He wan't taking care of a 4-mo old Down infant
Posted By: while mom out preaching FV to nation. on 2008-09-02
In Reply to: geez. Teddy Kennedy left a woman to drown.... - sam
nm
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Just look at statistics on infant mortality rate for mothers without prenatal care - nm
z
Taking care of things that actually MATTER
nm
and start spending them taking care of those...
who no longer function because they don't need to hide it at all anymore and taking care of the emphysema and other problems it causes. Just my opinion. Like I said, I am clearly in the minority here, but I think it is a stupid idea to legalize pot.
Nope, we are "king of the world", and instead of taking care of our own people, we'll kick
with Korea, Iran, (but hey, remember when we harbored the Shah of Iran so he could get the best of care when he had cancer?? We were not worried about war atrocities by him back then!!), we are Big Brother, we can have all the nukes we want, you can't. We turn away from the Sudan and Darfur, the abominable atrocities, bloodshed, rape, torture, social cleansing, etc., because they are poor and we do not need anything from them. But boy, if we had some oil interests there, we would be there in a heartbeat! What a social conscience this nation has!
It's not "infanticide". It's not a developed infant -
And where is YOUR 'tolerance', Church-Lady? If you wish to chose birth instead of terminating a pregnancy, that's YOUR right. But you and your little blinker-wearin', bible-quoting friends have NO RIGHT WHATSOEVER to make that decision for anyone else. PERIOD.
Religious fanatics like yourself need to get over your inadequacies, throw away the 'crutch' you lean on so heavily, keep your noses out of others' personal lives, and get some of your own.
if the infant has been temporarily-alive-outside-the-womb
x
Oh, honey - compared to me, Maxine's an infant.
x
Funny thing about those infant mortality statistics.
Rather than my doing the homework for you, I'll let you scour around and see if you can identify the problems with comparative infant mortality statistics, saying only that they don't quite prove what a lot of people think or want them to prove.
((Hint: The problems start with the definitions of "prenatal care" and "infant mortality" - which are of course the main independent and dependent variables of interest, and only get worse from there.)
Obama blocked the Born Alive Infant Protection Act....sm
He said there was a law on the books in Illinois to protect these babies. In this article, he says there was a bill federally that he *would have* voted for. He killed the bill in Illinois by sitting on it as head of the Health and Human Services Committee. Which is it, Obama?
Excerpted from CNS News: Barack Obama is the most pro-abortion presidential candidate ever.
He is so pro-abortion that he refused as an Illinois state senator to support legislation to protect babies who survived late-term abortions...
...State and federal versions of this bill became an issue earlier this decade because of "induced labor abortion." This is usually performed on a baby with Down's Syndrome or another problem discovered on the cusp of viability. A doctor medicates the mother to cause premature labor. Babies surviving labor are left untreated to die.
Jill Stanek, who was a nurse at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Ill., testified in the U.S. Congress in 2000 and 2001 about how "induced labor abortions" were handled at her hospital.
"One night," she said in testimony entered into the Congressional Record, "a nursing co-worker was taking an aborted Down's Syndrome baby who was born alive to our Soiled Utility Room because his parents did not want to hold him, and she did not have the time to hold him. I couldn't bear the thought of this suffering child lying alone in a Soiled Utility Room, so I cradled and rocked him for the 45 minutes that he lived."
In 2001, Illinois state Sen. Patrick O'Malley introduced three bills to help such babies. One required a second physician to be present at the abortion to determine if a surviving baby was viable. Another gave the parents or a public guardian the right to sue to protect the baby's rights. A third, almost identical to the federal Born Alive Infant Protection Act President Bush signed in 2002, simply said a "homo sapiens" wholly emerged from his mother with a "beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord or definite movement of voluntary muscles" should be treated as a "'person,' 'human being,' 'child' and 'individual.'"
Stanek testified about these bills in the Illinois Senate Judiciary Committee, where Obama served. She told me this week he was "unfazed" by her story of holding the baby who survived an induced labor abortion.
On the Illinois Senate floor, Obama was the only senator to speak against the baby-protecting bills. He voted "present" on each, effectively the same as a "no."
"Number one," said Obama, explaining his reluctance to protect born infants, "whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by the Equal Protection Clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we're really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a -- a child, a 9-month old -- child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it -- it would essentially bar abortions, because the Equal Protection Clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an anti-abortion statute."
