I wish I could really believe it but these are the latest poll and other results in states that matter:
Poll: Romney grabs lead in Wisconsin
Poll shocker: Romney up double-digits in Florida
Poll: Ryan bounce gives Romney the lead in Mich.
Romney raising cash from traditionally Dem cities
Yet some rogue fool running for the Senate in Missouri as a Republican can make all the difference in the world.
Melbourne Cup Day. The one day of the year Australia isn’t a complete fascist shit hole.
Infidel Tiger
22 Aug 12 at 1:28 pm
Romney is looking good but we can’t afford to be derailed by fringe religious cranks like Todd Akin. They must run that woman Palin endorsed, even as an independent if necessary.
Fisky
22 Aug 12 at 1:40 pm
Reason.com gives us an nice summary of the Kates Klassic analysis:
http://reason.com/archives/2012/08/20/the-wrong-side-absolutely-must-not-win
Daniel Barnes
22 Aug 12 at 1:43 pm
Reason backed Obama in 2008. In a righteous world they’d all be washing windscreens at traffic lights.
Infidel Tiger
22 Aug 12 at 1:46 pm
It is not only the Moron from Missouri, the Republican Policy Committee has just re-affirmed its opposition to abortion in any circumstances, including rape (‘legitimate’ or not) and incest.
I just don’t understand why they keep shooting themselves in both feet over this issue. The majority of women (irrespective of their political convictions) think that they are dickheads.
If these idiots could become pregnant, as many a dunny wall has accurately mentioned, abortion would be a sacrament.
I had a frisson of hope when the VeeP candidate seemed to be a genuine conservative. But no, it seems that he has been involved in moves to force women to undergo unwanted pregnancies – something he will never have to experience – in the past.
I rarely agree with ex-Yank Kristina Keneally, but her piece in today’s Tele is spot on. Voluntary voting has sent California into bankruptcy, via referenda which propose more benefits and less taxes – although that’s not the only reason. Rabid anti-abortionists have crippled the Republican Party for decades, in a way that they could not do in Australia.
If only the Republicans were more interested in fiscal discipline and less interested in bedroom discipline.
johanna
22 Aug 12 at 1:47 pm
Abortion is now opposed by a majority of Americans.
Nonsense. Here again we see the insecurity of the conservative commentariat. ‘Oh noes – we’ve invited our betters to the house and our fourth cousin twice removed farted at the table. How embarrassment.’
Get a grip.
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 2:10 pm
By contrast to the Demoncrats who have been “crippled” to your words by supporting the banning of businesses selling chicken from locations in Chicago, Boston and SF for not following strict “marriage discipline”…
Token
22 Aug 12 at 2:12 pm
Abortion has nothing to do with bedrooms, by the way.
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 2:14 pm
No-one gives arats patooty about abortion other than a few cranks
Rococo Liberal
22 Aug 12 at 2:22 pm
Hi, fellas!
Your views on abortion are welcome, just as mine on circumcision undoubtedly are.
Here’s the thing. I’ll permit you to keep your foreskins, and you can fuck off with your diktats about my body.
Cheers
johanna
johanna
22 Aug 12 at 2:25 pm
Most Americans oppose abortion.
Only a few cranks don’t care about it nowadays.
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 2:26 pm
Joanna is comparing a baby with a foreskin.
Fail.
Try again.
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 2:27 pm
We don’t care what you do to your body, but please refrain from murdering any kids okay?
Infidel Tiger
22 Aug 12 at 2:27 pm
The Democrats would LOVE to fight an election on abortion. LOVE LOVE LOVE.
m0nty
22 Aug 12 at 2:32 pm
Obama’s contraception mandate will likely further reduce abortions. Ironic.
steve from brisbane
22 Aug 12 at 2:35 pm
I don’t think it is as simple as whether people oppose or support Abortion.
If you asked whether people opposed abortion under all circumstances (including the circumstances Johanna describes) then you would get a different answer.
I am not sure whether there is that many secular people who oppose Abortion in the first weeks of pregnancy or in other circumstances described by Johanna.
While I personally have a problem with late term abortion (& yes I know the dividing line can be arbitary), I also have a basic liberatain problem with rules that are developed out of a religious world view being imposed on others that don’t share that religious belief.
It is just an unnecessary extreme position (& not a liberatain one) that alienates many secular people who would otherwise support the GOP
Richard D
22 Aug 12 at 2:36 pm
“Abortion is now opposed by a majority of Americans.”
What is the basis for this belief? The last Gallup poll (May this year) shows the percentages who think abortion should be legal under any circumstances, legal under certain circumstances, or illegal in all circumstances, are 25, 52, and 20 respectively. Those numbers haven’t moved more than about 5 points in any direction since 1975, when Gallup first started asking the question.
Jarrah
22 Aug 12 at 2:37 pm
johanna thinks she can murder another human life and all men have no right to oppose it.
Stupid bitch.
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 2:47 pm
The Akin issue in reality has nothing to do with abortion.
His intransigence means he’s the enemy of Pro-Life.
And apart from holding nutty beliefs, Akins is really really stupid, selfish and self-serving
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 2:51 pm
Johanna, there are both libertarians and conservatives at this site. Only conservatives want to compel women to become involuntary incubators.
The libertarians are the polite ones who agree with you.
DavidLeyonhjelm
22 Aug 12 at 2:54 pm
The caring face of neo-conservatism.
m0nty
22 Aug 12 at 2:55 pm
So Ron Paul isn’t a libertarian David, you fuckwit?
So all libertarians think men have no right to express an opinion on abortion, you condescending dick?
You are a disgrace to libertarianism, you utter fuckwit.
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 2:58 pm
Yes the question is, do you want a crank running for Senate? That is the key here.
Fisky
22 Aug 12 at 2:58 pm
No James, you are wrong.
He has done invaluable work for the LDP.
He is just old and crusty like you.
.
22 Aug 12 at 3:03 pm
I actually disagree Fisky.
The issue is Akins cannot win.
That’s reality.
Even if the GOP gave him $20 million to fund his campaign.
Akins would have won if he had hidden in his basement and not done a single media interview but he did a single interview and destroyed his candidacy.
It’s not difficult.
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 3:04 pm
????????
