| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Sound of Trumpet" |
| Date: |
03 Sep 2007 08:28:46 PM |
| Object: |
Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1890601/posts
Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise on Abortion if Elected
President
Life News ^ | 9/3/07 | Steven Ertelt
Posted on 09/03/2007 12:57:48 PM PDT by wagglebee
Portsmouth, NH (LifeNews.com) -- Presidential candidate Hillary
Clinton campaigned in New Hampshire over the weekend and told voters
that the she won't soften her hard-core pro-abortion views if she's
elected president. That could cause her problems as a recent poll
showed extreme pro-abortion views are a turnoff to women voters.
Clinton promised she would bring change as president but also vowed
she would never compromise on her pro-abortion views.
"Ultimately, to bring change, you have to know when to stand your
ground, and when to find common ground," she said. "You need to know
when to stick to principles and fight, and know when to make
principled compromises."
Clinton didn't back down from those pro-abortion views in an August
speech to leaders at Planned Parenthood.
There, she pledged continuing support for the nation's largest
abortion business and bragged of her 100 percent voting record with
that organization.
"I'm very proud of our partnership, of working together over so many
years on behalf of reproductive freedom and health care and
fundamental Constitutional rights and values," she said.
"[W]hen I'm president, I will devote my very first days in office to
reversing these ideological, anti-science, anti-prevention policies
that this administration has put into place," she said of President
Bush's pro-life policies.
Last month, the respected Polling Company firm conducted a survey with
600 women voters of both parties from August 15-20.
The poll revealed that Hillary's positions on abortion were at odds
with a majority of American women.
Some 64 percent of women voters would be less likely to vote for a
presidential candidate who voted against the partial-birth abortion
ban -- a measure Clinton voted against on four occasions.
Sixty-eight percent of women voters are less likely to vote for a
presidential candidate who supports taxpayer-funded abortion --
something Hillary Clinton adamantly supports.
And 73 percent of those polled said they would be less likely to vote
for a presidential candidate who voted against a law that would have
made it a criminal act for an adult to take a girl younger than 18
years of age across state lines to get an abortion without her
parents' knowledge.
Clinton twice voted against a Congressional bill to do just that.
"Clinton needs women voters to win, yet her extreme abortion policies
remain out of step with the majority of American women," Marjorie
Dannenfelser, the president of the Susan B. Anthony List, told
LifeNews.com about the poll.
"The feminist lobby may support her radical positions, but in the real
and bigger world of women voters, Clinton's extremism fails to
translate into votes. Hillary needs more in common with women voters
than anatomy," Dannenfelser added.
.
|
|
| User: "Edgar A Pearlstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
03 Sep 2007 09:23:20 PM |
|
|
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion." That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a matter betweenp atient and
physician.
Sound of Trumpet (soundoftrumpet@mailcan.com) wrote:
: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1890601/posts
:
:
: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise on Abortion if Elected
: President
:
:
: Life News ^ | 9/3/07 | Steven Ertelt
:
:
: Posted on 09/03/2007 12:57:48 PM PDT by wagglebee
:
:
: Portsmouth, NH (LifeNews.com) -- Presidential candidate Hillary
: Clinton campaigned in New Hampshire over the weekend and told voters
: that the she won't soften her hard-core pro-abortion views if she's
: elected president. That could cause her problems as a recent poll
: showed extreme pro-abortion views are a turnoff to women voters.
:
: Clinton promised she would bring change as president but also vowed
: she would never compromise on her pro-abortion views.
:
: "Ultimately, to bring change, you have to know when to stand your
: ground, and when to find common ground," she said. "You need to know
: when to stick to principles and fight, and know when to make
: principled compromises."
:
: Clinton didn't back down from those pro-abortion views in an August
: speech to leaders at Planned Parenthood.
:
: There, she pledged continuing support for the nation's largest
: abortion business and bragged of her 100 percent voting record with
: that organization.
:
: "I'm very proud of our partnership, of working together over so many
: years on behalf of reproductive freedom and health care and
: fundamental Constitutional rights and values," she said.
