Nebraska=Massachusetts

[HuskerO]

is big government exerting control over one's body.

Neither is forcing a child to be born into a situation where the family is not ready

You say this as if the child has a choice.

 

[HuskerO]

Forcing all women to carry every conception to term is big government exerting control over one's body. For what?

For what? So an innocent defenseless human being has a chance to live. But I get what you mean, it's better to terminate life than to have women be burden by a pregnancy and then to carry on as a mother or give that baby up for adoption.

Mistakes happen.

You're absolutely correct. Therefore if a mistake was made, people must live up to those mistakes.

The fight for life should be for more sex ed

Agreed.

easier and lower cost access to birth control.

Since birth control has been around longer to actually study the long term effects and more and more research is being done, science continues to discover additional harmful effects of hormonal birth control. My wife has friends in their late 20s and early 30s that have been on the pill since they were 16 years old and now are having troubles getting pregnant. There is a correlation to that. I'm not totally again birth control, but it's not as amazing and safe (long term) as it's made to be.

abortion can be a recourse

Ending life, especially innocent lives, should never be a recourse.

If the conservatives get their way and impose their own values through government, they will be more than happy to leave mothers, families, and children in the cold. These struggling folks will be told not to suckle at the government's teat.

This whole sentence is a total lie with no actual facts to back up. If conservatives were so against helping those less fortunate, then why do they donate more time and money to those less fortunate than their liberal counterparts? Conservatives/Republicans/Libertarians aren't against helping others or even having the gov't help others. They're against having a system that create dependency in able-bodied people. Conservative/Repubs/Libertarians are for a temporary safety net for those in need and a system that teaches people how to lift themselves out of poverty.

 

[FlintTown]

You're correct in what you posted, but I sure do notice how China gives the guilty a speedy trial, a ready made grave, a bullet to the head and then bills the family for the bullet !

Singapore runs a tight ship also. Swift death, no appeals. Remember the caning the American spray can graffiti man received ? Even down to improper disposal of chewing gum rates a severe caning. Singapore is a very clean, safe city.

Two quality role models that the USA should try to emulate. I'll bet you shop lifting would be drastically reduced if we cut off the perp's hands.

 

[wseattlesker]

No one wants abortions. Not even the pro-choice people. However, we would all do better to focus on improving the lives of pregnant women and children in their first 2 years of life. The European countries do a far, far better job than we do, making the health and welfare of the pregnant woman and child paramount. That alone would significantly reduce the demand for abortions.

I'm old enough to remember when a woman could not get a legal abortion in most states. I met women who had used a coat hanger or stuffed towels up themselves to cause a spontaneous miscarriage. Rich girls from Nebraska would fly off to New York to get an abortion. Poor girls risked their lives. We do not want to go back to that time. Should we force a 10-year old victim of incest to carry the child to birth? I don't think so. Should we force a rape victim to carry the rapist's child to birth? I don't think so. Should we force a woman who's child has developed without a brain (as occurred with a couple I know) to carry that child to birth? I don't think so. And some women will choose an abortion, by self-help methods, even if they're not safe or available. So if you ultimately conclude that there are situations in which the woman should make that decision, then it's in everyone's interest that those abortions be safe for the mother and available regardless of one's wealth.

 

[planored]

No one wants abortions. Not even the pro-choice people. However, we would all do better to focus on improving the lives of pregnant women and children in their first 2 years of life. The European countries do a far, far better job than we do, making the health and welfare of the pregnant woman and child paramount. That alone would significantly reduce the demand for abortions.

I'm old enough to remember when a woman could not get a legal abortion in most states. I met women who had used a coat hanger or stuffed towels up themselves to cause a spontaneous miscarriage. Rich girls from Nebraska would fly off to New York to get an abortion. Poor girls risked their lives. We do not want to go back to that time. Should we force a 10-year old victim of incest to carry the child to birth? I don't think so. Should we force a rape victim to carry the rapist's child to birth? I don't think so. Should we force a woman who's child has developed without a brain (as occurred with a couple I know) to carry that child to birth? I don't think so. And some women will choose an abortion, by self-help methods, even if they're not safe or available. So if you ultimately conclude that there are situations in which the woman should make that decision, then it's in everyone's interest that those abortions be safe for the mother and available regardless of one's wealth.

Are those situations the majority or is convenience the majority. I don't believe in protecting the scum of society vs the innocent. I am for free birth control pills. I oppose having kids for a bigger govt check.

 

[whiteshoes97]

No one wants abortions. Not even the pro-choice people. However, we would all do better to focus on improving the lives of pregnant women and children in their first 2 years of life. The European countries do a far, far better job than we do, making the health and welfare of the pregnant woman and child paramount. That alone would significantly reduce the demand for abortions.

