That struck me, too. Just like they say "reproductive rights" when they mean "prevention of reproduction and/or killing of the results of recent reproduction".
I'm curious - why is it okay to slaughter thousands of innocent civilians in the name of "freedom" or whatever crap GW is feeing us, but it isn't okay to kill a baby in the name of the mother's freedom?
Everytime the pro-war camp makes apologies for "collateral damage" (i.e. the murders of innocent people), I wonder how the two positions can be reconciled. Can you explain that?
I expect a better argument from you!
First, 99% of the time, the Mother of an infant chose to have sex. Having sex means you might get pregnant, period. That was her choice, that was how she chose to use her body, that is what happens. (Just like you can't expect to get thin eating Big Macs...what exactly did she expect?) The thought of basing one life's needs on the death of another one is wrong-especially when the first one made choices to put themselves in that position, period.
Abortion is selfish. It is about one person falsely superceding their rights through the death of aother person.
War is totally different from abortion. It is abhorrent that these insurgents use the shield of innocents to hide from their enemies. Now, to be very specific about current topics: there are collateral damage from both the insurgent attacks and the coalition reprisals and counter attacks. While war is much more precise than it once was, it is still bloody.
War is about the many. Say what you like, but Saddam being gone and democracy introduced to Iraq will have tremendous positive benefits in the future. It took war to give us the freedom we enjoy today. Freedom from tyranny almost always has a price in blood. Were the collateral damages wrought worth it?
You are criticizing pro-abortion people for "word and mind twisting" while you happily use the term "collateral damage" to refer to innocent people who are murdered. Who is word twisting?
Collateral can be defined as associated with.
Damage: disrepair or breakage resulting from an event
Collateral damage is exactly what it means. Inadvertant death and destruction resulting from a miltaristic action.
If I were twisting words the way the pro abortionists do I might call it "healthy crowd control in a military action"
Alright, you're about to lose credibility. Explain to me Mr. Pro Life how "Disrepair or breakage resulting from an event" can possibly refer to human beings? Are you saying that human beings are no different than a chair or refrigerator that is in disrepair or breakage resulting from an event?
Are you KIDDING me?
What about the "Blue Skies" initiative? What about constantly saying "saddam, Iraq and 9/11" over and over again, when no evidence was found (sorry, "curveball" doesn't count)? What about the "Terrorist Surveillance Act," stolen from bloggers themselves by a supposed "real" government? They're not creative enough to come up with an official name? I guess not, since bush has no accountability to the citizens of the United States. After all that is the only reason he would choose to break the law and sneak around those pesky American laws. I mean..really, why do things under the radar? none of the wiretappings were illegal if he had obtained a warrant, which are NEVER reveal to the public anyways.
Can you justify that? Giving your government a blank check to spy on anyone and everyone with no audit or paper trail..yea, that's reaaaaaaally smart. As far as it goes, this is the first time in contemporary history that an American under vague definitions enacted by official law, and WRITTEN in our codes, can be scooped up, shipped away, with no legal counsel or contact with family. That's what people like you don't get...It's not that is hasn't happened to you or people you know, it's that it IS LEGAL NOW. And you are worried about abortion, while your fellow Americans have to work 3 jobs to feed the children they do have.
What about Jesus' teachings about taking care of the poor?
Some Christian. (Hope ya like it when they import dirty bombs thru the Arab government owned ports bush didn't see a problem with. Cuz republicans sure aren't passing Port protection laws, like the dems tried : http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03...curity-funding/
By the way, if you read the whole proposal, there are no caveats in favor of dems. This is reality.
Same people who degrade fellow Americans involved in Katrina, cuz they weren't killed by enemies sure are showing a lot of compassion for their fellow countrymen. Oh, and I guess all of bushco's beating of his chest since 9/11 about how repubs have a 'strong record on defense and security' and his pushing for changes to 'keep us safe,' didn't amount to much cuz if katrina had been terrorists...the response was pretty gotdamn screwed up. We're not ready.
why is abortion your biggest fanatical obsession? why are you not fighting for your fellow people who can't find jobs because of illegal immigrants, whose jobs are outsourced, or work 3 of those "waitress/retail" jobs this fantastic president has created to feed their families?
You're all so one-track minded you're letting the rest of the country sink.
Oh yea, since you assume we have a right to spread democracy, I'd suggest you don't know what it's like to be in those people's shoes. your mind is small..you cannot conceive what would happen if people from a far awway land showed up on your doorstep with guns, different languages, different clothes to "protect" you. You deny stories of soldiers killing innocents or our torturing of people at abu gharaib as being immoral, simply to justify your position. you cannot pick and choose what is moral and isn't; it just is. If bushco is bring democracy to the middle east, you may want to tell that to the christian convert in afghanistan whose life was threatened..because the NEW "DEMOCRATIC GOV DOESN'T PROTECT RELIGIOUS FREEDOM. he done did a good job, yea?
As far as democracy being spread in the middle east...we should have been paying attention to the real threats from the beginning; china (250 million college graduates, while our total population is only 260 million) sorry buddy but you won't even HAVE an America to take to war, if you're losing the financial/research&development/educational means to support us.
Everything under bush as reverted and is receding. This is the good'bad ol days. The negativity from one American to another is palpable, and I hate it. I despise it.
You're warring with your own people; compromise must be found, otherwise the enemy from within will destroy us before a few hundred terrorists ever do.
If a building was burning..you had one choice to save a woman pregnant with a 4 week old fetus, or a woman 8 months pregnant..who would you save?
You can't win...get your hands off of other people's bodies and choices. They must reconcile their choices with God above, and their own conscience.
Wow Josh...
First, I've never said a word a Abu Grab prison because I'm totally repulsed by what these people have done. So quit making blanket accusations of me.
Second: you act as though you believe in the rights of the individual with your comments that I should "keep my hands off other people's bodies" ...
What if I happen to believe that there is an individual inside that body that has rights that are being violated by murder? Would I be wrong to not stand up against it?
Finally: I do not believe that the abortion debate will destroy our country. I believe that the right to argue this course is what makes our country strong.
II: I made it clear that death and destruction happens around military action. That doesn't mean I like it.
I'm saying that the compariston of abortion to war is a very bad comparison. It is more like comparing an assault of one individual on another.
Commenting by HaloScan
