Bear it's like the gay question. Don't Ask Don't Tell. What you don't know cant hurt you. I'm not big on apportion on demand. But it's a private matter between the doc and his patient. If I don't know that's ok. I really don't want our government telling us what to do. Either way. And I sure as hell don't want to build more prisons to sticks these docs and there patient. Or will they just get probation.
South Dakota Bans Abortion
- Thread starter smurphy
- Start date
djv,
but we obviously do know...
private matter between doc and patient???
"Lets put grandma to sleep as she cannot function anymore as a result of alzheimers"or.......I'm very depressed and cannot deal with it ...put me to sleep.
Euthanasia??? This is all AGAINST the law even for rational adults who can decide and make reasoned judgements...assisted suicide??
Don't want govt. telling us what to do...who needs laws for order a/o protection (elders??) ...Should only the fittest (strongest and wealthiest) survive, prosper and rule??
Babies are real, they feel it,they have no say ........ ( they are brutally destroyed everyday).........and cannot protect themselves.
Legalized abortion is the biggest disgrace ever in this country.
Thats just the way I see it..
bear
but we obviously do know...
private matter between doc and patient???
"Lets put grandma to sleep as she cannot function anymore as a result of alzheimers"or.......I'm very depressed and cannot deal with it ...put me to sleep.
Euthanasia??? This is all AGAINST the law even for rational adults who can decide and make reasoned judgements...assisted suicide??
Don't want govt. telling us what to do...who needs laws for order a/o protection (elders??) ...Should only the fittest (strongest and wealthiest) survive, prosper and rule??
Babies are real, they feel it,they have no say ........ ( they are brutally destroyed everyday).........and cannot protect themselves.
Legalized abortion is the biggest disgrace ever in this country.
Thats just the way I see it..
bear
ctownguy,
Some of us know how to write without using ALL CAPS.
I feel like a fellow moron for even responding to you, but here goes:
All laws may be changed through the proper channels. If you don't define abortion as "settled law" then you can't define anything not stated explicitly in the constitution as "settled law". And as we know even the constitution may be changed.
My point is that abortion is, in fact, settled law. The job of local lawmakers is not to become *activists* and try to provoke changes in federal law. That is exactly what these morons in SD are doing.
Again, the comparison I gave is still relevant. These moron lawmakers are doing something that they know is illegal *under present laws* because they have a different moral view on the issue. It is no different from the countless people who break laws and claim that their own moral compass allowed their actions.
You can believe that abortion should be outlawed the same way you probably believe that the 2002 Ohio State team was better than the 2002 USC team. Believing something like that doesn't make it so. True college football fans know that the Matthews rankings are the only ones that matter.
http://www.ncaa.org/champadmin/ia_football_past_champs.html
Some of us know how to write without using ALL CAPS.
I feel like a fellow moron for even responding to you, but here goes:
All laws may be changed through the proper channels. If you don't define abortion as "settled law" then you can't define anything not stated explicitly in the constitution as "settled law". And as we know even the constitution may be changed.
My point is that abortion is, in fact, settled law. The job of local lawmakers is not to become *activists* and try to provoke changes in federal law. That is exactly what these morons in SD are doing.
Again, the comparison I gave is still relevant. These moron lawmakers are doing something that they know is illegal *under present laws* because they have a different moral view on the issue. It is no different from the countless people who break laws and claim that their own moral compass allowed their actions.
You can believe that abortion should be outlawed the same way you probably believe that the 2002 Ohio State team was better than the 2002 USC team. Believing something like that doesn't make it so. True college football fans know that the Matthews rankings are the only ones that matter.
http://www.ncaa.org/champadmin/ia_football_past_champs.html
Nick Douglas said:
There ya have it, it was *actually* a 4-peat! The two loss Trojans were obviously better than the 14-0 (unprecedented before or since) Buckeyes who beat a dynasty for the NC. But hey, 'Matthews' thinks USC was #1.
smurphy said:
I have not seen Harold and Kumar, so I am unqualified to say you are wrong. But in my opinion, after seeing Fred Savage on the Seinfeld episode with Kramer who gave him his screenplay, Fred Savage is "The Man." It may not be Oscar-worthy, but he deserved the Emmy, if nothing else.
