Susan Komen cuts off funding for criminal organization Planned Parenthood.

I love that all the anti-choice people liken removing a clump of cells to putting a gun up to a two year old's head and pulling the trigger. A fetus is unconscious and incapable of suffering. A 16 year old girl who hardly has enough money to feed herself IS capable of suffering and the potential child she has inside of her will suffer as well once it is born into a poverty stricken and unsupportive environment. People who are anti-choice are also pro-suffering. They will all burn in hell come judgement day.

hah..so true... having an abortion is like taking a shite.. a fetus is no more viable than my last bowel movement.

broasted wrote:

I love that all the anti-choice people liken removing a clump of cells to putting a gun up to a two year old's head and pulling the trigger. A fetus is unconscious and incapable of suffering. A 16 year old girl who hardly has enough money to feed herself IS capable of suffering and the potential child she has inside of her will suffer as well once it is born into a poverty stricken and unsupportive environment. People who are anti-choice are also pro-suffering. They will all burn in hell come judgement day.

think about what you just said wrote:

Well, actually - the way it is now, whichever declaration you make, we're (excuse me, those of us who pay taxes) responsible financially from that point on. AFDC, SNAP, WICs, Medicaid, free lunch, free breakfast, education, and judicial system.

oh the irony, the irony. You are telling the other poster to "think" about what he wrote??

So let's get this straight: you right wingers cry and moan and call abortion murder, but then complain that you have to help pay for an unwanted kid through taxes when he is born, right??? Wow.

So in YOUR perfect world, the poor, stupid, minority, who YES, DOESN'T F'N KNOW ANY BETTER, gets knocked up (can't use contraception, Rick Santorum and the catholic church says that is a sin!!) , and then is FORCED to have the kid (even if it was rape, or as a prostitute, whatever). But wait, since you hateful ignorant republicans think any and all taxes and welfare are evil, you then want to cut off all funding for any poverty resources that the unwanted ba$tard might need to survive. And THEN, of course, you want to cut off any and all free health care he might qualify for. So what's the most likely end result for that poor ba$tard, born into abject poverty (and yes, when you, and the other right wingers get your way in your utopia, Ron Paul style, he would absolute be in complete poverty), not wanted by him Mom or anyone else? A life of crime (where you would gladly toss him jail) or a slow painful death on the street. Oh sure, charity would help a couple of these kids, and maybe a couple more adopted, and a few miracle success stories, but the odds would be incredibly bleak, and 99% would be a disaster. And you and other right wingers would just call them animals and wouldn't want ANY of our nation's tax dollars to give them ANY support. Yes, kids like that would certainly be better off never born, and it's not YOUR decision to decide if they are. THIS is what you call the moral thing to do, you SOB.

Republicans motto: we want the gov't to step in and protect you in the womb (declare abortion illegal), and we want the gov't to step in and protect you when you are brain-dead (see Terry Schiavo). But in between those times? YOUR ON ON YOUR OWN, AND GO F' YOURSELVES!

abortionbadbadbadsin wrote:

I hate planned abortion and all their stupid supporters. Those murderers should have to watch one of those later term abortions for themselves and hold that dead murdered baby in their arms...then let's see if they so pro abortion.

Naw.....

Know what would be cooler? If there was a huge convention of every conservative, libertarian, and right wing whack job in the country. Ya know, a mega convention, where they were all centered in one area at one time. And then Al Q or Iran dropped a nuke on their heads.

Finally, that would be the end of all our arguments and problems, and the USA would thrive forever after that (wiping out the nut-job DNA). Oh, and I hope you'd be in the front row! ha ha ha ha ....YES!

Yes, I dream of this nightly.

Sir Lance-alot wrote:

Republicans motto: we want the gov't to step in and protect you in the womb (declare abortion illegal), and we want the gov't to step in and protect you when you are brain-dead (see Terry Schiavo). But in between those times? YOUR ON ON YOUR OWN, AND GO F' YOURSELVES!

Your ignorance is astounding. Its like you put this statement in bold just to highlight how ignorant you really are. Think for yourself for a minute, and not what you've been told to think.

In between those times are when people have the power to fend for themselves. They make decisions which affect their daily life, and then have to deal with the consequences of them. They are individuals who can fend for themselves. Pre-born babies/fetuses can not in any way fend for themselves. Brain dead people can not in any way fend for themselves. So, yes, that is why they need someone else to do it for them. An immature 17 year old who "loved" her boyfriend, had sex w/o protection, and got pregnant? That is 100% her fault. She could have avoided that in MANY ways...abstinence, or by using one of the 10+contraceptives that are available today. Bottomline: Those inbetween times are when human beings can fend for themselves, so no they don't need others to.