That June, the U.S. Senate voted 98-0 in favor of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act (although it failed to become law that year). Pro-abortion Democrats supported it because the following language was added: "Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being born alive as defined in this section."
Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer explained that with this language the "amendment certainly does not attack Roe v. Wade."
On July 18, 2002, Democratic Sen. Harry Reid called for the bill to be approved by unanimous consent. It was.
That same year, the Illinois version of the bill came up again. Obama voted "no."
In 2003, Democrats took control of the Illinois Senate. Obama became chairman of the Health and Human Services committee. The Born Alive Infant bill, now sponsored by Sen. Richard Winkel, was referred to this committee. Winkel also sponsored an amendment to make the Illinois bill identical to the federal law, adding -- word for word -- the language Barbara Boxer said protected Roe v. Wade. Obama still held the bill hostage in his committee, never calling a vote so it could be sent to the full senate.
A year later, when Republican U.S. senate candidate Alan Keyes challenged Obama in a debate for his opposition to the Born Alive Infant Bill, Obama said: "At the federal level there was a similar bill that passed because it had an amendment saying this does not encroach on Roe v. Wade. I would have voted for that bill."
In fact, Obama had personally killed exactly that bill. Source - CNS News
who could possibly care? War, financial ruin, health care needs.
nm
Well, I care. I also care about the constitution.nm
nm
I'm taking this to the top.
x
So you are taking up for the thugs
who are keeping the rescuers from help. You are mentally deranged....very mentally deranged.
doing taking tempature???
I get it now. You figure if you spout enough of your illiteracy on the Liberal board, you will dumb us down to your level.
Taking a survey...
Anyone have any thoughts on Romney being Mormon, will it hurt, help, doesn't matter....Did he convert to Mormonism; I don't remember his father being a Mormon.
Taking this response
x
I'm taking this to the top to enlist
nm
THis is not about taking anything away from kids...they
still have access to birth control...health departments, planned parenthood, clinics, any number of places. It is common knowledge. You hear about it on television on a daily basis, and television, movies, and the internet are where most kids get their information. And frankly, listen to it much more closely than to their parents. Throwing more federal money into any kind of sex ed and/or abstinence programs to me is a waste of money. That was the original question, did I think federal funds should be used for sex ed and abstinence programs.
No, in this culture we live in today, to remove contraception would be idiotic. Sex has been reduced to "expression," having one partner for life has disappeared, multiple partners are fine, yada yada...in that kind of culture to remove birth control would be nuts. Think what the abortion rate would be if that was done...good grief.
By education and programs that doesn't mean dispensing actual birth control. At many schools kids can get condoms. Nearly every health department in the country will dispense birth control and any planned parenthood place will, and that is not going to change.
If you want to reach kids, put those programs on the internet or introduce that kind of information to the shows the kids watch all the time. If you want the information to get to them, that is where it should be covered.
Thank you for taking the time to lay it all out
They will immediately go to Palin flaming because that's all they have. They can never refute any proof made on this board because they can't find any to refute with. Instead, they keep going round and round with the only thing they can remember from TV, Palin this, Palin that.
You don't see the republicans putting down Biden because they are decent people, unlike the dems on this board who refuse to see. AND, the dems on this board know that Biden LOVES McCain and they know in their hearts Biden can't stand Obama; he already said so.
God isn't the problem....taking God out of our
=
fabulous? When he is taking away a better one?
Letting Bush's tax cuts expire? Have you done the math?
profit taking
The rules have not changed yet and the hedge funds are still running loose, betting ups, betting downs. Everything they were doing to get us into this mess is still going on and still legal. Leverage is still high.
Taking money out
is actually a good idea, since there has been talk of bank runs under the current situation THAT IS NOW HAPPENING UNDER GEORGE W. BUSH.
For me, taking time every now and then
to look back and reflect on what we come from, where we're at, how far we've come and how far we have yet to go is a good thing. An Abe-Lincoln themed inauguration seems to be as appropriate of an occasion as any. I cannot pretend to understand how it feels to have the pain of slave ancestors' stories dragged up and thrust in my face, but I can speak to pain of a different sort.
