I was referring to the increasing separation and dis-union between the states and the increasing divisions in our country's political and social geography, and between what we all want. It's gotten to the point where it isn't just about simple disagreement anymore. I really honestly don't get what many in the Southeast and the Plains states are about anymore. They're as genuinely alien to me as a foreign culture might be. That's a problem if we're to continue as one nation.

Two countries, The United fewer States of America, and Jezusland.

saw a map somewhere.

Since the Roe vs. Wade, I'd really like to see some statistics on how many abortions are actually performed in the US. Makes one wonder why American's are adopting from Russia and other countries instead of the US. I'm sure if we all knew the actual number of abortions, we'd be shocked.

@Believe, the number is 55 million aborted in the USA since Roe v Wade 40 years ago.

-Dr. Alveda King, a niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., endorses www.toomanyaborted.com

and notes the high ( higher than any other race) number of abortions of African Americans.

-She says: "How can the dream survive if we murder our children?"

CAFirst, agreed. The "freedom" loving Red South is becoming more Nazi-like by the passing year. How much longer before they publish a state morality guide for citizens to sign? If the South is going to continue toward a total theocracy, we should just cut them loose. Guns everywhere = good, birth control = bad, worker's rights = bad, bible classes in public schools = good, women's rights = bad, gay rights = ABSOLUTELY F*CKIN NOT, conformity = good, environmental protections = bad. How long does the normal United States have to put up with the backwards Southern relatives?

Oh my gosh you guys should try living in South Dakota. Talk about a bunch of fanatical loons. I dont know what happened. We had Tom Daschle representing us in the Senate and all of a sudden he got voted out and a bunch of teaparty zealots took over everything (I think) or maybe they are just normal republicans-not sure. There is only one clinic in the state where women can get abortions now. So discouraging. What is happening? The world has gone crazy but we have to stand firm and vote, vote, vote. I used to be proud of my state. Not so much anymore. It pretty much sucks anymore.

At this point, I'm with you, jake2247. Let 'em secede. Take Texas. Please. It shouldn't take long to devolve into Jezistan: small clans riding around in pickup trucks, heavily armed, doling out "justice" to women who don't follow the edicts of their Christian mullahs.

So when Obama said after the Newton massacre that "if we could save even ONE life we should consider" I guess he was not talking about the 1.2 million abortions performed each year? I guess sucking a developing baby from the womb doesn't count............

Planned Parenthood kills 300,000 unborn babies. Nobody cares. Some lunatic kills 20 kids and all of a sudden every freedom loving gun owner is under attack.

So an organization that supports killing 15,000 times more kids, is ok, but guns need to be outlawed. I'm just trying to make sense of the lunacy.

says who, Pro-business? Our religion does. And, in this country, the state is separate from religion... as a fundamental tenet of our constitution. Religious beliefs about what constitutes life and conception must be kept wholly independent the apparatus of state power. I'm a Christian. I personally disapprove of abortion, but the separation of church and state is far, far more important. Unfortunately, entire regions of the country seem to reject this most fundamental of concepts.

States moving away from abortion and people (70%) moving toward abortion. Who elects these idiots? Don't we live in a Democracy?

how bout we take care of these kids who are already BORN:

The Truth will set u free:

Children in foster care are regular children who, through no fault of their own, had to be removed from their families due to abusive or neglectful situations.

More than 250,000 children in the U.S. enter the foster care system every year. While more than half of these children will return to their parents, the remainder will stay in the system. Most of these children are living with foster families, but some also live in group facilities.

Each year more than 20,000 children age out of the foster care without being adopted. Today there are 104,000 children in foster care waiting to be adopted ranging in age from less than a year old to 21.

the truth will set u free: http://www.adoptuskids.org/meet-the-children

Abortion is the legal term for murdering babies. I would like for all of you who are in favor of a woman to have her baby murdered see in living color how it is done. Any so called Doctor who performs the murder of babies is not human. America is a lost nation, it cannot survive, history has prove that when a nations citizens embrace the wanton murder of the innocent and the lust of the flesh such as homosexuality, it is doomed.

Ken Trader

Try Afghanistan or any Taliban controlled country. They have exactly the kind of place you say you want. I hope you enjoy getting what you ask for.

Jerry-1927474 and Ken Tender when u moving to Iran??? That's a country where RELIGION RULES dudes....good luck to you!!!

When all 40 THOUSAND children who STARVE DAILY are fed and clothed and nurtured, then come to me with an argument to (once again!) outlaw abortion.

Evidently it is easier for a minority to take the rights of the majority away at the state level.

