The democrat parties 2012 campaign slogan for the murder of innocent babies in the womb will be titled : ” IT’S MY BODY AND I’LL F**K WITH TOTAL IMPUNITY IF I WANT TO “.

Just because something is legal, doesn’t make it moral or right.

The ‘Attack on Women’?? Gee, Jamie, I can’t quite tell what you’re getting at here.

Tell ya what, hun. You’re *so* offended. Please, just put your money where your mouth is and just cut a check to Planned Parenthood if you want them to keep-on-keeping-on with their baby-killing ways. Because that’s pretty much what this all boils down to for you folks. FWIW, I’d *love* to stay out of these skank’s crotches – by not funding their negligence and irresponsibility. See how that works??

We’ve gone beyond having the ‘right’ to kill an unborn in this country. It’s now, YOU WILL PAY for my ‘right’ to kill this unborn. Sleep tight at night, Jamie. Say hi to Margaret Sanger in those dreams of yours…..

First, I’d like to observe that I’ve been reading some of the comments here for quite some time. It’s really disheartening to see how much vitriol and hate comes out towards each other…towards people you don’t even know…in defense of people (the politicians) and policies that you don’t even fully know or understand.

I’d really love to be able to chat civilly/objectively.

Couldn’t that same argument be made for doing things like putting MPG minimums on cars like the government is proposing (i.e. ‘It’s MY money and MY decision to drive a gas guzzling car) or around just the act of making people aware that eating food like McDonalds is bad (i.e. It’s MY body and MY decision on what kind of food I eat…)?

I understand that there’s a ‘moral’ slant to this…but you can’t preach the idea of ‘freedom to do what I want when I want’ on one hand while turning around and saying… “Well, except in the case of abortion….”.

My opinion: I think ‘morality’ is subjective and shouldn’t even be considered. You must leave it up to the individual to decide what’s ‘morally right’ for them.

Even my liberal daughters do not want federal funding for abortion. Money is fungible and I do not believe that federal funds should go to Planned Parenthood or any other abortion providers. I don’t think funding for Viagra or for rhinoplasty is a legitimate federal priority.

You sound very, very young, Jamie, and very, very angry. Grow up a little and have some more life experiences, they might teach you some humility.

I hope it comes as no surprise that more females are killed by legal abortion than by the lack of it. The difference between victims is that the females killed by legal abortion have yet to breathe air, but they are human females nonetheless. Hence, to say that refusing to subsidize death is an attack on women really seems to get things completely backward.

Andrew, it is possible to oppose abortion funding but and still support the availability of legal abortion. Funding and availability are two separate issues.

I applaud your plea or civility.

Andrew, I cannot agree that morality is subjective. I’m very liberal. I have nothing against goat fuckers, for example, but I have something against goat thieves. Theft is morally wrong and we decide upon the penalties for that through our representative gov’t (who also choose to make goat fucking illegal).

The Supreme Court has prevented representative gov’t from determining the legality of abortion (that is an issue by itself). If it had not, Americans could decide whether to make abortion legal. It would be no different than determining laws on human-goat sex.

That said, I personally find abortion to be close to murder. I still would want it legal because I do not trust gov’t to properly decide which abortions are justified or not (and I certainly can see that there are such circumstances). However, most are not. It is sad that abortion is seen as anything less than the elimination of a human being, for that is an indisputable scientific fact. How one can look at the image of a fetus and not consider it a person is beyond me, but the decision to take a baby to term or to end its life is not scientifically determinable.

