Blogcritics: Comments on Abortion Reality

Comment by Nancy

Sat, 25 Jun 2005 15:04:45 EDT

Would that all our problems could be solved by transplants; a lot of us here could probably benefit from some kind of transplant, brains if not gender. Pity qualities like compassion or tolerance aren't corporeal enough to be transplantable.

Comment by Silas Kain

Sat, 25 Jun 2005 14:54:40 EDT

Hey. I know a tanssexual. And she said she gained her sanity when the penis was removed. Maybe it's the penis which is the root of all male emotional problems.

Comment by Nora

Sat, 25 Jun 2005 12:08:37 EDT

Maybe Nancy is a transexual that used to be a guy...Ooohh gross!

Comment by Silas Kain

Wed, 22 Jun 2005 11:45:02 EDT

And a lot of people call me a Nacy boy. Poor Dave.

Comment by Eric Olsen

Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:48:34 EDT

I Am the Walrus

Comment by Nancy

Wed, 22 Jun 2005 09:30:54 EDT

Dave is actually my less curmudgeonly, mainly conservative, Bush-boosting side of my split personality. The Nancy side has a better sense of humor and tends to anarchy w/occasional spots of nihilism.

Comment by Nancy

Wed, 22 Jun 2005 09:23:32 EDT

Well, Dave, I don't know about you, but I find it pretty funny to be accused of being you. However, this person is obviously in need of a good shrink and some strong anti-psychotic medication; either that or maybe they have Tourettes?

Comment by Jackknife johnny

Wed, 22 Jun 2005 07:46:44 EDT

Dave Nalle and Nancy seem to be the same person. Nancy you are not very bright are you......see above posts. She has the same post with 2 differnt names! Maybe its a hermaphodite!

Comment by Dave Nalle

Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:32:09 EDT

>>Jeb S is a male, and therefore never will be at risk. He can afford to be an arrogant asshole about your rights, body, and risks. Would that he and all of his mindset would get raped themselves so they could get a little idea what it's all about.<< JebS may be an idiot, but as a male he CAN still be raped and he can certainly get HIV, in fact if he's raped he's more likely to get HIV from it than a female can. And given his general attitude I wouldn't be surprised to hear he ended up somewhere where male rape and HIV run rampant. Dave

Comment by Silas Kain

Tue, 21 Jun 2005 13:12:06 EDT

My apologies JebS for wanting to add something to the discussion. Tell me, what part of South Africa do you live in? I only ask because while I'm fortunate enough to live in a nice town where crime is a relatively minor problem not all my fellow South Africans are as fortunate. Thank you for bringing up South Africa's plight. My doctor is from South Africa and we talk about the situation there quite often. Nelson Mandela showed great courage when he started speaking out about AIDS after losing his son to the disease. That was a start. In the meantime, the Roman Catholic Church would have South Africans believe that abstinence is the only answer to stop the spread of AIDS. That is too simplistic an approach to a complex subject. Now let me bring all this back to the original subject matter. In talking about abortion one cannot discount the issues of rape. One cannot turn away from the ravages of sexually transmitted diseases. Abortion, in and of itself, is a difficult issue to discuss rationally. Perhaps the best way to truly deal with it is by placing it in the hands of the woman and her doctor. An individual decision deserves the respect of individual dignity. It's easy to throw the religion card out in the fight but where's the compassion for the one who ultimately makes the decision?

Comment by Eric Olsen

Tue, 21 Jun 2005 10:02:51 EDT

sure, it's time for another go-round on the Wheel of Abortion - I'll take "baby-killers" for 100, please. If we are going to do this again, please try to address the merits of the POLICY - thanks

Comment by Nancy

Tue, 21 Jun 2005 09:59:51 EDT

Jeb S is a male, and therefore never will be at risk. He can afford to be an arrogant asshole about your rights, body, and risks. Would that he and all of his mindset would get raped themselves so they could get a little idea what it's all about.

Comment by Geek's Girl

Tue, 21 Jun 2005 09:25:36 EDT

Comment by Jeb S

Tue, 21 Jun 2005 08:05:33 EDT

Here comes the "HIV" card! An, oh its so rough in south africa!!!

