Access to the pill isn't the problem. Taking it, taking it as directed, not taking some other mediciene that makes it not work, affording it, or using some other method is. I don't know about Mississippi but there are 10 or more pharmacies within a 3 mile radius of my home.

If the government will not get out of the business of closing clinics then they better get into the business of making OTC birth control.

It's not the government. It's know it all conservative Christians who have no problems forcing thier personal beliefs upon everyone else in society WHILE they complain about situations where they try to tell us THEY are the ones being being forced to follow other people's personal beliefs.

Jesus didn't teach that his followers could demand that others follow him. Jesus taught that we are to bring others to God BY OUR ACTIONS NOT BY FORCE.

I sincerly hope that God has 'a special place in hades' for those who pervert his word and try to use force to make others follow him.

Next, they'll close the school.

Bc pills at wal mart are the same price as my acid reflux meds cheap T1 in fact. Now there have been 23 studies of BC pills and 21 link them to a rise in the risk of breast ,cervical, and liver cancer. Now since none of you want to read those studies or believe those studies do not come and bother me to pay for study #24 you won't read or believe

No surpirse there. It is Miss. after all. I hope the clinic will get an injuction placed on the law, or something, so they can stay in business. So lonereb, does that mean you are for the clinic staying open?

Lonereb,

Find me a medicine, OTC or RX, that doesn't have side effects and possible complications. Why are you only concerned about those that come with BC?

Heaven forbid you are a pregnant female, with a high-risk pregnancy that could severly hurt or kill you and your baby, and live in Mississippi.

And with all those opposed to free birth control.....I ask you this. Would you rather pay to support a child for 18+ years, or a package of cheap pills every month? I bet it's the lack of sex in your lives that makes you so miserable that you would rather no one has it.

Lowest abortion rate and highest rate of teen pregnancy, who would have thunk it? Hope they enjoy paying all the social costs to raise all those babies and support those families.

They care about the child before it is born. The only use they have for living, breathing children is to claim that any intrusive or self-serving law will ultimately benefit them.

Mississippi is not that big of a state. Not that they should have to, but I can't imagine someone who really wants an abortion not getting a ride to the next state over.

hs, you would be surprised how difficult it can be for people to travel for much here. A lot of the state is very rural and many of those people don't have transportation. It's hard enough for someone to travel 3 hours to Jackson, much less 4 or 5 to maybe Birmingham.

You volunteering to adopt one or more?

tiredofthelunacy: I don't think you have any idea what you are talking about. Not only poor people get abortions. In fact, one in three women will at some point in their life decide that having a baby is not right for them at the time. Mostly for the happiness of the child, not themselves. Count up all the women in your life and realize someone around you has had this procedure done. I absolutely guarantee you someone has. And then look at them and see if your comment resonates.

Compassion goes a long way. You have no idea what people go through. From teens who are scared and made a mistake, to a mother of four who knows she cannot provide for another child, to someone who has been raped and became pregnant. God knows what is in these people's hearts. Not you.

Killing a baby is no way to remedy a "mistake". Sometimes we all have to stand strong and accept the consequences of our actions.

Laura sue: You are 100% right. Especially about WHY women have abortions. Most abortions are actually had by women who already have children and when questioned the most common answer was: I want the babies I have to have a good life.

And the rest of them I'll just have killed...

"Sometimes we all have to stand strong..."

Another pocket mouse.

Killing a baby is no way to remedy a "mistake". Sometimes we all have to stand strong and accept the consequences of our actions.

RWNJ Translator: "Do as I say, not as I do."...

Dude... It's NOT a baby!!! You may believe it's a baby, but science can not prove when humanity begins, ergo it is your CHOICE. Hate it, protest it, scorn it, judge it all you want, but you DON'T get to ban it. You have NO legal case for doing so.

Take your hypocritical "small government" agenda and your Bibles and go pray for society if you want. Maybe that will make you feel less futile.

And please, spare me your personal science lessons. That may be the reasoning YOU use, but it's not universally accepted ANYTHING, let alone science.

And really, you're sooooo concerned about a "baby" but then refer to it as a "consequence", really???

Sarah, have you ever seen an ultrasound of a baby or heard a fetal heart monitor? Babies do move, their hearts do beat and they can respond to stimuli before they are born. Anyone who thinks that an unborn baby is not a living human being is mentally blind and doesn't want to see the inconvenient truth.

Abortion is barbaric. It is murder of the most innocent life.

