Bush disagrees with South Dakota abortion ban

AFP ^ | 1 March 2006

[jdm]

"A person who writes as you do is not worth worrying about."

LOL. I know he doesn't need any "cheerleaders," but you're talking about easily the most witty, intelligent poster I've come across here. Find someone who's not only uniquely brilliant, but also as consistently hysterical as Petronski. You'll be looking for a long while.

[Aussie Dasher]

Every abortion is more than a tragic decision.

Once we accept the humanity of the unborn, how can we say any child can be killed?

[DameAutour]

You are trying to substitute emotionalism and hyperbole for an argument. Don't waste time being "offended" by her use of analogy, don't waste time being "SHOCKED" that someone of the "female persuasion" could possibly be moral and make decisions rationally and morally, not emotionally.

[boomop1]

Yep your right, when you think about it, he has nothing to lose, except alienating his base a bit. He may have a chance to appoint another supreme so he doesn't need any flack on the abortion issue mugging up the choice, BTW I had reply 7 removed it was dumb and uncalled for, weren't the first time I stepped in it, cheers.

[clawrence3]

The same way we "accept" MORE traffic fatalities every year - do whatever we can to reduce them, short of throwing the baby (sorry) out with the bathwater.

[RobbyS]

The real world is full of surprises. This new law is far less rigorous than the Texas law voiced by Roe v. Wade and it reflects actual practice in the state today. The message needs to be got out that this is the way it should be settled: state by state. The overthrow of Roe has never meant anything more than a return to local option. The Republican response should always be: Let the people decide, whether it be a matters of abortion or gay marriage or prayers in the schools.

[boomop1]

Cheers

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

I'm sorry, I know how alot of you feel, but to make a woman carry a baby conceived from rape is so incredibly wrong.

"Rape", "incest" and "health" are intangible. Therefore when they are made exceptions, everybody just claims "rape" or "incest" and a "ban" becomes meaningless. But pregnancy is only temporary. Abortion is permanent. Better that a few be temporarily inconvenienced than millions die. If you cannot accept that, then you must accept being pro-abortion. (I suspect you are completely pro-abortion anyway but are only raising the specter of rape in order to undermine other's positions.)

[Will_Zurmacht]

the INNOCENT humanity of the unborn...

or else guys like me will say "Well, John Wayne Gacy was human too...what gives us the right...yada, yada."

the innocence of the unborn is crucial for your argument.

[TigersEye]

Good idea.

[Aussie Dasher]

Again, BIG difference:

Traffic fatalities are accidents. There is nothing accidental about abortion, but it's just as fatal.

[wireman]

It's not the woman's fault either.

[FRONTLINER]

You have got to be joking ......

[Aussie Dasher]

Agreed, and I'm not suggesting she be killed, either.

[TigersEye]

Once we accept the humanity of the unborn, how can we say any child can be killed?

Way to bottom line it, Bro!

[eeevil conservative]

well to listen to some of these women you'd think you were suggesting just that....oy!

[LasVegasMac]

But shouldn't the wishes of the would-be mother be taken into account as well? If she were forced to have a child because of a rape, that would be pretty rough. Imagine looking into the eyes of your child and reliving that moment... over and over again.

There have to be exceptions... extreme cases. Abortion is not birth control, but to ban it completely is definitely not the right thing to do.

Well said.........an island of sanity in an ocean of extremism and lost souls.

[DameAutour]

It seemed like a serious statement to me.

[Petronski]

Yes, I watch a lot of kids movies. What about it? :P

Don't make me call Acme for new rockets! ;O)