Posted on 09/07/2005 9:07:28 AM PDT by XtremeSS
First of all I "middle of the road" I dont blame the president for katrina, I believe in gun ownership, I think you should drive what ever you want, and I hold people responsible for actions they take.
I also believe in a womans right to choose, we should do all we can to protect the enviroment and helping the poor.
I was banned for nothing more than people who do not want to face facts, crying to moderators.
I have read this forum many times, some things I agree with and some I dont. But I just saw how the underground works first hand!
More than confused.
Reality challenged.
;-)
*chuckle*
Dim did not really answer the issue I raised (similar to yours) as to when "the line" is...only something about SCOTUS defining the line and the line getting further back every day with new technology. In the mean time, daily, thousands more are butchered.
The line , if we are to be true to our foundational principles, can only be at fertilization and the cretion of the fetus. At that point it can be nothing other than human, and is endowed by the Creator with the right to life short of acts of God or miscarriages (the same). But, IMHO, we cannot condone or leave legal any willful act (IMHO) to kill a child after that time, short of it already being dead in the womb. If not dead, then by definition, it is viable.
Ostrich needs a lot of bacon on it.
Me could come over and taste a lot of it for you next time you grill some..until you get it right.
Just to be on the safe side.
[it should also be stuffed with zebra, but you probably already do that.]
Maybe there wasn't enough alligator tail in the salad.
You JUST realized you can't say what you want on someone else's site?
So dim...can you or anyone else tell us where that line is?
We all know where the SCOTUS put it, and 'viability' is being redefined downward every day. Soon it will be possible to have true 'test tube' babies raised in an artificial womb.
In other words...you can't.
Nor can you, in a constitutional reference.
And neither can the SCOTUS who made an activist, and IMHO, unconstitutional decision --
Yep, you and millions more see something in our Constitution that gives governments the power to prohibit most anything. IMHO, no such power exists.
I see a presumption of individual liberty.
Thank you.
And THANKS FOR THE BEEBER!!!!
Sorry to yell, I got excited. Be still, my heart.
Seriesly, this is hugh. You made my day.
I'm Spartacus.
Who were you before the ZOT! ??
Screw the SCOTUS legal BS. Define for us when a "fetus" becomes human. At conception, everything but time is there for the baby to be a human being.
I'm Batman.
Happy Birthday and many more!!
So, it is clear that we disagree fundamentally. If you see a presumption of individual liberty (Life liberty and the pursuit) then that presumtion extends to the unborn because they are human.
But, in my estimation, you are allowing yuor presumption of liberty to be twisted and used as an excuse for a deadly holocaust IMHO, and that is about as defined a disagreement and difference in principle as it gets.
Again, adieu.
Y' know, a lot of people find that their beebers were stuned all along, but they just didn't realize it.
Hope this helps.
I'm your worst nightmare.
Who will he/she be when it comes TROLLING back?
They always come back like a reoccurring nightmare.
I'll bet that's it. I think my husband undercooked the ostrich, too.
The discovery of the beeber cleared up many of life's mysteries.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.