I love how pro-lifers think that pro-choice people WANT people to get abortions. We don’t. We’re not saying, “yeah, go out and get an abortion if it’s convenient.” We merely respect the right of women to receive an abortion if they need one.
The early commenters really do seem to be hateful people, and I don’t know why. I don’t see them going out and adopting the babies “saved” by abortion. I don’t see them offering support for the mothers.
Most women who get an abortion have already had a child. They’re not “skanks,” as much as some of you would like to believe. They merely understand that they cannot support a child, or another child. It’s incredibly offensive of you to assume that all women who get an abortion do so because they made a bad decision; many abortions are performed due to unwanted pregnancies stemming from rape, statutory rape, and incest. And even if a woman is getting an abortion because of something else — a health reason or the inability to financially support a child — it’s none of your business. Like all medical procedures, this is no one’s business but the patient’s and the doctor’s.
People like Lacyunderalls and Barack Must Go are proving their ignorance of this issue. They think it’s an issue of “murder” vs. “convenience,” when really it’s about the GOP attempting to rob women of their ability to make their own decisions. The argument here usually relates to religious beliefs — these people have the tendency to use religion to justify their hatred of pro-choicers or the killing of doctors (even though God is shown to commit many, many abortions in the Bible, and there’s also that whole “thou shalt not kill” thing, although it’s not surprising to see these people ignore teachings of peace and love when it conveniences them). The thing is, however, that RELIGION DOES NOT HAVE A PLACE IN GOVERNMENT. The United States is not a Christian nation; it never was, and hopefully it never will be. The Founding Fathers were not Christian (well, most of them weren’t, anyway), they were Deist, and they intentionally left religious beliefs out of the Constitution.
It’s nice to see how un-American some of you people can be when it comes to pro-choice matters. That’s what you’re doing. You’re going against the principles of this nation, and if it helps you sleep easier at night, then more power to you, but in the end you’re wrong. It’s not murder, it’s not negligence, it’s a much-needed medical procedure that many women (particularly lower-income women) need. It’s pretty obvious that you’re operating from a middle-class viewpoint. The thing is, some women cannot afford to have children. Of course, you’ll still go on believing that abortions are the blood of Satan and they make the non-aborted baby Jesus cry.

@Andrew
Thank you. “Moral” is a subjective term, and it varies from person-to-person. What one person sees as moral another person may decry as wicked.
It is not the place of the government to decide what is moral and what is not. Sure, going out and killing someone is legally wrong, but there may be mitigating factors. Stealing food for your family is illegal, but may be considered morally “right.”
You can’t say that women deserve the right to make their own choices and then turn around and say, “oh, well, except for abortion.” You’re either for women’s rights, or you’re not. The GOP is not. They want women to operate as broodmares for the state, and to stay in the kitchen where they belong. I know some Republicans who are very pro-women’s rights, and find this misuse of power disgusting. The GOP is attempting to set women back two-hundred years, because the government is a man’s place, right? A white man’s place, I mean.

Andrew Geonetta said:
First, I’d like to observe that I’ve been reading some of the comments here for quite some time. It’s really disheartening to see how much vitriol and hate comes out towards each other…towards people you don’t even know…in defense of people (the politicians) and policies that you don’t even fully know or understand.

I’d really love to be able to chat civilly/objectively.

Couldn’t that same argument be made for doing things like putting MPG minimums on cars like the government is proposing (i.e. ‘It’s MY money and MY decision to drive a gas guzzling car) or around just the act of making people aware that eating food like McDonalds is bad (i.e. It’s MY body and MY decision on what kind of food I eat…)?

I understand that there’s a ‘moral’ slant to this…but you can’t preach the idea of ‘freedom to do what I want when I want’ on one hand while turning around and saying… “Well, except in the case of abortion….”.

My opinion: I think ‘morality’ is subjective and shouldn’t even be considered. You must leave it up to the individual to decide what’s ‘morally right’ for them.

The only difference, except maybe in the case of the cows and chickens at McDonald’s, is the degenerate mother’s behavior and subsequent abortion, is murder of an innocent baby.

You dumbass libs try to connect every tree hugging bullshit scheeme some corrupt politician along with his sugar daddy corporation convinces you is the way to ” WIN THE GODDAMN FUTURE ” to murder and you’re not even on the same planet. So go hug a tree and shush.

Barack Must Go said:
The only difference, except maybe in the case of the cows and chickens at McDonald’s, is the degenerate mother’s behavior and subsequent abortion, is murder of an innocent baby.

The flaw here in your logic is that legally speaking, with the exception of many late-term and all partial birth abortions, our judicial system does not consider the abortion to be murder. You are very simply imposing your own personal moral beliefs and wishing with all of your black little heart that the very same morality will become legislation.

For that matter, why do we not impose all kinds of sexuality based moral legislation? Make masturbation illegal, make porn illegal, make it illegal for a woman to shed the lining of her uterus because, hell, there was potential for her to breed during that monthly cycle.

Arcko said:
The flaw here in your logic is that legally speaking, with the exception of many late-term and all partial birth abortions, our judicial system does not consider the abortion to be murder. You are very simply imposing your own personal moral beliefs and wishing with all of your black little heart that the very same morality will become legislation.

For that matter, why do we not impose all kinds of sexuality based moral legislation? Make masturbation illegal, make porn illegal, make it illegal for a woman to shed the lining of her uterus because, hell, there was potential for her to breed during that monthly cycle.

Liberals = immoral, crackpot, leeches.

