Akin

[birdog1960]

Granted, the way he described it was idiotic (although I think had he said trauma & the ensuing stress reduces the likelihood of pregnancy it would have been reasonably plausible - I'd want to see supporting data regardless), but I still don't get how claiming a raped woman is unlikely to be impregnated by her rapist translates to a lack of empathy for her suffering. Can you explain?

i'll try. a woman who has just been raped has much on her plate. guilt, anger, humiliation, fear of std's..and the worry over pregnancy by some vile, subhuman p.o.s. who has just violently attacked her. the idea of continuing that legacy must be nauseating to the point of inducing vomiting. i'm anti abortion but i think exceptional circumstances might require exceptional measures. at the very least, they require empathy. his comments were beyond insensitive. they were hurtful. what of those in this circumstance whose biology didn't follow his theoretical (and ridiculous) predicted outcome? Put yourself in her place. would you not feel attacked once again?

Edited August 22, 2012 by birdog1960

[DC Tom]

i'll try. a woman who has just been raped has much on her plate. guilt, anger, humiliation, fear of std's..and the worry over pregnancy by some vile, subhuman p.o.s. who has just violently attacked her. the idea of continuing that legacy must be nauseating to the point of inducing vomiting. i'm anti abortion but i think exceptional circumstances might require exceptional measures. at the very least, they require empathy. his comments were beyond insensitive. they were hurtful. what of those in this circumstance whose biology didn't follow his theoretical (and ridiculous) predicted outcome? Put yourself in her place. would you not feel attacked once again?

 

Best irony ever.

[birdog1960]

Best irony ever.

 

as i've stated many times, things are rarely black and white...and never perfect.

[Adam]

 

i'll try. a woman who has just been raped has much on her plate. guilt, anger, humiliation, fear of std's..and the worry over pregnancy by some vile, subhuman p.o.s. who has just violently attacked her. the idea of continuing that legacy must be nauseating to the point of inducing vomiting. i'm anti abortion but i think exceptional circumstances might require exceptional measures. at the very least, they require empathy. his comments were beyond insensitive. they were hurtful. what of those in this circumstance whose biology didn't follow his theoretical (and ridiculous) predicted outcome? Put yourself in her place. would you not feel attacked once again?

What she needs is for big government to step in and prevent the abortion. If they leave that decision to her, she will make the wrong one, apparently.

[Rob's House]

 

i'll try. a woman who has just been raped has much on her plate. guilt, anger, humiliation, fear of std's..and the worry over pregnancy by some vile, subhuman p.o.s. who has just violently attacked her. the idea of continuing that legacy must be nauseating to the point of inducing vomiting. i'm anti abortion but i think exceptional circumstances might require exceptional measures. at the very least, they require empathy. his comments were beyond insensitive. they were hurtful. what of those in this circumstance whose biology didn't follow his theoretical (and ridiculous) predicted outcome? Put yourself in her place. would you not feel attacked once again?

Attacked by what? An assertion that she's unlikely to get pregnant under the circumstances?

[3rdnlng]

 

Don't worry. I didn't expect anyone to be able to articulate a logical response. I wasn't trying to single you out, you just said what it seems many were thinking. I'm just wishing someone would explain the steps in the logical deduction that arrives at that particular conclusion.

 

Rob, I've got to hand it to you. You've questioned this lynching of Akin from the beginning. I think we can all agree that he was an idiot for saying it. (sort of like answering your wife about whether or not her slacks give her a bigger ass than normal) There actually could be some semblance of truth to what he said. I'm not saying there is, but is it not possible that the body can shut down in certain areas and or produce chemicals to counteract the creep's semen because of extreme stress? Frankly, I don't know, but we probably can all agree Akin F'd up for saying what he did, but could there be some truth to it?

[birdog1960]

Attacked by what? An assertion that she's unlikely to get pregnant under the circumstances?

yes. and that it's her fault if it doesn't go the way he predicts.

[Rob's House]

 

What she needs is for big government to step in and prevent the abortion. If they leave that decision to her, she will make the wrong one, apparently.

If you're trying to find irony in people who believe in small government and personal autonomy opposing abortion you've failed miserably. If you believe it is a baby being killed you're essentially calling for the government to protect a defenseless child. So unless conservatives start calling for legalized murder I'm afraid you don't have a point.

 

I know this particular situation touches on some more complicated issues, but that's irrelevant to the issue of hypocrisy you were attempting to establish.

[birdog1960]

If you're trying to find irony in people who believe in small government and personal autonomy opposing abortion you've failed miserably. If you believe it is a baby being killed you're essentially calling for the government to protect a defenseless child. So unless conservatives start calling for legalized murder I'm afraid you don't have a point.

 

I know this particular situation touches on some more complicated issues, but that's irrelevant to the issue of hypocrisy you were attempting to establish.

well, there is capital punishment. isn't that legalized murder?

[Rob's House]

 

yes. and that it's her fault if it doesn't go the way he predicts.

Whoa. How do you get from "unlikely to conceive" to "it's your fault if you do"?

[Adam]

 

If you're trying to find irony in people who believe in small government and personal autonomy opposing abortion you've failed miserably. If you believe it is a baby being killed you're essentially calling for the government to protect a defenseless child. So unless conservatives start calling for legalized murder I'm afraid you don't have a point.

