Most women are opposed to abortion in the US? So they have been campaigning against Roe v Wade for the last half century but those evil liberal males have been forcing them to have abortions? It takes quite a capacity for self delusion to be comfortable with being right-wing.
“[R]ight-wing?” Defending the weakest and least protected in society is something that leftists claim to do, but something they failed to do regarding living unborn human beings and abortion. That was what the very left-wing Nate Hentoff recited frequently in his columns in the very left-wing “Village Voice” - a popular newspaper here in New York City.
Right wing - absolutely. Every other Western country provides for abortion rights but that is because none of them are as extreme as the religious right in the US, who have defined the debate to conform to their ideology.
The irony in this debate is that the right routinely accuses the left of denying personal freedoms but that is exactly what the right seeks to do on abortion rights. They know that the majority do not share their views or values and yet they would seek to impose what they cannot persuade. Of course they do. That is one of their values. Intolerance of difference.
The irony in this debate is that the right routinely accuses the left of denying personal freedoms but that is exactly what the right seeks to do on abortion rights. They know that the majority do not share their views or values and yet they would seek to impose what they cannot persuade. Of course they do. That is one of their values. Intolerance of difference.
"The care of human life and happiness and not their destruction is the first and only legitimate object of good government." --Thomas Jefferson to Maryland Republicans, 1809. ME 16:359.
Jefferson sometimes failed to live by his beliefs, but many of his beliefs are enshrined in the founding documents of the USA.
Once again, Armstronglivs' observations of the USA are shown to be false.
“[R]ight-wing?” Defending the weakest and least protected in society is something that leftists claim to do, but something they failed to do regarding living unborn human beings and abortion. That was what the very left-wing Nate Hentoff recited frequently in his columns in the very left-wing “Village Voice” - a popular newspaper here in New York City.
Right wing - absolutely. Every other Western country provides for abortion rights but that is because none of them are as extreme as the religious right in the US, who have defined the debate to conform to their ideology.
Thank you for comparing abortion "rights" in the USA with those in other Western nations. Abortion in the USA is much more like abortion in North Korea, China, and Russia, than in other Western nations. In much of Europe, direct abortion is prohibited after 12-20 weeks whereas in much of the USA, even post-Dobbs, direct abortion may be procured at any time without limit.
The irony in this debate is that the right routinely accuses the left of denying personal freedoms but that is exactly what the right seeks to do on abortion rights. They know that the majority do not share their views or values and yet they would seek to impose what they cannot persuade. Of course they do. That is one of their values. Intolerance of difference.
"The care of human life and happiness and not their destruction is the first and only legitimate object of good government." --Thomas Jefferson to Maryland Republicans, 1809. ME 16:359.
Jefferson sometimes failed to live by his beliefs, but many of his beliefs are enshrined in the founding documents of the USA.
Once again, Armstronglivs' observations of the USA are shown to be false.
Jefferson was not talking about the agglomeration of cells that is the foetus but those whom he recognized as human beings. That of course includes women. In that regard his values are shared by other Western democracies, who permit abortion. But they aren't values shared by the religious right, who would impose their dogma over all. They are well-represented here.
Right wing - absolutely. Every other Western country provides for abortion rights but that is because none of them are as extreme as the religious right in the US, who have defined the debate to conform to their ideology.
Thank you for comparing abortion "rights" in the USA with those in other Western nations. Abortion in the USA is much more like abortion in North Korea, China, and Russia, than in other Western nations. In much of Europe, direct abortion is prohibited after 12-20 weeks whereas in much of the USA, even post-Dobbs, direct abortion may be procured at any time without limit.
Without limit? Up to birth then. A typical falsehood from the anti-abortion lobby. In practice, abortion - where it is permitted, both in the US and Western democracies - is performed shortly after the mother learns she is pregnant, which is when she makes the decision whether or not to go through with the pregnancy. The stipulation of limits, where they exist, is largely for medical reasons. However, the essential point is that Western democracies see abortion as a right - which you and the anti-abortion lobby in the US refuse to do.
The irony in this debate is that the right routinely accuses the left of denying personal freedoms but that is exactly what the right seeks to do on abortion rights. They know that the majority do not share their views or values and yet they would seek to impose what they cannot persuade. Of course they do. That is one of their values. Intolerance of difference.
You fail to diagnose your own self-irony: advocates for direct abortion fail to tolerate a whole class of innocent human beings in their entirety simply based on the difference that they are unborn. But the defense even of denying health care to newborns born despite abortion procedures to kill them blurs this difference. And don't, Armstronglivs, try to dismiss this, too, as false propaganda. Data from Canada indicate a .21% failure rate for abortion, meaning that for every 1,000 abortions committed, 2.1 children survive. Of these, however, many are believed to be uncared for and allowed to die, if they are not killed deliberately.
