Bush declares that fetus is a 'child' (New Abortion Debate Thread)

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by PadmeSkywalker, Feb 1, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. StarFire Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 31, 2001
    star 4
    Maybe we should spend less money blowing up people and more money distributing the totally un-equal distribution of wealth in the world.

    We blow up people who kill people who feed an economy which helps to feed starving people . . . m'kay?

    Maybe you should all give up your nice houses and televisions and computers so children in third world countries can eat. We live in a paradise and our comforts are met beyond expectation, yet we aren't willing to give it up to help the rest of the world.

    Lowering our standard of living doesn't do anyone a favor. Sure, we have luxuries. But the world doesn't suddenly become a better place because everyone is lowered to the same level of suffering.

    "We" care about the starving kids too, dude. But some kids starving doesn't devalue the lives of innocents, or justify murder.
  2. Darth Fierce Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 6, 2000
    star 4
    McCartney, I know where you're coming from, but I think it's off-base. I know you weren't talking directly to me, but I DO care about suffering all over the world. But, we ARE sending wealth to them, and we ARE sending people to educate them, and yet it doesn't work. So tell me how tossing my color TV and microwave out the window of my ivory tower will be the final piece in solving the puzzle? I'm sorry if that sounds selfish, but I honestly don't see how it would help.
  3. womberty Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 21, 2002
    star 4
    Perhaps we should get rid of the death penalty because innocent lives are lost every year.

    We should, perhaps, change the current system to ensure that no innocent people are given the death penalty. I'm not going to argue against that.


    Pro-life, in my opinion, is such a subjective and at times hypocritical stance.

    "Pro-life", like "pro-choice", was chosen as the best-sounding label for the group. My stance here is anti-abortion, and in favor of protecting individual rights to life, liberty, and property (sort of a libertarian view, I think).

    You don't have to call me pro-life. I don't mind going by "anti-abortion" if you think that "pro-life" does not apply to someone who supports the death penalty.

    The ones I think are hypocritical are those people who argue against the death penalty in all cases (even when the person is guilty) but support abortion rights.


    you seem to harp on the fact that a mother is an irresponsible slut who wants abortions against the will of all these fathers out there who SO WANT to stay and take care of the child.

    Is that what I said? It isn't what I meant. I do think it's irresponsible not to be concerned about the consequences of sex, but that in itself does not make someone a "slut". It just means they're ignorant or naive enough to think that they don't need to worry about the outcome of their actions.

    And I'm not saying that all, or even most fathers would want to keep their children if they were informed before the mothers got an abortion. I'm just saying that it's very likely that many women have abortions without informing the father first. And, judging by some men's reactions when they find that their children have been given up for adoption without their consent, I can't help but wonder what their reactions would be in this case.


    Or is it just American "unborn fetuses" that you care so much about saving?

    They're the ones under our government's jurisdiction. And I'm not asking you to save them at the expense of other children around the world, am I?
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.