An embryo isn't a baby. I get your point, but let's be clear on the language so as not to sensationalize the issue.

I will not get into the philosophical part of this, but having been in a NICU ward on many occasions I can tell you that any fetus at 26 weeks or later is most definitely a person. Any baby born at 26 weeks or later has a very good chance of going on to lead a normal, happy, healthy life with little to no long term health issue. As far as I am concerned, any abortion beyond 26 weeks should be illegal. Prior to that 26 week threshold I personally do not believe in abortion except in cases of rape, incest, or to protect the life of the mother but from a legal standpoint I think it should be up to the individual to make the choice for themselves. I am not one of those people who is so arrogant that I would try and force my personal views on others.

As for this article, the problem is as much with the area hospitals as it is with the law. I can understand the desire to have a doctor at the clinic with admitting privileges at the local hospital in case there is an emergency. This actually makes some degree of sense. The problem is that because of the local politics, none of the local hospital will grant those privileges to doctors who work at the clinic. To me, this shows a complete lack or ethics and guts on the part of the hospitals since they are denying these privileges over politics, not because the doctors are not qualified. The hospitals are making themselves complicit in preventing women from obtaining certain legal health care services. This is not only unethical, but a violation of the oath every doctor takes.

I don't like many things including abortion, but I find it is a necessary tool. People are not responsible and make bad judgement all the time. We have kids having kids all the time. And societies core values are ever changing for the worse. The other day a young mom at the health department told her kid who was throwing magazines on the floor "Do it one more time I dare you, Ill punch your fricken face off".

Sarah! During World War 2 Hittler justified killing killing other races and religions by saying nazis were a supreme race. You don't have to call it a baby your killing if you don't want to. You answer to god in the end not me.

@Kevin - But are those fetuses BREATHING? No. If I die when I take my last breath, then I am alive when I take my first breath (or are capable of taking my first breath). Before that, the fetus is a parasite.

When you are pregnant, you say "I am GOING TO HAVE a baby." You don't say, " I have a baby."

JS...that is what I don't understand, the part of getting admission privileges, unless like you say, the hospitals are not granting it for some reason. As hospitals are in business to make money, what exactly do they think it is going to cost them monetarily to allow a doctor from an abortion clinic admission privileges?

(On a side note, some of you might find this article interesting regarding some history of this subject:

Madame Restell: The Abortionist of Fifth Avenue

http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/history/2012/11/madame-restell-the-abortionist-of-fifth-avenue/)

Kevin,

I thought I told you all to spare me your personally twisted science lessons??? That's great that what you consider a baby is the activity of the fetus. SCIENCE disagrees.

Nick,

I'm shaking in my boots.

Abortion rates have gone down since Plan B was approved for OTC use.

Abortion rates have gone down since Plan B was approved for OTC use.

Is there an article or link for that? Seriously, I've been wondering if it's had any impact on abortion rates.

I don't see how ANYONE can pretend the unborn baby/fetus/embryo isn't alive. Personally I could care less about the semantics game (what do we call it, fetus or baby? SAME THING!!!) IF it's in a human body, then it's a HUMAN being - fetus, embryo, whatever, it's HUMAN! IF it's GROWING, then it's ALIVE - dead, inert matter doesn't grow (got that from Science, Sarah, so spare me your twisted science lesson already!). I'm NOT going to pretend that something both alive and human doesn't DIE during an abortion just to make someone else feel better about her "choice."

Clearly the BEST answer (are you listening, Sarah?) is birth control; better, more available, different types for different women, IUD's, pills, whatever. Because SURELY it's better to NOT get pregnant if you DON'T want a baby - surely even Sarah would agree with that!

(On a side note, some of you might find this article interesting regarding some history of this subject:

Madame Restell: The Abortionist of Fifth Avenue

http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/history/2012/11/madame-restell-the-abortionist-of-fifth-avenue/)

Interesting read, thanks!

Thank you T Bourlon, that WAS an interesting read.

@Kevin:

their hearts do beat and they can respond to stimuli

The same is true for cows.

@T Bourlon:

IF it's in a human body, then it's a HUMAN being

Does that include tapeworms?

Listen: Until a fetus can live outside the mother, it is nothing more than a parasite, living off of the host, who happens to be a living, breathing human with consciousness and loved ones who has rights to both privacy and choice.

And until you all are willing to stop killing other creatures on this planet for food, pleasure or because they're a nuisance, you have no place crying over a fetus.