Thank you for comparing abortion "rights" in the USA with those in other Western nations. Abortion in the USA is much more like abortion in North Korea, China, and Russia, than in other Western nations. In much of Europe, direct abortion is prohibited after 12-20 weeks whereas in much of the USA, even post-Dobbs, direct abortion may be procured at any time without limit.
Without limit? Up to birth then. A typical falsehood from the anti-abortion lobby. In practice, abortion - where it is permitted, both in the US and Western democracies - is performed shortly after the mother learns she is pregnant, which is when she makes the decision whether or not to go through with the pregnancy. The stipulation of limits, where they exist, is largely for medical reasons. However, the essential point is that Western democracies see abortion as a right - which you and the anti-abortion lobby in the US refuse to do.
Why should a US Citizen "see [direct] abortion as a right" when the US Declaration contains these words?
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
And there is plenty in the history of US jurisprudence and health care indicating that these unalienable Rights adhered to living unborn human beings, too.
Without limit? Up to birth then. A typical falsehood from the anti-abortion lobby. In practice, abortion - where it is permitted, both in the US and Western democracies - is performed shortly after the mother learns she is pregnant, which is when she makes the decision whether or not to go through with the pregnancy. The stipulation of limits, where they exist, is largely for medical reasons. However, the essential point is that Western democracies see abortion as a right - which you and the anti-abortion lobby in the US refuse to do.
Why should a US Citizen "see [direct] abortion as a right" when the US Declaration contains these words?
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
And there is plenty in the history of US jurisprudence and health care indicating that these unalienable Rights adhered to living unborn human beings, too.
When you have Life in Bold print does that go for the death penalty too?
The irony in this debate is that the right routinely accuses the left of denying personal freedoms but that is exactly what the right seeks to do on abortion rights. They know that the majority do not share their views or values and yet they would seek to impose what they cannot persuade. Of course they do. That is one of their values. Intolerance of difference.
You fail to diagnose your own self-irony: advocates for direct abortion fail to tolerate a whole class of innocent human beings in their entirety simply based on the difference that they are unborn. But the defense even of denying health care to newborns born despite abortion procedures to kill them blurs this difference. And don't, Armstronglivs, try to dismiss this, too, as false propaganda. Data from Canada indicate a .21% failure rate for abortion, meaning that for every 1,000 abortions committed, 2.1 children survive. Of these, however, many are believed to be uncared for and allowed to die, if they are not killed deliberately.
Jesus Christ - you anti-abortion fanatics never give up with your contrived definitions of what is a person. A foetus is not "a whole class of innocent human beings". No society that permits abortion recognises your definition. Were it to do so then abortion at any stage, from conception onwards, would be regarded as murder. It isn't because your definition is false. It is your dogma. It is no more rationally based than the religious fundamentalism from which it is derived. In a free society, we are free to reject your antiquated values. But you and the religious right cannot accept that.
Without limit? Up to birth then. A typical falsehood from the anti-abortion lobby. In practice, abortion - where it is permitted, both in the US and Western democracies - is performed shortly after the mother learns she is pregnant, which is when she makes the decision whether or not to go through with the pregnancy. The stipulation of limits, where they exist, is largely for medical reasons. However, the essential point is that Western democracies see abortion as a right - which you and the anti-abortion lobby in the US refuse to do.
Why should a US Citizen "see [direct] abortion as a right" when the US Declaration contains these words?
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
And there is plenty in the history of US jurisprudence and health care indicating that these unalienable Rights adhered to living unborn human beings, too.
There isn't. If it were so then abortion would never have been permitted under the Constitution. Even this right-wing SCOTUS does not say abortion is unconstitutional, or it would not have said it is a question for the States to decide.
Why should a US Citizen "see [direct] abortion as a right" when the US Declaration contains these words?
And there is plenty in the history of US jurisprudence and health care indicating that these unalienable Rights adhered to living unborn human beings, too.
There isn't. If it were so then abortion would never have been permitted under the Constitution. Even this right-wing SCOTUS does not say abortion is unconstitutional, or it would not have said it is a question for the States to decide.
You once again display your ignorance of the American system of government. I was hoping you would grow up in 2023 but I can see that won’t happen.
There isn't. If it were so then abortion would never have been permitted under the Constitution. Even this right-wing SCOTUS does not say abortion is unconstitutional, or it would not have said it is a question for the States to decide.
You once again display your ignorance of the American system of government. I was hoping you would grow up in 2023 but I can see that won’t happen.
Speaking of ignorance, yours is always on full display.