Nicky
your quote "My point is that abortion is, in fact, settled law. The job of local lawmakers is not to become *activists* and try to provoke changes in federal law. That is exactly what these morons in SD are doing."
You should keep responding moron, you might learn something. Activists lawmakers, now that's a good one. At least they are making laws to challenge bad law the right way.
How in the hell did abortion get to be law in the 1st place, by an activist SC which is absolutely wrong.
You have got it exactly ass backwards just like almost all your ridiculous ideas and opinions.
As far as your FB opinion, all I can say is you have your head up you ass so far you would have to fart to blow your nose.
OMG please tell me how an educated person like yourself could become so FUCCCKKKKINNNGGG STUPID???????
your quote "My point is that abortion is, in fact, settled law. The job of local lawmakers is not to become *activists* and try to provoke changes in federal law. That is exactly what these morons in SD are doing."
You should keep responding moron, you might learn something. Activists lawmakers, now that's a good one. At least they are making laws to challenge bad law the right way.
How in the hell did abortion get to be law in the 1st place, by an activist SC which is absolutely wrong.
You have got it exactly ass backwards just like almost all your ridiculous ideas and opinions.
As far as your FB opinion, all I can say is you have your head up you ass so far you would have to fart to blow your nose.
OMG please tell me how an educated person like yourself could become so FUCCCKKKKINNNGGG STUPID???????
bjfinste said:
Oh my!!!!
Am I really reading this???
First you leftists want to confiscate the entire wealth of the citizenry and have us all hooked up to a feeding tube from the government.
NOW, you want the government dictate to us which of our babies are worth living to see their first birthday???
Did you pull this right out of "Mein Kempf"?
This extermination culture of death plan is nothing short of fasciism!!!
Kudos to the men and women of the South Dakota legislature who have the courage to ban this heinous act.
Kudos to the pro-choice legislators who believe that the baby should have a choice to live.
Lets hope that more states follow suit and challenge this disgrace of a ruling made by black robed lawyers imposing their will on us all. This judicial activism must be STOPPED!!!
Anyone with a 2nd grade education must realize that the Constitution does NOT grant the court's power to CREATE LAW!!! Thus no law passed could ever be deemed "illegal" because of an overbearing ruling from these black robed traitors. If this is so, surely Mr. Douglas must have deemed all civil rights legislation "illegal" because of historical supreme court rulings.
Such reasoning is not only irrational, but is hypocritical.
Congratulations South Dakota on having the courage to pass this important Civil Rights piece of legislation. Surely every citizen shall have the right to see his/her birthday and should be protected by the law to do so.
Has anyone ever wondered why some woman would want to harm her unborn child???
If such a behavior were observed in nature, would one not conclude that something was emotionally/mentally wrong with that creature?
Why then, do we act like this should be accepted practice???
Surely these women need help and treatment. Where is the compassion from you leftists to give them this treatment to prohibit this deletorious behavior?
Where is the compassion??
If such a behavior were observed in nature, would one not conclude that something was emotionally/mentally wrong with that creature?
Why then, do we act like this should be accepted practice???
Surely these women need help and treatment. Where is the compassion from you leftists to give them this treatment to prohibit this deletorious behavior?
Where is the compassion??
dr. freeze said:
I am going to remove myself from any further discussion on this topic after this post as it does no good for either side since no minds will be changed, but just to address this one point:
No, you aren't reading that correctly. I don't want the government to dictate that. I just feel the pregnant woman to make that decision for herself. If she has the foresight to see she's not fit or ready to be a parent, I feel she should be able to have an abortion if she so chooses. While I'm sure that's no better in your eyes, I certainly don't think the government should be deciding that, although I guess I can see how you would come to that conclusion based on how I worded the first part of my post.
No one in here is going to change their mind on this subject; we've all made up our minds long ago. Some care a little, some care a lot, some don't care at all. But we'll do nothing than go around in circles, so I see no point (for myself anyway) to continue. I probably should've just followed my first instinct and stayed out of the thread all together like I generally do when this subject is brought up.
