Bill Simon Draws Conservative Line in Sand - Race Tightens - Convention Approaches

California News Media Outlets ^ | 02/06/02 | Various

[purereason]

"Isn't that 'restraint' on the 2A protected right?"

No. I said any person intent on breaking the law. What your talking about is regulation. Failure to obey the regulation would be a violation of the law, but you still wouldn't be arrested for what you intend to do with the gun unless you've already violated some law (e.g.conspiracy to commit murder).

"The equitable solution would be either give the pregnant woman the opportunity to exercise her freedom, and for the opposing people to either pay her to have her baby, or let her have the abortion in peace. In making her have the baby, you are taking away her freedom to do with her life as she pleases, and note that in her doing so does not diminish one whit your freedoms as well."

I don't know what equitable has to do with it?..but notice you've backed off your statement "I agree that pro-life/anti-abortion is the correct moral choice":
1. The pregnant woman already exercised her freedom;
2. Not only are the opposing people paying but everybody is paying for either the birth or the abortion, they call it insurance. (The price of Insurance is based on what they are required to pay for.);
3. As I stated, freedom is a only a concept. Its intended to allow someone to do as they please so far as they don't hurt someone else. The Constitution is merely a tool which guarantees "our" freedom of action by obligating the government to respect it unless we injure someone else. (e.g. commit a crime against someone else.) Whenever the government fails to protect someone's freedom, and we allow it, our own freedom is at risk. That means I'm at risk and that's more than one whit of my freedom.

"As far as government and laws being based on moral principles, tell that to the widow of Donald Scott"

I said laws, not government. That's a perfect example of what happens when the government fails to protect the freedoms of someone else.

[Frohickey]

I don't know what equitable has to do with it?..but notice you've backed off your statement "I agree that pro-life/anti-abortion is the correct moral choice":

I haven't backed off my statement. Pro-life/anti-abortion is a moral choice. If I subscribe to that choice, it was because I want to do so. I should not dictate to others what to choose in THEIR situation. Since they are the one that has to live with their choice, its it theirs to make. Not mine. That is why I said in an earlier post... "Fine. Put me down on the pro-abortion side then. But make sure you put down 'cheapskate, not for govt-subsidized abortions'."

Govt-subsidized means that I have to pay for their choice, and that is not what I want my taxes to go towards. I'd rather it go into my pocket if the time ever came that I have to make the choice of abortion or child-rearing.

What is your solution? Absolutely no abortion for others? If you take abortion away from them, why shouldn't they take away something else of yours that isn't theirs? When does it end?

[purereason]

"If you take abortion away from them"

Its not my desire to take anything away from anybody. My desire is to give life back to the unborn. If you can figure out a way to do that and still support choice, I'll support it along with you.

"why shouldn't they take away something else of yours that isn't theirs?"

I wish I could say "they" have never taken away anything(rights)of mine....The list is so long I won't even attempt to list them....you mentioned serveral earlier. Unfortuneately, that's the price of civilization. The Government's role is supposedly to act as a fair and impartial arbitor, to protect us from each other. True, the interest of one citizen sometimes conflicts with another citizen. That's when government is empowered to make rules. Those rules should be to inflict the least harm upon the fewest number of people.

That's why abortion is a travesty that should be stopped. It harms the most people in the worst possible way, it deprives them of the right to live in exchange for an someone else's inconvenience. It likewise paves the way for the government to decide others are unworthy of life.