Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 6
  • 14
South Dakota to ban abortions?; ...the perfect law.
Topic Started: Jan 23 2006, 07:56 AM (4,188 Views)
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Jolly
Jan 23 2006, 06:34 PM
sue
Jan 23 2006, 02:17 PM
Jolly
Jan 23 2006, 02:08 PM
sue
Jan 23 2006, 12:56 PM
Aqua Letifer
Jan 23 2006, 12:31 PM
Quote:
 
I would think this is not a black or white decision. What if you already had 3 kids, your husband had recently died, you had no relatives around to look after your existing kids....would you still make the same decision?


Well, there's always the adoption agency, foster families, etc...

I find it hard to imagine any mother making a wilful choice to have her existing kids sent out to foster homes for the sake of an unborn child. How about looking after the ones you've already got? Could you really do this to your own kids? I can't imagine it.

I don't even has to ask her. My wife would lay it on the line in a heartbeat.

See, that bunch of cells bouncing around your uterus is your child, just the same as the eight-year old sitting at the kitchen table.

It would be the same decision as picking up a baseball bat, and killing the youngest children in time of famine...it achieves the desired result, but at what cost to the soul?

What about the responsiblility, and love, of the three kids? Is that so unimportant to you? Why bring another child into the world when you've left three heartbroken children motherless?

Why kill the fourth?

Let's rephease the question:
Five persons: {Wife/mother, Child#1, Child#2, Child#3, Child#4}
Only four gets to live.
You pick which four.

Jolly says her wife would let herself die, damn the future of all four would-be orphans.

sue says she would let Child#4 die so the mother can continue to care for the other three children.

I say to each his/her own.

Either way, I repeat the importance to have proper "advance directive" in place just in case... a decision as important as this, you don't want to pull another Terry Schiavo in this regard. Your Coffe Room posts cannot function as your "advance directive."
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
sue
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Thank you, bach.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
bachophile
Jan 23 2006, 04:57 PM
to sue..

where exactly? if u must know, its from the mishna, and involves the concept of rodef or pursuer.

the idea is, if something is threatning to your life, equivalent to someone chasing u to kill u, that pursuer can be stopped.

the idea is that the fetus does not have a black or white identity, human or not, ensouled or not. it is clearly alive and has clear importance.

yet at the same time, abortion is not "murder" in the classic sense, otherwise abortion should NEVER be permitted, because murder is never an allowable action.

and so, the jewish construct is a grey area, there is a very jewish notion that some things cannot be quantified into yes or no, black or white. rather, like an electrons spin, its actually sort of a cloud of potentiality, which can be seen in varying shades of grey. here is a small text resource, for more u can go to...

Jewish Attitudes Towards Abortion


Jewish doctrine on abortion: allowable, even required, when the life of the mother is at stake
Given that abortion does not equate to murder - in the case of threat to the mother's life, abortion becomes a requirement:

Damn you Jews!

Always thinking, thinking, thinking! Abnd making the rest of us look stupid!

If I didn't know any better, I would assume you people secretly run the world! :biggrin:
[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LWpianistin
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
musicasacra
Jan 23 2006, 08:58 AM
Moonbat
Jan 23 2006, 09:56 AM
Meanwhile in a saner part of the world:

Quote:
 

the High Court rejected a review of guidelines which state terminations do not need parents' consent and doctors should respect girls' confidentiality.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/4636666.stm

that's because europe is losing its soul. it's denying the inherent value of life and giving into the culture of death.

and yet American fashion now worships Europe? Europe is sooo much better (in general).
And how are you today?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bachophile
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Quote:
 
I would assume you people secretly run the world!


shhhhhhh!!!!!!, we're trying to keep it a secret
"I don't know much about classical music. For years I thought the Goldberg Variations were something Mr. and Mrs. Goldberg did on their wedding night." Woody Allen
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LWpianistin
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
musicasacra
Jan 23 2006, 09:42 AM
AlbertaCrude
Jan 23 2006, 10:39 AM
musicasacra
Jan 23 2006, 09:25 AM
sue
Jan 23 2006, 10:24 AM
musicasacra
Jan 23 2006, 08:58 AM
that's because europe is losing its soul.  it's denying the inherent value of life and giving into the culture of death.

