Thousands of children are deprived of birth due to lack of vasectomy regulation

[finehoe]

As a devout catholic... this makes sense...

What doesn't make sense is thinking that those of us who aren't Catholic, much less devout, should have this view imposed on us.

[BridgeTroll]

As a devout catholic... this makes sense...

What doesn't make sense is thinking that those of us who aren't Catholic, much less devout, should have this view imposed on us.

I disagree with his view also... but why would his viewpoint be an imposition on you or me?

[finehoe]

... but why would his viewpoint be an imposition on you or me?

Oh, I don't know...maybe because politicians run for office in order to impose their worldview on the country?

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

... but why would his viewpoint be an imposition on you or me?

Oh, I don't know...maybe because politicians run for office in order to impose their worldview on the country?

I always thought that their 'worldview' always seemed to change depending on whichever state/city/demographic they're stumping.  Maybe I'm wrong....

[BridgeTroll]

... but why would his viewpoint be an imposition on you or me?

Oh, I don't know...maybe because politicians run for office in order to impose their worldview on the country?

So I guess that applies to any and all politicians... not just catholic Santorums?

[FayeforCure]

How utterly ubsurd you are, a woman's monthly cycle is NOT the same ting as harvesting embryonic cells. It boggles the mind that you would even go there! And, you are a woman who supposedly is somewhat intelligent. Tell me, how could a natural occurance be considered willful distruction of a fertilized fetus?

As stated before, my objection is to the use of fertalized and growing fetuses. Life begins a conception, there is no other benchmark that can be used to determine this. Intentionally harvesting these viable fetuses for use in scientific is the of immorality and absolutley wrong. Theuse of stem cells from the umbilical cord, however, is not an issue.

Instead of attacking me for my views, why not advocate the use of umbilical stem cells and respect not only life, but other's opinions and closely held beleifs?

Only somewhat intelligent? I beg to differ. I was the only female in 1980 to receive a masters degree in Economics from the University of Amsterdam. I actually consider myself highly intelligent, thank you very much.

Even attended medical school in my early thirties.

So please refrain from talking down to me. And you are not attacking me for my views?

There are states that want to criminalize natural miscarriages, so how is a woman supposed to prove that her early pregnancy ended natuarally in those states? As many as 25% of implanted fertilized eggs never develop. Many more never implant. Natural genocide?

http://reason.com/archives/2004/12/22/is-heaven-populated-chiefly-by

Why don't you practice your religion privately without imposing your views on others like me and my paralyzed son.

[finehoe]

So I guess that applies to any and all politicians... not just catholic Santorums?

Obviously.  That's why we vote for candidates who's positions most closely approximate our own.  Or at least that's what I do.  Maybe it's different for you.

[BridgeTroll]

So I guess that applies to any and all politicians... not just catholic Santorums?

Obviously.  That's why we vote for candidates who's positions most closely approximate our own.  Or at least that's what I do.  Maybe it's different for you.

Nope... that is why I do not consider his views an imposition.  Now we know where he stands and more importantly... why his views are as they are.  Good for us.  You really should not consider him speaking his views as an imposition...

[finehoe]

Nope...

So how do you evaluate a candidate?  On whether or not you'd like to have a beer with them?

You really should not consider him speaking his views as an imposition...

I don't.  It's when a politician translates his/her views into law that I view it as a possible imposition.

[BridgeTroll]

Nope...

So how do you evaluate a candidate?  On whether or not you'd like to have a beer with them?

You really should not consider him speaking his views as an imposition...

I don't.  It's when a politician translates his/her views into law that I view it as a possible imposition.

The "nope"... is in response to your... "Maybe it's different for you" quip.  You and I are very much alike...

It's when a politician translates his/her views into law that I view it as a possible imposition.

We could be long lost twins!

[Gonzo]

How utterly absurd you are, a woman's monthly cycle is NOT the same ting as harvesting embryonic cells. It boggles the mind that you would even go there! And, you are a woman who supposedly is somewhat intelligent. Tell me, how could a natural occurrence be considered willful distruction of a fertilized fetus?