I'm old enough to remember when a woman could not get a legal abortion in most states. I met women who had used a coat hanger or stuffed towels up themselves to cause a spontaneous miscarriage. Rich girls from Nebraska would fly off to New York to get an abortion. Poor girls risked their lives. We do not want to go back to that time. Should we force a 10-year old victim of incest to carry the child to birth? I don't think so. Should we force a rape victim to carry the rapist's child to birth? I don't think so. Should we force a woman who's child has developed without a brain (as occurred with a couple I know) to carry that child to birth? I don't think so. And some women will choose an abortion, by self-help methods, even if they're not safe or available. So if you ultimately conclude that there are situations in which the woman should make that decision, then it's in everyone's interest that those abortions be safe for the mother and available regardless of one's wealth.

So you defend the right to abort to prevent a black market from emerging?

 

[HuskerO]

However, we would all do better to focus on improving the lives of pregnant women and children in their first 2 years of life. The European countries do a far, far better job than we do, making the health and welfare of the pregnant woman and child paramount. That alone would significantly reduce the demand for abortions.

I can be on board with that and I think most people would. It just has to be a temporary safety net program.

I'm old enough to remember when a woman could not get a legal abortion in most states. I met women who had used a coat hanger or stuffed towels up themselves to cause a spontaneous miscarriage.

I've heard this being done before and I believe it, but how many women actually performed an abortion themselves? Was it some kind of epidemic? Are there any facts or data to back this claim up? I'm not trying to make light of it, I'm just curious how common the practice was in states where abortions were illegal? Also, I just have a really hard time believe that in today's world in the USA, that if abortions became illegal that self-abortions would increase drastically.

then it's in everyone's interest that those abortions

Everyone's best interest except for the defenseless child.

Should we force a 10-year old victim of incest to carry the child to birth? I don't think so. Should we force a rape victim to carry the rapist's child to birth? Should we force a woman who's child has developed without a brain (as occurred with a couple I know) to carry that child to birth? And some women will choose an abortion, by self-help methods, even if they're not safe or available. So if you ultimately conclude that there are situations in which the woman should make that decision

Okay, so lets say the law on abortions is changed. If you're raped you can have an abortion. If there's incest involved you can have an abortion. If there's no way of the child living or there's no brain (whatever reason there is where the child can't live once born) you can have an abortion. If the mother's life is at risk you can have an abortion. By this new law (hypothetical of course), unless those 4 situations occur you cannot legally have an abortion. Would you be on board with this new abortion law?

 

[SilentCommit]

Conservatives rail against big government, but they embrace it when it comes to their own ethics. This is the height of hypocrisy. Reversing Roe v. Wade isn't a panacea, it will make the situation worse. Do we really expect that outlawing abortion will lead to more responsibility? Ridiculous. Personally I find abortion a repulsive choice I wouldn't want to make, but I feel it's more repulsive to tell a woman what she must do with her pregnancy.

 

[HuskerO]

Conservatives rail against big government, but they embrace it when it comes to their own ethics. This is the height of hypocrisy. Reversing Roe v. Wade isn't a panacea, it will make the situation worse. Do we really expect that outlawing abortion will lead to more responsibility? Ridiculous. Personally I find abortion a repulsive choice I wouldn't want to make, but I feel it's more repulsive to tell a woman what she must do with her pregnancy.

For me (and most others who are anti-abortion), abortion is about not killing the unborn innocent who have no say. This isn't a women's rights issue, this is a human rights issue.

Logically sound conservatives are against big government. Logically sound conservatives believe that the abortion debate should be left up to the states, not the federal government, therefore there is no hypocrisy. Of course there will be knucklehead conservatives who are huge hypocrites.

 

[Red Law]

A fundamental flaw that is always present in these big issue debates - that every political party is guilty of at some point in time - is illustrated by your statement HuskerO.

You say that "logically sound conservatives" believe that the abortion debate should be left to the states and not the federal government. The problem is the abortion debate is not dictated by federal statute but has been determined to be an inherent individual privacy right derived from the US Constitution. I understand that that notion is rejected by half of America, but that notion has been tested several times and remains the law of the land. Accordingly, allowing a state government to regulate abortion in this context is a big government and not small government solution. A constitutional right is being regulated, reduced, possibly even abolished. It is perfectly acceptable to object to abortions on religious or moral grounds. But it is a complete non sequitur to associate the states further regulation of abortion within the guidelines of Planned Parenthood v. Casey and small government or the conservative notion of preservation of personal freedom. If, for whatever reason, your job required you to move to Massachesuetts, I doubt you would be thumping states rights on this issue.

 

[hamneggs53]

Ashamed to be a Nebraskan today. No vote of the people, just an act by a legislative body that gave in to one man.

Sorry in advance mods as I assume this will get locked.

rolls eyes...

 

[MissaSolemnis]

I was born in the wrong time. Probably should have rode with Ghengis Khan.

But they didn't have Internet forums back then. sry had to be a smartass.