So what about a morning after pill? Is that abortion? And will any picture ever reveal that to be abortion?

 

At what point does it become a baby and not tissue? At some point it's just tissue, and I think there's no debate to that besides a religious one.

 

About 20% of all diagnosed pregnancies end in first trimester spontaneous abortion (miscarriage.) Doctors estimate that roughly an equal number occur without the woman even knowing she was pregnant. Are we to mourn all these occurances as if a child has died? Our society would be paralyzed if we did.

 

At some point, you're devaluing real children (and, yes, in my opinion, late-term fetuses) by equating them equally with a zygote.

 

I find it curious that we see a campaign devoted to ban 'partial birth abortion.' Personally, I'm totally opposed to it, but you know what else I'm not in favor of which is not nationally banned? Ice-pick lobotomies, which to me is the absolutely most gruesome medical procedure ever conceived. How can we not get rid of lobotomies (some states have,) but have a debate about ANY OTHER PROCEDURE? This needs to be at the front of the line. If we can keep ice-pick lobotomies legal against the improbable chance that someone might medically benefit from one, I can't imagine banning any other procedure. Just something I think about sometimes.

Human life begins at the point of conception period. It is a baby. A real live human baby not a blob of tissue. The morning after pill is murdering a child. Some birth control methods do the same thing. It is obvious however that I am not going to sway you. We will agree to disagree and I will pray for you.

People are missing the point of the recent partial-birth abortion case.

 

The decision held that the procedure was unlawful. The effect of the decision as I see it is twofold:

 

1) a procedure considered gruesome by many and inhumane will no longer be used

 

2) the same children that would have been aborted using the procedure will still be aborted. Only now, the mother must bare an increased risk of serious medical problems (infertility)

People are missing the point of the recent partial-birth abortion case.

 

The decision held that the procedure was unlawful. The effect of the decision as I see it is twofold:

 

1) a procedure considered gruesome by many and inhumane will no longer be used

 

2) the same children that would have been aborted using the procedure will still be aborted. Only now, the mother must bare an increased risk of serious medical problems (infertility)

I'm not totally sympathetic.

Nor am I totally sympathetic.

 

Obviously the abortion debate is very intense. I guess I just feel like banning a specific procedure is a peculiar result. The decision doesn't save a fetus from abortion.

 

The broader issue is whether or not anti-abortion groups will use this recent decision to push harder. I think its obvious the answer is yes. However, unless the makeup of the current court changes, the essential holding of Roe v Wade (and Casey) will not change.

 

Justice Kennedy (who authored) the recent decision, WILL NOT vote to overturn Roe. So the ultimate result IS:

 

The same fetuses that would have been aborted using the D&X procedure will still be aborted, doctors will illegally still use the procedure or women will potentially suffer injury, and litigation will ensue in an effort to ban abortion - which will not succeed.

Human life begins at the point of conception period. It is a baby. A real live human baby not a blob of tissue. The morning after pill is murdering a child. Some birth control methods do the same thing. It is obvious however that I am not going to sway you. We will agree to disagree and I will pray for you.

At the moment of conception, it doesn't even qualify as a blob of tissue. I understand that to you there is a spiritual argument that this is a person at that point, but there is no ground to stand on beyond that.

 

So, like I said, since upwards of 40% of ALL PREGNANCIES end in miscarriage early in the first trimester, about half occuring so early and inconspicuously that the woman never knows, should we react to this DAILY occurence as if a child had died?

 

If it's the same as a baby you can hold in your arms, or even the same as a fetus at 16 weeks, it seems that you would have to. To me, that cheapens life.

Nor am I totally sympathetic.

 

Obviously the abortion debate is very intense. I guess I just feel like banning a specific procedure is a peculiar result. The decision doesn't save a fetus from abortion.

 

The broader issue is whether or not anti-abortion groups will use this recent decision to push harder. I think its obvious the answer is yes. However, unless the makeup of the current court changes, the essential holding of Roe v Wade (and Casey) will not change.

 

Justice Kennedy (who authored) the recent decision, WILL NOT vote to overturn Roe. So the ultimate result IS:

 

The same fetuses that would have been aborted using the D&X procedure will still be aborted, doctors will illegally still use the procedure or women will potentially suffer injury, and litigation will ensue in an effort to ban abortion - which will not succeed.

And thus the reason why it is essential that a President be elected that will place a judge of the Supreme Court that will go towards overturning this scarlet letter on our generation. Much the same way that Abe Lincoln rid this country of the embarrassment of slavery, we need to continue the path that GW started and rid this country of our next great embarrassment, abortion.