It's a nutty world out there. No one case fits all. Some how Grandpa cant pee anymore has no idea who you are or he is. Drugged up on pain bills sits and looks out in space drooling. Want's to die. And the law won't let him. Some young Gal gets raped just wants that out of her. What about her rights. Or the Gal that finds out she is P G. And it's going to kill her if she does not stop the process. What to do let her die. But same folks that say that, believe in death penalty. I still rather let the woman take care of there business. I'll take care of mind. And I do believe in death penalty in many case. But we better be sure there to. Many with new DNA test walking out of prison because they were not guilty. A crazy world.
Too bad an unwanted baby cant just walk out of the death chamber .....cuz he/she is certainly not guilty!
It drives me absolutely nutty how the SC has basically become a one issue body in a way that it hasn't been since the mid-19th Century.
Politically, I don't like running to the wings and circling the wagons on every issue. Lots of us are raised to think (or know) that abortion is just wrong. OK...but thats morality........The SC CREATED a law.......that is the travesty here. They INTERPRET law, but they are not supposed to make it, plain and simple. Any argument past that is inadmissible (sic?) in court, as it were. I lean w/freeze here when I say that just b/c the SC says its so, it doesn't make it right. They screwed that one up good......obviously a residual from 60s radicals graduating college and exerting influence.
So, this comes down to oversight. If the SC says abortion is legal, can they say wiretapping, euthanasia, taxation, war-making power, trade dealings, etc are legal by twisting the Constitution anyway they see fit?? Roe v Wade came about via the same mechanics that led to our own Civil War, which resulted in 600,000+ 60th trimester abortions for our nation.
The states should have the right to decide this issue....through channels.
Politically, I don't like running to the wings and circling the wagons on every issue. Lots of us are raised to think (or know) that abortion is just wrong. OK...but thats morality........The SC CREATED a law.......that is the travesty here. They INTERPRET law, but they are not supposed to make it, plain and simple. Any argument past that is inadmissible (sic?) in court, as it were. I lean w/freeze here when I say that just b/c the SC says its so, it doesn't make it right. They screwed that one up good......obviously a residual from 60s radicals graduating college and exerting influence.
So, this comes down to oversight. If the SC says abortion is legal, can they say wiretapping, euthanasia, taxation, war-making power, trade dealings, etc are legal by twisting the Constitution anyway they see fit?? Roe v Wade came about via the same mechanics that led to our own Civil War, which resulted in 600,000+ 60th trimester abortions for our nation.
The states should have the right to decide this issue....through channels.
Another hypocritical stance from these lefties
California has its panties in a wad while a convicted killer cannot face JUSTICE in carrying out the death penalty because they can't find an anesthesiologist
Meanwhile, they continue to execute (chop up....slice and dice....whatever heinous term you may use to describe) hundreds of 3rd trimester babies who can feel AS MUCH IF NOT MORE PAIN (due to sensitivity of pain receptors) than this creep!!!
California has its panties in a wad while a convicted killer cannot face JUSTICE in carrying out the death penalty because they can't find an anesthesiologist
Meanwhile, they continue to execute (chop up....slice and dice....whatever heinous term you may use to describe) hundreds of 3rd trimester babies who can feel AS MUCH IF NOT MORE PAIN (due to sensitivity of pain receptors) than this creep!!!
I will have to take your word for it on that episode. I never saw it or can't remember it.Chadman said:
I do remember, however, how much Fred Savage annoyed me on 'Wonder Years'. He was always stuttering, caught off guard, and acted all "who me?" on every little thing that happened. It really bugged me - much like the way Ben Stiller is in many of his movies.
Fred Savage was in the story arc when Kramer got pissed about the keys and went to Cali. Fred wanted nothing to do with Kramer.
I agree with Smurph, that 'turn' had nothing on Doogies in Harold and Kumar go to White Castle.
I agree with Smurph, that 'turn' had nothing on Doogies in Harold and Kumar go to White Castle.
ctownguy said:
It has to do with a response to a quick, comical post to break up a very intense thread where tempers are obviously flaring - mainly due to antagonistic, frustrated flamethrowers like you.
It's a joke, dumbass. Much like the "serious" comments you offer up for unanimous ridicule most of the time.