As stated before, my objection is to the use of fer talized and growing fetuses. Life begins a conception, there is no other benchmark that can be used to determine this. Intentionally harvesting these viable fetuses for use in scientific is the of immorality and absolutely wrong. Theuse of stem cells from the umbilical cord, however, is not an issue.

Instead of attacking me for my views, why not advocate the use of umbilical stem cells and respect not only life, but others opinions and closely held beliefs?

Only somewhat intelligent? I beg to differ. I was the only female in 1980 to receive a masters degree in Economics from the University of Amsterdam. I actually consider myself highly intelligent, thank you very much.

Even attended medical school in my early thirties.

So please refrain from talking down to me. And you are not attacking me for my views?

There are states that want to criminalize natural miscarriages, so how is a woman supposed to prove that her early pregnancy ended naturally in those states? As many as 25% of implanted fertilized eggs never develop. Many more never implant. Natural genocide?

http://reason.com/archives/2004/12/22/is-heaven-populated-chiefly-by

Why don't you practice your religion privately without imposing your views on others like me and my paralyzed son.

Wow, and now she pulls out the paralyzed son card. I had no idea you had a paralyzed son, nor is it germain to this conversation. I am truly sorry for you and your son, it is an unfortunate occurrence just as any other affliction is. Both of my mother's parents died with Alzheimer's, but I still do not advocate the use of fetal materials to find a cure for that terrible disease.

I congratulate you on your educational accomplishments, as well. Surely you have a right to be proud of them. But, you know nothing of my accomplishments and insist on making somewhat absurd comments about a woman's period being a willful natural abortion. Hogwash! I would certainly like to hear more about states that want to make that illegal. I tend to think that there is more to any such law than you are revealing here.

So far, you have managed to dance around my questions by constant changing of the subject. My religious beliefs are what they are. Yours are what yours are. I merely say I object to willful destruction of innocent life to carry out medical experiments. Especially since there is no need to do it when stem cells can be obtained by other means. I have not attacked you in any way. A reference to a relatively intelligent person means that you have a good head on your shoulders, it is not "talking down."

I ask you again:

How could a woman's natural monthly cycle be considered willful abortion?
What makes you believe that life does not begin at conception?
If life does not begin at conception when does it begin?
Where will science draw the line and say, "we cannot cross this line without being morally corrupt?"
Why do people such as yourself think that it is OK for science to play God in this way?
With the birth rate what it is, why is it not an acceptable alternative to harvest stem cells from umbilical cords?




 

[Gonzo]

You really should not consider him speaking his views as an imposition...

I don't.  It's when a politician translates his/her views into law that I view it as a possible imposition.

How is this different from Obama forcing a health care bill on us that requires the Catholic church to do something that is steadfastly against their religious beliefs?

[finehoe]

We could be long lost twins!

No doubt! 

[finehoe]

How is this different from Obama forcing a health care bill on us that requires the Catholic church to do something that is steadfastly against their religious beliefs?

When legislation is passed by both chambers of the Congress and signed into law, that is not the president "forcing" a bill on us.  It's the way our government works.

Romneycare in Mass. has the same requirement in that state, and the Catholic church hasn't had an issue with it.  Why all of a sudden is it now a problem?

[Gonzo]

How is this different from Obama forcing a health care bill on us that requires the Catholic church to do something that is steadfastly against their religious beliefs?

When legislation is passed by both chambers of the Congress and signed into law, that is not the president "forcing" a bill on us.  It's the way our government works.

Romneycare in Mass. has the same requirement in that state, and the Catholic church hasn't had an issue with it.  Why all of a sudden is it now a problem?

I think you lost me there, one man -- a Republican candidate -- speaks his mind about his beliefs regarding the issues, while another -- the sitting president -- says he believes all Americans should be required to have health insurance whether it violates their religious freedoms or not. How again is it different?

And I must confess, I have not read much about Romneycare nor do I keep abreast of the news within the state of Mass. However, I will look into it. If the same rules are in there, I will be just as outspoken against them.