dayman

B/c making healthcare available to people who can choose to use it or not is the same as denying healthcare to people whether or not they choose to use it?

The reason that it is factually/logically correct (IMO of course hehe) to view pro-choice as the more pro-rights (liberal..or even conservative..lol however you see it) stance...is because BOTH sides necessarily have to acknowledge that however they feel about the fertilized egg being life...they aren't God and there is a good faith and contentious disagreement about if it is. Therefore, given the regulation prohibiting abortion would interfere with the most intimate of experiences humans have...it's not appropriate. That's really why it's not an even handed debate where either way one side is forcing their view on the other. No matter how you slice it it's a parasite living in the body of another person who is charged by nature with turning into a full human being or not...one side of this issue controls their decisions from that point on regarding their reproduction the other does not.

It just isn't equal here though. It's not both sides forcing their opinion on the other. Pro-choice lets people reproduce how they see fit (with reasonable exceptions for really late abortions and whatnot perhaps)...pro-life does not.

I see this point. It's still a terribly intimate and private matter though. How we reproduce is probably the most private matter there is. Given the controversy over early abortion, understanding that people fundamentally disagree, and understanding it's one of the most private and personal experiences humans have...it's not a huge stretch to call it inconsistent. That said I get the argument, some people think it's their business to control someone else's reproduction and make them behave a certain way to protect a fertilized egg that lives inside them b/c it's a person. The bottom line though, prolife people would do well to just change the hearts and minds of their neighbors and support those (make it easier) who do keep babies they weren't planning on having. To simply say "it's a life so it's government protecting a life" to bypass the basic fact that under either theory (life or not) it's government interference in the most basic of human experiences....that doesn't sit well with me.

is this a no to the law or a weak yes?

Well I guess my question is the position itself though. Not if you would respect someone, but if you would like to see the law they want on the books.

Which Obama haters on here support the RNC position btw? Out of curiosity...

hehe, get the **** out of here Tom

lkjlihp vfhjb #%&$ZHGHFJ^i$%irtgf

Following polls should cause you great concern for people who follow polls. Anyway I'm off to DickMorris.com to get an honest, nonpartisan view of where the voters stand w/ no agenda behind it.

lol ok

I'll take a look next time I'm at the liquor store may give it a shot I need a change anyway. Given you are the one suggesting this...you drink it how?

I ...uh..."acquired" the first season recently...but it's Starz and apparently starting the second season recently (I think). No idea when it's on.

http://www.latimes.c...0,1438253.story

LOL save face? Obviously I never save face. As such I still don't understand what you are talking about. The name of the bill or cosponsors matter? Am I running around pasting the endless list of sponsors for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or do I cut to the chase in topics on Obamacare? I still don't know what your point is here. People in congress who feel strongly about abortion should own it. The ones who do and rise to front of the stage should continue to. This isn't unreasonable and I could care less honestly that they do I know all kinds of people (living near the bible belt) that feel this way. If there's one issue I strongly disagree with it's this one. But don't run from it if it's something you want to be law b/c people start talking about it.

Give me a good bourbon I'll give it shot. Haven't had many I find special.

Pretend I'm retarded (shouldn't be hard)...I still don't get your point. Also..."how many wins this year"...don't get that either. (not trying to be snarky here btw)

LOL what is your point here?

bleh...Cutty Sark or Jameson or go home

Haha

hehe...is this how we pretend there's a point to asking what the name of the bill is?

I'm only 2 episodes in but I suspect most on this board would like this series. Seems pretty good so far. Political. Kelsey Grammer is pretty good etc...recommended (so far)

Your point?

Somehow I doubt the GOP party wants it defined as "the entire GOP bill." You sound like MSNBC hehe

Some scientists somewhere said they are afraid and can't conceive when "horrified hormones" are coursing through their woman parts though. This is important to debunk the argument of the real world implications of making a rape victim carry and have a baby she gets through rape. Obviously btw...CO2 emissions effect on the ozone is not settled so we need not rush to conclusions.