P.S. It will not hurt to educate yourself on the topic at hand, I promise.

oh please...you are just forcing your religious dogma on others. you have no brain or rational thought of your own

broasted wrote:

A fetus is unconscious and incapable of suffering.

Were you sober when you wrote your post? Science and actual facts disagree with this. For the love of all things holy, please educate yourself before posting again. If not for that, just for yourself because you are really embarrassing yourself with statements like this. People here who actually know what they are talking about laugh (or cry?) when they read stuff like this.

The research you are alluding to above comes from a study in the NEJM. Which is fine, but that research even acknowledges (if you care to read it) that it's risk factor of 1.0 falls outside of a pool of 54 other studies that showed an average risk factor of 1.24 despite those other studies having a similar confidence interval. So if you are going to quote from the one study, you have to acknowledge that there are 54 others that refute that assumption. Additionally, they admit in the statistics that they oversampled the number of young women and african american women on the case side (two groups with lower rates) and that 24% of the eligible cases were not included in the study without going into detail as to why those cases were rejected. Additionally, they acknowledge that their research focused on women 35-64, whereas some of the other research included women less than 35 years in age.

74 left dive wrote:

oh please...you are just forcing your religious dogma on others. you have no brain or rational thought of your own

Translation: "You are using facts, common sense, and logic to defeat our arguments at every opportunity. So I don't really have anything else to say other than what I have been trained to say, which is, by default (I've been trained well!), something concerning how you are religious and trying to force your religion on others. Sure, I could listen to the facts that science in this day and age has brought us in order to better inform myself on the issues, but that would expose all of my ignorance."

Thanks. You have validated everything I said and made yourself look even more uninformed than before. Merci beaucoup.

Word to the wise: Knowledge is your friend. Do not be afraid.

west coaster wrote:

east coaster wrote:

You do not have the right to commit suicide so it seems that no, you do not have a right to your own body.

Anyway, how is anyone's rights being denied here? You want an abortion, pay for it your damn self.

You do in Oregon !! smart person :) oh yeah you sound like another self centered man !

Birth Control is a two person problem...But men don't have to deal with it every month.

Abortions despite what pro-lifers think are birth control. you might not like it, but denying it does not make go away. you don't want to pay for it. My insurance plan pays for Viagra as a health problem...pay for that your dam selfish person.

False. Birth Control prevents the fertilization of the egg while abortion kills the actual life form. Birth control does not kill babies, it prevents them. Abortions kill babies.

P.S. another living thing isn't a woman's body

74 left dive wrote:

hah..so true... having an abortion is like taking a shite.. a fetus is no more viable than my last bowel movement.

Please see previous posts on how knowledge is not a bad thing, nor something you should be afraid of. I swear that acquiring just a tiny bit will not harm you in any way.

Or, you could just keep posting away, and the rest of us will keep laughing.

vrtes wrote:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parasite

Funny, a virus is also a living organism...so is bacteria. We have no problem killing these things when they attach our body and make us feel sick.

End the thread .

Wait for it .

My head explodes !

vrtes wrote:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parasite

Funny, a virus is also a living organism...so is bacteria. We have no problem killing these things when they attach our body and make us feel sick.

Fetuses will turn into human beings who are apart of our society. Spiders and other bugs are also living organisms, and I have no problem killing them, already born or in the egg. I don't think anyone does. And if you do, then what is the difference between killing an adult spider and an adult human? Both are just living organisms, right? Who is to say the spider doesn't have rights? Why aren't people in jail for killing spiders?

I hope you see how horribly fallacious and deluded your argument it. If you don't now, I don't think you ever will...

Pro-choicers are getting embarrassed in this thread. Someone trow them a lifeline, they are drowning.

Boycott Komen. It's been infiltrated by Jesus nazis and un-American instigators.

If there is a link between oral contraceptives and breast cancer, it's a very weak one. Drinking alcohol, for instance, is much more likely to cause breast cancer. As the link I posted earlier shows, there's a good chance that contraceptives don't cause cancer at all. So it's hardly an awkward relationship, especially since the Komen foundation was specifically funding cancer screening.