Pay attention people. The GOP hypocrites are getting good at it.

@CaliforniaFirst

Outstanding post. It's amazing how the "pro-birthers" ( they're not really pro-life) fail to understand that simply allowing others to make their own decisions is not tantamount to wanting to kill babies. It's equally amazing that while these people want to mandate that all babies be born, regardless of circumstances, these same people are unwilling to help with them after the birth, or for that matter, even before the birth. Interesting too that most of these people consider themselves devout Christians and yet are not willing to allow God or Jesus to handle these decisions one-on-one with the people involved.

The picture at the head of this article says it all. Men wanting to control women, but god forbid we control guns.

ProBusiness

If you really want to make the comparison, abortions are like guns in that if you ban them, people will still get them and more wives, girlfreinds and daughters will die trying to get it done in unsuitable conditions.

It's interesting that everything seems to be an all or nothing proposition anymore. Progressives see middle America as freaks. Middle America sees progressives as freaks. In the meantime, people that are truly in the middle are alienated. What's really wrong with restrictions on abortion? Same as what's really wrong with restrictions on guns? I personally think none of this will matter if we don't get our finances in order.

We live in a country of CHOICE. I don't want all of those men in Congress dictating what I wish to do with my body. I believe in restricting abortions if it makes sense but to blatantly eliminate abortions is wrong. Just like pornography, graphic movies and TV programs...if you don't agree with them or wish to look at them just turn the channel. It's your choice! How dare you try to rule your fellow man/woman. Do something worthwhile like community service.

Jerry...what color is the sky in your world? America became "America" by butchering the previous residents of this land. Remember Geo. Custer? It was believed that killing a pregnant squaw was a "toofer" because you not only got an Indian woman but possible a future Brave as well. When Custer met his well-deserved demise at the hands of several thousand warriors, he thought and expected to ride into a village where he would slaughter about 50 women. So this fantasy of America being a lost land where innocence and virtue once prevailed is pure drivel and BS.

Furthermore,Eeyore, most pro-choice people are like me: not really favoring abortion, just not wanting to rule over women. I'm quite sure that abortion is a mistake but people get to make their own choices and either regret them or benefit from them. How is it that the party of "personal responsibility" refuses to allow people to make their owndecisions and then be responsible for them. It seems to me that if you want to save every unborn baby, you should be willing to adopt and raise them too.

Planned Parenthood main business now is abortion, not preventive health services. In fact, cancer screenings have dropped 29% and they don't even perform mammograms.

They demand that all of their affiliates provide abortions and is evidence that their chief concern is making money off abortions-not the health of vulnerable women and girls.

It's no wonder that many states have taken action to cut off tax payer dollars for Planned Parenthood only to see their efforts blocked by the abortion provider's top ally Barack Obama.

Since when was a poll of a thousand taken from a liberal news site a fair representative picture of the nation. The election process ensures that the voice of the people is heard. Abortion has always been a topic in elections, so the people elect those that they support and support their ideals. Sorry if I am a little wary of a liberal news media poll that clearly polls from those that read from their sites, and who are generally liberal. I know it is a hard concept to understand, but maybe you'll get it.

Per the article:

"A majority of Americans do not want their tax dollars being used to fund abortions," said Mallory Quigley, a spokeswoman for the Susan B. Anthony List

To me that's just silly. I'd rather have my tax dollars being spent on abortions than supporting that child for 18 years.

Kwilson,

Care to provide a source for that claim about Planned Parenthood?

Everyone Else,

Show me where the CREDIBLE, SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY has proven when HUMANITY begins, and we'll have a talk about banning abortion. And, by the way, your thoughts, as in statements like...

"Well it's obvious that human life begins at conception because what else could that embryo grow into?"

DO NOT constitute the credible, scientific community.

kwilson - untrue. Abortion is only 3% of Planned Parenthood's 'business'. Um so what, they don't provide any mammograms? They also don't do prostate exams, eye exams, or hearing exams. What is your point?

Sorry, but none of the new laws that they included in this article sound extreme to me. Notifying a parent for a girl under 16? Reasonable. Admitting privileges at a hospital? What if something went wrong at the clinic - you can't have your patient admitted. They would have to be a walk-in --- all alone after a procedure that a doctor did. Waiting time? This is a momentous decision and not one you can take back, but it should not cause hardship on a woman to have to make two visits. Ultrasound? As long as it is external I see no problem. Actually, I think it is what should be done to ensure that there are no unseen issues beforehand. Just because Roe v Wade made it illegal to ban abortions, does not mean that there should be some limits/restrictions. I read an article today about four doctors that perform late term abortions - that is in the 3rd trimester. At that point the fetus is viable and could survive outside the womb. They did not state under what conditions these abortions are performed. There are reasons for there to be some restrictions. No one is denying access. No one is being prohibited.