The majority held that abortion is not a constitutional right as the Constitution does not mention it and its substantive right was not "deeply rooted" in the country's history, meaning that individual states have the authority to regulate access to abortion.
Right wing - absolutely. Every other Western country provides for abortion rights but that is because none of them are as extreme as the religious right in the US, who have defined the debate to conform to their ideology.
I find Armstronglivs obsession with American abortion laws to be comical given he is from New Zealand. Different cultures place different values on human life. The repeal of Roe simply means that in the US laws are decided on the state level where they can represent the values of the local community. There are states within the US with more liberal abortion laws than New Zealand (New Zealand has it's share of regulations on the practice as. Overall rates are comparable to the US). Just because you come from a country where eating other people was part of the culture does not mean it is the culture here. Maybe Armstronglivs is really Fat Basstard.
Best Selling Movies - https://amzn.to/2ZKhlUiDr. Evil is back and has invented a new time machine that allows him to go back to the 1960s and steal Austin Po...
You fail to diagnose your own self-irony: advocates for direct abortion fail to tolerate a whole class of innocent human beings in their entirety simply based on the difference that they are unborn. But the defense even of denying health care to newborns born despite abortion procedures to kill them blurs this difference. And don't, Armstronglivs, try to dismiss this, too, as false propaganda. Data from Canada indicate a .21% failure rate for abortion, meaning that for every 1,000 abortions committed, 2.1 children survive. Of these, however, many are believed to be uncared for and allowed to die, if they are not killed deliberately.
Jesus Christ - you anti-abortion fanatics never give up with your contrived definitions of what is a person. A foetus is not "a whole class of innocent human beings". No society that permits abortion recognises your definition. Were it to do so then abortion at any stage, from conception onwards, would be regarded as murder. It isn't because your definition is false. It is your dogma. It is no more rationally based than the religious fundamentalism from which it is derived. In a free society, we are free to reject your antiquated values. But you and the religious right cannot accept that.
Which religious fundamentalism do you think is being expressed in opposition to direct abortion? Hinduism, Buddhism (many consider this a religion rather than a philosophy), Judaism, Christianity, Islam - the Big Five - all express significant opposition to direct abortion.
Direct abortion violates Natural Law, the Golden Rule, the Silver Rule, and, though Rawls was himself wishy-washy about its application to direct abortion, the Blind Veil of Justice.
The irony in this debate is that the right routinely accuses the left of denying personal freedoms but that is exactly what the right seeks to do on abortion rights. They know that the majority do not share their views or values and yet they would seek to impose what they cannot persuade. Of course they do. That is one of their values. Intolerance of difference.
Direct abortion denies EVERY personal freedom to a living unborn victim. It is by very, very, very, far a net destroyer of personal freedom. It delivers one choice, and with it a dead human being, while destroying an innocent human being and his or her lifetime of choices.
"The care of human life and happiness and not their destruction is the first and only legitimate object of good government." --Thomas Jefferson to Maryland Republicans, 1809. ME 16:359.
Jefferson sometimes failed to live by his beliefs, but many of his beliefs are enshrined in the founding documents of the USA.
Once again, Armstronglivs' observations of the USA are shown to be false.
Jefferson was not talking about the agglomeration of cells that is the foetus but those whom he recognized as human beings. That of course includes women. In that regard his values are shared by other Western democracies, who permit abortion. But they aren't values shared by the religious right, who would impose their dogma over all. They are well-represented here.
agglomeration of cells? Rarely is so little made of so much. You sound like the Wizard of Oz - "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!" in trying to dismiss a unique human being as no more than a cluster of parts.
impose? If staying the hands of an abortionist is an imposition, surely more violent language is needed to describe chemically destroying a living human being with chemicals, slicing through it with scalpels, dismembering it with forceps, etc., to abort it.
Right wing - absolutely. Every other Western country provides for abortion rights but that is because none of them are as extreme as the religious right in the US, who have defined the debate to conform to their ideology.
I find Armstronglivs obsession with American abortion laws to be comical given he is from New Zealand. Different cultures place different values on human life. The repeal of Roe simply means that in the US laws are decided on the state level where they can represent the values of the local community. There are states within the US with more liberal abortion laws than New Zealand (New Zealand has it's share of regulations on the practice as. Overall rates are comparable to the US). Just because you come from a country where eating other people was part of the culture does not mean it is the culture here. Maybe Armstronglivs is really Fat Basstard.
A concern about the denial of women's rights in the US may be comical to you but rather less so to women. It is interesting that you liken your different cultural approach to the long extinct practice of cannibalism (that has never been part of New Zealand culture but preceded it). Yes - it is backwards.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.