Tommygun on October 2, 2008 at 6:16 PM

Imposition of one’s own value system which requires carrying a forced, nonconsensual pregnancy to term by a brutalized woman may also have some moral deficiencies. The old canard about just giving birth and handing it off for adoption or raising it as a love child with no negative psychological impact on the mother is the cheap easy answer, molded to justify the original value system.

a capella on October 2, 2008 at 6:42 PM

Due respect, but isn’t abortion the “cheap easy answer”, almost by definition? $300 – $500 and pretend you were never pregnant?

I’ll say it again: abortion kills an innocent child. The baby did not rape that woman. I’m all sympathy to the argument for killing the rapist, who is undeniably guilty. If it were possible to take the baby from the rape victim and force the rapist to be pregnant and carry the baby to term, I’d be in favor of that, too.

But if we can’t fix what’s wrong, we should at least try not to add to it.

But I believe rape is such a gigantic deprivation of a mother’s rights that it overrides the resulting baby’s right to life.

I know this doesn’t seem consistent with your beliefs on every child’s equality, but I don’t really give a damn.
….

Speedwagon82 on October 2, 2008 at 6:04 PM

The rapist violates the woman’s rights by raping her, so the resulting baby’s right to life is forfeit.

Isn’t that punishing the baby for the crime of the rapist?

That’s not just inconsistent with beliefs in every child’s equality. That’s inconsistent with justice.

Adoption is not a satisfying answer in such cases, but the easy answer is not always the right one. And abortion is the easiest answer of all. Abortion says, “just kill it, flush it, and pretend it never happened.”

I’ll say it again: In cases of rape, it was not the resulting baby that raped the victim. The resulting baby is even more a victim than the rape victim, even if not aborted. Abortion makes the baby a victim again.

NightmareOnKStreet on October 2, 2008 at 8:03 PM

Who cares what some talking-heads on the boobtube think? They’re not representative of the population. Most people know tv is full of lefttards.

Most liberal women realise palin and mccain can’t undo roe vs wade and I’m willing to bet it’s a non-issue for them.

Darth Executor on October 2, 2008 at 7:38 PM

I disagree. Every time the subject of abortion comes up on some left-tard show they drum home the (fake) argument that women’s rights are at stake, blah, blah, blah. Celebutards like Ashley Judd are spewing crap about Palin trampling on women’s “privacy rights”- latest code for abortion rights. Frankly, if liberals thought it a “non-issue” as you say, why do they keep debating the effect Palin’s opinions would have on Roe v Wade?

Let’s hope she knocks Biden and his hair plugs out of the park.

What a wuss–the guy doesn’t even have the guts to bald and proud.

Stand up Gwen! God love ya!

upinak on October 2, 2008 at 7:48 PM

Cheers, my lady. I’ll be back after the debate and see who is left standing and who had crow for dinner. :)

Crow isn’t bad, btw. All depends on seasoning.

Limerick on October 2, 2008 at 7:46 PM

Well I am about outta here. I have more cooking to do at home. Oven is on low for the “ptarmigan and meatballs” the fish is going to be grilled here soon.

Lim, bring Grue, Madison, Manly and a few others.

That’s the spirit! (sorry about the late response, calories got in the way)

Watch for split screens, but only when Biden is making his points. Can’t have shots of Joe’s hair plugs popping out when Sarah goes on the attack.

…hypothetical rape love babies…
Speedwagon82 on October 2, 2008 at 5:40 PM

What a strange and disturbing sequence of words…

I disagree. Not smart – dumb.

That whole schtick was predicated on the assumption she had experience and command of the issues. Once it became obvious that Palin doesn’t have the knowledge and worse, the curiosity, for her to play attack dog now just looks like she’s avoiding the issue.

sanguine4 on October 2, 2008 at 7:29 PM

This isn’t Europe. Americans want to see a good ass kicking. Especially from the underdog.

NightmareOnKStreet on October 2, 2008 at 7:34 PM

Overblown. Palin can’t undo roe vs wade and women who think aabortion’s a right won’t want the issue back to the states, they’ll want it federally supported, much like people like me who think it’s murdered want it banned everywhere. Most liberal women realise palin and mccain can’t undo roe vs wade and I’m willing to bet it’s a non-issue for them.

In my opinion, even if Roe v Wade is overturned, it will not make abortion illegal. It will merely throw the debate BACK TO THE STATES to decide. Am I wrong? -NightmareOnKStreet on October 2, 2008 at 7:01 PM

I wonder if it would be possible for Congress to pass a law that states something to the effect of “we reaffirm that, under the constitution, laws governing the practice of abortion are the jurisdiction of State and local governance.”

“Joeeeee, I’m not wearing any underwear!”

kurtzz3 on October 2, 2008 at 7:16 PM

…works for me…gonna try to keep that mental image going during the debates…might come in handy.

…a man of his long-standing ego, he’d probably reply, “Neither am I!” with a big pederastic grin…that’d end the debate. He wouldn’t want to go on national television with vomit all over his chest….

That whole schtick was predicated on the assumption she had experience and command of the issues. Once it became obvious that Palin doesn’t have the knowledge and worse, the curiosity, for her to play attack dog now just looks like she’s avoiding the issue.

Go get ‘em Sarahcuda!

-of course, if he doesn’t destroy himself first

about Biden’s disagreements with Obama

Even better still, Biden’s and Obama’s disagreements with our Constitution, our Founding Fathers, and the vast majority of the American electorate.

Same thing about religion (and by extension, atheists), but we’re not running around clubbing people over the head for believing differently.

*eats*

Grue in the Attic on October 2, 2008 at 7:14 PM

Grue, you lost me. ‘Splain please.