Surely, Sarah understands that you can take every precaution in the book and still get pregnant. And surely, Sarah understands that being ALIVE doesn't mean being a HUMAN BEING.

hambone, how many times have you walked up to a pregnant woman and described her baby as a parasite??? Surely even YOU know the difference between a tapeworm and a fetus in a human female's womb, but if you don't then there are biology classes that can explain the difference to you. Sorry, but your argument is without merit.

Same for you, Sarah - I never said a living cat was human, but I maintain that a fetus inside a human female's body is, in fact, a HUMAN fetus. In fact, it is impossible for the fetus to be anything but human, science and medicine are on MY side of this argument. So if you want to justify abortion, please use some other argument besides the "it's not really alive/human" argument, which has no merit.

T,

YOU maintain. That's fine. That's why I'll never tell you, you MUST have an abortion. But YOU MAINTAINING, is not SCIENCE maintaining. You're argument makes basic sense for you, however it holds no weight as credible, widely accepted evidence for when the potential for humanity, becomes humanity.

That's what folks like you don't get. We need more then your belief or your "take". Seriously, get over yourself. Your boiled down belief does not give you any authority to tell someone what to do, or even to tell someone they need to use another argument.

And I don't need an argument, because unlike you, I'm not trying to tell you want to do. I'm telling you that since NEITHER of our arguments proves the question at hand, NEITHER of us gets to tell the other what to do. Ergo, CHOICE.

It isn't justifying abortion, it's justifying CHOICE.

Tired of the lunacy:

I'm sure you've heard of the current fracas in Ireland over a woman who requested an abortion and was refused it?

In case you haven't, here's the bare bones of the story.

A woman named Savita Halappanavar went to the emergency room on Oct 21 with severe pain. Doctors determined within hours of her admittance that she was having a miscarriage of a 17 week baby. They also determined that the miscarriage was triggered by her having been infected with a new strain of E.Coli that has proved fatal in Europe, and the antibiotics that are used to treat this new strain cannot be given to a pregnant woman.

Savita asked for an abortion to be performed, but as Ireland is Catholic and their laws ban abortion, the doctors refused, saying they could not do anything while there as still a fetal heartbeat. It took 2 1/2 days for the E.coli to complete the miscarriage and for the the fetal heartbeat to stop (baby pronounced dead Oct 24), and although the doctors rushed to put her on the required antibiotics as soon as they removed the dead 17 week old baby from her body, by that time the E.Coli had spread to her internal organs and she died of organ failure and blood poisoning on Oct 27.

If you were her doctor would you have performed the abortion ON A BABY ALREADY DYING to save her life? The stats on this new strain of E.Coli say the faster the affected person can get the antibiotic the better the survival rate was, and if she had gotten the antibiotics before it reached her internal organs she had an 85% chance of surviving.

Until the men commenting on this subject grow a uterus STFU.

T Bourlon:

how many times have you walked up to a pregnant woman and described her baby as a parasite?

Often. And it's true. It cannot survive without receiving nutrients and such from the mother. It would literally die outside the womb.

I know there is a difference between a tapeworm and a fetus, but there is a lot in common, as well.

Horrific that women have to either be responsible for their actions, or have to actually spend some time and money and be inconvenienced by having to go out of their way to have their babies killed? I know it's hard, but for goodness sake take responsibility, make some sacrifices, bring that life into the world and work hard to make that child a success.

Even when it's evidence of rape? Oh, I forgot--your hero Mourdock thinks getting pregnant by a rapist is a blessing from Gawd. Tell you what, grinder--if you're so concerned for these fetuses, how about adopting a few?...

This is a disgrace. It definitely reinforces their 'forty years behind the learning curve' stereotype!

Mourdock is a good man. I heard him speak in person, very caring and passionate. He made a mistake

Nick, that is like saying his beliefs are a mistake. He was speaking about his beliefs, which are not in touch with the majority of the state in which he lives. Otherwise, he wouldn't have lost the election.

Why oh why does everyone blame the women, or criticize her for making the mistake? Wasn't there a man involved, somehow? I'm going to take a guess and say that most of them don't want to live with the "consequences" either. Unless you can get the father to consistently and generously pay child support, then this is a lost cause.

I can only hope that my daughter will not have to make this decision, but I will support her every step of the way.

I agree with you. Abortion is a necessary tool. We should put abortion clinics in schools and on every block. Its big business and population control.

#4: I don't see how any woman in the state could vote for any republican. All the women can't be that stupid.