I think it's kind of funny about all these right-wingers bashing the polls.

Remember the last time that happened? That "effeminate" Nate Silver guy was predicting more Dem voters to come out than others? And you called him names, you made fun of him, you railed and blared at any MSM outlet that had his predictions up and were following him.

He wiped the floor with your greasy faces. On county-by-county, he nearly took the whole damn thing. The only thing he really got wrong was Florida, and that was because the voter suppression tactics signed by Rick Scott didn't work nearly as well as they had hoped.

As for why the GOP wants state rights? That's because they have gerrymandered the districts so much, they have a much higher chance of getting and keeping the legislatures there than they do in Congress. So now, everything is "states' rights" again, and nobody even cares about the 4th, 9th, or 14th amendments. Because, like the verses in the Bible that they don't like, those amendments don't count. Unless it's an illegal search & seizure on a rich white man.

Lori,

How do you know the woman hasn't already pondered and weighed this decision for an adequate time? Why should the government decide how long she has to think about it? What's adequate time? Your concept? My concept? The government's concept?

Why should the government insert itself into the doctor/patient relationship? If an ultrasound is needed it should be the call of the doctor and the patient, why should the government make that decision?

Admitting privileges? Why aren't ALL outpatients procedures required to be performed by doctors with admitting privileges??? Why only first trimester abortions?

Lorielle Sisson -

Notifying a parent? I know many who would argue against that, but as the parent is responsible for the child, the parent should be notified. Not that the parent should have a say in what happens, but notification should be required.

Admitting privileges to a hospital? How many outpatient doctors offices have that? Why is abortion so special compared to similar medical procedures performed every day where the patient walks in in the morning and out in the afternoon? Plus, it's an out to where the local hospitals are pressured by the politicians to refuse admitting privileges to the doctor, and then the clinic's gone. This should be scrapped.

Waiting time? Most women who avail themselves of an abortion are poorer. They often have their own jobs, their own children, etc. Because of the increased restrictions on abortion, many places (particularly rural communities) don't have a provider nearby. They have to take one day off of work already to have this procedure. If you force a 24 hour waiting period, that's 2 days. If it's 72 hours, that's still 2 days off for the woman, but it also puts pressure on the doctors. Many places have become so horrid that the doctors cannot afford to stay there due to personal risk, so the clinics will fly them in when a procedure (or group of procedures) needs to be done. The Utah law seems to aim specifically at this, in order to cause the doctors to have to come in, do the preliminary checkup, then come back again 3 days later. This is bull@!$%#. The women who come in have generally already thought about this and made up their minds. Scrap the waiting periods.

Ultrasounds? Well, that should be up to the doctors. Is it medically necessary? I don't know, and neither do you. If the doctor thinks an ultrasound is necessary to prevent unseen complications, then they should do it. If it's not necessary, then it's just another bull@!$%# attempt by the state to try to prevent a woman from making a choice that it is her legal right to make. And trans-vaginal ultrasounds are just the politicians' rape fantasies playing out. Scrap the ultrasound requirements.

Late-term abortions are used for life-threatening issues with the mother or child. If there is a serious complication, like the fetus dying and threatening sepsis, or a serious injury that would prevent the mother from giving birth, or some other issue, then the doctors perform a late-term abortion. Or, if the woman's Rick Santorum's wife, then it's something else, maybe a D&C or some other medical term. No, IOKIYAR never applied more truly to anything when that guy claimed his wife didn't have an abortion.

I agree with you that there should be some restrictions. Notifying a minor's parents should be mandatory as the minor is the legal responsibility of the parents, though the doctor should follow the girl's orders and not her parents'. Other than that, these are just roadblocks. They can't come right out and ban abortion entirely, again, so they create these workarounds in an attempt to severely discourage a woman from making a choice that is her right, not theirs. That, and they're using it as another excuse to violate the 1st Amendment and funnel money to corrupt religious organizations. Pathetic loons.

Hope, So kill them? Nope.

Your argument is that they should be killed if we co not feed them. We needs to do both but killing as an alternative choice to feeding is idiocy.

WTF! 4 men forcing their beliefs onto what is and can only be a women's issue!?

Just who the hell do they think they are?

Arrogant misogynists.

