Protestantism

» pink101 - Politics

.
Yesterday, we were treated to the TRUE victory conservatives won in the past two presidential elections.
.
This set back for American women to be in control of their own bodies has come about as a direct result of the election of George W. Bush to the presidency of the United States.
.
Perhaps, the American people will begin to see the main difference between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party has to do with individual rights.
.
I might not have liked any of the Democratic Party's candidates; but, now I know why I should make it emphatic in the next election.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - Politics

In response to Politics posted by pink101:

.
.
High Court Upholds Curb on Abortion
5-4 Vote Affirms Ban on 'Partial-Birth' Procedure
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...
.
I'm pro-choice, but I DO agree with this decision.
.
If not familiar with PBA and D&E (D&X) procedures, go here:
(WARNING: graphic illustrations)
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/diagram...
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/DEabort...

The Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act does provide an exception to save the woman's life.

-- posted by Migisi

» pink101 - Choices

In response to Politics posted by Migisi:
.
You might be right in your thoughts; but, the point still remains that it is important to differentiate between the two major political parties in the United States. This is especially true when it comes to the place where the next president will undoubtedly make judicial appointments to ALL THE FEDERAL COURTS AS WELL AS PROBABLY TO THE HIGHEST COURT IN THE LAND. That was my point. So, far, George W. Bush has made two appointments to the Highest court and may make more.
.
It's a very important issue as judges get to serve for life in most cases. A youngish judge can effect the choices of society for fifty years into the future.
.
.

-- posted by pink101

» _Boanerges_ - Politics

In response to Politics posted by pink101:
This set back for American women to be in control of their own bodies
actually.. this law protects the weakest of individuals.. those who cannot speak for themselves....
we do not live in communist china... among many other nations that dictate what "a body" is and "who" is in control of it. Whether or not that includes harvesting parts for profit (commodification), or, who can have a child, or who lives or dies - and etc etc......

and so... the world keeps turning.....

-- posted by _Boanerges_

» pink101 - Politics

In response to Politics posted by _Boanerges_:
.
Do you think you should have control of your body as far as the rest of humanity is concerned? Or do you think someone else should be able to impose their ideological beliefs on you?
.
It's not such a tough question to answer, Wendell.
.

-- posted by pink101

» _Boanerges_ - Politics

In response to Politics posted by pink101:
Do you think you should have control of your body as far as the rest of humanity is concerned? Or do you think someone else should be able to impose their ideological beliefs on you?
I made my opinion.. The law passed protects the most innocent - those that cannot speak for themselves.

Your question has no relevence because it is a strawman argument..

-- posted by _Boanerges_

» pink101 - Insensitive

In response to Politics posted by _Boanerges_:
.
No, my quesrtion certainly has relevance.
.
But, YOU are the one who makes yourself irrelevant with your disrespectful response to my honest question. I don't appreciate that from you or anyone else, Leahy. And, I don't expect you should appreciate me being so uprovokably dismissed by me. How discourteous of you and insensible to the feelings and civility of this site.
.

-- posted by pink101

» pink101 - ERATA

In response to Insensitive posted by pink101:
.
For clarity, this statement:
.
"I don't expect you should appreciate me being so uprovokably dismissed by me"
.
Should have read,
.
I don't expect you should appreciate if I were to so uprovokably dismiss you.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - Questions re: the Body

In response to ERATA posted by pink101:

Pink, Migisi, PT, Wendell, whoever....

Some questions...

Do you think a person should have a legal right to put drugs in their body? (I'm talking narcotics - cocaine, LSD, etc)

Do you think a person should have the right to prostitute their body?

Do you think a person should have a right to commit suicide? I ask because suicide is officially illegal in most states. This allows the police to intervene to prevent suicide - if they can.

Do you think a person should have the right to do physical harm to their body short of suicide? Again, there are some laws on this to allow the police and/or parents to intervene in the event of cutting, etc.

If you answer "NO" to any of the above, then this means you have opened the door to the government regulating your body.

» Brian Tubbs - Choices

In response to Choices posted by pink101:

I agree with you, Pink, which is why I vote Republican.