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 3:04 pm
I don’t get what johanna is arguing.
Is she saying she should have a right to an abortion at any time under any circumstances, and those who don’t agree can have part of their dick cut off, and if it’s already done, she can cut more off?
People argue against circumcision and abortion from the same preface – the rights of those who can’t express themselves.
R.L. is correct.
Safe, legal and rare – and let’s not conflate issues.
.
22 Aug 12 at 3:07 pm
There is Ron Paul and Clinton’s position on abortion that I 100% agree with. I also oppose abortion and it’s prohibition.
I think Joanna has a point that it’s her body and she can also choose what she does with it. However if a woman chooses not to carry a kid while the man wants it, then I think the right libertarian position should be that he’s compensated for losing the kid (which would have 50% of his DNA).
JC
22 Aug 12 at 3:09 pm
So anti-abortionists have no moral grounds to oppose abortion because it’s johanna’s body?
Presumably on that reckoning we can’t say anything if johanna murders her mother cos it’s johanna’s mother?
Or on JC’s rationale the baby 10 mins prenatal can be killed because it’s inside johanna’s body but it can’t be killed 10 minutes post natal because it’s outside johanna’s body?
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 3:15 pm
And JC, Ron Paul and Bill Clinton have very different positions on abortion
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 3:16 pm
Compensated? Does this fall under property rights, or tort, or what?
m0nty
22 Aug 12 at 3:17 pm
100,000+ / year in Australia.
Too rare, not rare enough or well done dot?
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 3:19 pm
Far too many James.
You wouldn’t entirely ban it though.
I know you agree with me that one abortion is too many, so a reduction isn’t an improvement.
Abortions shouldn’t be subsidised. It is like the reverse of what was said before – religious people shouldn’t subsidise choices they don’t agree with. The can conscientiously object to military service but are forced to subsidise abortions.
.
22 Aug 12 at 3:23 pm
“Voluntary voting has sent California into bankruptcy, via referenda which propose more benefits and less taxes”
@johanna – California is on the verge of bankruptcy because it was run by an Austrian actor who blew billions on pie in the sky green schemes.
That has nothing to do with voluntary voting, but politicians once again spending money badly.
“If these idiots could become pregnant…abortion would be a sacrament.”
Sorry johanna, that’s sexist garbage. There are lots of Christian women who would rather die than have an abortion – its a moral issue.
(for the record I’m an athiest who supports the right to choose in a free society)
james
22 Aug 12 at 3:23 pm
Like I said, libertarians are polite. You’re a conservative. You’re also a cnut, but you make that obvious.
DavidLeyonhjelm
22 Aug 12 at 3:26 pm
JC,
I think that a man could only rightfully sue in a planned pregnancy, or an unplanned one where it was decided where the couple, estranged or not, would keep the child.
.
22 Aug 12 at 3:27 pm
I also have a basic liberatain problem with rules that are developed out of a religious world view being imposed on others that don’t share that religious belief.
No, the view that the foetus is an individual human being is also scientific, not only religious. It’s certainly distinct from the women as the foetus has it’s own DNA.
Only conservatives want to compel women to become involuntary incubators.
Again, no. Whether they ‘volunteer’ or not is beside the point. Most woman ‘volunteer’ by engaging in an activity that leads to pregnancy, and those that haven’t are not entitled to commit a wrong against the unborn child because they have been wronged themselves.
But the problem for the fiscal conservatives-social liberal is that the latter destroys the former, and this is as clear as night follows day.
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 3:28 pm
Well ideally I would but I’m practical.
That will never happen.
The US federal government can’t ban abortion anyway.
They can’t.
They can only approve presidential appointees to the SCOTUS (which may in time over-turn RoeVWade) and stop public funding of abortion
I’m actually a 100% with Ron Paul on this.
It’s state rights issue not a SCOTUS or federal government issue.
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 3:30 pm
So you’re a polite pasive-aggressive dickhead.
Worse still you are stupid, David.
Offensively so.
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 3:32 pm
Well, we could go through all the arguments for the umpteenth time, but apart from saying that anyone who calls themselves a libertarian and who would force a woman to bear a child, however conceived, is a liar and a fool, there is not much to add.
It’s pretty straightfoward. Every poll in the Western world shows that women (that would be the people who actually get pregnant) overwhelmingly support the right to abortion. So, you blokes who care so much should wrap a bit of Glad Wrap around it and do something about the irresponsible sperm donors of all stripes in your midst.
My point is that the Moron from Missouri and, it now turns out, the Great White Hope VeeP, may cost the Republicans the election. The weird fixation of a minority on this issue will alienate millions of potential voters – mostly women.
When the Republican Policy Committee decides to oppose abortion even in cases of rape or incest, they have well and truly lost touch with the mainstream. I just wish they were as hard-line on agricultural subsidies or the excesses of the EPA. But, like the Greens, cheap symbolism seems to have overtaken considered policy.
johanna
22 Aug 12 at 3:33 pm
“you can fuck off with your diktats about my body”
When does a baby change from being part of MY body to being its own entity? I would establish my arbitrary line, just before a baby achieves consciouness which from memory is around 20 weeks.
Also, painting libertarians as pro-choice ignores the fact that libertarians would protect the right of the baby as well but I guess it depends on what stage they think it is a “baby”.
Adam Diver
22 Aug 12 at 3:34 pm
Whatever you say, James. I mean, you prove your intelligence here every day. Not.
DavidLeyonhjelm
22 Aug 12 at 3:35 pm
Quite right Johanna. It is weird, it is a fixation, and it is a minority (even among men). And it’s one American characteristic I’m very glad we’ve never imported into Australia.
DavidLeyonhjelm
22 Aug 12 at 3:37 pm
So Ron Paul is a liar and a fool according to johanna.
johanna’s only argument is that if we disagree with her we’re evil or stupid or both.
johanna, ironically the only evil stupid person expressing woefully inane ‘arguments’ in support their position is you.
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 3:37 pm
Translation of David’s ‘position’:
“Quite right johanna. My ‘intellectual’ argument is that people who disagree with me are ‘weird’.
Because I’m as morally and as intellectually bankrupt as you are”
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 3:40 pm
Johanna
Get a freaking grip. Everyone knows the GOP’s position on da abortion. Romney is not going to lose the election because of that idiot Akin. He’s will lose it if he is unable to continue to convince the public he will do a better job.