#1.6 tempus - the number is 55 million aborted

Look. These are the facts. If we don't curtail population growth NOW, we will not survive as a species. There are enough resources in the world for the number of people we have, but barely. We are growing in numbers too fast for the planet to keep up. Climate change is a perfect example of the planet becoming uncomfortable with the way She is being abused. So, aborting 55 million fetuses is a good thing. Should be a lot more than that. There are not enough resources for them.

Religion should not be a part of sound decisions with regard to use of common resources. Suggest the anti-choice people focus on minding their own business instead of going around constantly annoying everybody.

America = Freedom - Not so, it's fanatic Jezusland idiots all over. If you take all these stupid church driven lunatic laws into consideration, you have to admit that your so called precious freedom has gone-to-@!$%#.

How can it be that the majority of people is hogtied by a few church idiots??? Get rid of those morons and send them somewhere where they can not do any harm to an otherwise fine country.

Looks like the same people who want to restrict women's rights are the ones whining about gun regulations.

Glenn--you don't seem to understand the fundamental purpose of the Supreme Court, so why would anyone believe you understand the Constitution? The Supreme Court's core purpose is to determine what is and is not "Constitutional". That means they are by definition the people who decide what the Constitution says and means. They determine what things are prohibited by the Constitution, and what things are protected by the Constitution. Their ruling in Roe v Wade determined that abortion was protected under the Constitution. They don't just make up decisions or laws, they interpret the laws the Congress passes to determine whether or not those laws are constitutional. 40 years ago they ruled that laws banning abortion were unconstitutional. And until another Supreme Court comes along and overturns that ruling, it stands as the basis around which all abortion-related laws must be built. End of story.

Not understanding your point. Government money going to PP is not allowed to be used in any abortion services (which only accounts for about 3% of their activities). The OTHER 97% is women's services (prenatal, family planning, contraceptives, cancer testing, etc etc etc).

Planned Parenthood can and does earmark government money for services other than abortion. They have to by law. Public funding cannot be used for abortions. But that little fact apparently does little to stop people from using the "my tax dollars should not support something I don't believe in" argument. And it has been my observation that if you tell a lie long enough, and loudly enough, at least some people will believe it. So the anti-abortion people apparently believe that the end justifies the means (it's okay to lie, if it achieves the purpose of eroding support for abortion rights). Kind of makes me question their morals when they are screaming about "protecting the unborn" out one side of their mouths while lying out the other side. What also makes me wonder about their morals is that they are perfectly willing to have women die from breast or cervical cancer, rather than have access to abortion services. Most (97%) of what Planned Parenthood does is provide breast exams, pap smears, contraceptives, etc., but the abortion foes want to cut off funding for those services unless Planned Parenthood caves into their demands to not provide any access to abortion services, even if funded from other sources or performed by other providers. Makes you wonder, doesn't it?

Heather, one thing is that you think people are rational. My brother lives in North Dakota, one abortion clinic some 250 miles from him althogh I do believe, as he does, that there are Doctors who perform abortions throughout the state, witout being referred by PP. He doesn't have to worry about abortion since he's male. His wife is over 60 so she isn't likely to need or want one either. Both are staunchly pro-abortion. And of course, since he's a Democrat who used to be a registered Republican, he seems at times to despair at how the Tea Party types, or even extraconservative Republicans are elected to the state legislation and local government.

I live in South Carolina, more liberal than a lot of people think. Not liberal in the sense of Massachusets, but more openminded to ideas. My State Senator, although Republican, voted for a pilot program to fund tidal-generated electricity. Not enough to power the state but to see how much electricity can be derived from each.

When it comes time, yearly it seems, to fund PP, he votes yes. There are enough other Republicans, the majority party in both Houses (60-40 percent IMO). He may disaprove personally about abortion, but it is the law in the state and the Federal Government. I talk with him periodically and though we have some truely polar opposite ideas, we agree on a surprising number of issues. This includes PP. He understands that without PP many women would never be able to get basic women's services. And he believes that PP actually sends fewer women to abortion providers, at least in our State, than is thought, simply because it's against the law to use state and federal funding for that service. He's a pretty good man with a lot of ideas and feelings that the state has absolutely no reason to snoop into other's lives.

My personal feelings is that PP should be able to provide whatever services women need. I believe in abortion, and have taken two young women to an abortion provider. How they feel today, some 20+ years later I have no idea. I do know that, even with my beliefs, I asked them if that was truely what they wanted and of course got the yes answer. My only problem is with women who use abortion as a method of birth control, but I stil believe that is their perogative. There are clinics that provide free contraception, free abortions. And these are not funded by the State, Feds opr PP. They depend entirely on people and organizations, even churches, to fund them. I think that's a good idea, although there are people who firmly believe they are funded by either the State or PP.