Obviously you've never spent any time in Mississippi. I have. If you believe the Democrats there are any better than Republicans, you're mistaken. What so many people don't seem to comprehend is just how much apathy exists there, particularly away from the Gulf Coast region. Once you get above Hattiesburg, it's like being thrown into a time capsule from 1950... if not 1850. (Think the Delta.)

Here's the politically incorrect truth: MS Democrats love welfare subsidies. Women and men, particularly those in their teens, are largely undereducated, have in all too many cases grown up in households that are dependent on welfare, and many of them truly do see it as a way of life and a source of income. And before someone assumes I'm referring only to a certain race, I'm not. Ignorance is rampant there, and color has zero to do with that.

What demographic do most of the women seeking abortions come from? That group. The hell of it is, they do have access to birth control already. They aren't practicing it. Why? Apathy and lack of education, naturally. Religious beliefs are only a very, very small part of that. Who do the majority of them vote for? Well, probably no one... most of 'em aren't into politics. But if they do, it's going to be for the ones who keep the checks coming, which is not any Republican. You can take that as gospel.

Now enter the Republicans of the state, thumping their Bibles and shaking their fingers in everyone's face. State leaders, for the most part, come from the "Good Ol' Boy" network; it's almost scary how many of them are connected to each other, and while they might not be considered particularly wealthy outside of MS in some cases, they generally have a lot more than the average citizen there in terms of money and influence. They don't want to pay for any of the above; and I honestly can't blame them for that. They're outraged that people who (in their opinion) have no business breeding at all keep doing so. Of course they aren't helping to educate these folks in how to prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place, they just lay everything off on abstinence and stupid rules that aren't based in common sense or the first shred of humanity.

I'm not going to get into my personal views about abortion here, except to say that it is something I know I could never have done. But this isn't about me, it's about a stranger's choice of either bringing yet another unwanted child into the world that will not be properly cared for once it is born and that my tax dollars get to pay for to the detriment of my own family (that I carefully planned for). Or, opting to terminate a cluster of cells that cannot in any way, shape or form live outside of the womb. I'd rather see it done at that stage than see a baby born into horrible poverty, ignorance, and all too often, abuse, who will very likely grow up and perpetuate that cycle of apathy and misery. I would rather see a woman have a safe procedure, live through it and realize she has a responsibility to keep it from happening again than be forced to turn to some "underground' source and die from a botched procedure done by a quack. Logic versus emotion.

But from a political point of view, both parties in Mississippi share equal blame for keeping the state firmly in the middle of the 1850s, and its lower-income residents [especially] as dependent as possible. You can believe that neither side wants folks to ever wake up from the ether and think for themselves. That's about the worst thing that could happen to any politician.

Great post. It's ironic that Republicans do not want to pay for social services, but that their stance on abortion will lead to more people, which means even more social services. An abortion is a heck of a lot cheaper than a baby.

Not to mention all the women who are raped. But Between Akin, who thinks women can't get pregnant through rape, and Mourdock, who thinks its some kind of twisted blessing, they think they have that avenue covered. I know it's cold to wish that one of their wives or daughters be impregnated by a rapist, but it might give just a smidge of reality to the RWNJs...

What happened to earning what you get. everyone wants everything given to them these days. tigntink you are a sad soul

When did I ask to be given anything? When did I say anyone should be given anything? Some women literally CAN NOT WORK after a certain point before and after birth. Do you think we as people should let them starve? Are you really that much of a cold heartless human being that you think they deserve no support?

Exactly tigntink!

Some people think women miracuously can have a child with no problems or anything. I had a co-worker who had to leave work throughout her whole pregnancy because she was so sick she couldn't even get out of bed. My mother told me with all of us she was so sick she couldn't work-had no income. Even females who are lucky enough to not get so sick they still have to go on bed-rest and miss work ..even after the pregnancy they can't work for awhile-which means no income. Not everyone can afford that, not everyone has someone that can help support them till they are on their feet again.

"Pro-life" people dont give a crap about the life already living, they only care about the fetus (which isnt life yet) forming in the womb...until it's born of course, then it's not their problem.

Really? You think abortion is a "big" business? I want some of what you are on in lala land there. Got any citations from reputable sources?

No, tig, all she's got are factoids from the University of I Don't Remember...

Eona is speaking for a lot of people. Read her words and take note. This world is screwed. Eona like so many others accepts zero responsibility for her actions. The proof is in the pudding, and were overflowing with pudding.