Why don’t you gals stick the glad rap you know where. It’s takes two to tango you doofus and gals aren’t entitely blameless in the pregnancy stakes.. This isn’t a site where females are treated with kid gloves because they squat on the toilet instead of standing up at the urinal.
Stop being so fucking offensively rude, you moron. If you’re suffering from penis envy go buy yourself a plastic one and wear it.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 3:42 pm
Romney will lose if independents desert the GOP. And there are a lot of women, including the famous soccer mums, among them. I’ll warrant very few of them have any time for this hard line anti-abortion stuff.
Johanna makes a valid point.
DavidLeyonhjelm
22 Aug 12 at 3:47 pm
Dot,
People like Johanna use the argument that it’s their body. That’s fine I’m, okay with that. However the kid is 50% the man’s.
If she wants to hoover it out and he doesn’t he deserves fucking compensation.. Courts are very good at assessing what that would be.
I’m fucking sick with this sort of shit being a one way street with men getting clobbered whether its this stuff or divorce.
Woman need to be treated as responsible adults too or we could always go back to the Roman system of treating them as perpetual minors, which to be honest carries some merit.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 3:49 pm
Fisky is absolutely right about the Santorum-Akin ideological nexus.
In fact, if Santorum had been nominated, I expect we’d see a Santorum/Akin ticket on the strength of the latter’s comments alone.
Oh come on
22 Aug 12 at 3:50 pm
Do you really want to play this game? Close your fuckin’ legs.
.
22 Aug 12 at 3:52 pm
David
That’s true. What can Romney do though other than what he’s done already. He’s disavowed the stupid prick in the most direct way possible. He’s indicated his displeasure and the GOP election committee has said they will not throw one read cent into his election campaign.
That’s all they can do. If the leftwing hate groups want to make this into a bigger issue and attempt to attack Romney I’m sure that no matter what he says, it won’t stop them.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 3:53 pm
Richard D
22 Aug 12 at 3:55 pm
If inheriting DNA gives “ownership”, parents cannot claim 100%.
The body in which the kid is located belongs 100% to the woman. It’s not like an egg incubator.
DavidLeyonhjelm
22 Aug 12 at 3:55 pm
OCO
But we haven’t seen that ticket. We saw the GOP primary voters tick Romney’s name at the primaries and that’s all that matters.
Romney won and no matter what the Administration and its allied leftwing hate groups say, a decent candidate was chosen as the candidate in November who will most likely win.
So much for GOP extremism.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 3:57 pm
johanna’s only ‘valid’ point and yours is wishy-washy.
The GOP do not support Akin or his insane views.
Akin is a moron and he can now only lose the safest Senate-flip-to-GOP seat up for a vote this November.
The issue isn’t abortion; the issue is Akins’ offensiveness being reasoned from pseudo-science.
The other issue is his sheer stupidity.
And now his small-mindedness, selfishness and self-centredness
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 3:57 pm
Those backing laws to make some or all abortions illegal…
ABC News/Washington Post Poll:
80 percent.
Time Poll:
54 percent.
Gallup Poll:
72 percent.
————————————-
CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll:
(Those opposing federal funding of all and any abortions:
61 percent.
————————————-
Pew Research Center:
78 percent.
CBS News Poll:
62 percent.
Virginia Commonwealth University Life Sciences Survey:
59 percent.
Gallup Poll (morally wrong):
50 percent (versus 38 percent).
http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 3:59 pm
It would be difficult to find a more concise summation of JC: whiny, childish, profanity-laced abuse. Hoist yourself with that petard, JC.
m0nty
22 Aug 12 at 4:00 pm
David,
Why can’t/shouldn’t a man (be able to) sue for the unagreed to termination of a planned pregnancy?
.
22 Aug 12 at 4:00 pm
David
It is an incubator. That’s what the womb is.
I’m not saying a woman has no right to abort the kid. However the man also has a right to comp if he’s against that decision. It’s the fair thing all round.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 4:01 pm
Wow that is offensively stupid.
Oco’s obviously straining for an argument.
Have you been terribly bored Oco?
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 4:02 pm
No.
Because they were liars.
.
22 Aug 12 at 4:02 pm
Well, we could go through all the arguments for the umpteenth time, but apart from saying that anyone who calls themselves a libertarian and who would force a woman to bear a child, however conceived, is a liar and a fool, there is not much to add.
Is that your argument?
My point is that the Moron from Missouri and, it now turns out, the Great White Hope VeeP,
Wow. We have someone whose now sliming Ryan with Akin. johanna we can only conclude is a ‘left-libertarian’ and Dem.
When the Republican Policy Committee decides to oppose abortion even in cases of rape or incest,
Silent, of course, on Obama’s support for leaving a child to die when it survives an induced abortion.
women (that would be the people who actually get pregnant) overwhelmingly support the right to abortion.
Yes, a slave-owners generally supported the right to own slaves.
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 4:02 pm
Monst
Get to the gym and stop wasting pixels in a conversation you have no reason to be involved in. We know your position anyways, so fuck off.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 4:03 pm
“People like Johanna use the argument that it’s their body. That’s fine I’m, okay with that. However the kid is 50% the man’s.
I’m fucking sick with this sort of shit being a one way street with men getting clobbered whether its this stuff or divorce.”
I’ve always thought that its strange that a guy has no say in whether an abortion takes place, but also has no say when it comes to child support. So 100% legal responsibility, 0% legal rights…
As a lawyer once told me – “if you know what’s good for you, you’ll keep your DNA to yourself…”
james
22 Aug 12 at 4:04 pm
what about eptopic pregnancies?
harrys on the boat
22 Aug 12 at 4:05 pm
I’m a big believer in property rights, but neither a foetus not a woman’s uterus are property. The male contribution was DNA, that’s it.
There may be circumstances in which a man and woman have agreed to produce a child, in which the man may argue he has a say about whether to terminate it. (I’m not generally in favour of termination once the child is capable of independent life outside the uterus, by the way.) But that’s more likely to be an implied contract.