There is no good answer to abortion. If a woman wants or needs one, she should have it, even for birth control, the one part of abortion I don't like.

Even though I'm 65, if a woman over the age of majority wanted me to take her to get an abortion, I'd do it, although I would make sure that was what she truely wanted, regardless of my feelings that abortion should be easily abailable in most places. Of course, I'm sure women who get an abortion have thought about it, at least I hope so. And as a man, I don't believe I have any right to tell any woman what she can do with her body.

This is probably a polemic, but it's something I feel I should say. I hope it does some good.

You are wise and have reason...I read your entire post and agree...thank you for your convictions and determination to stand up for others...

Wish this entire issue could be de-politicized and GO AWAY. We have people living under freeway bridges, mental patients turned out for lack of funding, prisons overflowing with non-violent or even innocent inmates.

The point here is we have actual issues which need to be dealt with.

Message to politicians and others: Get out of women's reproductive area please. (Yes the pun is definitely intended.)

Easiest way to ensure that govt money can go to help all women needing help with Planned Parenthood is to have them stop doing abortions. Then much of the argument would go away.

Otherwise, funding for PP will always be a target for reduction of govt funds and rightly so.

We all/most agree that The mother can do with her own body as she chooses. The baby's body is not the mother's.

NC,

Until viability, the fetus is very much a part of the mother.

The specious logic in trying to gut PP is very typical of what drives the current health care debacle. PP uses only 3% of their funding for abortions. the American Taliban kills PP and then poor women have no health care and , without even getting into the costs of unwanted children being born, you now have poor women showing up at hospitals with cancer and cysts that could have been dealt with sooner, easier, and cheaper. So you save a few bucks for political points and pay a ton of money in food stamps, aid for children, medicaid, and other costs incurred by killing PP. This is like throwing away the baby and keeping the bath water. If you really want to stop abortions, I suggest that a good start would be giving women other alternatives to abortion besides jail. PP does many fine works. Do you really want to throw away an organization whose mission it is to help women stay healthy? Maybe rather than the American Taliban trying to decree to its adversaries, they could try discussing their objections and try to develop a co-operative way to reduce abortions by working with others- counseling, adoption services, financial aid, job training, working to help the poor develop skills so that the choice isn't having a baby and living in poverty or abortion.

The sale of assault weapons to the general public has been banned for decades. You have been taken in by the anti-gun crowd who know nothing about firearms. FYI - Senator Feinstein has a permit to carry a concealed weapon for protection.

let me ask you this question Bill,do you think that every day since abortion has been legal that a married woman has gone to a clinic to abort a baby that came from a one night stand or affair and did not consult with the husband before having the abortion I can guarantee that it has happened every day aclinic is open and thats fine it is the law but lets presume now that the husband wants a vasectomy and he goes to have it done what does he have to do GET HIS WIFES SIGNATURE FOR PERMISSION does that sound like a man has control over his reproductive rights like a woman does I could care less if a woman gets an abortion using the argument it is her body and she should be able to control the reproductive rights but I want the same rights for married men as well do you ever see a womans group protesting for that right or a politician bring it to the floor for a vote No ONLY IF HE WANTS TO COMMIT POLITICAL SUICIDE. As a conservative I just want equal rights the way the Founding Fathers intended it you should to

Okay, you asked for this one. Research if you must, but these are the facts. Read closely before you blame conservatives for all of your problems:

Why is it that those who steal guns, who then go and kill movie goers and
children in school have never been evil conservatives or NRA members?

Ft Hood shooter - Registered Democrat – Muslim

Columbine shooters- Too young to vote; both families were registered Democrats and progressive liberals

Virginia Tech shooter - Wrote hate mail to President Bush and to his staff - Registered Democrat

Colorado Theater shooter - Registered Democrat; staff worker on the Obama campaign; Occupy Wall Street participant; progressive liberal

Connecticut School Shooter - Registered Democrat; hated Christians

Congresswoman Gabby Giffords’ shooter – leftist, registered democrat

Common thread is that all of these shooters were progressive-types…why is that, when the media always tells us that conservative NRA-type gun-owners are the real danger???

Have fun with that. Stick it in your pocket and think on it before you start running off at the mouth again.

Great Post guns pretty sure it will be collapsed by the community as hate filled bigotry, racism etc, etc!

