Do you agree with what Sol just said? If so, what beliefs and experiences lead you to believe that a woman has a right to control the body of her child, even to the point of harm?

Also, if anyone else who shares his beliefs would care to answer the questions I posed to JK, feel free. The following questions remain unanswered.

1) What would happen if the Democratic party got everything it wanted? Analyze programs such as HillaryCare and deduce the possible results of their implementation. As specifically as possible, how would you describe the resulting society?

2) Why do you believe Bush used drugs?

3) Why do you favor friendly relations with the government of China, which has killed thousands of people for no reason?

4) If you believe that 'if you are an individual, it is your body, and that no one can tell you what to do with it, and that no one may touch you without your permission,' does this apply to Siamese twins, where affecting one's body would nesecarily affect another person? Also, does it apply to the body of the unborn child in an abortion, who is being touched without his/her permission? If not, why not?

Effectively, what is your position on the right to do what one wishes with one's body, when the exercise of that right involves the death of another?

5) Can you think of, and provide evidence of, an instance where George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, et al. lied to the people of the country?

6(relating to China) Do you believe that the unauthorized actions of a few under a previous administration are equivalent to the ordered actions of a current administration? Do you believe that previous crimes commited by people claiming to represent this country justify dealing with murderers?

7) Do you believe that all intentionally caused human death, including capital punishment, is murder? If so, what is your position on abortion?

8) Do you believe the Chinese would cease their attrocities if we traded with them? If so, why?

9) Do you believe that the right to speak automatically conveys a right to be heard, in any medium desired? If so, how does this apply to the property rights of the owner of the press? Further, how does this apply to the freedom of expression of the publisher of the paper?

10) What is your response to the accusation that the DNP ignores the constitution wherever it proves inconvenient, given the list of events at the top of the page?

11) What is your basis for the belief that an unborn child is not alive?

Sol said two different things there.

1) What would happen if the Democratic party got everything it wanted? Analyze programs such as HillaryCare and deduce the possible results of their implementation. As specifically as possible, how would you describe the resulting society?

My memories bad, and I am looking it up, but sites like www.conservative.org keep putting a slant on the actual content.

2) Why do you believe Bush used drugs?

Mmmm, alcohol is a drug.

3) Why do you favor friendly relations with the government of China, which has killed thousands of people for no reason?

No reason to you. The politicians were protecting their way of life, I can't agree with their way of life, but the idea of protecting ones way of life is natural.

4) If you believe that 'if you are an individual, it is your body, and that no one can tell you what to do with it, and that no one may touch you without your permission,' does this apply to Siamese twins, where affecting one's body would nesecarily affect another person? Also, does it apply to the body of the unborn child in an abortion, who is being touched without his/her permission? If not, why not?

One half of Siamese twins have been sacraficed for the other to live for quite sometime, very seldom do Siamese twin gain their majority.
The point of view of the fate of an unborn child rests solely on when people consider it a person in its own right. A partial birth abortion is wrong, the child is a person then and that is murder, to me. Since people to it, it must not be to them.

Effectively, what is your position on the right to do what one wishes with one's body, when the exercise of that right involves the death of another?

Circumstances mean everything, if I decide to not donate blood, that is my choice, even though that blood could save a life. Shooting myself in the heart is my choice, even though if I shot myself in the head my heart could be transplanted to a person that will die without it. See above for your abortion point on this.

5) Can you think of, and provide evidence of, an instance where George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, et al. lied to the people of the country?

If I remember didn't the entire GOP have their �Contract with America', which wasn't followed through on? (I know a question....) This Contract involved eliminating the Department of Education, now the GOP package has $40+ billion funding section for them.

6)(relating to China) Do you believe that the unauthorized actions of a few under a previous administration are equivalent to the ordered actions of a current administration? Do you believe that previous crimes commited by people claiming to represent this country justify dealing with murderers?

No, and we should not do anything good towards Yugoslav Federation, even though they voted in a different guy for their leader, since the previous leader, that the people rioted against, killed all those ethnic Albanians.

7) Do you believe that all intentionally caused human death, including capital punishment, is murder? If so, what is your position on abortion?

Nope, I do believe in the �eye for an eye' routine. I am going to say, and I'll catch hell for it, that until the end of the 20th week it is an it, a growth. After that it can be considered to be alive. My reasoning for this is that premie babies born before this have a high mortality rate. My son was emergency C-sectioned at 24 weeks, and was given a low chance to live, 40%. He's six now.

8) Do you believe the Chinese would cease their attrocities if we traded with them? If so, why?

By opening a door to trading with the Chinese we can get our feet in there, speaking for the �free world'. As we get more people in there starting up companies and supervising factories the word will travel more about what they are doing. The government will be pressured by the rest of the world to be better, or we will have our factories pull out. After the Chinese calculate the hurt that can be put on them, financially, they may ease up on their people.

9) Do you believe that the right to speak automatically conveys a right to be heard, in any medium desired? If so, how does this apply to the property rights of the owner of the press? Further, how does this apply to the freedom of expression of the publisher of the paper?