DavidLeyonhjelm
22 Aug 12 at 4:05 pm
Watching people argue about abortion is as funny and frustrating as ever. The key point, which neither side of the debate seems willing to address square on, is whether or not a foetus is a person.
If a foetus is a person, then abortion is the morally reprehensible killing of one human for the convenience of another. OTOH, if the foetus is not a person, then abortion is a personal health issue and the sole decision of the woman concerned.
Both sides assume the answer to this question (in opposite directions), without ever openly admitting that their argument depends on the answer.
So, somewhere between a multi-cell blastula and birth, it stops being “a foetus” and becomes “a baby”. Now draw the line.
Cato the Elder
22 Aug 12 at 4:08 pm
Nobody will be talking about Akin in ten days.
The conservative commentariat in America are womanish hysterics.
I’d love to see an attempt made to link him to Ryan or Romney. Not recommended
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 4:10 pm
Yep exactly my fucking point. It’s really like the perpetual minor principle only that the man gets the hit on everything.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 4:11 pm
I’d ban them if I could.
Infidel Tiger
22 Aug 12 at 4:11 pm
You’re right, that’s the key to the debate. A baby has rights as an individual, in addition to the mother. A 16 cell foetus does not.
I know it’s not precise, but I draw the line at the capacity for independent life. It’s dependent on technology, but roughly 20 odd weeks.
DavidLeyonhjelm
22 Aug 12 at 4:11 pm
Please no more abortion debates. The site will explode.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 4:12 pm
Good point OCO. Santorum’s quixotic campaign could have become even more quixotic with Akin on the ticket, only extending Obama’s margin of victory. And that would have been bad for the economy and for families. We really dodged a bullet there.
Fisky
22 Aug 12 at 4:12 pm
The body in which the kid is located belongs 100% to the woman.
Yes, the unborn child belongs to the mother and father in the sense that s/he is in their custody, that is why both the mother and father are duty-bound to protect their child, whether born or unborn. And that is why it is outrageous for either the mother or father to do anything to deliberately harm or destroy their child.
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 4:12 pm
I’m with CL on this.
What I meant in my ealrier post was that only cranks bang on about ‘choice’ and really think that abortion is an election winning or losing issue.
Abortion is like gay marriage, one of those issues that excites extremist lefties, who are all going to vote Democrat anyway. It is not an issue that is going to rile up independents either way. The state of the US ecnomy and the statist urges of Obama are the issues that are important here.
Rococo Liberal
22 Aug 12 at 4:13 pm
Why is that the ‘key’ point’?
It’s not.
But to address the issue often multiparous woman will tell you that their different babes in utero have had different personalities.
Who gets to decide when the human life becomes a person?
Obama’s HHS and Sec Sibelius?
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 4:13 pm
the baby has a right to life like anyone else.
candy
22 Aug 12 at 4:14 pm
I’ve heard their really freaking painful. As IT said ban them.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 4:14 pm
You’re an expert in unplanned pregnancy now?
m0nty
22 Aug 12 at 4:14 pm
The answer is yes. Incredible as it may seem, it’s not an aardvark.
Human life begins at conception.
‘Personhood’ – invented as a distraction by anti-science obscurantists – has nothing to do with it. Many people in comas, suffering from dementia, or otherwise catatonic through illness and self-abuse are no longer ‘persons’ either, in their sense.
Explain why they shouldn’t be killed too.
Go!
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 4:14 pm
Not eager to see abortions of “nearly people” but shit scared of drivng women to amateurs. Awful dilemma. There can be no good answer. Only a least bad one.
whalehunt fun
22 Aug 12 at 4:15 pm
RL
That fucking idiot running for the senate may cost the GOP the majority in the senate. It shouldn’t be totally dismissed and unimportant. It is.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 4:16 pm
Translation of Fisky’s latest dross:
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 4:17 pm
Perfectly expressed Candy.
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 4:18 pm
Yes, as a matter of fact. Our first kid wasn’t exactly on my to do list that freaking year, Monster.
So I’m more of an expert than you are seeing you’re still a virgin.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 4:18 pm
I also have a basic liberatain problem with rules that are developed out of a religious world view being imposed on others that don’t share that religious belief.
Every poll in the Western world shows that women (that would be the people who actually get pregnant) overwhelmingly support the right to abortion.
Well, I’m a woman, so maybe Johanna will think I have a right to an opinion on this.
First up – EVERYONE HAS A RELIGIOUS BELIEF. You can call it a worldview, a perspective, a belief system … but whatever you want to call it, you hold presuppositions about right and wrong.
Johanna’s point seems to be that if the majority of women think it’s okay to kill an unborn baby then it is. Is that your standard Johanna – majority morals? Always?
Do we hold that a child should die for the sins of his/her father? Do we not teach our kids about the birds and the bees anymore? Do people not know that sexual intercourse may well lead to pregnancy? Should we really discriminate against someone based on their size?
By what standard do we decide these issues? Your standard, your authority is your religion/worldview/whatever-you-want-to-call-it. And we are always imposing those views as a society. At the moment, we still think it’s wrong to murder (some people), to break a contract, to cheat on an exam. These are religious/moral/worldview issues – not everyone agrees with them. We think our society works better when these moral codes are enforced.
(FWIW, I would describe myself as a Christian Libertarian – I certainly seem to want a much smaller government/fewer laws than a lot of Catallaxians)
Ellen of Tasmania
22 Aug 12 at 4:19 pm
Apparently a candidate for political office can’t be disendorsed in the US as they can be here. Too bad.
Viva
22 Aug 12 at 4:19 pm
I despise that song James. Whenever I hear it I’m always hoping Major Tom died a painful death.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 4:19 pm
The key point, which neither side of the debate seems willing to address square on, is whether or not a foetus is a person.
Hang on, Cato, we’ve addressed this point a number of times though not on this thread and the literature on it is voluminous. One side argues that the human being and human person are integrally related, the other side does not. Thus the former conclude that the human person begins with conception, and the latter believe the human person appears sometime or other after conception, with some like Singer, etc. prepared to argue that personhood begins post-birth thus supporting infanticide.
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 4:20 pm
Ectopic pregnacies are never viable and a threat to the mother.
They are never a moral or ethical issue.
They’re a maternal life-threatening issue only.
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 4:20 pm
…shit scared of drivng women to amateurs.
