to abortion.

proartist.....Whats "reality check time" about that website????
.
I could also say the website I referred to was "reality check time."
.

All life is precious.

I know 2 different women who had multiple abortions. One had 3 while in high school all from her boyfriend and they didn't want kids. The other has 2 kids and the now ex-husband didn't want anymore so he had her abort twice. Multiple convenient birth control in those cases. I told the one girl in high school that is what birth control is for! Yes a woman can choose but come on?? How about a little more responsibility in the first place in these incidences? I am against abortion and before you slam me for it I say to you feel free to make your decision because you are the one who has to live with that decision as I am the one who has to live with my decision to be pro-life. After all if your moms weren't pro-life you wouldn't even be here to make that decision.

Reality check time!
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2008/...

Also, the abortion rate skyrocketed after 1973.
.
I wonder why THAT was...
.
Problem pregnancies didn't all-of-a-sudden become epidemic after that year.
.

It could be argued all week, but the number of "convenience" abortions has been put at well over 95% and there is no reason to not believe it.
.
Remember, there are over a million done a year in the US...............
.

Of course abortion is a horrible reality, but it doesn't take away a woman's right to make a personal decision about her life & body. Abortion isn't always a matter of convenience. Sometimes the baby is not developing correctly and will die shortly after birth (as was the case of one of my friends who desperately wanted a baby). I have met several women who have had abortions, and none of them took the decision lightly. This is not to say they regret their decision. But let's leave the decision to them and not the government.

And BillNewbie ... "Those of us who have been exposed to such indoctrination and have failed to adopt it may wonder why, if women must be trusted to make good decisions regarding their own bodies, so many seem to make such poor decisions for their bodies prior to conception?" That's just insulting to insinuate that adult women cannot make decisions regarding their own body. You're assuming, as I stated before, that all abortions are due to convenience. Grow up.

lovetoscrap - I still want to believe there are those out there that want to be educated.

Truth, no one will go on and view the website as they don't want to be confronted with the truth. It's easy to argue for abortion when it's kept at a safe distance. A person would have to be absolutely heartless to still stand for abortion if really faced with the horrors of it. That still small voice inside of them, that they argue with, knows this and so do we.

By the way, Kansas, New Jersey and ILLINOIS are the late term abortion capitals of the country.

Well said Bill.

Sorry, I should have warned people first, the site is gruesome.

Yes, we have all received our political indoctrination about the rights of women to control their bodies. Of course, some of us just don’t get it (too stupid, I guess).
Those of us who have been exposed to such indoctrination and have failed to adopt it may wonder why, if women must be trusted to make good decisions regarding their own bodies, so many seem to make such poor decisions for their bodies prior to conception? It isn’t that the cause of conception is misunderstood. Why should we assume that women with such an apparently poor track record of decision making will suddenly, with the onset of conception, acquire the wisdom to make such decisions correctly?
Are members of the religious right the only ones disgusted by the thought of the results of a botched abortion writhing at the bottom of a scrap bucket in an operating room? Do only the members of the religious right wretch at the thought of a partially born child getting a pair of scissors stabbed into its skull to make a hole for a suction tube to be inserted for the purpose of sucking out its brains while its body convulses in agony? For the sake of this country, I hope not.

well said futurerichguy

Isn't a partial birth abortion illegal by federal law in all 50 states?

I don't make the argument that there's a correlation between abortion survivors and breeders of megalomaniacs. I just stated a fact, or in actuality a speculation as it’s not even proven. I'm just using a single example just like the author of this article did. It has no statistical significance and it's completely anecdotal, just like the article above. I'm just trying to pander to the kind of people who would use the above article to smear Obama.

So, if Hitler's father was an abortion survivor then all abortion survivors should be put to death so they don't breed megalomaniacs?
If a propensity to breed megalomaniacs, or any other anti-social result, is an effect of surviving a botched abortion, who bears the blame? The abortion doctor who commits malpractice or the mother who choose to late term abort without regard to the possible effect on her child? Shall we now exterminate the unborn based on the potential harm their existence may create? Who among us is qualified to decide that?

Adoph Hitler's father was an abortion survivor.

Unidentified - Did you click the link? Did you read the page and see the sources that are cited on his page, specifically the Chicago Tribune and The New York Times? To think that Obama would create a page like this and then just think that people would take it for face value without citing sources is absurd. That is why nearly every article on his website has external links to outside sources that have reported on what people are saying he has supposedly said or done. Sources which he has no influence over. Doesn't anyone read anymore? The law as it stood does not just allow babies to die in linen closets, read the text below.

(720 ILCS 510/6) (from Ch. 38, par. 81‑26)
Sec. 6. (1) (a) Any physician who intentionally performs an abortion when, in his medical judgment based on the particular facts of the case before him, there is a reasonable likelihood of sustained survival of the fetus outside the womb, with or without artificial support, shall utilize that method of abortion which, of those he knows to be available, is in his medical judgment most likely to preserve the life and health of the fetus.
(b) The physician shall certify in writing, on a form prescribed by the Department under Section 10 of this Act, the available methods considered and the reasons for choosing the method employed.
(c) Any physician who intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly violates the provisions of Section 6(1)(a) commits a Class 3 felony.

Taken from the State of Illinois own website, which of course Obama has no control over. Obama is pro-choice it's not like that is a surprise to anyone. I've got to get to sleep but if I remember correctly I think I wrote in my blog about there being some other attachments to this bill that he voted against.

http://thejasondoctrine.blogspot.com/

What? Doesn't the Illinois laws speak for themselves? Wasn't he representing the state of Illinois in his voting? He was clearly FOR allowing late term and live birth abortions. There is no clearer way to state it...in the state of Illinois. (no pun intended) If he is for this, why is he so hush hush now? Embarrassed maybe? Probably not. He just knows it goes against the hearts of most Americans.