Nick, it takes two to make a baby. How much responsibility does the male partner have? You seem to point to the women as being irresponsible, but it takes 2 to tango, or does it only apply to women because men can't get pregnant? Please elaborate.

It does take two. A guy leaving is not killing. A guy helping is killing. I hope this helps clarify things a little

A guy leaving, insinuates relinquishing responsibility. Leaving all responsibility to the woman for the child he helped create. How is that not irresponsible on the guy's behalf? Explain how helping=killing.

Eona, I would say the realistic solution is NOT murder, and that is exactly what a mother is deciding to do when they have an abortion, is to Kill their child. We have to wake up and realize the sanctity of Human Life. God has created all of us from conception, whether we are willing to admit to that Truth or not.

So, what exactly is the solution here? Should the fathers of all of these children be made to marry the girls and assume their parental responsibilities? Perhaps we should start prosecuting all the ones who were already married! Seriously, let's start a conversation. What is a realistic solution to unwanted children born to unfit mothers and fathered by men who are apparently incapable of supporting them?

Fair questions, I agree - but I don't think abortion is a terrific solution. It's like blaming the victim (the baby), only more like killing the victim. Nothing wrong with forcing men to take financial responsibility for the children they father; many states work hard to do just that. I doubt the father is "incapable," more like "unwilling." I mean, my biological father walked out on me and my siblings when I was three years old - apparently "unwanted" by him, yet no one (so far) is advocating the death of abandoned children as a "solution." And why do you assume that the only women getting abortions are unfit mothers? That might make you feel better, but I really don't believe the Casey Anthony's of this world beat their kids to death because they can't get an abortion. Really, abortion doesn't seem to have improved child abuse rates any, we still have it, don't we? Like I said in other posts, birth control, birth control, birth control.

dt82 said;

that is exactly what a mother is deciding to do when they have an abortion, is to Kill their child. We have to wake up and realize the sanctity of Human Life. God has created all of us from conception, whether we are willing to admit to that Truth or not.

If you define conception as the joining of sperm and egg,and if you assert that at that point the conjoined cells are alive and life and is a baby, then you must consider a woman who has a miscarriage as a murderer/killer and advocate putting her in jail for the miscarriage.

Now, you do know that even when sperm and egg join, sometimes they don't automatically implant in the woman's uterus, sometimes they are just flushed out of the woman's body with her period and the woman never even knows it happens. So therefore, she would be a murderer too since she/her body rejected implantation of the egg?

Nick, as much as you like to say that women are irresponsible, an abortion IS a RESPONSIBLE decision.

okay, please tell me how your ignorant statement is any better than racism or any other bigotry...

It's not. Welcome to the real world.

But somehow they're the victims in all this, you notice. They sure love their persecution complexes...

Kill a baby, no they would rather kill the mother. You won't see those statistics, the government hides them from the public. You're going to get more and more mother deaths as more states take away women's rights of free choice. Again, you see the right's total disregard for women's rights!

The women buying abortions almost certainly aren't the ones you want to prevent from breeding.

What a backwards little state full of little politicians who should spend more time trying to lift themselves out of poverty. Mississippi gets back twice as much from Wash.DC than they send there.

Bob I like your mind

wow, I just drove through some slums outside of Baltimore that made my teenage son very uncomfortable when we took a wrong turn. I don't think MD has a tremendous lot to brag about....

sure it does, but like every other state right now there's poverty, not sure how you can equate poverty to a state with 18th century thinking

Really Pattie? Stereotype much? Ignorantly, I might add? There are PLENTY of people in MS who are fighting to drag the rest of the state into the 21st century. Do you really think EVERYONE here feels the same? Wake up, we do have colleges here, we do have educated people here, we do have non-religious people here, we do have people who want change. If you're not doing anything to help, at the very least dropping the snide, condescending attitude and learning something, then I suggest you refrain from making any more comments such as this that make you look like a bigot and a fool.

It's all about the money. Bars make money and governments make money from intoxicated driving. If they really cared about saving lives they would try to prevent drunk driving. You could reduce the BAC for legal driving to zero like they do in some countries and post cops outside of bars to test BAC if you actually wanted to save lives.

These politicians do not care about women or children or even the fetus. They care about controlling women and imposing their religious beliefs on everybody else.

Because that's the way they've been doing it for over 100 years. Why stop now?

