Page 13 of 16 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 159

Thread: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

  1. #121
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by dclxvinoise View Post
    Well, call me crazy, but I'm holding him to his campaign promises.
    Amiong his supporters, there will be those that do, and those that don't.

    Those that do will fall in the "leftist" camp.
    Those that do not will fall in the "partisan" camp.

  2. #122
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    02-13-09 @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,942

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by dclxvinoise View Post
    Well, call me crazy, but I'm holding him to his campaign promises.
    You do realize that you're setting yourself up for permanent disappointment and frustration, right?

  3. #123
    Dangerous Spinmaster
    RightOfCenter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Last Seen
    04-14-12 @ 04:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,736

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    Nonsense. What you're advocating is for judicial usurptation of the democratic process.
    Anyone else find it strange that when a court kills handgun ban it is the correct, Constitutional choice, but when a court supports privacy it is usurpation of the democratic process?
    Quote Originally Posted by SWM
    I never thought infanticide could be so delicious.

  4. #124
    Androgyne
    Dr_Patrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Montana
    Last Seen
    12-16-15 @ 11:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,349
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    You do realize that you're setting yourself up for permanent disappointment and frustration, right?
    That remains to be seen. I for one think we should give him a chance before condemning him and hoping for failure.

  5. #125
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    02-13-09 @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,942

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by RightOfCenter View Post
    Anyone else find it strange that when a court kills handgun ban it is the correct, Constitutional choice, but when a court supports privacy it is usurpation of the democratic process?
    No.

    Roe and it's companion case, Doe, effectively prevent the American people from working together, through an ongoing process of peaceful and vigorous persuasion, to establish and revise the policies on abortion governing our respective states. Roe imposes on all Americans a radical regime of unrestricted abortion for any reason all the way up to viability—and, under the predominant reading of sloppy language in Roe’s companion case, Doe v. Bolton, essentially unrestricted even in the period from viability until birth.

    Do you really believe that the DC gun ban case opinion effectively removed from public policy debate handgun regulation?

    Of course not...your nonsense here about some supposed hypocrisy is just that...nonsense.

  6. #126
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    I don't think it should be banned.
    I must be confusing you with someone else. I'm glad we cleared that up.

    For the umpteenth time in this thread...I do think our fed tax dollars shouldn't be subsidizing ESCR research given the legitimate and real ethical and moral problems associated with it
    A valid point assuming the ethical and moral concerns are compelling. In my experience the only arguments against it stem from unsupportable religious beliefs.

    and given that there is substantial state-level ESCR funding as well as public and private partnership financing out there as well as substantial private dollars funding ESCR and given that there are finite fed resources that would be better directed at research that has actually resulted in nearly a hundred medical treatments (that would be adult stem cells) and given that alternatives to destroying embryoes to harvest embryonic stem cells exist.
    I'll leave the feasibility studies to the experts. I'm fairly confident they have a better idea of what research is worthwhile and what is not over you and I. Though some here insist that their own judgements are superior because they have read a book or article on the matter.

    I chose conception as what? Please address actual arguments.
    Somehow people come to the determination that something is moral or immoral. In the abortion/ESCR debate many time people decide that a certain instance in time is deemed special for matter (in this case human matter) and thus any action that would compromise the expected outcome of that matter is immoral. Some claim conception is that special time. Others claim "every sperm is important." Others claim sometime during pregnancy. Still others believe only after birth. A small minority (such as certain tribes in Africa) claim a human is only important after it is named.. Thus depending on ones beliefs ESCR can be either immoral, moral, or ambiguous.

    How did you come to the determination that ESCR is immoral. That is, at what point in time does matter suddenly become special to you and why? If you believe for some other reason then please explain why.

    Yeah, opinions are like a-holes, we all have one.
    Opinions free from fallacies, consistent with facts and knowledge are far superior to those that are not.


    Yeah, so lets start medical experimentation on death row inmates and defective children...
    only if I believed such people did not have a "right to life" would I believe such. Since I do believe they have such a right then your scenario is a non-sequitur .

    I don't disagree that conducting research to cure disease is a virtuous endeavor. The fact is, though, that you're ignoring that this virtuosity (a word?) doesn't justify any and all medical research. That much you have to acknowledge, no?
    Of course. That doesn't support your position though so I'm confused on why you think its important.


    I wasn't talking about abortion.
    Such a debate is based on the "right to life" in most cases thus the issues coincide many times.
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

  7. #127
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    From the OP:

    As far as abortion goes, I believe it should be legal in those states which want it, and illegal in those which don't. It is up to the states themselves, and none of the Federal government's business. This is the reason that I am opposed to Roe v. Wade, just as I am opposed to any effort to federally criminalize abortion.
    I have never understood this argument. The States can no more deny a person their "right" to an abortion than they can deny them their right to due process. Conversely, the States can no more condone the murder of an unborn person than they can a born one.