The sight of hordes of GWTW southern belles all bedecked en masse in pools of pastel puke conjures up the shame I inherited from my own white ancestors. As a child, I felt plenty of it growing up in a southern metropolis in the 50s where cotton was still king and the vestiges of plantation life were still palpable and, at times, visceral. As a child, I lived in a wealthy community where some household "help" still stayed in "servants' quarters" behind the main residence (gag me). These were the days of segregation and separate but unequal when and the "N" word was still socially acceptable.
Enter MLK and the revolution of the 60s and 70s that turned our country up-side-down, thank you Jesus. The progress has been slow but steady since then, but the fact that I can still feel the stinging shame of where I came from and that you can still feel such outrage over a historical parade lets us both know that we have not yet reached the Promised Land.
When I watch the Azalea Trail Maids next Tuesday, they will not be marching toward me. They do not have the power to bring back the past and slap me in the face with it. Every step they take will be one step further away, back into a time we best not forget anytime soon, and I will be reminding myself that they are indeed GONE WITH THE WIND.
PS. I too am hoping for brisk winds that whip right past those pretty pastel pantaloons and chill them straight to the bone.
I appreciate you taking time out....(sm)
to respond to my post in such a reasonable and adult manner. Keep up the good work! You must be so proud.
Government is taking over
everything and they aren't even smart enough to run the government let alone every business in the US. I just cannot believe you Obamabotics find this okay. This is total government control going on here!!!! This is scary crap!
Thank you for taking the time
I appreciate your reasonable and well-composed argument. I do see how recent actions by this administration could be construed as a power grab, but what actions do think they should have taken instead?
Regarding the private sector argument, if a company accepts federal funding to bail them out of a financial crisis, are they still truly a private company, at least until the money is paid back? I do not agree with all the actions of this administration with respect to the financial crisis, but I do think they had to demonstrate that there are strings attached to receiving taxpayer money. (I may not agree with how they choose to about demonstrating that, however.)
So you are taking the word of
a guy who others consider a little off, Jolie's father? Not a good selection. Can you do better?
You said you had no problem taking on the Taliban...
there is no evidence THEY had anything to do with 9-11 either. Iraq had as much to do with 9-11 as the Taliban did. Both countries had Al Qaeda training camps. Both harbored Al Qaeda operatives. Saddam Hussein funded all kinds of terror operations, including bounties to families of suicide bombers. It was proven that a member of the Sadam Feyadeen met with Mohammed Atta prior to 9-11. Of course, they could have been discussing the weather. Saddam harbored the man who pushed Leon Klinghoffer and his wheelchair off the Achille Lauro...he harbored Al Zarqawi. What more do you need? Him on one of the planes? Your arguments make no sense. Basically, bottom line...you do not care if your protests hurt the effort in Iraq and thereby the soldiers fighting there..and as to soldiers dying for something they did not believe in...the vast majority are not of that mind. If you watched anything but CNN and listened to anything but liberal spin you would see the interview after interview after interview where soldiers do affirm their mission and affirm their disappointment in lack of support of some Americans.
As to Cindy Sheehan's son...other members of her family, her husband included...have said numerous times on the record that Casey Sheehan believed in the effort, and would be appalled at what his mother was doing. We do not make those things up...just because the liberal press does not report it does not mean it does not happen...oh...but I guess in YOUR world, that is true. Because you just pooh-pooh it and say that means nothing to me. Why is it that liberals are so arrogant? Why is it ALL about you? I have tried and tried to wrap my mind around that and just can't. I cannot understand what it is that makes someone disregard the lives and the mission of our military in harm's way just so they can hold a sign and call attention to THEMselves. There is nothing noble about that. The noble ones are the ones in Iraq. How profoundly sad that you cannot see that...in one breath okay to fight the Taliban, in the other just throw Iraq and our boys and girls there to the dogs. How twisted is that...sigh. So...go on about your protesting. Only call a spade a spade. It is about YOU...and making yourself feel good. It is not, nor has it ever been, for anyone else.
Thanks for taking up for me Brunson, the problem is SM
I didn't post any of these posts. Someone is playing a stupid joke and not a very funny one. However, since Lurker seems content to know me so well, I am not sure who got the real butt of the joke ;)
taking things out of context
I agree that it's not fair to take Michelle Obama's statements out of context, but then you turn around and take Cindy McCain's problem out of context. I say leave both wives alone. I know what Cindy did was illegal, so it's kind of apples and oranges, but she's worked through her recovery and worked it out with the law, so I don't think she needs to be beat over the head with it the rest of her life.