Why?
What’s so especially horrible about that, compared to 80,000 abortions a year?
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 4:20 pm
are a threat to the mother
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 4:21 pm
The test is if you support the Fisk Doctrine. If you don’t then you’re not really a Libertarian in the real sense.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 4:22 pm
C.L. you ask a lot to have us tell someone raped to tough it out. I still think conception is perhaps too early to draw the line. Every case is a luttle different but some are heartwrenching. I still think a moirning after pill is not unreasonable. Only problem is it would immediately be abuses. So what do you do?
whalehunt fun
22 Aug 12 at 4:22 pm
I used despise it even when I was stoned JC.
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 4:23 pm
Spittle-flecked, red-faced abusers above – none of you has addressed the Republican Policy Committee’s decision that even a woman who has been raped or is a victim of incest should be forced to continue the pregnancy. Why would that be, I wonder? Since it may have been an oversight, just thought I’d raise it again.
You are entitled to your views – but since none of you (AFAIK) has any chance of ever being pregnant, even under the most benign circumstances, your opinion shouldn’t and doesn’t bind me.
You have lost the battle a long time ago. But, as I point out, this stupid fetish may well sink the Republicans – and that would be a great pity, IMO. Sorry if I don’t fit the stereotype.
I remind you that all female MPs (including Julie Bishop and others with impeccable conservative credentials) were opposed to the attempts to ban outright RU486. Get over it, guys. You are right up there with the radical Islamics on this issue.
johanna
22 Aug 12 at 4:24 pm
I’m afraid to say that if the GOP loses by 1 – running against a Marxist clown like Obama and a deranged drunk like Pelosi – they don’t deserve the Senate.
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 4:24 pm
How not? If it’s a person then he/she has rights, including the right to life. That trumps the mother’s right to control her own body. If it’s not a person, it has no rights and the mother’s right to control her own body prevails.
I acknowledge that. So what?
There’s the rub. I probably shouldn’t mention the war; but IIRC the Catholic Church says that the slope is too slippery, the line is too hard to draw, which is why the favour no abortion at all.
Fuck no. It’s a moral/social issue, why would anyone expect sense from those retards?
Cato the Elder
22 Aug 12 at 4:25 pm
So you’re saying that the decision for a boy to be circumcised rests solely with the father and women are forbidden from circumcision policy discussions?
If you insist.
twostix
22 Aug 12 at 4:26 pm
80,000 people killed by septacemia, by blood loss and god knows what.
whalehunt fun
22 Aug 12 at 4:26 pm
I know it’s not precise, but I draw the line at the capacity for independent life. It’s dependent on technology, but roughly 20 odd weeks.
What a silly argument. If it depends on technology to live it is not independent. And, anyway, even a new-born is dependent on their mother and father for at least the first 15 years of their life. Moreover, why should dependence mean that the mother has the right to kill their child but not that the mother is obliged to care and protect it?
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 4:27 pm
Be serious CL.
This is war.
I agree with akins that abortion is morally wrong.
But Akins is a destructive moron who cannot win.
It’s not difficult.
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 4:28 pm
Anyways back to the thread.. If the Romster is actually ahead in Michigan and it’s a decent poll, the Kenyan better start calling for the U-Haul truck as he’ll need it in January. He’s outta of the white house in a big way.
A lead in Michigan means the Kenyan is toast through most of the mid west. That would be game set and match.
One other thing… I know people (some at any rate) think I’m crazy to call this. But I’m still calling NY to go GOP. Yep, it’s a big freaking call, but if the Romster wins a landlside, NY will be part of it.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 4:28 pm
This old sob-mama routine always amuses me.
Today’s women have about 2 children (if that), experience the most painless childbirth in human history, get mollycoddled with welfare and child-care to an extent never before seen and, generally speaking, have the most leisurely lives ever experienced.
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 4:29 pm
“Explain why they shouldn’t be killed too.”
Well, to play devil’s advocate (sort of pun intended), maybe the starting point is to ask what are the categories of people who shouldn’t be killed.
Do you have an objection to turning off the resusitator for a vegetable? Lots of people think that is a sensible thing because a brain-dead person is not really there, it’s just living meat.
Now, is there a stage in foetal development that is equivalent to our vegetable on the iron lung? If so, maybe there is no objection to killing that foetus.
Obviously there is a point in development where sentience develops, maybe that is the right dividing line. This stuff isn’t very easy to decide unless you have silly beliefs.
One thing is for sure, if god exists then he/she/it hasn’t any qualms about topping lots of little ones in uetero.
Pedro
22 Aug 12 at 4:30 pm
Who cares about abortion? The USA is just about to go off a fiscal cliff. Economic things need to be addressed urgently.
What Paul Ryan has done, is what few Australian politician ever do. He has forcefully argued the alternative case. Abbott is better than the ALP, but do you ever hear him making a spirited defence of significantly smaller government? Campbell Newman is doing some good work, but he wont forcefully make the case that big government programs are bad.
Here’s a debating tip for the LNP: If you won’t make the case, don’t expect to win the argument.
Ryan might be a significant political game changer. If the Republicans win because they argued the opposite case forcefully and won the debate, then you might see a real renaissance of the small government view being argued forcefully in the public political domain. We might even hear a Liberal leader extol the virtues of smaller government, and cut the size of government, when they are actually IN GOVERNMENT.
Ryan has been decisive so far, but its a long way to November and there are plenty of ways to still lose. Fighting about abortion is one of those ways the Left will try and shift off economics.
From the bits and pieces I see, Ryan is decisive and brilliant. He is taking ‘too close to call’ Florida into the Republican column, he is making ‘leaning Democrat’ Michigan and Wisconsin into too close to call or leaning Republican. Romney might well be rewriting the rule book with the Ryan VP pick.
Let’s hope it continues.
John Comnenus
22 Aug 12 at 4:30 pm
WTF? No mention of Harry Reid? CL! dude!
JC
22 Aug 12 at 4:30 pm
They don’t say anything of the sort.
They say – along with science – that a human life begins at conception.
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 4:31 pm
That trumps the mother’s right to control her own body.
Cato, the mother isn’t “controlling her own body” in an abortion, she is killing an organism, namely the unborn child, that is materially distinct from her own body.