Comment by Geek's Girl

Tue, 21 Jun 2005 07:33:46 EDT

I am very alarmed at the tone of some of the comments and feel I need to say something. Not all women end up pregnant because they couldn't keep their legs together or because they forgot to take their pill. Some end up pregnant because they were raped. By men. Often they are left to deal with not only pregnancy but HIV as well. Do you expect those women to carry that pregnancy to term? And if so, are they expected to care for that baby, love it and nurture it and raise it to adulthood (assuming of course that they themselves don't succomb to the AIDS virus first)? Maybe not, perhaps that would be expecting a bit much. Of course there is always the adoption option but I don't think there are too many people keen on adopting an HIV positive baby. Now by all means throw statistics at me, tell me that pregnancy as a result of rape is scarce, that statistically it's barely a blip on the radar. That yes, there are folks who want to adopt HIV positive babies but I'd put money on the fact supply exceeds demand. One might concede that abortion is acceptable but only in the case of rape, which is fine for those "some nameless, faceless attacker jumped out of the bushes and attacked me" scenarious. But what about those scenarious where the women know their attackers? She says it's rape, he says she consented? Do you postpone the abortion until the case is proved? It's so easy to make generalisations, to judge countless nameless, faceless women, brand them murderers for doing what was best for them (and their families), for making the most difficult decision any women can make. But take it on a case by case basis, hear the story of each and every woman who has ever had an abortion (for what ever reason) and then come back and let me know how your generalisations are holding up. Of course, what do I know, I live here at the bottom of Africa and perhaps rape and HIV are only african issues?

Comment by Victor Plenty

Tue, 21 Jun 2005 02:23:02 EDT

Bennett and Fred have both misunderstood me, although they oppose each other in just about everything else. Let's assume for a moment that a fetus has a soul. Religious folks like to believe this gives the fetus a right to life. So let's suppose the fetus really does have a right to life, and see where that leads. Until the fetus becomes viable outside the womb, its soul exists in a body that cannot survive on its own. Without access to another person's body, the fetus will die and the soul will go wherever our souls go when we die. This situation is very similar to the situation of a person needing a kidney transplant. Please notice I am not comparing the fetus to the kidney! I am comparing the fetus to the person who needs a kidney. That person has a soul, if anyone has one, even if we are all pretty sure the kidney does not. Without a new kidney which can only be gotten from another person, the kidney patient will die, and their soul will go wherever souls go. (Medications and dialysis can prolong life for people with kidney failure, but they are no substitute for a new kidney.) Does this mean the kidney patient has a right to someone else's kidney? If my blood type is compatible, (or Fred's is compatible) should the law require me (or require Fred) to donate a kidney? At the moment our laws say no to this. Fred and I both have the right to keep our kidneys. We can donate them if we choose, but the kidney patient's right to life does not include a right to take Fred's kidney, or mine. This is how the fetus can have a right to life without having the right to occupy the womb of an unwilling woman. If Fred wants the law to force the woman to carry a fetus to term, then logical consistency would require him to also want the law to force him to donate a kidney. After all, the kidney patient has a right to life too, and a soul no less precious than the soul God entrusted to the fetus. (P.S.: Silas is right. Sammy owes Nancy an apology, and it wouldn't hurt for Sammy to apologize to everyone else who has been subjected to those really creepy comments.)

Comment by Silas Kain

Mon, 20 Jun 2005 23:49:01 EDT

Sammy: I love how you pulled that one out of your hat. Just because a guy shoots up a clinic the pro aborters use him as a spokesperson for pro lifers. Feeble at best....Keep the lame arguments and excuses coming Pro aborters..... You just shot yourself in the foot, dude. Pro-choicers used an extremist pro-lifer to push their cause while pro-lifers did the same thing with this idiot doctor in Kansas. The demonizing is a two way street, sammy, and nothing but nothing gets accomplished this way. Dave: Eric's initial point is very well put. Republicans as a group and as a party may talk a lot about saving the unborn, but the reality is that when push comes to shove most of them want to keep it legal. So true, Dave and Eric. The Republicans will talk the talk but they dare not walk the walk. If they were to succeed in overturning Roe v. Wade, they would be setting their party back a hundred years. The religious right and pro-lifers would lead you to believe differently but the first death at the hands of a butcher in a back alley abortion would put the nail in pro-life's coffin. Sammy: How many abortions is too many? Nancy? anyone. How about some more ho's. Some slutbags can weigh in and let us know how they psyche themself up to drop a kid in the toilet. Sir, these comments are blatant evidence of insensitivity to the issue at hand. Where's the hate the sin not the sinner line? It doesn't apply to abortion, does it? And the line about dropping a kid in the toilet happens all too often to women who have miscarriages. Your crude and cruel remark totally disregards the feelings of those mothers who wanted their babies and lost them in such a horrible way. I feel that you owe those who you have offended a sincere apology for the remarks made. That, my friend, would be the Christian thing to do.