You're funny. You think that because you keep insisting that others are not thinking for themselves, and need to educate themselves, and aren't being rational like YOU, that it makes it so?? Sorry, it doesn't work that way, and that is an approximately jr high level (at best ) debating tactic. Just repeating something over and over doesn't mean anything. You need to SHOW us why we are being so illogical and irrational and uneducated and not thinking for ourselves, not just SAY it. See how that works, mr smartypants? Oh, how about this, *I* will give you an example:Your post below is perfectly irrational. HERE Is why:You claim that a fetus and a brain-dead person NEED gov't intervention because they can't fend for themselves, but a person in between those situations can. At first glance, reasonably fair enough . However....1) It is, at best, very doubtful that one can say state that either one of those "persons" (the fetus or brain-dead person) is "alive" in the true sense of the word. The brain-dead person certainly is not. And the fetus? Well, that is at the heart of this debate. But honestly, since we will not settle that part of the debate, let's leave that aside, and praise your empathy and concern for the unborn and "living dead" like Terry Schiavo. Kudos to you. Moving on...2) You stated that the above examples need protection, because they really can't protect themselves. Yet you then write that (now pay intention mr I'm-not-ignorant-,but-those-don't agree-with-me-ARE!!")

Really? A an infant born to a crack addicted mom can "fend for himself" ??? A young girl raised with relatives that rape her is responsible for her own destiny and doesn't need help or protection?? A 6 y.o. child with 2 unemployed parents and nothing to eat (except for the gov't-provided free lunch and food stamps, which republicans WANT TO TAKE AWAY, YOU NUMBSKULL) can just grab the american dream by the balls and make it happen for himself? I don't think so. How about the young child with cancer who can't get health insurance because his parents can't afford it and the free market private insurance won't cover him due to a pre-existing condition??? Tough luck, right?

Well THESE are exactly the places where democrats believe that the gov't SHOULD and can step in and give a minimum of subsistence to help the child, and provide some level of health care. But republicans??? For the most part they, say, as I claimed: you're on own, go f' yourself. YOU and other righties desperately want that unfortunate child born into those dire circumstances, but don't want to do $hit to help that poor child the very second the he/she is born into one of these hellholes through no fault of their own.

Furthermore, your wrote:

Now firstly, let's assume, that in a vacuum, yes, you are right about the above. But WHAT ABOUT THE BABY BORN TO THAT IMMATURE STUPID PERSON??? Can that baby fend for himself? Can he count on his momma to protect him and feed him and afford to buy him health insurance without any assistance?? The likely answer in many cases is : no, no, and no. And again, THIS is where you and other idiot right wingers say, too bad, it's not the gov't's or my problem, fend for yourself little child. But THIS is precisely where the actual, REAL LIVING, fully born child truly needs some protection and help if the parents are not up to it, and if the free market fairy has failed them and not provided them with some basic necessities. But THIS, and at all other times during their lives, is where republicans say: go f' yourself, you are on your own. Even someone as dense as you must see the inconsistency in this.

And guess what, without enough food to eat, without a good education, without a chance at success, that poor child that you DEMANDED be born into the hellhole that he lives in will likely grow up to be another teenager getting pregnant, and you will insist that THAT fetus be born also, and on and on it will go. And you will refuse to allow society, as represented by their gov't, to try and step in in any way to help BREAK THIS CYCLE.

But you will make sure that the GOV'T demands, through law, that that baby is born . But as soon as it born, to no matter what circumstances, you want to abandon it to a life quite possibly full of extreme destitution and neglect. That child, born to such circumstances, has a CHOICE in what happens to him during his childhood? Of course not. And what happens to him in his childhood doesn't then directly effect every other part of his life? Of course it does. And you won't give a damn when the cycle continues and you force him/her to have an unwanted pregnancy come to term and continue this horrid cycle.

Who needs to become educated? I think you just received a thorough education on life right here, junior.

This might be the only post that appears thought-out and sober.

Moca wrote:

Just to clear up a few of the untruths from a medical perspective (I am an M.D. radiologist specializing in breast disease).

Oral contraceptives do not increase the risk of breast cancer.

Abortion does not increase the risk of breast cancer.

The Komen grant money given to Planned Parenthood does not pay for a physical breast exam. It pays for mammograms, ultrasounds, and breast biopsies (not something women can do on their own).

I've read every post on this thread...a lot of emotional responses, on both sides of the argument (obviously). However, the above post seems to be the most factual and least emotionally charged of all!