That's a little over the top, don't you think?

no it isn't. i'm not the first to say it either.

:blink: Who said that and just what is it supposed to mean?

JP II first spoke of the culture of death. IT could likely cite all of the apostolic letters and encyclicals in which JP II discusses the culture of death.

Benedict is continuing to speak about it.
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/0...e.warning.reut/

um, it might be a shock to you, but the whole world doesn't listen to the word of an old guy in a robe :P all respect to John Paul II and Benedict whatever-he-is (XVI?). seriously though, why does their word matter more than anyone else's? the whole world isn't exactly Catholic...
And how are you today?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kathyk
Member Avatar
Pisa-Carp
AlbertaCrude
Jan 23 2006, 05:02 PM
QuirtEvans
Jan 23 2006, 03:45 PM
AC -- I think it would be possible (even though Kathy appears to disagree) for a state like South Dakota to prohibit its residents from crossing state lines to procure an abortion.

What they could NOT do is prohibit a South Dakota resident from moving to another state.  That's a constitutional prohibition.  So, to get the abortion, you might have to relocate.

Moreover, if you're in the first trimester, and assuming you know about the South Dakota law, hopefully you wouldn't be dumb enough to tell anyone that you're pregnant.  You use a home pregnancy test, take an unscheduled vacation to Minnesota, and come home.

Thank you QuirtEvans. That's all what I wanted to know.

Kathy K for Kollontai wrote
 
And that was the question I answered, Mr. Smarty Pants. You can't charge someone in your own state of a crime for something they did legally in another state. Simple enough for you? (you must really want to win that poll. :wacko:


Read QuirtEvans' response above. It was directed to my question: "If S.D. has a law prohibiting abortions can a resident still leave the state and have one performed elsewhere then return without the possibility of prosecution?"

You answered:

"As to AC's question whether making something that one does legally in another state a crime for a citizen of another state would fly squarely in the face of states' sovereignty. You want to see another civil war in the US? Try pulling that one off."

As I said earlier that wasn't my question. I think you're a spinning idiot.

You are denser than I thought, Your Crudeness. So what are they going to do? Run mind tests on pregant women before they're allowed to leave the state to see if they're intending to get an abortion?

Unless they're prepared to prosecute in the state for the abortion that was obtained outside the state, there's no way they could make abortion outside the state a prosecutable offense.
Blogging in Palestine: http://kksjournal.com/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TomK
HOLY CARP!!!
bachophile
Jan 23 2006, 08:57 PM
to sue..

where exactly? if u must know, its from the mishna, and involves the concept of rodef or pursuer.

the idea is, if something is threatning to your life, equivalent to someone chasing u to kill u, that pursuer can be stopped.

the idea is that the fetus does not have a black or white identity, human or not, ensouled or not. it is clearly alive and has clear importance.

yet at the same time, abortion is not "murder" in the classic sense, otherwise abortion should NEVER be permitted, because murder is never an allowable action.

and so, the jewish construct is a grey area, there is a very jewish notion that some things cannot be quantified into yes or no, black or white. rather, like an electrons spin, its actually sort of a cloud of potentiality, which can be seen in varying shades of grey. here is a small text resource, for more u can go to...

Jewish Attitudes Towards Abortion


Jewish doctrine on abortion: allowable, even required, when the life of the mother is at stake
Given that abortion does not equate to murder - in the case of threat to the mother's life, abortion becomes a requirement:

But if you just substitute Jew (or anything or anyone else,) for fetus you make a valid point for whatever you may want.

Either ALL live is sacred--or we just define life as we see legally fit.

Would Himmler have said:

"Aryan doctrine on the killing of Jews: allowable, even required, when the life of an Aryan is at stake
Given that the killing of Jews does not equate to murder - in the case of threat to an Aryan's life, the killing of a Jew becomes a requirement."