Comment by sammy

Mon, 20 Jun 2005 23:26:42 EDT

Just hope I never date anyone like Nancy. How many abortions is too many? Nancy? anyone. How about some more ho's. Some slutbags can weigh in and let us know how they psyche themself up to drop a kid in the toilet.

Comment by Dave Nalle

Mon, 20 Jun 2005 23:23:57 EDT

>>So, how many people are pro-life? How many are pro-choice?<< I'm pro-death and pro-abortion too. And I'm a Republican. I'm just a little more honest than the party as a whole about it. Eric's initial point is very well put. Republicans as a group and as a party may talk a lot about saving the unborn, but the reality is that when push comes to shove most of them want to keep it legal. Dave

Comment by sammy

Mon, 20 Jun 2005 23:19:45 EDT

I love how you pulled that one out of your hat. Just because a guy shoots up a clinic the pro aborters use him as a spokesperson for pro lifers. Feeble at best....Keep the lame arguments and excuses coming Pro aborters.....

Comment by Silas Kain

Mon, 20 Jun 2005 20:55:34 EDT

They wouldnt have wanted to be aborted but its ok to have an abortion. Then they come up with all the worst case scenarios to justify killing babies. This is an issue that's too volatile to debate rationally because the extremists on both sides refuse to look at the big picture. I'm not fond of abortion. I find it a very sad alternative. But I believe that as a man I have no right whatsoever to dictate what a woman can and cannot do with her body. It's easy to demonize those who have had or assist in abortions as 'baby killers' but the truth of the matter is that it's a hell of a lot more complex than that. It's not a simple issue with a simpler solution. Once government intervenes in reproductive freedom it precipitates the loss of other basic human rights. Insofar as not wanting to be aborted, it really wouldn't have mattered because I never would have known that I was aborted because I would not exist. The spirit does not enter the body until the first breath of life is taken by an infant. At least that is what I believe. Freudias, the pro-lifers are having a field day with this story. They use this situation to demonize all choice advocates. Frankly what I find most interesting is that the mainstream newspapers mention nothing about cannibalism. Those charges are being made by the staunchest "pro-lifers" who advocate bombing abortion clinics and killing doctors who perform the procedure. If this story is indeed true I would think that the press would have a field day with it. After all the mainstream media is more interested in sensationalism and ratings than in reporting real news. But then again so are the Christian news organizations.

Comment by freudias

Mon, 20 Jun 2005 20:21:05 EDT

Pro-Choice = Hippocrites They wouldnt have wanted to be aborted but its ok to have an abortion. Then they come up with all the worst case scenarios to justify killing babies. I wonder why the nes doesnt cover the story below> http://www.wnd.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44779 Because the news is Pro abortion!!

Comment by Silas Kain

Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:39:57 EDT

OMG, Nancy, right on! Those men who are most fervently opposed to abortion are the very poster children for why the right to choose should remain in force. Abortion is a very tough issue, I won't deny that. But the preservation of a woman's dignity and well-being far outweighs the necessity to bring every pregnancy to term. Society does more damage to the woman who has had to make the unfortunate decision to terminate her pregnancy. Most women don't make the decision lightly. Most women suffer scars long after the procedure. In order for men to truly understand what it's all about they should be forced to endure the pain of a kidney stone the size of a cantalope going through their penis. Right now, Nancy, hundreds of men just cringed at reading that sentence. If men were as respectful of women as they are for the phallus, the world would be a much better place.

Comment by JR

Mon, 20 Jun 2005 16:27:41 EDT

I'm still confused as to how people think they can run around having sex like maniacs yet not have to suffer the concequences of that??? By being male.

Comment by The Theory

Mon, 20 Jun 2005 16:09:06 EDT

I'm still confused as to how people think they can run around having sex like maniacs yet not have to suffer the concequences of that???