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 4:33 pm
I was clear.
A definition of person-hood is irrelevant to abortion.
It’s relevant only if you believe in the Roe v Wade
SCOTUS decision as having any validity.
From conception there is an individual human life.
A ‘person’ is relevant only in their moral duty to protect that life if possible.
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 4:35 pm
Hey look, its’ stupid argument v stupid argument:
“…since none of you (AFAIK) has any chance of ever being pregnant, even under the most benign circumstances, your opinion shouldn’t and doesn’t bind me.
This old sob-mama routine always amuses me.
Today’s women have about 2 children (if that), experience the most painless childbirth in human history, get mollycoddled with welfare and child-care to an extent never before seen and, generally speaking, have the most leisurely lives ever experienced.”
Pedro
22 Aug 12 at 4:36 pm
lol. They do don’t they. Western females would have to be the most spoilt brats in the history of the human race.
Yes the US healthcare stuff is over the top and all. I counted 12 people in the freaking delivery room at one time when we had our second kid. There were two specialists administering a freaking epidural FFS.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 4:37 pm
“It’s relevant only if you believe in the Roe v Wade
SCOTUS decision as having any validity.”
Roe v Wade was based on an implied right to privacy, not personhood.
Pedro
22 Aug 12 at 4:38 pm
No. D-Day was war. This is politics.
I don’t defend that Presbyterian loon. But I don’t think he’s a wilfully evil person either. He’s not very bright and was ambushed with the left’s favourite horsehit question about abortion and rape. Bumbling through, he concluded that rapists should be punished, not unborn children. I find this significantly less shocking than Obama’s support for killing children born alive.
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 4:39 pm
John, The libs don’t believe in smaller government overall. They say they do because it’s in the manifesto but they really don’t. I’m just waiting for them to get returned to government as I really want to get stuck into the statist bastards.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 4:40 pm
If a woman gets pregnant, and the father says he doesn’t want to pay child support, does that get him off the hook and put the onus on the woman to raise the child herself or get an abortion? In fact is the father even partly responsible for what is born by default at all? You know, eggs, incubators, woman’s body, and all?
Aqualung
22 Aug 12 at 4:44 pm
John Comnenus, I agree with your approval of Paul Ryan and I agree the the US fiscal position and the moral case for smaller government will be the issues of the Nov elections.
But the above quote tells us yhat you are Pro-Choice.
Fine.
Argue that if you want.
But saying: ‘Who cares about abortion?’ marks you out as a Pro-choicer happy to be gratuitously offensive to people who disagree with you.
It’s the equivalent of saying:
‘Who cares if murder or rape is legalised when we have a pressing issues whereby despite being the richest nation in the world but we’re running a deficit and we need to tighten our belts?’
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 4:44 pm
Now, is there a stage in foetal development that is equivalent to our vegetable on the iron lung? If so, maybe there is no objection to killing that foetus.
No, and the analogy doesn’t work because being a ‘vegetable’ is not a stage of development, but that doesn’t mean the respiratory cannot be removed if there is no hope of recovery. I think the same duties that are owed to the unborn child are owed to the 90-year old with end-stage dementia.
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 4:47 pm
You are now taking a contrary position to one you held before for the purposes of pdeantically ‘winno9ng’ an argumeht CL.
It’s not politics as usual.
It’s non-combative civil war.
Akins is a contemptible tosser.
Stop playing dumb.
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 4:47 pm
JC,
I told off my local Lib candidate campaigning in Canberra for not being serious about cutting the size of government. I told them I would join the party if they actually did something about the size of government. I will join you in getting stuck into the Libs if (when) they don’t cut the size of government.
John Comnenus
22 Aug 12 at 4:48 pm
CL’s on fire today.
Dover Beach too is functioning on all cylinders.
JC is playing a blinder.
Between you you have nailed this debate tight shut.
I am impressed.
Rococo Liberal
22 Aug 12 at 4:51 pm
Good points aqualung. Every single one of them.. Of course it’s a rhetorical question because we know the man gets screwed over if the woman wants the kid. It’s a one way street of course.
And not only that…. the Australian family court has opined that a husband is also fucked over financially if the child his wife conceived isn’t his. How do you like them apples? Furthermore a DAN test on a kid is not admissible in court over issues like this!
Can someone please explain to me why sharia marriage law is positively ghastly in light of this? Go on, I freaking dare anyone.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 4:51 pm
Let’s ban abortion except in the cases of proven rape or incest. By my calculation that will eliminate 99.9% of abortions.
Infidel Tiger
22 Aug 12 at 4:52 pm
Oops… DNA test.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 4:52 pm
Richard D
22 Aug 12 at 4:52 pm
Look, this is what fiscal conservatives need to consider, we’ve had easy availability to contraceptives and abortion and a culture of ‘free love’ for almost half a century. How is public spending looking?
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 4:53 pm
It’s an abortion.
Infidel Tiger
22 Aug 12 at 4:54 pm
One thing is for sure, if god exists then he/she/it hasn’t any qualms about topping lots of little ones in uetero.
He doesn’t seem to mind topping the little ones out of utero, if his orders to Moses in the Old Testament can be believed.
I’m sure I’m not the only one to notice the bible is pro-infanticide.
Quentin George
22 Aug 12 at 4:54 pm
No, Quentin, you’re mistaking the Bible for the Koran.
Gab
22 Aug 12 at 4:55 pm
Let’s ban abortion except in the cases of proven rape or incest. By my calculation that will eliminate 99.9% of abortions.
Politically, I’d settle for that. I would even oppose moves to ban contraception; that is a private, moral position.
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 4:55 pm
See what you do there? In the first instance you define the nature of the subject as a “16 cell foetus” going for minimal impact, then you throw out the “oh 20 weeks” like it’s more or less the same.
Why not say “A baby has rights as an individual, a five month along foetus does not”?
Also abortions in most of Australia are allowed up to 24 weeks – which is six months – I.e nearly fully developed babies are being induced into labor and then killed upon birth.
So even you are more conservative and out of line with the “it’s my body, my rights” Emily’s listers than you think is the case.
twostix
22 Aug 12 at 4:56 pm
“Those backing laws to make some or all abortions illegal”
There’s the rub, CL. You said a majority were “opposed” to abortion. Your own statistics show that you are wrong. You can’t include people who think some abortions should be legal as “opposing abortion”.