 

And why I will continue to vote a single issue while casting my Congressmen, President, Governor and pretty much all the way down to mayor.

At the moment of conception, it doesn't even qualify as a blob of tissue. I understand that to you there is a spiritual argument that this is a person at that point, but there is no ground to stand on beyond that.

 

So, like I said, since upwards of 40% of ALL PREGNANCIES end in miscarriage early in the first trimester, about half occuring so early and inconspicuously that the woman never knows, should we react to this DAILY occurence as if a child had died?

 

If it's the same as a baby you can hold in your arms, or even the same as a fetus at 16 weeks, it seems that you would have to. To me, that cheapens life.

My sister suffered several miscarriages before she was able to bring her daughter into this world. I remember our family treating each of those miscarriages as a lost of a baby. We didn't have a funeral but in our hearts and the sadness we carried was real.

 

I look forward to the day of getting to heaven and possibly being acquainted with these nieces/nephews that I never got to know.

I agree. The next President will almost certainly get to appoint 1 Justice, potentially more.

 

Justice Stevens will likely step down from the court very quickly if a Democrat wins the presidency. On the other hand, if a Republican wins, Stevens may very well "try for 4 more years" - he would be 90+ years of age by 2012.

 

One more thing to consider. The political party of the Appointing President might not accurately predict how a Justice would vote on the issue.

 

Souter - Republican (Bush I)

Stevens - Republican (Ford)

Kennedy - Republican (Reagan)

I agree. The next President will almost certainly get to appoint 1 Justice, potentially more.

 

Justice Stevens will likely step down from the court very quickly if a Democrat wins the presidency. On the other hand, if a Republican wins, Stevens may very well "try for 4 more years" - he would be 90+ years of age by 2012.

 

One more thing to consider. The political party of the Appointing President might not accurately predict how a Justice would vote on the issue.

 

Souter - Republican (Bush I)

Stevens - Republican (Ford)

Kennedy - Republican (Reagan)

I fully understand that but which would you rather take the chance with in appointing a SC justice that would vote to end abortion? A Democrat running as a pro-choice candidate and the Democrat national platform that is for allowing abortions to continue or the Republican candidate that is pro-life and has appeared to be anti-abortion?

 

If there is proof out there that shows a Democratic Presidential candidate is honest or even taking that position about stopping abortion, I would love to consider them when casting my ballot in late May.

Again, I agree.

 

You sound like you want to take no chances. I would not suggest voting for Romney or Rudy.

 

The reality is that even if a Republican wins the white house and gets to make an appointment - Democrats are likely to be in the majority in Congress. Therefore confirming a "strong anti-abortion" Justice will be easier said than done.

 

It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

Again, I agree.

 

You sound like you want to take no chances. I would not suggest voting for Romney or Rudy.

 

The reality is that even if a Republican wins the white house and gets to make an appointment - Democrats are likely to be in the majority in Congress. Therefore confirming a "strong anti-abortion" Justice will be easier said than done.

 

It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

Rudy has never been a consideration for me as he has been waffling or taking the flavor of the month stance on the abortion issue to the point that I don't trust him.

 

As I have well stated on here, I like Huckabee. Still waiting on him to make that run like Clinton did from the Arkansas governor mansion to the White House.

 

With your next to last paragraph can any of the Rep nominees mention that did not necessarily fall in line with the views of the President who nominated them fall into the category that you have established in that paragraph?

My sister suffered several miscarriages before she was able to bring her daughter into this world. I remember our family treating each of those miscarriages as a lost of a baby. We didn't have a funeral but in our hearts and the sadness we carried was real.

 

I look forward to the day of getting to heaven and possibly being acquainted with these nieces/nephews that I never got to know.

How far along was she when these occured?

Ladies, I am not sure I understand your question... please re-ask it

How far along was she when these occured?

I was probably 8-10 at the time, so I don't remember much about it and not something I would bring up at this point almost 25 years later. You know how we treat kids at that age with a subject like this.

 

I was told my sister had a miscarriage. I asked what that was. Told she lost the baby. I remember being really sad that I wouldn't have a nephew or niece at that point. I remember my sister moving back in with us for awhile and she was upset and depressed for a time. Being young, I don't really recall how long it was.

 

But I do remember that there was a period of sadness, I guess you could even call it a mourning. Something that we were excited about was gone and not going to be there anymore.

Ladies, I am not sure I understand your question... please re-ask it

Were any of the justices that did not follow a conservative stance on the abortion issue a "compromise" choice because of a Democrat-controlled Congress/Senate?