People can spout all they want, in any form they want. Whether it is in the local rag, on the internet, or standing on a street corner. If people listen, great, if not, hey, you got to have your say.
Same thing, only societies narrow minded ideas of �bad' words is a limiting factor.
(Omega, you're a church goer, doesn't say that God only said not to use his name in vain? Not that fuck and shit are �bad' words? This is what I mean about societies narrow minded point of view.)

10) What is your response to the accusation that the DNP ignores the constitution wherever it proves inconvenient, given the list of events at the top of the page?

The support of the Fairness Doctrine � Support doesn't mean ignoring....
The support of banning firearms � Support doesn't mean ignoring....
The support of banning school prayer � Support doesn't mean ignoring....
The support of Bill Clinton, a man who commited a crime and thus, according to the constitution, should have been removed from office � Republican led Congress didn't impeach him....
The DNP inniated attempt in the Senate to dictate what isles food products would be placed in in
supermarkets � This was stupid
90% of the programs that FDR implemented � Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures
The existance of the FCC � Forgot the IRS
The abduction of Elian Gonzales from his court-appointed guardians � To return to his dad.

11) What is your basis for the belief that an unborn child is not alive?

Please see #7.

12) What is your opinion on the fact that this thread has 9,000,000 different topics going on at the same time?

This isn't a thread, it's an interrogation.......

------------------
Well, it's done, yes, the deed is done.

The abortion issue is far from clear cut. Would you allow a woman to have an abortion just as she's going into labour? Or would you allow it at 8 months?

That's the main thing I have with it. I do agree with abortion sometimes, but where do you draw the line? I'd say that it's still a blob of cells after a couple of weeks, but after 20?

------------------
Well, it's done, yes, the deed is done.

How do you feel about people on an iron lung, respirator, dialysis, or some other artificial life-support system?

For that matter, how do you feel about spaceship/starship crews, whose survival is dependent upon an external life-support system?
"Carbon units infesting USS Enterprise..."

------------------
"Ed Gruberman, you fail to grasp Ty Kwan Leap. Approach me, that you might see." -- The Master

Even with life support and the best Docs the chances were in the single digits. Before the 20th week the chances were lower than single digits.
Mind you this was almost 7 years ago, so my 20th week maybe high.

How do you feel about people on an iron lung, respirator, dialysis, or some other artificial life-support system?

Badly. Although this is somewhat similer to the issue, it is not truely relevent. Unless your embryo is in an iron womb.

For that matter, how do you feel about spaceship/starship crews, whose survival is dependent upon an external life-support system?
"Carbon units infesting USS Enterprise..."

They should be aborted before the 20th week of thier flight..... Come now.

------------------
Well, it's done, yes, the deed is done.

------------------
"Ed Gruberman, you fail to grasp Ty Kwan Leap. Approach me, that you might see." -- The Master

Several of you seem to want JeffK and I to defend our belief that we shouldn't be the ones to make laws concerning a womens body, and that of the growth in her that becomes her child.

I am now asking you people to defend you belief that you should make laws that cover such an intimate thing in a womens life. How much control will this law have.

Scenario:
Abortion is outlawed.
Ok, now you have this law, what follows.
Pregnant women drinks, she is fined for the first offense, fined and 1 week in jail for the second, incarcerated for the third and loses custody of the child when born, even if she wanted it.
Same thing for smoking cigarettes.
Illegal or illegally obtained drugs the penalty jumps right to the third drinking offense, with a longer term in prison.

Sound like bullshit, it won't be if laws ar passed controlling a womens body.

So, now you can stop asking us if it's right or wrong, that point was moot, since we said it wasn't for us to decide. You seem to want to make this decesion, so make it.
Do you want a law prohibiting abortion?
Do you want exceptions to said law for rape? Why?
How do you plan on keeping the law from evolving on to the little scenario that is above?

------------------
Well, it's done, yes, the deed is done.

My question is this: why do you see a difference between killing a child in the womb and killing a child outside the womb? They are both living human beings, with all the rights thereto entitled. One's inside, one's outside. What's the difference?

I suppose my point has less to do with abortion than it does a certain kind of ethical thinking. Namely, one that judges today's actions exclusively by tomorrow's results. It's an interesting discussion, though one that I doubt we'll get to, being too busy calling each other murderers and fascists.

------------------
"I finally see that what we thought was a fun way to celebrate our love was really an expression of hostility and disrespect toward Jesus."
--
Bill Metz, in The Onion
****
Read chapter TWO of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! Now with 30% more plot.

------------------
Well, it's done, yes, the deed is done.

Wha? You guys could stand some grammer lessons. Between reading you and JK, MY grammer's getting screwed up.

Sol:

"If you are willing to consider a fertilized egg as being fully human because it may someday develop, does this extend to any species which may someday evolve sentience?"

There's a difference between considering the life of a sentient that actively exists, and a theoretical one that may or may not exist millions of years hence.

And I'm only allowing for the possiblity of evolution for the sake of argument, before anyone jumps on THAT.

------------------
"I finally see that what we thought was a fun way to celebrate our love was really an expression of hostility and disrespect toward Jesus."
--
Bill Metz, in The Onion
****
Read chapter TWO of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! Now with 30% more plot.