The republicans need all the people they can get to fight and die in other countries. The republicans are just as bad, they just kill them when they are older!

Can you back anything you say up gunner? The only sites that agree with you (word for word at that) are right wing nutjob websites. What a surprise.

@Mike: The republicans need all the people they can get to fight and die in other countries.

Oh? The draft ended in 1973. That's 40 years ago. We have a VOLUNTEER Army.

As for dying overseas, how about when we did have a draft?

WW1: Wilson (Democrat)
WW2: FDR (Democrat)
Korea: Truman (Democrat)
Viet Nam: Johnson (Democrat)

Mike - well said about republicans. I've thought the same thing for a long time . . . Thought I was the only one.

@Hope

Sorry, but the numbers don't bear that out.

WW1: Wilson (Democrat) dead US troops: 116,516
WW2: FDR (Democrat) dead US troops: 416,800
Korea: Truman (Democrat) dead US troops: 36,940
Viet Nam: Johnson (Democrat) dead US troops: 58,220
Invasion of the Dominican Republic - Johnson (Democrat) dead US troops: 44
Invasion of Grenada - Reagan (Republican) dead US troops: 19
Beirut - Reagan (Republican) dead US troops: 256
Invasion of Panama - George H. W. Bush (Republican) dead US troops: 23
Gulf War - George H. W. Bush (Republican) dead US troops: 294
Somali Civil War - Bill Clinton (Democrat) dead US troops: 19
Afghanistan War - George W. Bush (Republican) dead US troops: 2,083
Iraq War - George W. Bush (Republican) dead US troops: 4,487
War in North-West Pakistan - Barack Obama (Democrat) dead US troops: 15

Totals:
Democrats: 628,554
Republicans: 7,162

Note: I'm not counting episodes where the US lost less than 10 soldiers in combat, just to keep the list shortish. So Carter gets a pass on the Iranian Hostage rescue while Reagan gets a pass on the bombing of Libya... etc. Wars are attributed to whomever sent the troops in.

So as points of comparison:
* The US could invade and occupy Afghanistan & Iraq 10 MORE times to approach the level of death in Viet Nam alone.
* For every dead American solider under a Republican President, there are 87 under a Democratic President.
* Even without WW1 & WW2 "skewing the average", it's still 95,238 vs 7,162. Or 13 to 1.

Hope,

You have not had a cogent thought since before puberty.

Mike,

If all of us Americans go away, who will feed and protect you?

Info came from military information. There is nothing hateful or racist about it. I'm glad someone chose to do research. That is what we should be doing. I would have to say the reason that it is not found on the liberal mainstream is the same reason no one has seen any reporting on several home invasions and a mall shooting that was stopped or prevented by legal gun owners and concealed carriers. They do not want anything good to prevent the campaign against it all. It is far from the time that we should forget about the political labels and fix this country. Trying to make the other side look bad accomplishes absolutely nothing. We are still in the same place we were a few years ago with marginal improvement in the economy, yet still going deeper in debt everyday. This article is about svaing the lives of unborn babies or not and the battle will go back and forth. I believe that it is murder. There are other choices. the perfect choice is to not get pregnant, but we have millions of people who cannot ave children that want to adopt.

@ gunner...your source? Calling it "military information" isn't exactly showing proof. Military info about Columbine? Gimme a break. That sounds pretty bogus. Prove your assertion.

@Mark from Bridgeport

Pretty specious there, Mark. Should I elaborate or do you already know that? WWII? Really? Viet Nam and LBJ? Hmmm....I suspect you should do some homework. Very specious. And very wrong.

Ironically, the "real" (registered Republican) NRA pro-gun nut-job didn't use a gun committing his mass-murder: Timothy McVeigh

@Thomas Blue: Specious? How ever do you mean? All I'm doing it showing death toll vs. President.

I should do homework? Why? I've already proven my point. All you're doing is saying the word "specious" over and over again. Without putting up squat.

So, please, if you can show that the Republicans have killed more US soldiers than the Democrats, put up the math. You know it's accurate, no matter if you want to count it at 87:1 or 13:1.

We wonder why our politicians are so dysfunctional when most Americans cant even debate or discuss in a civil manner without casting dispersions and extreme judgement on one another. "I disagree with 4 men demonstrating their belief, but since those views are not the same as mine they are ridiculous and pathetic." Extreme judgements generally is the other side of the same ignorant coin.

I just love the bible thumpers that want to have their religious views be the imperative as though their religion should have greater weight than any other religion. Where did they get the notion that they can tell a Jew, Muslim, Buddhist or any other person of a different religious persuasion what they can or cannot do because it offends their biblical beliefs?