:
: "[W]hen I'm president, I will devote my very first days in office to
: reversing these ideological, anti-science, anti-prevention policies
: that this administration has put into place," she said of President
: Bush's pro-life policies.
:
: Last month, the respected Polling Company firm conducted a survey with
: 600 women voters of both parties from August 15-20.
:
: The poll revealed that Hillary's positions on abortion were at odds
: with a majority of American women.
:
: Some 64 percent of women voters would be less likely to vote for a
: presidential candidate who voted against the partial-birth abortion
: ban -- a measure Clinton voted against on four occasions.
:
: Sixty-eight percent of women voters are less likely to vote for a
: presidential candidate who supports taxpayer-funded abortion --
: something Hillary Clinton adamantly supports.
:
: And 73 percent of those polled said they would be less likely to vote
: for a presidential candidate who voted against a law that would have
: made it a criminal act for an adult to take a girl younger than 18
: years of age across state lines to get an abortion without her
: parents' knowledge.
:
: Clinton twice voted against a Congressional bill to do just that.
:
: "Clinton needs women voters to win, yet her extreme abortion policies
: remain out of step with the majority of American women," Marjorie
: Dannenfelser, the president of the Susan B. Anthony List, told
: LifeNews.com about the poll.
:
: "The feminist lobby may support her radical positions, but in the real
: and bigger world of women voters, Clinton's extremism fails to
: translate into votes. Hillary needs more in common with women voters
: than anatomy," Dannenfelser added.
:
.
|
|
|
| User: "Harold Burton" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
02 Oct 2007 10:15:23 PM |
|
|
In article <fbifio$r7d$1@unlnews.unl.edu>,
(Edgar A Pearlstein) wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion."
That's because you can't read between the lines.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
03 Oct 2007 12:36:11 AM |
|
|
On 2-Oct-2007, Harold Burton <hal.i.burton@hotmail.com> wrote:
In article <fbifio$r7d$1@unlnews.unl.edu>,
epearlst@unlserve.unl.edu (Edgar A Pearlstein) wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion."
That's because you can't read between the lines.
That's a very good way of putting it.
Also "reading into the actual words" is another way of putting it.
Susan
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "=?iso-8859-1?q?Gwyne=F0_Bennetdottir?=" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
03 Oct 2007 06:13:17 AM |
|
|
On Oct 2, 10:15 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
In article <fbifio$r7...@unlnews.unl.edu>,
epear...@unlserve.unl.edu (Edgar A Pearlstein) wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion."
That's because you can't read between the lines.
And what would be between the lines?
What sane group of people would want a woman to have an abortion
against her will?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Harold Burton" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
03 Oct 2007 08:16:23 AM |
|
|
In article <1191409997.988701.291660@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
Gwyne> Bennetdottir <gwen.bennet@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 2, 10:15 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
In article <fbifio$r7...@unlnews.unl.edu>,
epear...@unlserve.unl.edu (Edgar A Pearlstein) wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion."
That's because you can't read between the lines.
And what would be between the lines?
What sane group of people would want a woman to have an abortion
against her will?
People who want women to have abortions against their will tend to be
leftists.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
03 Oct 2007 01:59:59 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 09:16:23 -0400, Harold Burton
<hal.i.burton@hotmail.com> wrote:
In article <1191409997.988701.291660@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
Gwyne> Bennetdottir <gwen.bennet@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 2, 10:15 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
In article <fbifio$r7...@unlnews.unl.edu>,
epear...@unlserve.unl.edu (Edgar A Pearlstein) wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion."
That's because you can't read between the lines.
And what would be between the lines?
What sane group of people would want a woman to have an abortion
against her will?
People who want women to have abortions against their will tend to be
leftists.
And just where would I find these Idiots, no I will not go to
church.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Harold Burton" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
03 Oct 2007 08:09:50 PM |
|
|
In article <fjp7g31sd6fmu302979jkc6ev8j96pd7pb@4ax.com>,
Robert <robpar@netportusa.com> wrote:
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 09:16:23 -0400, Harold Burton
<hal.i.burton@hotmail.com> wrote:
In article <1191409997.988701.291660@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
Gwyne> Bennetdottir <gwen.bennet@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 2, 10:15 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
In article <fbifio$r7...@unlnews.unl.edu>,
epear...@unlserve.unl.edu (Edgar A Pearlstein) wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion."