 

I know this particular situation touches on some more complicated issues, but that's irrelevant to the issue of hypocrisy you were attempting to establish.

I am as anti abortion as the next guy, but it is impossible for it to be murder. There is no proof of when life starts.

 

Whether you want big government involved in subsidizing social issues, or spending everything on the military (and I think you know, I don't actually mean YOU), you are bringing the country to ruin.

 

Do you have an opinion on that billboard I posted about, several days ago?

 

 

well, there is capital punishment. isn't that legalized murder?

No. And I don't even think punishment is the correct term for it. Removing someone who is a danger to others isn't punitive.

[Rob's House]

 

well, there is capital punishment. isn't that legalized murder?

Are we really going to pretend the killing of a brutal preditor is equivalent to killing an innocent baby?

[birdog1960]

Are we really going to pretend the killing of a brutal preditor is equivalent to killing an innocent baby?

 

we know that sometimes it hasn't been done only to brutal predators. is that ok? collateral damage?

[Rob's House]

 

I am as anti abortion as the next guy, but it is impossible for it to be murder. There is no proof of when life starts.

 

Whether you want big government involved in subsidizing social issues, or spending everything on the military (and I think you know, I don't actually mean YOU), you are bringing the country to ruin.

 

Do you have an opinion on that billboard I posted about, several days ago?

 

 

No. And I don't even think punishment is the correct term for it. Removing someone who is a danger to others isn't punitive.

Come on, man. That's weak. You're conflating accuracy with hypocrisy. Not even accuracy really. In fact, you have an even weaker argument because the other option is when in doubt err on the side of killing a little baby.

 

 

 

we know that sometimes it hasn't been done only to brutal predators. is that ok? collateral damage?

You can make the same principled arguments of incarceration, the only difference is severity. Back to the original topic, please answer the previous question I asked. I honestly want to hear the rationale.

Edited August 22, 2012 by Rob's House

[dayman]

If you're trying to find irony in people who believe in small government and personal autonomy opposing abortion you've failed miserably. If you believe it is a baby being killed you're essentially calling for the government to protect a defenseless child. So unless conservatives start calling for legalized murder I'm afraid you don't have a point.

 

I know this particular situation touches on some more complicated issues, but that's irrelevant to the issue of hypocrisy you were attempting to establish.

 

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.

Edited August 22, 2012 by TheNewBills

[Adam]

 

Come on, man. That's weak. You're conflating accuracy with hypocrisy. Not even accuracy really. In fact, you have an even weaker argument because the other option is when in doubt err on the side of killing a little baby.

Not really. Neither side can prove when life begins- we have no comprehension of that. I can't argue or refute either side, and I know that- I would just be BSing my way through it, like everyone else does. As far as hypocrisy, I grow tired of that word, we are all hypocrites, although some refuse to admit it. Whether for altruistic reasons or selfish reasons, we all adjust what we do.

[3rdnlng]

 

Not really. Neither side can prove when life begins- we have no comprehension of that. I can't argue or refute either side, and I know that- I would just be BSing my way through it, like everyone else does. As far as hypocrisy, I grow tired of that word, we are all hypocrites, although some refuse to admit it. Whether for altruistic reasons or selfish reasons, we all adjust what we do.

 

Adam, on the fence again.

[Rob's House]

 

 

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.

I agree it's a very sticky subject & I don't claim to know the proper role of government on the issue. I'm merely stating why the hypocrisy argument doesn't wash.

[Fan in San Diego]

So it's all about her? Has nothing to do with the father or the child (or future child if you may). She just woke up one day, peed in a cup and found out she was pregnant. If she never intended to have kids why did she not take precautions of birth control or the ultimate precaution and became celebate?

 

We are talking about a rape situation here. But even in a domestic relationship, yes it is still her decision. It is her womb. Flip it another way, say you want a vasectomy but society frowns on it. It's your life, your nuts, your decision. Why should society dictate such a personal decision. If you force a woman to always have a child, society better well be prepared to pay for that child and not complain once about that child. Since its all sacred and all.

[Adam]

 

I agree it's a very sticky subject & I don't claim to know the proper role of government on the issue. I'm merely stating why the hypocrisy argument doesn't wash.

 

I agree it's a very sticky subject & I don't claim to know the proper role of government on the issue. I'm merely stating why the hypocrisy argument doesn't wash.

Although there is an issue I have with people on both sides wanting government interference on what they want, then they slander the other side for what they want the government to do, there is some real hypocrisy elsewhere in this issue. Both sides are just so insistent on when life begins, they feel that their lack of knowledge is somehow better than somebody else's lack of knowledge.

 

The billboard I brought up (which I guess is supposed to be anti abortion) is an example of the debate being taken way too far. Those people are clearly fundamentalists who don't want to engage in discussion, they just want the government to asserts their will on others.

 

 

 

We are talking about a rape situation here. But even in a domestic relationship, yes it is still her decision. It is her womb. Flip it another way, say you want a vasectomy but society frowns on it. It's your life, your nuts, your decision. Why should society dictate such a personal decision. If you force a woman to always have a child, society better well be prepared to pay for that child and not complain once about that child. Since its all sacred and all.

I get what you are saying, but I don't think the situations equate.