What "life" is, is a matter of a simple definition in a rule book--nothing more.

Either life is sacred or the definition of "life" is a matter if interpretation of the "people in charge." I don't see any middle ground.

With all due respects,

Tom

(Want to get on the Woo Woo TomK's an Anti-Semite stchick, fine--but it's a valid question.)

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AlbertaCrude
Bull-Carp
kathyk
Jan 23 2006, 07:14 PM
AlbertaCrude
Jan 23 2006, 05:02 PM
QuirtEvans
Jan 23 2006, 03:45 PM
AC -- I think it would be possible (even though Kathy appears to disagree) for a state like South Dakota to prohibit its residents from crossing state lines to procure an abortion.

What they could NOT do is prohibit a South Dakota resident from moving to another state.  That's a constitutional prohibition.  So, to get the abortion, you might have to relocate.

Moreover, if you're in the first trimester, and assuming you know about the South Dakota law, hopefully you wouldn't be dumb enough to tell anyone that you're pregnant.  You use a home pregnancy test, take an unscheduled vacation to Minnesota, and come home.

Thank you QuirtEvans. That's all what I wanted to know.

Kathy K for Kollontai wrote
 
And that was the question I answered, Mr. Smarty Pants. You can't charge someone in your own state of a crime for something they did legally in another state. Simple enough for you? (you must really want to win that poll. :wacko:


Read QuirtEvans' response above. It was directed to my question: "If S.D. has a law prohibiting abortions can a resident still leave the state and have one performed elsewhere then return without the possibility of prosecution?"

You answered:

"As to AC's question whether making something that one does legally in another state a crime for a citizen of another state would fly squarely in the face of states' sovereignty. You want to see another civil war in the US? Try pulling that one off."

As I said earlier that wasn't my question. I think you're a spinning idiot.

You are denser than I thought, Your Crudeness. So what are they going to do? Run mind tests on pregant women before they're allowed to leave the state to see if they're intending to get an abortion?

Unless they're prepared to prosecute in the state for the abortion that was obtained outside the state, there's no way they could make abortion outside the state a prosecutable offense.

I thought I told you to wait in truck. Quirt already answered my question.

Stop making yourself into a bigger fool than you already are.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AlbertaCrude
Bull-Carp
TomK: the reference to Himmler and company in your post was totally unnecessary. You possess sufficent grey matter in your brain to have explained your point without repeating that same anti-semitic bitterness you have shown the past year.

Go back to being shunned and while you're at it, take KathyK with you as she has shown herself to be equally as anti-semitic in past.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
apple
one of the angels
should it be illegalized? no.. i really don't think so.. it is important that such a practice be regulated and there should be some way of culling the very stupid among us... they are a total drag on society.


is it just about the vilest, grossest, inhumane, diabolic thing we do as humans? To tell you the truth i view cannibalism (of the already naturally dead of course) as a more acceptable behavior..

i have an old good girlfriend - at the forefront of research on lung disease in the very young and she is in major trouble from the prolifers for 'ordering' fetal tissue to study. She is at the mercy of a prolife group who obtained her application to use the lungs of the aborted to further her research.
it behooves me to behold
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Quote:
 
TomK wrote:

"Either ALL live is sacred--or we just define life as we see legally fit."
You should watch more Star Trek to learn the definitions of life.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
musicasacra
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
kathyk
Jan 23 2006, 04:57 PM
As I said, I can only surmise.  But, unlike Jolly, I do take stock in statistics.  Sure, they can be skewed, but I have no reason to doubt the veracity of those I posted here.  They're taken from a survey site that looks to be without an agenda - not a political site .  And, the question was clear enough: "On abortion are you pro-life or pro-choice?"  Of the 582 SDs polled, 49% said the former, 47% said the latter, and 5% were undecided.

i used to work in politics, and i know how polls are really conducted. when the questions are being asked, the group paying for the poll and conducting the poll do not necessary reveal their true identity. the website such a poll is published on might also lack true identification, details, etc.

the questions are sometimes loaded with a preference for a particular outcome and use introductory language that is not objective. i worked on polls just like that.

btw, that site did not have the question in quotes. i can only assume the statement to be a summary of what was asked, not specifics.

you can get a sense of the veracity of a poll if its publication includes some or most of these:
who paid for the poll
who conducted the poll
how were the questions worded
how were the questions introduced and explained
who were the persons polled (i.e., how were they selected)
what was the size of the sample
on what dates was the poll conducted

is it responsible to grab a random poll off the internet and cite it because it shows the results you like, without checking on those relevant questions?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
sue
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
TomK
Jan 23 2006, 07:31 PM
Either life is sacred or the definition of "life" is a matter if interpretation of the "people in charge." I don't see any middle ground.




It's the middle ground I find worth talking about. Perhaps my coming from a place with no religious 'baggage' if I may, puts me in a place you can't get to. I believe there are grey areas, and I appreciate having my eyes opened to a religion that has some acknowledgement of this.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
gryphon
Member Avatar
Middle Aged Carp
Axtremus
Jan 24 2006, 01:38 AM
You should watch more Star Trek to learn the definitions of life.

Perfect. This place never fails to disappoint. I was going to reply to 89th's initial post to disagree with him and tell him although I hate to agree with the RZ's of this world who are sure to come later they would be right and he wrong, but I thought I'd pop to the last page to see if anyone else had an intelligent reply first. Imagine my surprise.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
musicasacra
Jan 23 2006, 10:09 PM
kathyk
Jan 23 2006, 04:57 PM
As I said, I can only surmise.  But, unlike Jolly, I do take stock in statistics.  Sure, they can be skewed, but I have no reason to doubt the veracity of those I posted here.  They're taken from a survey site that looks to be without an agenda - not a political site .   And, the question was clear enough: "On abortion are you pro-life or pro-choice?"  Of the 582 SDs polled, 49% said the former, 47% said the latter, and 5% were undecided.

i used to work in politics, and i know how polls are really conducted. when the questions are being asked, the group paying for the poll and conducting the poll do not necessary reveal their true identity. the website such a poll is published on might also lack true identification, details, etc.

the questions are sometimes loaded with a preference for a particular outcome and use introductory language that is not objective. i worked on polls just like that.

btw, that site did not have the question in quotes. i can only assume the statement to be a summary of what was asked, not specifics.

you can get a sense of the veracity of a poll if its publication includes some or most of these:
who paid for the poll
who conducted the poll
how were the questions worded
how were the questions introduced and explained
who were the persons polled (i.e., how were they selected)
what was the size of the sample
on what dates was the poll conducted

is it responsible to grab a random poll off the internet and cite it because it shows the results you like, without checking on those relevant questions?

Exactly.

Any poll that seeks credibility based on its objectivity is going to publish all of that information. And you are exactly right, MS, without that there is no way to determine the validity of the poll.

And even those that are valid are based on statistical maipulation of the data and if the method of manipulation is flawed, the poll results will be flawed, even if the statisticians do their best to guard against it.

And then there are times when the poll is simply wrong.

And finally, a poll is only a snapshot of the moment. This is why trends are so important -- and the valid polling organizations seeking to show true trends, use the same questions, the same methodology and the same statistical maniulation techniques every time.
[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
John D'Oh
Jan 23 2006, 11:45 AM
I object strongly to being called a baby murderer.

John, you keep drumming this up as if anyone (at least here) has called you a baby murderer. Are you an abortionist? If not, then I don't see why anyone would have any grounds for calling you a baby murderer.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
gryphon
Member Avatar
Middle Aged Carp
kathyk
Jan 23 2006, 06:29 PM
even if Roberts and Ailito turn out to be the swing votes in this direction

Why do you say this? They are not even swing votes in Roe v. Wade.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
gryphon
Member Avatar
Middle Aged Carp
AlbertaCrude
Jan 23 2006, 07:40 PM
kathyk
Jan 23 2006, 03:29 PM
...