That's because you can't read between the lines.
And what would be between the lines?
What sane group of people would want a woman to have an abortion
against her will?
People who want women to have abortions against their will tend to be
leftists.
And just where would I find these Idiots, no I will not go to
church.
Definitely not in church.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
03 Oct 2007 12:45:21 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:15:23 -0400, Harold Burton
<hal.i.burton@hotmail.com> wrote:
In article <fbifio$r7d$1@unlnews.unl.edu>,
epearlst@unlserve.unl.edu (Edgar A Pearlstein) wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion."
That's because you can't read between the lines.
It's because you make things up. Pro-choicers are ANTI-abortion.
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
"They laughed at Newton, they laughed at Einstein, but they also laughed at
Bozo the Clown."
- Carl Sagan
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
02 Oct 2007 11:06:47 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:15:23 -0400, Harold Burton
<hal.i.burton@hotmail.com> wrote:
In article <fbifio$r7d$1@unlnews.unl.edu>,
epearlst@unlserve.unl.edu (Edgar A Pearlstein) wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion."
That's because you can't read between the lines.
There's nothing to "read" between the lines.
Why do they lie through their teeth about those who understand why it
is a matter of the individual's conscience?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Harold Burton" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
03 Oct 2007 08:10:34 PM |
|
|
In article <s856g3h89jj0kg3rbgooaiaqaauidnb3u9@4ax.com>,
Christopher A.Lee <calee@optonline.net> wrote:
On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:15:23 -0400, Harold Burton
<hal.i.burton@hotmail.com> wrote:
In article <fbifio$r7d$1@unlnews.unl.edu>,
epearlst@unlserve.unl.edu (Edgar A Pearlstein) wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion."
That's because you can't read between the lines.
There's nothing to "read" between the lines.
Only to people with nothing between their ears.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
04 Oct 2007 10:54:36 PM |
|
|
Harold Burton <hal.i.burton@hotmail.com> wrote:
Only to people with nothing between their ears.
People like you.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
03 Sep 2007 10:47:15 PM |
|
|
On 3-Sep-2007, (Edgar A Pearlstein) wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion."
That's because, unlike anti-choice liars, you're not an idiot.
Susan
That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a matter betweenp atient and
physician.
Sound of Trumpet (soundoftrumpet@mailcan.com) wrote:
: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1890601/posts
:
:
: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise on Abortion if Elected
: President
:
:
: Life News ^ | 9/3/07 | Steven Ertelt
:
:
: Posted on 09/03/2007 12:57:48 PM PDT by wagglebee
:
:
: Portsmouth, NH (LifeNews.com) -- Presidential candidate Hillary
: Clinton campaigned in New Hampshire over the weekend and told voters
: that the she won't soften her hard-core pro-abortion views if she's
: elected president. That could cause her problems as a recent poll
: showed extreme pro-abortion views are a turnoff to women voters.
:
: Clinton promised she would bring change as president but also vowed
: she would never compromise on her pro-abortion views.
:
: "Ultimately, to bring change, you have to know when to stand your
: ground, and when to find common ground," she said. "You need to know
: when to stick to principles and fight, and know when to make
: principled compromises."
:
: Clinton didn't back down from those pro-abortion views in an August
: speech to leaders at Planned Parenthood.
:
: There, she pledged continuing support for the nation's largest
: abortion business and bragged of her 100 percent voting record with
: that organization.
:
: "I'm very proud of our partnership, of working together over so many
: years on behalf of reproductive freedom and health care and
: fundamental Constitutional rights and values," she said.
:
: "[W]hen I'm president, I will devote my very first days in office to
: reversing these ideological, anti-science, anti-prevention policies
: that this administration has put into place," she said of President
: Bush's pro-life policies.
:
: Last month, the respected Polling Company firm conducted a survey with
: 600 women voters of both parties from August 15-20.
:
: The poll revealed that Hillary's positions on abortion were at odds
: with a majority of American women.
:
: Some 64 percent of women voters would be less likely to vote for a
: presidential candidate who voted against the partial-birth abortion
: ban -- a measure Clinton voted against on four occasions.
:
: Sixty-eight percent of women voters are less likely to vote for a
: presidential candidate who supports taxpayer-funded abortion --
: something Hillary Clinton adamantly supports.
:
: And 73 percent of those polled said they would be less likely to vote
: for a presidential candidate who voted against a law that would have
: made it a criminal act for an adult to take a girl younger than 18
: years of age across state lines to get an abortion without her
: parents' knowledge.
:
: Clinton twice voted against a Congressional bill to do just that.
:
: "Clinton needs women voters to win, yet her extreme abortion policies
: remain out of step with the majority of American women," Marjorie
: Dannenfelser, the president of the Susan B. Anthony List, told
: LifeNews.com about the poll.
:
: "The feminist lobby may support her radical positions, but in the real
: and bigger world of women voters, Clinton's extremism fails to
: translate into votes. Hillary needs more in common with women voters
: than anatomy," Dannenfelser added.
:
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gwenyth Bennet" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
05 Sep 2007 08:19:29 AM |
|
|
On Sep 3, 10:47 pm, wrote:
On 3-Sep-2007, (Edgar A Pearlstein) wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion."
That's because, unlike anti-choice liars, you're not an idiot.
In a nutshell.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gwenyth Bennet" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
05 Sep 2007 08:19:11 AM |
|
|
On Sep 3, 9:23 pm, (Edgar A Pearlstein)
wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion." That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a matter betweenp atient and
physician.
A very practical, sound response.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "M_P" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
04 Sep 2007 02:25:16 PM |
|
|
On Sep 3, 9:23 pm, (Edgar A Pearlstein)
wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion." That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a matter betweenp atient and
physician.
An abortion, unlike a tonsillectomy, kills an innocent human person.
In defining what is a person---a holder of rights such as the right to
life---the only reasonable alternative to blatant species-ism is to
START WITH the position that reasoning free-willed individuality (such
as is possessed by adult humans) is unique in its ethical
significance, and thus that all who possess reasoning free-willed
individuality are persons. But we can't stop there, because this group
does not include infants, who have almost without exception in Western
history been regarded as persons. The extension of "all who possess
reasoning free-willed individuality" to include infants seems clear:
they have the potential to develop reasoning free-willed
individuality. So all who possess, or have the potential to get,
reasoning free-willed individuality are persons. This definition of
"person" clearly includes all unborn humans, from conception till
birth.
(I could stop right there, except that "potential" needs to be more
sharply specified. One could argue that a human gamete---sperm or
egg---has the potential to develop reasoning free-willed individuality
by first fusing with a complementary gamete. This is true in a certain
sense of "potential"---but that is a vastly different sense than
applies to zygotes. A zygote has the DNA of one particular human
individual; a gamete has an incomprehensibly larger range of
possibilities---namely, the possibility to fuse with any one of the
incomprehensibly large number of possible complementary gametes---and
thus has a vastly different potential to achieve any one of those
possibilities.)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
04 Sep 2007 10:00:08 PM |
|
|
M_P <m_p@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 3, 9:23 pm, (Edgar A Pearlstein)
wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion." That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a matter betweenp atient and
physician.
An abortion, unlike a tonsillectomy, kills an innocent human person.
That's a known falsehood. A lie.
In defining what is a person---a holder of rights such as the right to
life---the only reasonable alternative to blatant species-ism is to
Your OPINION is not particularly relevant.
START WITH the position that reasoning free-willed individuality
Which means what?
[...]
So all who possess, or have the potential to get,
reasoning free-willed individuality are persons.
Thus, all eggs are persons. All sperm are persons.
And you are an idiot.
(I could stop right there, except that "potential" needs to be more
sharply specified. One could argue that a human gamete---sperm or
egg---has the potential to develop reasoning free-willed individuality
by first fusing with a complementary gamete. This is true in a certain
sense of "potential"---but that is a vastly different sense than
applies to zygotes.
And a vastly different sense than applies to newborns.
Your argument can be summarized as: A fetus is a person just becaus
eyou say so and regardless of any fact or law.
A zygote has the DNA of one particular human
Another falsehood.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "M_P" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
05 Sep 2007 09:33:46 AM |
|
|
On Sep 4, 10:00 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 3, 9:23 pm, (Edgar A Pearlstein)
wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion." That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a matter betweenp atient and
physician.
An abortion, unlike a tonsillectomy, kills an innocent human person.
That's a known falsehood. A lie.
In your unsupported opinion.
In defining what is a person---a holder of rights such as the right to
life---the only reasonable alternative to blatant species-ism is to
Your OPINION is not particularly relevant.
START WITH the position that reasoning free-willed individuality
Which means what?
Consult a dictionary ... each of those words is there.
[...]
So all who possess, or have the potential to get,
reasoning free-willed individuality are persons.
Thus, all eggs are persons. All sperm are persons.
Already rebutted below. Learn to read.
And you are an idiot.
(I could stop right there, except that "potential" needs to be more
sharply specified. One could argue that a human gamete---sperm or
egg---has the potential to develop reasoning free-willed individuality
by first fusing with a complementary gamete. This is true in a certain
sense of "potential"---but that is a vastly different sense than
applies to zygotes.
And a vastly different sense than applies to newborns.
In your unsupported opinion.
Your argument can be summarized as: A fetus is a person just becaus
eyou say so and regardless of any fact or law.
Stamp your feet and wail.
A zygote has the DNA of one particular human
Another falsehood.
In your unsupported opinion.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
06 Sep 2007 11:12:29 PM |
|
|
M_P <m_p@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 4, 10:00 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 3, 9:23 pm, (Edgar A Pearlstein)
wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion." That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a matter betweenp atient and
physician.
An abortion, unlike a tonsillectomy, kills an innocent human person.
That's a known falsehood. A lie.
In your unsupported opinion.
No, pro-liar, your claim is a lie. According to the laws of states and
nations worldwide, a human being's life starts at birth.
In defining what is a person---a holder of rights such as the right to
life---the only reasonable alternative to blatant species-ism is to
Your OPINION is not particularly relevant.
START WITH the position that reasoning free-willed individuality
Which means what?
Consult a dictionary ... each of those words is there.
Free will is a fiction.
Thus, your criterion is meaningless. :-)
So all who possess, or have the potential to get,
reasoning free-willed individuality are persons.
Thus, all eggs are persons. All sperm are persons.
Already rebutted below.
Claiming it doesn't make it so.
(I could stop right there, except that "potential" needs to be more
sharply specified. One could argue that a human gamete---sperm or
egg---has the potential to develop reasoning free-willed individuality
by first fusing with a complementary gamete. This is true in a certain
sense of "potential"---but that is a vastly different sense than
applies to zygotes.
And a vastly different sense than applies to newborns.
In your unsupported opinion.
As opposed to YOUR unsupported opinion?
Your argument can be summarized as: A fetus is a person just becaus
eyou say so and regardless of any fact or law.
Stamp your feet and wail.
You're doing just fine at that all by yourself.
A zygote has the DNA of one particular human
Another falsehood.
In your unsupported opinion.
No, pro-liar. Fact.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "M_P" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
07 Sep 2007 01:24:44 PM |
|
|
On Sep 6, 11:12 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 4, 10:00 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 3, 9:23 pm, (Edgar A Pearlstein)
wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion." That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a matter betweenp atient and
physician.
An abortion, unlike a tonsillectomy, kills an innocent human person.
That's a known falsehood. A lie.
In your unsupported opinion.
No, pro-liar, your claim is a lie. According to the laws of states and
nations worldwide, a human being's life starts at birth.
The laws of states and nations worldwide have no monopoly on defining
personhood.
In defining what is a person---a holder of rights such as the right to
life---the only reasonable alternative to blatant species-ism is to
Your OPINION is not particularly relevant.
START WITH the position that reasoning free-willed individuality
Which means what?
Consult a dictionary ... each of those words is there.
Free will is a fiction.
Thus, your criterion is meaningless. :-)
If free will is a fiction, then neither your posts nor mine will
change any minds, nor will we be able to freely choose to stop
posting. Bummer.
So all who possess, or have the potential to get,
reasoning free-willed individuality are persons.
Thus, all eggs are persons. All sperm are persons.
Already rebutted below.
Claiming it doesn't make it so.
The words below make it so. Try reading them.
(I could stop right there, except that "potential" needs to be more
sharply specified. One could argue that a human gamete---sperm or
egg---has the potential to develop reasoning free-willed individuality
by first fusing with a complementary gamete. This is true in a certain
sense of "potential"---but that is a vastly different sense than
applies to zygotes.
And a vastly different sense than applies to newborns.
In your unsupported opinion.
As opposed to YOUR unsupported opinion?
Unlike you, I support my opinions with arguments.
Your argument can be summarized as: A fetus is a person just becaus
eyou say so and regardless of any fact or law.
Stamp your feet and wail.
You're doing just fine at that all by yourself.
Ooh, a so's-yer-mama. You must be the terror of the playground.
A zygote has the DNA of one particular human
Another falsehood.
In your unsupported opinion.
No, pro-liar. Fact.
Claiming it doesn't make it so.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
08 Sep 2007 12:58:51 AM |
|
|
M_P <m_p@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 6, 11:12 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 4, 10:00 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 3, 9:23 pm, (Edgar A Pearlstein)
wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion." That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a matter betweenp atient and
physician.
An abortion, unlike a tonsillectomy, kills an innocent human person.
That's a known falsehood. A lie.
In your unsupported opinion.
No, pro-liar, your claim is a lie. According to the laws of states and
nations worldwide, a human being's life starts at birth.
The laws of states and nations worldwide have no monopoly on defining
personhood.
More so than the irrational whinings of a misogynistic control freak.
(I could stop right there, except that "potential" needs to be more
sharply specified. One could argue that a human gamete---sperm or
egg---has the potential to develop reasoning free-willed individuality
by first fusing with a complementary gamete. This is true in a certain
sense of "potential"---but that is a vastly different sense than
applies to zygotes.
And a vastly different sense than applies to newborns.
In your unsupported opinion.
As opposed to YOUR unsupported opinion?
Unlike you, I support my opinions with arguments.
And where is your support for your claim that the potential of embryos
is "vastly different" than the potential of gametes?
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "M_P" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
11 Sep 2007 03:58:00 PM |
|
|
On Sep 8, 12:58 am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 6, 11:12 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 4, 10:00 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 3, 9:23 pm, (Edgar A Pearlstein)
wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion." That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a matter betweenp atient and
physician.
An abortion, unlike a tonsillectomy, kills an innocent human person.
That's a known falsehood. A lie.
In your unsupported opinion.
No, pro-liar, your claim is a lie. According to the laws of states and
nations worldwide, a human being's life starts at birth.
The laws of states and nations worldwide have no monopoly on defining
personhood.
More so than the irrational whinings of a misogynistic control freak.
*yawn*
(I could stop right there, except that "potential" needs to be more
sharply specified. One could argue that a human gamete---sperm or
egg---has the potential to develop reasoning free-willed individuality
by first fusing with a complementary gamete. This is true in a certain
sense of "potential"---but that is a vastly different sense than
applies to zygotes.
And a vastly different sense than applies to newborns.
In your unsupported opinion.
As opposed to YOUR unsupported opinion?
Unlike you, I support my opinions with arguments.
And where is your support for your claim that the potential of embryos
is "vastly different" than the potential of gametes?
In the text you deleted:
a gamete has an incomprehensibly larger range of possibilities---
namely, the possibility to fuse with any one of the incomprehensibly
large number of possible complementary gametes---and thus has a vastly
different potential to achieve any one of those possibilities.)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
11 Sep 2007 04:49:49 PM |
|
|
M_P <m_p@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 8, 12:58 am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 6, 11:12 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 4, 10:00 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 3, 9:23 pm, (Edgar A Pearlstein)
wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion." That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a matter betweenp atient and
physician.
An abortion, unlike a tonsillectomy, kills an innocent human person.
That's a known falsehood. A lie.
In your unsupported opinion.
No, pro-liar, your claim is a lie. According to the laws of states and
nations worldwide, a human being's life starts at birth.
The laws of states and nations worldwide have no monopoly on defining
personhood.
More so than the irrational whinings of a misogynistic control freak.
*yawn*
The logic of the egomaniac. Nobody's opinion counts but your own.
Unlike you, I support my opinions with arguments.
And where is your support for your claim that the potential of embryos
is "vastly different" than the potential of gametes?
In the text you deleted:
a gamete has an incomprehensibly larger range of possibilities---
Opinion.
namely, the possibility to fuse with any one of the incomprehensibly
large number of possible complementary gametes-
And it's only your OPINION that that is of any relevance at all.
After all, an embryo may develop in countless different ways, even
into multiple infants, depending upon genetics and environment.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sid9" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
07 Sep 2007 02:22:38 PM |
|
|
M_P wrote:
On Sep 6, 11:12 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 4, 10:00 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 3, 9:23 pm, (Edgar A Pearlstein)
wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion." That would be
like being pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a matter
betweenp atient and physician.
An abortion, unlike a tonsillectomy, kills an innocent human
person.
That's a known falsehood. A lie.
In your unsupported opinion.
No, pro-liar, your claim is a lie. According to the laws of states
and nations worldwide, a human being's life starts at birth.
The laws of states and nations worldwide have no monopoly on defining
personhood.
*Neither do you*
.
|
|
|
| User: "M_P" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
10 Sep 2007 03:02:15 PM |
|
|
On Sep 7, 2:22 pm, "Sid9" <s...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
M_P wrote:
On Sep 6, 11:12 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 4, 10:00 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 3, 9:23 pm, (Edgar A Pearlstein)
wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion." That would be
like being pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a matter
betweenp atient and physician.
An abortion, unlike a tonsillectomy, kills an innocent human
person.
That's a known falsehood. A lie.
In your unsupported opinion.
No, pro-liar, your claim is a lie. According to the laws of states
and nations worldwide, a human being's life starts at birth.
The laws of states and nations worldwide have no monopoly on defining
personhood.
*Neither do you*
Never said I did; I'm here attempting to persuade.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sid9" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
10 Sep 2007 03:05:02 PM |
|
|
M_P wrote:
On Sep 7, 2:22 pm, "Sid9" <s...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
M_P wrote:
On Sep 6, 11:12 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 4, 10:00 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 3, 9:23 pm, (Edgar A
Pearlstein) wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion." That would be
like being pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a
matter betweenp atient and physician.
An abortion, unlike a tonsillectomy, kills an innocent human
person.
That's a known falsehood. A lie.
In your unsupported opinion.
No, pro-liar, your claim is a lie. According to the laws of states
and nations worldwide, a human being's life starts at birth.
The laws of states and nations worldwide have no monopoly on
defining personhood.
*Neither do you*
Never said I did; I'm here attempting to persuade.
Maybe on these pages...but
elsewhere you fight to get the
power of law to agree with
your religious views
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
10 Sep 2007 04:20:53 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 16:05:02 -0400, "Sid9" <sid9@bellsouth.net> wrote:
M_P wrote:
On Sep 7, 2:22 pm, "Sid9" <s...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
M_P wrote:
On Sep 6, 11:12 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 4, 10:00 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 3, 9:23 pm, (Edgar A
Pearlstein) wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion." That would be
like being pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a
matter betweenp atient and physician.
An abortion, unlike a tonsillectomy, kills an innocent human
person.
That's a known falsehood. A lie.
In your unsupported opinion.
No, pro-liar, your claim is a lie. According to the laws of states
and nations worldwide, a human being's life starts at birth.
The laws of states and nations worldwide have no monopoly on
defining personhood.
*Neither do you*
Never said I did; I'm here attempting to persuade.
