Duros62′s remark to Catherine asking how many babies she has adopted: that is a red herring. It doesn’t matter if Catherine has adopted any babies or not, just like it doesn’t matter if Duros62 has actually participated in an abortion decision or not. What matters is if Catherine supports adoption as a loving, caring way to deal with orphans and Duros62 supports the killing of an innocent baby in the womb.

Which brings us to the next red herring, postulated by Duros562, Daniel Rotter, Grumpymann, and others about the death penalty. Generally speaking, a death penalty is exactly that…a penalty. The person has committed a crime against society that is considered to be so heinous (try murder or multiple rapes) that the only just punishment for that crime is his own life. Please explain what crime the baby in the womb has committed to deserve such a punishment. Abortion and the death penalty are two different issues.

As for Daniel Rotter’s question about arresting a 13-year old girl who had an abortion, the answer is no. But the adult who took her for an abortion should be arrested, as well as the father who raped her and the doctor who performed a medical procedure on a minor while she was in duress. But this is yet another red herring: the Guttmacher Institute does studies on why women get abortions and less than 1 percent of the women who had abortions in the US said it was because she was pregnant because of rape and less than one-half of 1 percent of the women who had abortions in the US are because of incest. The reality is, a vast majority of women (over 70 percent) said it was because having would change her life. And before anyone says that the Guttmacher Institute must be pro-life, it ain’t so. They started off as a part of Planned Parenthood, the number one provider of abortions in the US (performing over 20 percent), and they continue to produce studies in support of the abortion industry.

As for the question of when human life begins, check your embryology, medical, or nursing books and you will find most of them to say, that at the moment of fertilization, a unique life is begun. That’s what science that’s not trying to make a point of justifying abortion says.

None of this really matters in the context of this blog. Tiller wasn’t on trial for performing abortions. He was on trial for breaking the law. In Kansas, in order to perform a late-term abortion, the patient was supposed to get an independent second opinion that it was safe for her to get that late-term abortion. As it turns out, most of the second opinions that Tiller’s patients got were from a doctor who is paid by Tiller’s medical practice and only takes patients from Tiller’s referrals. The 19 violations he was cited for all had second opinions from this doctor.

Whether you are pro-choice or pro-life, this blatant conflict of interest and flagrant snubbing of the law should concern every one of us. When there is no law, there is only anarchy, and I don’t think any of us really wants that.

I’m amused by people who proclaim they’re “pro-life” and support the death penalty. Sort of like a self-proclaimed vegetarian who supports the eating of meat.

syco: to be truly pro-life you must be a pacifist.

any thing less is a joke.

I think that’s an oversimplification….

any thing less is a joke.

I’d be wary of using a “Well, if you’re truly pro-life you must be an pacifist or (HA!) I just called you on your hypocrisy” argument.

any thing less is a joke.

PLUS

being pro-choice doesn’t mean you can’t be anti-abortion.
I may not like guns but that doesn’t mean I think you shouldn’t have one.

If you want to nip a possible life before it has a chance that’s your damn business not mine.

Just curious how far your “Pro-life” position goes.

How would you know? Did you do a poll of “most people” on their “my dog versus the unborn” attitudes?

…starker in your reality than in mine.

You all can debate what “pro-choice” means till the cows come home.

I’m pretty sure it means this:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184097&title=Bristol-Palin%27s-Choice

There is no such thing.

Interesting that Hedley did not respond to THAT part of syco’s post.

Death penalty.
Affordable health care.
Affordable housing.
Issues of affordable and safe food.

You will see how out right … Darwinian, unchristian like all and all how un-pro-life they are.

Pro-choice does not mean anti-life yet it is framed that way.
I doubt there are more than 100 people in the country who are anti-life.

they have corned the market on word play.
they cal themselves pro-life when they are clearly not.
They are instead anti abortion but pro-life sounds a hell of a lot better.