Roughly a fifth to a quarter of Americans oppose abortion.
Jarrah
22 Aug 12 at 4:56 pm
Richard D
22 Aug 12 at 4:59 pm
” the analogy doesn’t work because being a ‘vegetable’ is not a stage of development”
The point is that in both cases there is no brain thing happening in any meaningful sense. Obviously one has potential and the other does not, but I’m not sure that is relevant at the time in question.
Anyway, I just ask the question because moral certitude is generally a sign of unthinking.
If the protection of life is a moral imperative then that is only to the extent generally agreed. We largely agree that I can kill you to defend myself from your potentially lethal attack, or if I’m a soldier and you are an enemy combatant. So if we largely agree that you can kill your unborn baby then how is it wrong?
Pedro
22 Aug 12 at 4:59 pm
Jarrah, if your reasoning were correct the opposite cannot hold either; namely, you couldn’t include people “who think some abortions should be [il]legal as “[supporting] abortion”.
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 4:59 pm
Enough of this bullshit meme, Dover.
WWI, Keynes and WWII ruined the liberal agenda. It wasn’t people having one night stands using protection.
.
22 Aug 12 at 5:00 pm
“Look, this is what fiscal conservatives need to consider, we’ve had easy availability to contraceptives and abortion and a culture of ‘free love’ for almost half a century. How is public spending looking?”
And how would it look if there hadn’t been a single abortion and contraception hadn’t been invented? I’ll bet there wouldn’t be that much less fucking.
Pedro
22 Aug 12 at 5:01 pm
No, Quentin, you’re mistaking the Bible for the Koran.
Gab, I think you should have a read of your copy. You might find a lot of stuff in there you don’t like.
Where do you think the Koran got it from?
However, if you want to skip right what I’m talking about, have a look at Moses’ Yahweh-inspired directive over what to do with the Midianite children in Numbers.
Quentin George
22 Aug 12 at 5:01 pm
I don’t believe he actually said that so what is your point?
badm0f0
22 Aug 12 at 5:01 pm
You’re right Quentin.
There’s always a few like you howling at the breeze
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 5:02 pm
The point is that in both cases there is no brain thing happening in any meaningful sense. Obviously one has potential and the other does not, but I’m not sure that is relevant at the time in question.
Why is it relevant that something be happening at the time in question? People in coma have little meaningful brain function, why shouldn’t we be able to kill them? May be because they enjoy the real possibility of this returning.
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 5:02 pm
Okay let’s add that. By my reckoning we are still looking at 95% of abortions no longer being allowed.
Infidel Tiger
22 Aug 12 at 5:02 pm
Worrying about the “potential of life” inherent in a zygote inevitably leads to worrying about nocturnal emissions. And I’m not sure I want to live in a world where a wet dream is tantamount to infanticide.
Quentin George
22 Aug 12 at 5:03 pm
http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm
Pedro
22 Aug 12 at 5:03 pm
My God, that is generous of you, d-b.
Also, very laughable.
I take it you have strongly considered and come out against revoking the vote for women?
steve from brisbane
22 Aug 12 at 5:03 pm
Enough of this bullshit meme, Dover.
Looks like I’m over the target.
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 5:03 pm
Really? Do quote it.
Gab
22 Aug 12 at 5:05 pm
Dover, but there is a period in the early days when the foetus basically doesn’t have a brain, so the argument would be that the life being snuffed is still pretty basic. Obviously that changes, but a very early abortion is quite a different thing from smothering bubby with a pillow.
Pedro
22 Aug 12 at 5:08 pm
Ooh….. less there was any doubt about my last comment, Quentin’s latest straw-man facile dross seals the howling idiot meme.
As Quentin would say: Ahh-wooooooo
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 5:10 pm
The west, as Steyn has pointed out, is aborting and contracepting itself into oblivion, as well as spending more than it earns in a lot of cases.
Approve or disapprove, poll it or don’t. But note the consequences.
I’d add that we are PC-ing ourselves into submission and impotence in all areas as well.
Blogstrop
22 Aug 12 at 5:11 pm
“Jarrah, if your reasoning were correct the opposite cannot hold either; namely, you couldn’t include people “who think some abortions should be [il]legal as “[supporting] abortion”.”
Yikes, a couple of shandies with lunch dover? Obviously people who think only some abortions should be illegal clearly are supporting the abortions not in that category!
Pedro
22 Aug 12 at 5:12 pm
And this is the inherent and utter moral cowardice that exists in so many pro abortion arguments.
The ridiculous haughty Reductio ad absurdum.
Never, ever will a pro abortionist start by arguing for the right to abort a six month along baby, it’s always just a “clump of cells” or a “zygote” as represented before about 7 weeks.
Abortions are allowed and regularly done up to SIX MONTHS so your ‘clever’ little quip just covered about 10% of abortions done.
Now what about the rest?
twostix
22 Aug 12 at 5:14 pm
That is what this is ultimately all about. Populate or perish, yellow peril, thinly veiled racist nationalism.
m0nty
22 Aug 12 at 5:15 pm
What a crock of shit. Anti abortionists are now racists.
I bet they hate women too.
Populate or perish? You’re done for monty.
.
22 Aug 12 at 5:19 pm
We’d all applaud monty’s and SfB’s every effort not to breed, but it may be too late.
Blogstrop
22 Aug 12 at 5:20 pm
Yes m0nty.
People who are against this are the evil ones.
twostix
22 Aug 12 at 5:20 pm
Strop
I don’t buy that argument without taking into account longevity and future expectations.
Dude, they’re implanting pacemakers and artificial joints in octogenarians these days.
Most people can really work into their 70′s. In fact my mother is mid 80′s and goes to work each day getting up at 5 in the morning. True. She has a pacemaker and is kicking around each day without a care in the world and her mind is as clear as anything still being able to add numbers in her head and still owns the first dollar she ever made.
As for protection with police and military.. It’s all about firepower really. The bigger and more accurate the explosion the more enemy you kill. Notice how drones are basically taking over more of the kill from the air. Our factories are becoming more automated and shit.