Barack Must Go said:
The only difference, except maybe in the case of the cows and chickens at McDonald’s, is the degenerate mother’s behavior and subsequent abortion, is murder of an innocent baby.

You dumbass libs try to connect every tree hugging bullshit scheeme some corrupt politician along with his sugar daddy corporation convinces you is the way to ” WIN THE GODDAMN FUTURE ” to murder and you’re not even on the same planet. So go hug a tree and shush.

@Robert White (by the way, this is Andrew…I accidentally logged in using Facebook on my previous post. No big deal…so you all know who I am now :) ): I 100% agree with you. Funding is indeed a different issue than availability. With funding, the only thing I can say for how I feel about that is that we should use our common sense in judging what is an acceptable exception to the rule.

But I chose to respond to BarackMustGo’s statement, which has nothing to do with funding and everything to do with his generalized perception of Democrats stance on the sweeping topic of abortion. I’d love to hear people’s thoughts on funding, though. It’s a very slippery slope and a far more interesting conversation than simple ‘Abortion: Right or Wrong?’

@BarackMustGo: As I said, I’ve been ‘lurking’ here over the past couple of months or so. You seem to comment in the same way every time…and by that I mean you comment with some kind of serious chip on your shoulder. That’s OK; it just makes for a very predictable read. I challenge you to at least try to have a conversation without attempting to beat someone down.

First, despite what you think, these are my very own honest-to-goodness thoughts sans corporate or political influence. I like to think I’m a pretty capable independent thinker. I’m not sure how this is a ‘tree-hugging bullshit scheme’.

‘On the topic of ‘degenerate mothers’: Do you think that every person that goes to get an abortion is a ‘degenerate’? I think that’s a huge sweeping generalization you make. Do you truly believe that a woman who gets gang-raped and chooses to have an abortion should not have it? What if that woman was your wife? Your sister? A close friend? How about a less heavy-handed example? How about a 15 year old girl who’s parents are both disabled and on a fixed income…who can’t afford health insurance, much less an abortion? Thoughts?

On the topic of ‘moral differences’: You’re missing my point. “Murdering a baby” is your attempt at framing this in a moral way. I’ll ask you the typical ‘pro-choice’ question: At what point do you consider it a life? Even deeper…what IS life?! If life is defined as an organism that is able to respond to stimulus, can reproduce, can function on it’s own, etc….then a human zygote is not life. It’s just a big blob of…stuff…that has the potential to turn into life. In order for you to impose your morality upon me, you have to assume that I define life as the same way as you do.

And that is why you cannot bring morality into the equation.

Some cultures find it ‘morally’ OK to eat a dog. Is that wrong? Well…to me it is. I’d never do it. But that’s their choice. And it’s my choice to stay away from that culture!
Some religions find it ‘morally’ OK to have multiple wives. Is that wrong? To me it is. But my morality dictates that it’s wrong for me…and I therefore make the choice to not be a part of that religion.
Some people find it ‘morally’ OK to have an abortion. Is that wrong? To me…yes. My moral compass dictates that there are only certain exceptions…common sense exceptions…where an abortion is acceptable. And important thing is that I live in a country where someone isn’t telling me what I SHOULD think is acceptable.

I’ll repeat in part what I said previously: You can’t preach the idea of ‘freedom to do what I want when I want’ on one hand while turning around and trying to impose your morality on me because morality can differ from person to person.

And…I also don’t believe you truly believe that all liberals are ‘immoral, crackpot, leeches’….just like I don’t believe all conservatives are…well…any number of the hundreds of stereotypes out there for conservatives :). There’s nothing wrong with liberalism…there’s nothing wrong with conservatism. The two opposing forces force balance, and are thus a good thing. It just sucks that politics get in the way of common sense.

Dammit…stupid Facebook connect… :(

GET YOUR GOVERNMENT HANDS IN MY UTERUS!!!!

My, how things change.

Nice job Jamie. I enjoyed your article and the upbeat style.

We need to arrest God for causing abortions. God should know better since every pregnancy means so much to God, or is God actually Pro Choice? God aborts about half of all pregnancies so I think the matter isn’t important to God.

Either we spend the money to provide abortions for women who don’t want babies or we can spend thousands more to heal, correct, house or imprison the unwanted babies. We need to pass laws that force women to love every baby they have. That’ll work.

We can arrest God for causing abortions, arrest women for not wanting or loving every pregnancy, and arrest ourselves for not taking care of the unwanted babies so we can produce more Charles Mansons.