    The entire argument hinges on the status of the unborn, i.e. whether or not they are indeed a person. Once this determination has been made it is up to the Federal government to compel the complicity of the States. Abortion is either a right or it is murder; as such the concept of State-authority doesn't enter into it.

  8. #128
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    02-13-09 @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,942

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    I must be confusing you with someone else. I'm glad we cleared that up.
    I think Felicity, though, was making that argument.

    A valid point assuming the ethical and moral concerns are compelling. In my experience the only arguments against it stem from unsupportable religious beliefs.
    It's a valid point regardless of whether you find the citation of such ethical and moral concerns as "compelling." Are ethical and moral consideratins not appropriate considerations in debating public policy?

    And, so what if those concerns arise from an individual's religious beliefs or otherwise? Scrutinize the concerns themselves rather than impugning some perceived religious zealotry.

    I'll leave the feasibility studies to the experts. I'm fairly confident they have a better idea of what research is worthwhile and what is not over you and I. Though some here insist that their own judgements are superior because they have read a book or article on the matter.
    I am not pretending that my judgment on the value or feasibility of such research. I am, though, exercising my judgment relative to the appropriateness of using fed taxpayer dollars to subsidize ESCR. That's not an issue that the scientific experts have any particular authority on.

    Somehow people come to the determination that something is moral or immoral.
    Somehow? What does this mean? We all exercise our moral judgment and do so based upon our individual values.

    In the abortion/ESCR debate many time people decide that a certain instance in time is deemed special for matter (in this case human matter) and thus any action that would compromise the expected outcome of that matter is immoral. Some claim conception is that special time. Others claim "every sperm is important." Others claim sometime during pregnancy. Still others believe only after birth. A small minority (such as certain tribes in Africa) claim a human is only important after it is named.. Thus depending on ones beliefs ESCR can be either immoral, moral, or ambiguous.
    Um, I think you're conflating abortion and ESCR here. To my knowledge, those participating in the ESCR debate don't rely on any time measurement. It's the type and nature of the cells involved and the implications drawn from the use of those cells, err, embryoes.

    Ad I don't agree that morals can be derived from religious beliefs. However, religion is not the onyl source of moral and ethical considerations.

    How did you come to the determination that ESCR is immoral. That is, at what point in time does matter suddenly become special to you and why? If you believe for some other reason then please explain why.
    I find it immoral because it involves the destruction of human life for scientific research, I find it morally repugnant to consider a human embryo as simply a collection of cells that have no instrinsic value and, therefore, should be available to do with as we please,

    Opinions free from fallacies, consistent with facts and knowledge are far superior to those that are not.
    I have presented a logically coherent argument that relies on facts and knowledge.

    only if I believed such people did not have a "right to life" would I believe such. Since I do believe they have such a right then your scenario is a non-sequitur
    So, children with physical deformities or mental defects have no right to life? Death row inmates have no right to life? I offered up eugenics earlier as another example where ethical and moral considerations affected fed policy regarding eugenics. Do you also believe that humans born without favored genetic characteristics have no right to life?

    This is curious, your right to life consideration. What basis do you use to conclude that some humans have a right to life while others do not?

    Of course. That doesn't support your position though so I'm confused on why you think its important.
    I was addressing your point which argued that since scientific research is always virtuous then ethical and moral considerations have no place at the table. At least that is how I understood your comment.

    Such a debate is based on the "right to life" in most cases thus the issues coincide many times.
    My ESCR argument has no right to life component. You're improperly conflating two different issues.

  9. #129
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    02-13-09 @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,942

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    I have never understood this argument. The States can no more deny a person their "right" to an abortion than they can deny them their right to due process.
    You're missing the trees in the forest. The states cannot, right now, unduly regulate abortion per the Supreme Court. The OP is arguing for an alternative environment where this public policy issue is returned to the political process where the states would then have the authority to impose regulations affecting abortions.

    Currently, what's happening, though, is that state's have attempted to regulate abortion by imposing, for example, notification laws, These have been routinely struck down.

    Conversely, the States can no more condone the murder of an unborn person than they can a born one.
    Huh? States like Illinois permit (or used to permit) babies surviving an attempted abortion to be left to die be it on a counter, in a custodial closet, or some other morally repugnant situation. We know this as it came up during the presidential campaign where Obama was rightly criticized for opposing a law that would have not permitted such hideous treatment of born babies despite the state law containing the same exact clauses as the federal law. I'm not sure I understand your reasoning here.

    The entire argument hinges on the status of the unborn, i.e. whether or not they are indeed a person. Once this determination has been made it is up to the Federal government to compel the complicity of the States. Abortion is either a right or it is murder; as such the concept of State-authority doesn't enter into it.
    False choice.

    If abortion is not a federal constitutional right that does not mean that a state cannot grant such a right to its residents via its own constitutional process.

  10. #130
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,263

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    Would libs allow suicide as a viable method of abortion?
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

Page 13 of 16 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •