Why is Dubya too scared to testify?

[buckiprof]

hey buckiprof, its been a while since ive been in a poly sci class so in todays political spectrum what party do i fall closest to im just curious? im pro choice, pro gun, pro death penalty, pro civil rights, anti patriot act, pro legalization of marijauna (and no i dont even drink CAFFEINE, so im not a stoner whoever just jumped to that conclusion... i dunno who it was but i heard ya land so i know ya jumped :p ) , anti flat-tax, ummm any other major issues ya need to figure it out? ive always called myself an independant try to actually know who believes in what im voting for but is there a party that follows at least close these beliefs?

It has been awhile since I too have been in a poly sci class. I can't classify people as easily as many others can. You sound like the type of person that many are, in the middle. Some items you mentioned appear to be out of the Republican handbook, others appear to be out of the Democratic handbook, and a few appear to be out of the Libertarian handbook. As buckinmichigan points out, you are the type of voter that both major parties worry about.

Finally Nixon, your comment

"I only used the words "open minded liberal" because you claimed that ultraliberals were more open minded than ultra conservatives."

once again fails to address the context of my original comment. I said the people I know who are ultra-liberal vs the people I know who are ultra-conservative. I do not really "know" anyone here. If your comment

"Apparently its only "adult discussion" if all the participants love taxes, are pro-abortion, and anti-guns. Way to be an "open minded liberal".

was prompted by the above, then you have missed my original assertion.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

gbear: "If a lady is raped, has pregnancy problems, has the baby with a relitive, etc. I want the lady to be able to abort the child. Again, I would never abort my own child, however I don't feel I have the right to tell somebody else what they can/can not do in regards to abortion. It is also my feeling that even if abortions are illegal, folks will still do it. The people that perform these illegal abortions more than likely will not be doctors, so the risk of injuring/killing the lady would be large IMO... In effect I think it would work as well as prohibition (folks that want it will get it... in a much less controled environment, with risks to themselves)."

To me, the cause of the pregnancy is totally irrelevant because in the end we are still talking about the termination of a human life for the simple convenience of another. A mother can't kill her children for her convenience, so why so she be able to kill her fetus just because it hasn't left her body yet? What if you found out if you were the child of someone who had raped your mom instead of being the child of your dad? Would that make you a different person? No. Then why would have your life been expendable during your time in your mom's womb just because of the rape?

buckiprof: "I too am pro choice and by and large opposed to the death penalty/guns. On the surface it does appear to be contradictory. Years ago I had to reconcile these seemingly contradictory beliefs, since I do believe that life is precious and the taking of a life is usually wrong. And here is the rationale that allowed me to do just that: An unborn fetus up to say 3 months is a potential human. Once born, we have an actual human. Actuality outweighs potentiality. (This line of thinking may be borrowed from Plato, I'm not sure.) This allowed me to reconcile by position on the abortion issue as well as death penalty."

To me, a human being starts at conception (reason being that it is the point where the DNA of the individual is set and the growth cycle begins using that DNA as the blueprint). You say that at 3 months or so a fetus is nothing more than a "potential" human being. So how do you feel about an abortion at 6 months? Or 8 months? I'm sorry, but that 8-month old fetus could easily survive if born (the 9-nine gestation period is arbitrary and many healthy babies are born at 8 months and can survive without artificial incubation) and is a completely formed human being. If fact, most fetuses are fully developed by around 6-7 months, and the final stages of the pregnancy are nothing more than a growth period. Have you ever seen photos of the aftermath of a late-term abortion? I have, and it is the most sickening thing I have ever seen. Fetuses at late stages have functioning senses and as such can feel pain. Can you imagine how that fetus felt being ripped apart during the abortion? (the photos I saw were of a vacuum-suction abortion from the 70s). It's OK to savagely terminate the life of a total innocent human being, yet it's immoral to painlessly kill a mass murderer via lethal injection. That just shows how ****ed up our society is, in my mind.

 

[gbearbuck]

Mili,

I don't like abortions.

I really don't like late stage abortions for the reason you just stated. I also realize that like pot smoking it will happen if legal or not.

I don't want girls being killed by untrained people trying to abort her kid. I also don't think it is right to tell somebody that they can not do something to themselves. For those reasons alone, I am pro-choice... I however would do everything in my power to keep a family member/friend from having one... I think they are discusting...

 

[buckiprof]

mili: "You say that at 3 months or so a fetus is nothing more than a "potential" human being. So how do you feel about an abortion at 6 months? Or 8 months?"

At those benchmarks (6, 7, or 8 months) I do not consider the fetus to be a "potential" human. I do not support late-term abortions since a 7 month old fetus can be "delivered" and survive; no longer a potential human but an actual human at that point. This is consistent with my viewpoint of potential vs. actual and I agree with the ban on late-term abortions. (Except are there certain situations, i.e. the mother's life is jeopardized, that allow late-term abortions?)

Your view Mili that life begins at conception is a belief that no one can say is invalid. Is your belief that life begins at conception one grounded in religion? (That is meant as an honest question since I respect people's opinions and beliefs I am usually curious to the root of their formation.)

 

[Nixon]

"Apparently its only "adult discussion" if all the participants love taxes, are pro-abortion, and anti-guns. Way to be an "open minded liberal".

"was prompted by the above, then you have missed my original assertion."

It was prompted by the fact that you said this was an adult discussion because I had not posted. In my opinion you are a liberal but that comment shows that you're not as open-minded as you claim liberals are.

 

[buckiprof]

nixon -

"Finally, it is nice to see civilized discussion on this topic here at BP. There are differing opinions but it appears that all respect the fact that different people can and do have different opinions. But maybe that's because Nixon only posted once and then lappears to have left the thread."

Wrong again in your attack on me. My winking eye was in reference to that many here respect that different people can and do have different opinions. See I was joking (hence the winking eye) that this was do to you having posted once and leaving. A joke; not to take seriously.

Classify me however you want; it would be considered consistent. And I fail to see how you can draw a conclusion about open mindedness based on that. But by this time, I do not care anymore. Good bye nix

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

buckiprof: "Is your belief that life begins at conception one grounded in religion?"

No, it's not. I'm the closest thing to being an atheist without being one. My belief that life begins at conception is grounded in proven science and, in my feeble mind, common sense. From the point of conception, an entity with a distinct DNA, completely different than anyone else's on the planet, is formed. Although totally dependent upon its mother's womb for life until birth, because of its distinct DNA it is indeed a separate and individual being...it may not have developed the recognizable physical and measurable mental attributes of a fully developed human, it is human nonetheless.

As for abortion is the case of danger to the mother, I'd say the first recourse should be a Cesarean Section. If the choice is between the mother and the baby's life, I can understand saving the mother. However, look at the situation after the baby is born...if a woman and her infant child are in a burning car, and you can only save one before the flames engulf the vehicle, which would you save? I think the vast majority would save the baby. You could argue the same in the pre-birth situation.

I take this view point because I would give up my life for my children, despite their being grown adults (24 and 21) without hesitation. I think most parents would do the same. I would also guess that the majority of mothers would dies for the babies, so it just confuses me as to why women would abort their pre-born babies.

 

[buckiprof]

mili - Thanks for the response. It seems that we may be similar in mindset yet have differing views on when life begins, which makes for an interesting place.

I asked about the late-term abortion still being able to be performed if the mother's life was in danger (and assuming a C-section has been ruled out) for the dilemma that you brought up. I can understand saving the mother's life via a late-term and I too would save the baby in your burning car scenario. This is a dilemma that hopefully won't cost me too much sleep.

Personally, I can't envision aborting a child. Not saying that because I'm a male. Saying that because there is nothing I wouldn't do for my children including sacrificing my life.