Most conservatives have put the abortion issue behind them. its just the small group of radical religious ones that have a problem with abortion. The liberals just like to keep the fire going. Its a political tool that works very well for them.

Really? Care to explain all the anti-abortion legislation brought forth by the conservative legislatures, in conservative states? Or maybe the 30 some odd bills that went through the US House but never saw the floor in the US Senate. If I had to guess, I say you either live under a huge rock, or are seriously misinformed.

Nick, as a woman living in the Commonwealth of Virginia, I assure you that it wasn't liberals who brought a bill to our House floor MANDATING transvaginal ultrasound for every abortion. The Republican lawmakers (including one who was an OB/GYN and should have known what an ultrasound at 8 - 12 weeks requires) conveniently "forgot" that RAPE laws include "forcible penetration by an object". If a woman does not consent to a TVUS then it becomes GOVERNMENT SANCTIONED RAPE if it is mandated.

It is not the liberals that are trying to push "personhood" bills. It's not the liberals who are mandating that abortion providers have surgical suites equipped like the hospitals while other outpatient surgical offices are left alone.

It wasn't a liberal who FORCED a young woman I know to carry a fetus to term even though the fetus has exactly ZERO chance of living outside the womb even at 40 weeks due to gross physical abnormalities. It wasn't a liberal (or the young woman) who cancelled appointment after appointment after the mid-term ultrasound until the pregnancy was past the cut-off and who refused to certify the pregnancy as unviable in order for her to go out of state to terminate the pregnancy. It wasn't a LIBERAL who tortured her by making her continue the pregnancy after she knew the fetus would never live - feeling the fetus move inside of her and prolonging the grief at KNOWING that the baby she WANTED would never live.

Tell me again how the "liberals just like to keep the fire going". Liberals are not the ones proposing the laws limiting a woman's right to make a choice. Or are you saying that liberals should just lie down and allow the laws limiting a right to choose to go forward?

Cat,

I hope your friend is ok now. I was in her shoes, but we made the decision to abort at 5 months rather than carry through a pregnancy where the baby wouldn't be viable or could have miscarried late and killed me, too.

I wanted to be around for my husband and 2 year old son. Those two were the most important things in making that decision.

So the question is asked one more time ~ Who had the greatest authority? 

The woman over her aborted fetus, of course! What a silly question!

Besides, if god gave us free will, it should be up to the woman to decide if she wants an abortion, and up to god to judge her for it.

Who the hell do you think YOU are, denying her the god-given right to free will? And how can it be god-given at all if you have the authority to take it away?

Answer me, christian!

Yeshuas Healer, how many athiests and/or people of other religions, do you think are going to give your rant any credibility? I doubt many will. Thanks for playing.

If she wants to kill her baby its her choice. Lets move past the abortion issue. God can sort it out in the end. That's how we do things in millitarys all over the world

You assume all militaries are following your religion. I can assure, you many do not.

Hwy look--another "Christian" who quotes the Old Testament, the Epistles, and Revelations, with NO MENTION OF THE GOSPELS. Color me surprised--not...

So I said to god, WTF is wrong in Mississippi? There was no answer, god dosen't know either.

Why do you worship such an evil, sadistic god?

if I understand correctly god doesn't intervene directly in peoples lives (if it wanted to stop abortions certainly an all powerful all knowing entity could do any thing it wants). It supposedly gave humans free choice, why would anyone believing it seek to deny free choice to anyone else, baffling

Nick, move past it? Gladly. As long as it stays legal.

Health care should be earned not just given. everybody wants something for nothing. A bunch of sour puss whiners is what we have here. Although they are strong enough and willing to kill. Scary stuff

Ahhh, the real matter at hand. You are an anarchist. Every man for himself. I understand this, but do not agree with it. There is no unifying message in anarchy. Lesson here is conservatism=anarchy. You do realize that anarchy pretty much goes against the teachings of Jesus? Right?

I think it is important to understand that the mother(and father) that decides to have an abortion to protect agains their child's potential of growing up to be a murderer is obsurd. If you choose to have an abortion you are a murderer.

dt82:

Very black and white, no shades of gray.

What of a woman who find out her baby has anencephaly--will be born without a brain? Or the child with Tay-Sachs who will not live past their 3rd birthday? both those conditions mean the child will live a very very short life , the child with Tay-Sachs will be in severe, unendurable pain the entire time till death, both will spend their entire lives on life support. Is it murder to want to save your child from a short life spent completely on life support and narcotic medication?