No that wasn't my question...Musicascra answered it and without the hubbub and hysteria you, as usual, impute into what people write.

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Axtremus
Jan 23 2006, 10:38 PM
Quote:
 
TomK wrote:

"Either ALL live is sacred--or we just define life as we see legally fit."
You should watch more Star Trek to learn the definitions of life.

Ax:
I trust that most of us here are able to distinguish between perceived reality and fiction. Just because it's on TV doesn't mean it's true.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
AlbertaCrude
Jan 23 2006, 10:01 PM
TomK: the reference to Himmler and company in your post was totally unnecessary. You possess sufficent grey matter in your brain to have explained your point without repeating that same anti-semitic bitterness you have shown the past year.

Go back to being shunned and while you're at it, take KathyK with you as she has shown herself to be equally as anti-semitic in past.

Not invalid at all, and not anti semitic. In fact, he is arguing that just as the Jews are human beings, the embryo is. And that the same arbitrary standard of determining who lives and who dies applies in both cases. It seems a fair analogy, and the umbrage taken at it is misplaced.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jon-nyc
Member Avatar
Cheers
LWpianistin
Jan 23 2006, 09:12 PM
um, it might be a shock to you, but the whole world doesn't listen to the word of an old guy in a robe :P all respect to John Paul II and Benedict whatever-he-is (XVI?). seriously though, why does their word matter more than anyone else's? the whole world isn't exactly Catholic...

Don't be silly, LW. Everyone I know is waiting to see what Pope PanzerFaust says before they make up their mind on the issue.
In my defense, I was left unsupervised.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
jon-nyc
Jan 24 2006, 06:25 AM
Don't be silly, LW. Everyone I know is waiting to see what Pope PanzerFaust says before they make up their mind on the issue.

(jumping in here to make a comment)

Be careful Jon. You're awfully close to the Bush=Hitler argument, which, of course invalidates everything you say subsequently.

(slinks off to go to work).

:leaving:
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jon-nyc
Member Avatar
Cheers
I was just having some fun, George. Prior to his election as pope one of the blogs that was handicapping the race started calling him the PanzerKardinal which I thought was just brilliant. They then shifted to the PanzerFaust title after the election. I should have footnoted it, but i've forgotten the name of the blog.


In all seriousness, though, I'm less and less inclined to support Roe v Wade even though I'm very much pro choice. Firstly, I really think that federalism is a necessary escape valve for a society with such different subcultures. Andrew Sullivan once said (paraphrasing) 'forcing Mississippi and California into the same social model is a recipe for disaster.'

Secondly, I'm not a huge fan of Griswold or penumbra theories generally. I have some (some) sympathy for the constructionist viewpoint.

Thirdly, (and perhaps most cynically) I think the overturning Roe will upset the alliance between the Rockefeller and Goldwater wings of the Republican party, which will ultimately result in the marginalization of the latter. THis would be a huge benefit to the country, indeed the world.




In my defense, I was left unsupervised.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LWpianistin
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
gryphon
Jan 23 2006, 10:28 PM
Axtremus
Jan 24 2006, 01:38 AM
You should watch more Star Trek to learn the definitions of life.

Perfect. This place never fails to disappoint. I was going to reply to 89th's initial post to disagree with him and tell him although I hate to agree with the RZ's of this world who are sure to come later they would be right and he wrong, but I thought I'd pop to the last page to see if anyone else had an intelligent reply first. Imagine my surprise.

was there any point to that post at all, gryphon? if you were going to reply to 89th's original post, why didn't you? i mean, I of course know that only you have the "real" opinions and intellect, and no one else is entitled to have opinions of their own (seeing as they're all too stupid to really know what they're talking about), but i'm not sure if everyone else has caught on.... :rolleyes2:
And how are you today?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create your own social network with a free forum.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 6
  • 14