Friends of Akin, a question for you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No it doesn't make me Akin's friend. Rape is HORRIBLE. Unspeakably horrible. But IF you believe that the baby conceived...even in the horror of rape...is a human being, how can you justify ending the life of that baby. The baby didn't commit rape. Ending the baby's life doesn't punish the rapist. I agree that it would be horrible to carry a rapist's baby, and that's something I wouldn't wish on anyone, but the alternative is killing an innocent child.

So you're willing to transform rape from a few horrible minutes/hours into a nine-month living nightmare?

I do not get that. And if it was you or your daughter, I think you'd change your mind in a nanosecond.

Well, first, I don't think the horror of being raped is just over after a few minutes/hours. But I understand your point. I agree that it is a terrible situation. (that's too mild, but I can't think of a more appropriate word than terrible), and a continuation of the suffering of a woman who has suffered, but I honestly believe the alternative is killing an innocent child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
God dammit, I do NOT believe that the embryo is a human being!!!!! The beliefs of you, Akin, and your Aunt Fanny have NO bearing here! Apply your beliefs to YOUR uterus and its contents, NOT. MINE. And not anyone who is not YOU.

So if I shoot someone because I don't believe they are a human being, does that make it ok?

If a woman drowns her 3 month old because she says they aren't a human being, is that ok?

Why do the beliefs of others matter in those situations but not in the case of abortion?

No, because the three month old and others are not dependent upon a single individual who may or may not want it around for its existence. Others can take over for the parent of the newborn. No one can take over for the pregnant woman. These are not opinions, these are facts. It is also a fact that, with our current technology, the embryo cannot exist without her body. It should not exist without her consent. A popular sci fi theme involves uterine replicators, where an embryo can be gestated in a machine. Were that technology available, the debate would necessarily change. But as long as the meeting of two cells requires the body of an individual to reach its potential personhood, that individual must be in control.

[Anonymous]

Two wrongs don't make a right. Don't kill the child take away govt resources given to illegal immigrants and shower them on children and mothers of rape( after conviction of course).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Two wrongs don't make a right. Don't kill the child take away govt resources given to illegal immigrants and shower them on children and mothers of rape( after conviction of course).

Wow. So many things wrong with that post, I don't know where to begin.

1. It's not a child, it's a bunch of cells. In cases of rape, women tend to abort pretty early on.
2. Resources given to illegal immigrants include health care and education. I like to think we're civilized enough not to turn people away from hospitals and schools just because they don't have their papers in order.
3. I would love to see Fox News characterize a government program that aims to 'shower' anything (other than disdain) on children and mothers
4. "After conviction of course"????? Do you know how many rape cases are ever reported, forget about successfully prosecuted?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Two wrongs don't make a right. Don't kill the child take away govt resources given to illegal immigrants and shower them on children and mothers of rape( after conviction of course).

The only way a Republican is going to shower them with money is if we dress the mother up like a banker or oil exec, in which case we'll have to buy her a helmet to protect her from flying duffel bags full of cash.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Okay, since there are so many arguments against the details of OP's post, let's distill this down.

Romney/Ryan have won the November 2012 election and in January are sworn in. The Republicans have won enough swing states that they now have both a Senate and House majority. In the first 6 weeks, they push through a storm of bills that defund any organization that supports abortion, including PP. Much like DOMA, the Republicans force through a Defense of Children Act and DOCA is the law of the land making abortions illegal. The Republicans have overturned ACA and it no longer requires people to have insurance. A young black woman who works as a waitress in a small diner, making just enough to pay her rent, utilities and food gets pregnant. She finds out that the child has a birth defect that will be costly for medical coverage, but she has no medical insurance coverage because she cannot afford it. She makes just over the poverty level, so is not eligible for Medicaid. Due to complications, she has to take two weeks off to have the baby. She doesn't get paid. She no longer has enough to pay her rent, let alone medical bills.

What is she supposed to do? If she can make it there, she can eat in a soup kitchen, but for the 2 weeks, she's on bedrest so can't take the bus to get to the soup kitchen. And she doesn't have bus fare anyways. But she's not allowed to abort the baby, she is about to be evicted because she cannot pay her rent and she has no means of child support, so even if she could go back to work, she has no one to take care of her child and has to stay home to care for the baby.