I wish they would all be relocated to a Iran or Saudi Arabia for a while so they can get a taste of what they are trying to force onto others. I don’t want to force my religion on anyone and expect them not to force their religion upon me.

William,

Surprise! Babies are both make and female.

I sure hope NC doesn't stand for North Carolina where spelling and sentence structure has died off. "Babies are born both make and female"?

Wan't it Roosevelt who got us into WWII, Truman who got us into the Korean War, and Kennedy who got us into the Viet Nam War????

Peter, actually Ike was the first president to send advisers into Viet Nam!

But it was LBJ who fabricated the Gulf of Tonkin incident. He also upped the anti of US troops from a few thousand advisers to 500,000 COMBAT TROOPS.

Slodon..

Fabricated? I was there! You are a buffoon to even say such an asinine thing!

Peter,

Did you really just say that FDR got us into WWII? Was Pearl Harbor a hoax?

probably, they are the daddies. These are the same people who refuse to do anything about the widespread sexual abuse of women in the military. If this was India, they'd probably be taking the side of the Delhi gang rapists. One country's Taliban is another's old boys...

It's kind of hard tracking them down with the only evidence to go on being a wet vagina. I don't know if a blood hound would even work on that trail.

The state is doing a good job of that!

We do go after them. So what? Killing is still killing.

Jack,

Are you with child?

"Bands of white men want to command women to have babies born of incest." As a white man, that is the most ridiculous opinion I've seen in a number of years. The thought that comes to mind is that you must really be an angry, bitter person to type the drivel that all men dont respect women, oh excuse me, bands of men what ever that means.

Deerhunter-sounds more like that time of the month.

Jack,

If a baby conceived in incest is born, would it be ok to kill it then?

Close, but you included gun worship.

Class warfare I could buy, but this is just silly.

You forget, the cross burning group you are referring too was started by the southern democrats dumb@#$

gun worship, voter suppression

So... it's okay to maintain a national database of gun owners but not voters? How does *that* work?

peteMT - whoa !

When Obama was re-elected and all those petitions to secede came in, Liberals laughed. Now you

WANT us to secede ?? I would be VERY happy NEVER to have to hear from another Liberal

again in my life !! Talk about forcing things down everyone's throats - remember Obamacare ??

We are already starting to feel the effects of that with higher taxes and higher insurance

premiums - a real stinking Socialist pig sty.

One Tree Hill (as in the TV series set in that region where the main theme is that apparently nobody 16-22 seems to know what protection is or how to use it..). Yep. These good ole' boy moral majoritarians' idea of utopia is One Tree Hill, but with guns, hate, enforced morality, and state control over women's bodies.

Are people from California allowed to post......... ???

Nope. We aren't. Best send out your extra super-secret morality police to come get us :) hehe.

Meanwhile, another headline on this site's front page cites a recent poll that says the majority of Americans want abortion to be legal. What's wrong with this picture?

pete....are you saying that the laws against murder are forcing religious morals and will upon others? That is the basis of abortion, MURDER. It doesn't matter where the human being is, if it's life is being ended, it's a problem.

You are just so enlightened, you bigoted, hateful, intolerant, child murdering liberal.

Yo PeteyMT, logically speaking (not emotionally speaking now, logically) who's spiralling to the bottom, those who seek to follow God's instructions, or those who kill unborn humans all in the name of choice? And BTW, your name-calling makes you look like the uneducated, ignorant, and bigoted person you yourself are ranting against.

It funny how Liberals call the shooting in Newtown, CT a massacre - and it was !!

but abortions, where 10's of thousands of children are ripped from their mother's wombs by sharp

surgical instruments and suction devices - Liberals call this "choice" - it sounds better.

And when this unwanted child comes into the world ARE YOU GOING TO BE THERE TO LOVE AND SUPPORT

IT. Or will the child end up going to bed hungry at night. Let's see all the pro lifers adopt a child or two

and give them a decent life before deciding how other people should live theirs.

Ines......sounds like a lot of "what-if's" in your post. Or maybe the child will grow up happy and well adjusted in loving home. So are you saying that if we don't want the children to be murdered we have to pay for them all for 18 years? How about asking those questions of the people having the abortions, so they don't end up pregnant in the first place???

Place the blame where it lies.......lots of little babies have been killed because of "what if" scenarios.

They're all poopers?

Never heard this summation before but I mostly agree with it. As I posted above when all of the people who STARVE to death daily are fed, clothed, nurtured then come to me with an argument to outlaw abortion.