I'm taking my response to a new thread
nm
Not interested in taking this off task.
nm
All the while, his supporters taking notes
X
Why do you "whiners" think that taking money from
nm
oh, REALLY? So snipers or bombs taking out
In many ways, Christianity is even worse than Islam. And it's disgusting to see the US has been so thoroughly infested with it.
Taking a rest today.
Yes, you go ahead. Take a rest. Freedom of speech.
Taking from Peter to pay Paul.....
Well, h@ll........I suppose with this glorious reform package of Obama's, I should just go sit under a bridge, kiss my hard working years goodbye. Obama will kill this society. My husband has also worked his butt off since he was 12 years old and he definitely does not owe anyone his money. They can get off their butts and shovel dirt, dig ditches, work in a powder factory, haul hay, move furniture, dig sewages, whatever. WORK FOR A CHANGE! Live within their means. My husband did it. They wanna go to college, do like us, work your butt off and pay for your college education. Quit whining!!!
Even those families at the low end of the income bracket will be paying dearly in taxes, more than now, and they actually think they will be getting a break. Tax credits are NOT tax cuts.
Socialists are whining, sniveling, moaning, groaning....
You wanna see free money given to people who DO NOT pay taxes? If you don't contribute, don't expect anything else.
GP was taking issue with the stereotype
characterize all poor people as freeloaders in the linked post. In the current post, she is addressing an entirely different subject...corporate welfare.
I thank you for taking the time to try to explain
Difference in opinion is what makes horse races. I respect your opinion that the b/c is not authentic, I ask that you respect my opinion that it is.
Irregardless, I think the mayhem that would result in Obama not being inaugurated far outweighs his becoming president even IF his b/c should prove to be inaccurate. After all, we have the Congress to keep things in check although there is little comfort for me in THAT. I doubt the electoral college would dare defy the will of the people either and I would imagine all of them are a bucket full of crooks the same as all congress and other politicians.
I fear that Bush will find a reason to declare martial law and I will continue to fear that until he is OUT OF THERE. Would we really want to see that happen? Can you possibly imagine the bedlam at this 11th hour if we woke up and had no president elect? Please, I ask all of you who are trying to make this happen to stop and think what would be the result if you "win."
I did not want to see either Obama or McCain elected nor did I want to see Hillary elected or any of the other candidates. It's a fine kettle of fish we find ourselves in in any event.
And as a final note, I have no confidence in our crooky Supreme Court either. Look how THEY got in their positions.
Are you taking about Stevens in Alaska?
Their thought is if he's voted in and goes to prison, they'll be able to hold a special election and put someone else in or something like that.
I thought it was ridiculous.
Thank you for taking the time to post this!! :-)
awesome post
I've been taking the package apart.
I see no jobs for this area.
In fact, 2 years ago, they turned a whole mountain into windmills. Who has those jobs? The company that put them there. Their guys come from another state to maintain and repair them. No locals are employed by that company. Doesn't make sense but that's the way they do it.
So you think government officials taking a pay
solve the issue of $2 trillion dollars worth of toxic paper held by the our financial institutions and stop the hemorrhaging of 650,000 job losses per month? Will that really restart the flow of credit to businesses and put people back to work? Will government officials taking a pay cut restore the million and billion dollar budget deficits faced by the states?
I just finished taking a tax class --
The instructor never lets anything be an open book test in our other classes, but the tax class is because it is some complex and confusing that even doing just the basics you cannot get it all in your head.
It is CRAZY!!!
Obama is taking our money... you would be
nm
Thanks for taking the time to post
Sorry, forgot to add that. Have a good afternoon.
taking back our country
So, most of us agree that Obama should not be in office for another term. As well, most of want our country back. How do we, as Americans, do this? Contacting our representatives or senators is not the answer, since they are "in bed" with each other. There must be a way.
right on, it is about justice, not about taking sides!...nm
nm
Taking a course on common sense
nm
Well, of course you have no problem taking welfare from a communist. sm
That's your problem. You believe people should get something for nothing. You believe in support of the masses equally, i.e., socialism where everyone is equally poor but that's okay. I have no problem believing you would think that was okay. He is also virulently anti-American, but then so is the left. Perfect match!
|