I would walk my a** to one of the European Embassies in DC and apply for asylum in France/Germany/Netherlands/Denmark/Sweden etc. If all of the above scenarios happen, then I'm confident I would be eligible for asylum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who are "friends of Akin?" You can be staunch pro-life and think that Akin is a complete douche who should be out of the race.

I can't respond to your hypothetical because it is just hypothetical. To think there will be a perfect storm where all this happens at once is out of the realm of possibility.

I'm in total agreement with what you've written. Personally, I don't know anyone who could support him.

[Anonymous]

Adoption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I can't respond to your hypothetical because it is just hypothetical. To think there will be a perfect storm where all this happens at once is out of the realm of possibility.

You are completely out of touch with the real world. This IS happening all the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I am sure the working poor, who has little or no job flexibility and no health insurance do get pregnant and have complications. Abortion is still legal, Planned Parenthood is still funded and there is still publicly funded health care. I just don't see all of those going away overnight even if Akin ( you know he isn't running for President right? Romney doesn't have the same view as Akin) wins.

isn't the point that it wouldn't be if the Tea party has its way this election?
Plus, this is happening county by county, state by state. If you're poor, without reliable transportation, traveling for hours and back (with med expenses and overnight stay) isn't going to happen easily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here. First, I don't think all abortion should be illegal. But the OP's post is pretty silly. It assumes that it's the government's responsibility to provide not just a safety net (which is fine, and I have not heard anyone lobbying to remove) but everything for the kid-- food, childcare, housing, etc.
In the OP's scenario, replace "unwanted pregnant" with "have a six month old and it's so much harder than I thought" and the mom can't make ends meet. Is the solution still to end the life of the child? If no, why not? How is having an unwanted infant different from having an unwanted fetus or embryo? You will say because someone else can care for the child, but that's no different from giving birth then relinquishing the child.

Anyway, the answer would be, what people did before Obamacare (which is brand new, so I'm not sure why people act like not having it is taking away some long-standing right): get help from charities and friends/family, and go on Welfare/kids on Medicaid. I'm not saying this is ideal at all. But it is not starving to death in the street.

It's not silly at all, and quite simple. Just use logical thinking and a bit of imagination.
A six month-old you can put up for adoption, or place in the care of family (or other caretakers) while you're at your job. You can still go to work, get a paycheck to support your family and pay rent.
If you're pregnant, high-risk, and cannot get out of bed, you can't get paid.

FYI, there's a precedent for mandating women to stay on bed rest- Pregnant Woman Fights Court-Ordered Bed Rest
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/florida-court-orders-pregnant-woman-bed-rest-medical/story?id=9561460#.UDpy5qmPX0w

[Anonymous]

They can have my uterus when they pry it from my cold, dead thighs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gr_OpFxCx-A

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Adoption.

How many children have you adopted?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here. First, I don't think all abortion should be illegal. But the OP's post is pretty silly. It assumes that it's the government's responsibility to provide not just a safety net (which is fine, and I have not heard anyone lobbying to remove) but everything for the kid-- food, childcare, housing, etc.
In the OP's scenario, replace "unwanted pregnant" with "have a six month old and it's so much harder than I thought" and the mom can't make ends meet. Is the solution still to end the life of the child? If no, why not? How is having an unwanted infant different from having an unwanted fetus or embryo? You will say because someone else can care for the child, but that's no different from giving birth then relinquishing the child.

Anyway, the answer would be, what people did before Obamacare (which is brand new, so I'm not sure why people act like not having it is taking away some long-standing right): get help from charities and friends/family, and go on Welfare/kids on Medicaid. I'm not saying this is ideal at all. But it is not starving to death in the street.

Don't be stupid. You sound like a man. If someone can't take care of thier 6 month or 6 year or 16 year old, they can give it up. It's called adoption or foster care.

If you have a fetus growing inside you that you don't want in your body, there is only one way to get it out (if you don't want to wait for it to grow into a baby and be born). Abortion. Hsving an unwanted fetus, an unwanted ANYTHING growing INSIDE your body is absolutely, a thousand percent different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are "friends of Akin?" You can be staunch pro-life and think that Akin is a complete douche who should be out of the race.

I can't respond to your hypothetical because it is just hypothetical. To think there will be a perfect storm where all this happens at once is out of the realm of possibility.

I'm in total agreement with what you've written. Personally, I don't know anyone who could support him. [/quotehttps://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/524436_250081521779901_562314304_n.jpg.[/img]