Maybe on these pages...but
elsewhere you fight to get the
power of law to agree with
your religious views
The liar is not attempting to persuade. If he were he wouldn't insist
that everybody use his redefinitions, his lies, his bogus "logic" or
his peculiar presumptions.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
13 Sep 2007 10:49:11 PM |
|
|
On Sep 10, 2:20 pm, Christopher A.Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 16:05:02 -0400, "Sid9" <s...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
M_P wrote:
On Sep 7, 2:22 pm, "Sid9" <s...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
M_P wrote:
On Sep 6, 11:12 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 4, 10:00 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 3, 9:23 pm, (Edgar A
Pearlstein) wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion." That would be
like being pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a
matter betweenp atient and physician.
An abortion, unlike a tonsillectomy, kills an innocent human
person.
That's a known falsehood. A lie.
In your unsupported opinion.
No, pro-liar, your claim is a lie. According to the laws of states
and nations worldwide, a human being's life starts at birth.
The laws of states and nations worldwide have no monopoly on
defining personhood.
*Neither do you*
Never said I did; I'm here attempting to persuade.
Maybe on these pages...but
elsewhere you fight to get the
power of law to agree with
your religious views
The liar
That's 1.
is not attempting to persuade. If he were he wouldn't insist
that everybody use his redefinitions, his lies
That's 2.
If you had to post without saying "Liar" or "lies" God knows
how many times, you would be dumbstruck.
How many children do you have, if any? If none, I suggest
you keep it that way. With *your* attitude to children
particularly to babies in the womb you sound very dangerous
to those unable to defend themselves.
, his bogus "logic" or
his peculiar presumptions.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "M_P" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
11 Sep 2007 04:03:40 PM |
|
|
On Sep 10, 3:05 pm, "Sid9" <s...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
M_P wrote:
On Sep 7, 2:22 pm, "Sid9" <s...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
M_P wrote:
On Sep 6, 11:12 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 4, 10:00 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 3, 9:23 pm, (Edgar A
Pearlstein) wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion." That would be
like being pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a
matter betweenp atient and physician.
An abortion, unlike a tonsillectomy, kills an innocent human
person.
That's a known falsehood. A lie.
In your unsupported opinion.
No, pro-liar, your claim is a lie. According to the laws of states
and nations worldwide, a human being's life starts at birth.
The laws of states and nations worldwide have no monopoly on
defining personhood.
*Neither do you*
Never said I did; I'm here attempting to persuade.
Maybe on these pages...but
elsewhere you fight to get the
power of law to agree with
your religious views
And how would I do that in our democratic society without persuading
my fellow citizens? Your tinfoil hat is starting to show. (And catch
up on your reading ... my argument is nonreligious.)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sid9" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
11 Sep 2007 04:27:41 PM |
|
|
M_P wrote:
On Sep 10, 3:05 pm, "Sid9" <s...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
M_P wrote:
On Sep 7, 2:22 pm, "Sid9" <s...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
M_P wrote:
On Sep 6, 11:12 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 4, 10:00 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
M_P <m...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 3, 9:23 pm, (Edgar A
Pearlstein) wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion." That would be
like being pro-tonsillectomy.Either procedure should be a
matter betweenp atient and physician.
An abortion, unlike a tonsillectomy, kills an innocent human
person.
That's a known falsehood. A lie.
In your unsupported opinion.
No, pro-liar, your claim is a lie. According to the laws of
states and nations worldwide, a human being's life starts at
birth.
The laws of states and nations worldwide have no monopoly on
defining personhood.
*Neither do you*
Never said I did; I'm here attempting to persuade.
Maybe on these pages...but
elsewhere you fight to get the
power of law to agree with
your religious views
And how would I do that in our democratic society without persuading
my fellow citizens? Your tinfoil hat is starting to show. (And catch
up on your reading ... my argument is nonreligious.)
The abortion argument is a religious argument.
Anti-Choice advocates want to impose their religious views on others.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Compromise On Abortion |
11 Sep 2007 05:29:50 PM |
|
|
On 11-Sep-2007, "Sid9" <sid9@bellsouth.net> wrote:
The abortion argument is a religious argument.
Anti-Choice advocates want to impose their religious views on others.
Give you a cigar - you got that in a nutshell.
Susan
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