Typical...take only what will help your cause...regardless of context.

LOL...straight from the horses mouth and not from his record. It's the old "do as I say and not as I do". Hmmm...more back pedaling.

Do you know what else was contained in these bills as presented for a vote?
Could it be that there were many unrelated items that would cause one to cast a negative vote on the bill as packaged?
But then be vilified as against everything in that package, regardless of the individual merits?

"On an issue like partial birth abortion, I strongly believe that the state can properly restrict late-term abortions. I have said so repeatedly. All I've said is we should have a provision to protect the health of the mother, and many of the bills that came before me didn't have that.
Part of the reason they didn't have it was purposeful, because those who are opposed to abortion have a moral calling to try to oppose what they think is immoral. Oftentimes what they were trying to do was to polarize the debate and make it more difficult for people, so that they could try to bring an end to abortions overall.

As president, my goal is to bring people together, to listen to them, and I don't think that's any Republican out there who I've worked with who would say that I don't listen to them, I don't respect their ideas, I don't understand their perspective. And my goal is to get us out of this polarizing debate where we're always trying to score cheap political points and actually get things done."

Johndoe, Gabby in her post was referring to medical bills. That is what I commented on. According to your own post you do not have evidence to back up this theory. What I am not seeing you comment on here is the article above. Do you agree with Obama on this issue? That is what is in question here. I personally think that having someone pay for forensic testing is ridiculous. I would hope that these comments you are referring to are only to smear Palin and not the real truth. But, comparitively, killing a baby which has been delivered alive is 1000 times worse. You might as well chase down Gianna Jesson and try to kill her now. What would be the difference? Obama's record and view of this is very real and the absolute truth. That is scary.

lovetoscrap...we're not talking about only "medical treatment" here, we're talking about the victim being forced to pay for evidence collection. A complete travesty.

"City records show that Sarah Palin was aware that sexual assault victims were being billed for forensic testing. Recently released budget documents show that Sarah Palin directly shifted the cost of the rape kits from the police department to the victims in her budget for fiscal year 2000. If what a former city council member told CNN is true, that "Palin would review each department's budget line by line," then she either knew about the funding shift and approved it or was negligent in her role as state executive.

Palin spokeswoman Maria Comella wrote USA Today that the GOP vice presidential nominee "does not believe, nor has she ever believed, that rape victims should have to pay for an evidence-gathering test"...however..."the evidence from Wasilla's budget records says otherwise."

Gabby, Neither McCain nor Palin disagree with abortion when the mother's life is as stake. As for a person paying for your their own medical bills if raped, it is no different than any other medical situation. For instance, if you are in a car accident and it isn't your fault. If the person who hit you has no insurance, then you pay your own bills. If you catch a cold from your child who brought it home from school, from someone else, and you have to go the doc, you pay your own bills. Obviously rape is a hideous crime, but I wouldn't expect tax payers to pay for my treatment in any case, even in the case of rape.

So this apparently is talking about abortions after the first trimester? I honestly didn't think you could do that. I thought that after the first trimester they were considered living and then it would be murder. Maybe I have my facts wrong. I did not know this about Obama. It kinda disturbs me, but if you go to McCain and Palin.....aren't the commercials saying they want rape victims to pay their own medical bills. That is crap! I don't agree with abortion to be used as a form of "birth control" but if their is a condition with the mother, where the baby or the mothers life is in danger to go through the pregnancy, then it's up to the mother to make her own choice. The same with rape victims.

jguernsey: Nice try, but you lost any credibility linking to Obama's own self help site. This is one area I have a problem with Obama. It's one thing to have the right to an abortion, but another if the baby survives one. Obama supported the laws on the books, which essentially allowed these babies to die in clinic closets with no care, even though nearly everyone else voted them down once they found out this was happening. That is the fact. There are lots of great things about Obama, but every politician has had a few black eyes and this is one of his. The smart thing Obama and supporters can do is just keep their mouths shut on this one, because defending it simply points it out more and points to guilt.

I'm going to try not to be offensive but have you actually read the law on the books that Obama refers to? If not here's what he refers to:
(720 ILCS 510/6) (from Ch. 38, par. 81‑26)
Sec. 6. (1) (a) Any physician who intentionally performs an abortion when, in his medical judgment based on the particular facts of the case before him, there is a reasonable likelihood of sustained survival of the fetus outside the womb, with or without artificial support, shall utilize that method of abortion which, of those he knows to be available, is in his medical judgment most likely to preserve the life and health of the fetus.
(b) The physician shall certify in writing, on a form prescribed by the Department under Section 10 of this Act, the available methods considered and the reasons for choosing the method employed.
(c) Any physician who intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly violates the provisions of Section 6(1)(a) commits a Class 3 felony.

Taken from:
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/doc...

I, for one, find it odd that these nurses didn't go to the proper authorities seeing as it says right in the law that any physician violating this act would be committing a Class 3 felony.

Also, Sarah Palin has stated many times that she only believes in abortion in cases where the mother's life is in danger, and that if a woman were to become pregnant due to rape or incest, she would recommend "counseling."

For more, I would recommend going to http://fightthesmears.com/articles/15/wi...
I highly doubt that Obama, a father of two girls, is the "baby hater" that so many people try to paint him as.