Patriot...that is the most ridiculous thing I've read in a while. It sounds like you are trying to spin oppression and rights into this, when this is about the murder of the unborn. I don't care what a woman does with her body except when she's carrying another human life inside of it. Do you think the labels on cigarettes warning pregnant women are also trying to abuse women and control them??

You're so far out, you'll say anything and think of anything to try and make it seem appropriate to kill babies.

yeah, and before Loving vs Virginia.. only a few years earlier, whites and blacks desiring to have relationships or to marry one another were forced to choose between imprisonment and medieval banishment from the Commonwealth. Oh, I forget.. that's the type of regulation-of-personal-business law y'all approve of down there.

So you think it is OK to kill the kid before it is born because it might not be adopted. Don't worry - it seems that will continue to be your choice. I agree that some people think a child would be better off dead than not be adopted. It seems that you are one of those people and I probably would not convince you about any morality.

Yep. It's okay, Tom. I'm sure you would be perfectly happy to pay the taxes necessary to support tens of thousands of unwanted and unadopted children in your home State, and you would pay them happily and willingly to support all of those children until age 18 or beyond. Right?

You're right bw!! Murdering should be the murderer's choice!! No one has the right to tell someone they can't murder, that's none of their business!!

You are so enlightened!! You're also right, since we're not adopting these babies, we shoud think it's okay to kill them!! I guess we shouldn't remove kids from dangerous homes either if we're not willing to take them in ourselves, right?

VetinVA...I would be happy to pay extra taxes for kids in need of help, as long as we cut spending on unnecessary gov't funding, of which there is a lot!! We could make up the difference.

Again, you're inferring that death should come to these babies unless we fully fund them and all children forever, what a delusional hypocritical statement.

Cuban,

There isn't any unnecessary gov't funding in this circumstance. The Hyde Amendment already barrs the use of gov't funding for abortions-except in cases of rape or incest. And please stop saying murdering babies, it's not a baby until it is born. A fetus at 7 weeks doesn't even have any organs developed which means no lungs or heart. Can you say that fetus is alive? I think some of the problems with this discussion is the interchangeable use of 'baby' and "child", when it is a fetus which is neither of these things. Also, there is no clear definition as to when life begins. To me an abortion before or around 7 weeks isn't murdering. Murdering a baby (1month-36 months) or a child or a teenager and adult, then yes that is murdering It is not murder if if is something that doesn't even have organs but is still an unevolved clump of cells which hasn't differentiated yet into specific cell types and then tissues and eventually organs. I think it is appropriate first to get a concept of "first life" before we start throwing stones.

Sorry Ines, murder is a human issue, nothing to do with men or women. Please get an education. I have every right as a man to oppose murder.

And the Republicans kill millions and call it war. Read the Bible - Thou shell not kill.

Democrats what it an option for the women, the Republican just want to kill as many as it can, they have no God.

rober I hope you're not putting America in with advanced civilization . . . Our white ancestors exterminated the native people of America by bullet, smallpox, starvation, and every other means at their disposal.

I don't call that advanced. I call this an acute DIS-respect for life. And as Marvin noted we still are actually warring on one another in these highly advanced times we live in.

What highly advanced civilization were you referring to BTW?

Uh Marvin, so do Democrats, what's your point?? Read the previous posts above about the war statistics. Nice try though.

Great post Al!

IF life starts at conception, it certainly doesn't end at birth. The same gangs that are protesting PP
are yelling abuse at mythological "Well-fare Queens". If a young and economically challenged woman
is choosing to terminate a pregnancy, (by the way, aren't these the same guys that are anti birth-control?)
If a young woman has made this painful choice, bight it be because she realizes that she cannot properly
raise the child, and that she realizes that the system will not help her.

Reminds me of "The Handmaid's Tale". Are we going to chain women to their beds?

This is directed at ptownz comments who wrote, "

Forcing unwanted pregnancies make for good strippers,gang members,mma fighters and the good ol' cannon fodder.

Make believe flavor of the day savior would be proud.....Go Team!!!

Maybe we could bring back witch burning and stoning too while we are at going back in time."

Ken responds:

"Forcing unwanted pregnancies" you say? I've got a novel idea ptownz - how about the fellas keeping their junk in their pants and the women keeping their legs closed and you wont have an "unwanted pregnancy." But that's just CRAZY talk today isn't it! I mean - crap - you have a RIGHT to have sex every day and get pregnant and kill babies if you want to. You are WOMAN and I hear you ROAR!!!!!!