Both parties are too extreme on abortion

Boston Globe ^ | August 26, 2012 | JEFF JACOBY

[presidio9]

When it comes to abortion, which political party’s views are more extreme?

Unless you’ve spent the past week as a stowaway on NASA’s new Mars rover, the approved media answer is obvious: Republicans are the abortion fanatics. Between the furor over Todd Akin’s “legitimate rape” gaffe and the GOP platform language calling for a constitutional amendment to undo Roe v. Wade, the Republicans have revealed themselves to be — as The New York Times editorialized on

[Verginius Rufus]

Apparently there are rare cases when the problem is only discovered when it is too late for a Caesarian. But the movie was made long before some of the modern technology which could perhaps give the doctors the information in time.

Julius Caesar was not born by caesarian section. The name "Caesar" was a cognomen used by a branch of the Julii long before he was born. If the first one to get the cognoment was born by caesarian section, it was long before the famous Julius Caesar.

[potlatch]

I doubt you miss much as I see you post every 10 posts of so.

Let Obama win and install several more liberals on SCOTUS and we’ll never have an effect on changing abortion laws in our lifetimes and beyond.

And I’m through with this ‘chitchat’.

[presidio9]

Apparently there are rare cases when the problem is only discovered when it is too late for a Caesarian. But the movie was made long before some of the modern technology which could perhaps give the doctors the information in time.

In that case, I think you may want to continue this conversation with the original poster. Correction: I SUGGEST you continue this conversation with the original poster. Correction: Why are you persuing this conversation with me instead of the original poster?

If the first one to get the cognoment was born by caesarian section, it was long before the famous Julius Caesar.

Yes, thank you professor. This entire thread as begun to bore me. Thus the flippancy.

[ansel12]

I'm assuming that your continued personal attacks (I had also assumed that you are Catholic, or at least Christian, right?) are based on my willingness (not to be confused with eagerness) to provide exceptions for the life of the mother. This is not the same thing as supporting Mitt Romney.

Where does this come from, you read my posts on this thread, and you want to lie, and say they are talking about the life of the mother? You are trying to dismiss all this by lying about that?

Life of the mother has nothing to do with this or any of my posts, you are just making stuff up, you even claim that you are not defending Mitt Romney's candidacy as you keep keep lashing out at anyone who challenges him or his abortion agenda.

Strong words have accomplished nothing in three decades.

Now you are endorsing Mitt Romney's dumping the GOP's abortion platform because you find the language too strong? This is one of the worst pro-abortion, pro-Romney attempts that I have seen.

[ansel12]

Your voting to change the GOP party platform on abortion and for the first pro-abortion republican, means that you are voting for just that.

[Theo]

Self-defense is the only legitimate justification for ending a pregnancy.

Those who exercise this option in this difficult situation should not be judged. And those who take the risk of continuing the pregnancy should not be judged.

[TigersEye]

It is never too late to do a Caesarian section, since the origin of the procedure was to remove a baby from a dead mother, and an abortion would never be a safer option for the mother.

Also, whether it actually happened or not, the origin of term does come from the belief that Julius Caesar was born by Caesarian section.

Caesarean section

[donna]

You’re just trying to find a way to lower your moral standards.

[exDemMom]

I have not followed this debate until akin muttered his ignorance so I may have missed the debate over how the funding for raising all these new members of society will be handled. Once the mandate that all birth control be eliminated is in place, what tax mechanism will be used?

The major use of abortion is as a primary method of birth control. Therefore, it is unlikely that a massive spike in births would occur if the legality of abortion were reversed today. Those now using abortion would use one of the many contraceptives already available.

Your pro-abortion sentiment really gives itself away in your next sentence. No one has ever suggested that contraceptives be banned or even limited. That's a strawman abortion advocates raise whenever there is talk of even the most minor and reasonable "restrictions" (such as requiring full disclosure about fetal development prior to an abortion). Any person with half a brain knows that promoting contraceptive use leads to fewer pregnancies.