I don’t buy the argument that population is destiny. It sounds good but like most things it’s all a function of the level of technology.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 5:20 pm
Strop
The ever present danger to the west is Leftism pure and simple.
Invoke the Fisk Doctrine and everything will turn out fine.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 5:22 pm
One ray of hope is that leftists aren’t breeding so quickly any more.
Blogstrop
22 Aug 12 at 5:23 pm
Leftist demagoguery by way of response to the criticism of the sheer inanity and nihilism of leftist demagoguery.
And from the over-grown infant himself.
Whoda guessed?
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 5:23 pm
“if your reasoning were correct the opposite cannot hold either”
Yes, that’s right. And it’s true – only a slightly larger proportion of Americans support abortion without qualification than oppose it without qualification. The majority support it in some circumstances and oppose it in others.
According to the Gallup poll, the average American thinks abortion should be legal when the woman’s life or physical or mental health is endangered, when the pregnancy is from rape or incest, or in its first trimester. They would not overturn Roe v Wade. Opinion is evenly split when it comes to abortion when the baby is physically or mentally impaired, a surprising statistic.
Jarrah
22 Aug 12 at 5:23 pm
Evidence please.
Specifically not your opinion
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 5:25 pm
Richard D
22 Aug 12 at 5:28 pm
Someone earlier mentioned RoeVWade saying it’s popular. I’d like to remind people that Supreme Court judges aren’t elected and are there to interpret the law as best they can. So its irrelevant if Roe is popularly supported in the US.
JC
22 Aug 12 at 5:29 pm
Roe v. Wade was a setup. Interesting that the ALP is now seeking to replace at least two high court judges before they get booted out themselves. What does this tell you about the infallibility of superior courts? The system is gamed all the time.
Blogstrop
22 Aug 12 at 5:29 pm
On the 38th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, Most Americans Still Don’t Understand the Court’s Decision
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 5:32 pm
“Evidence please. Specifically not your opinion”
This will be a whole lot easier if you get your reading glasses on. I said “according to the Gallup poll”.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/1576/Abortion.aspx#2
Since you don’t like even clicking links I give, why are you asking in the first place?
Jarrah
22 Aug 12 at 5:37 pm
Which Gallup poll?
The one that you decided to link now?
No not even that:
I had to search two pages of multiple questions on abortion etc and none asked about RoevWade.
There is a famous poll on RoevWade which say what you allege but it has questionable validity.
Idiot that you are you couldn’t even link to that weak evidence to support your assertion.
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 5:50 pm
“I had to search two pages of multiple questions on abortion etc and none asked about RoevWade. ”
Like I said, get your reading glasses on!
“Idiot that you are”
LOL
Jarrah
22 Aug 12 at 6:13 pm
James – I’m anti abortion but I wouldn’t ban it.
Roe v Wade might be unpopular – but would a majority of Americans have an outright ban, or repeal the XIV amendment?
.
22 Aug 12 at 6:16 pm
m0nty-
Here’s m0nty on a thread titled “Liberals don’t get free speech” 6 months ago-
Fisky
22 Aug 12 at 6:18 pm
Here’s m0nty, denouncing “racist nationalism”:
Here’s m0nty, on a thread called “liberals don’t get free speech”, endorsing…well read for yourself:
Of course, “the philosophy that individuals can and should be defined by race” is officially known as “racism”.
Endorsing racism and then opposing it. Claiming the Prime Minister is elected by the parliament before claiming she isn’t. He’s a bigger flip flopper than John Kerry.
Fisky
22 Aug 12 at 6:23 pm
Moderator?
Fisky
22 Aug 12 at 6:23 pm
Fuck.
How did I forget the Nevada degenerate?
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 6:39 pm
I’m not sure that mOnty is a racist. Pictorial evidence suggests he has blood sugar issues that may send him troppo. If he reduces his carb intake he’ll still be very stupid but more measured in his stupidity.
Infidel Tiger
22 Aug 12 at 6:42 pm
I’m not trying to win anything.
We’re not at war.
But look here, if you want to talk about this in war terms, I’m heartily sick of conservative softcocks who keep lecturing certain Republicans to abandon large swathes of important terrain to the left – to give up – and move the battle to other theatres.
Stop here and fight, you pansies.
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 6:44 pm
I think a comfortable majority are uncomfortable with late term abortions and public funding of abortions.
I think RoevsWade should be overturned.
It was a horror decision on rational constitutional grounds.
It’s properly a states’ rights issue.
I’d support a ban on all abortion except in medical maternal life-threatening circumstances.
I’d support an exemption for rape also but only after balanced counseling rather than encouragement to abort.
I still believe that gestating life is human life but the woman is pregnant not because of free choice.
It’s morally very very difficult
I think the woman would be better served psychologically by bringing the child to delivery.
The assailant obviously should have no rights of fatherhood.
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 6:46 pm
In this day and age, the time for a woman to ‘control her own body’ is prior to conception.
Abortion should be a crime.
In the case of rape there is no reason why the child can’t go full term and, if not wanted by the mother, adopted.
manalive
22 Aug 12 at 6:57 pm
It’s non-combative war against the major existential threat to classical liberalism and individual liberty.
With Adkins it’s suicidal.
Another GOP candidate could win.
Fight when you can win and it’s strategic.
If the GOP don’t get 51-52 Senate seats in the next Congress Obamacare will never be rescinded.
The MSM are against us.
They’re not ‘fair’.
Get over it.
If America goes down that route, out liberty in Australia will have no long-term future either.
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 6:58 pm
CL – “large swathes of important terrain” does not include “legitimate rape” and crank theories on biology. Those are the Gallipoli or Stalingrad in terrain terms.
Fisky
22 Aug 12 at 7:37 pm
I wasn’t talking about those remarks or beliefs, Fisk.
I was talking about the ‘social issues’ against which the Meghan McCain wing of the GOP is constantly, hysterically surrendering.
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 7:43 pm
Well I had assumed that was the issue under consideration so if that is to clarify that you do agree with disendorsing Akin, a fringe unelectable crank, then this particular discussion is happily resolved. On the more general topic of how much time should be spent on “social issues”, which have the unfortunate tendency of being hijacked by unelectable cranks, the GOP are entitled to introduce abortion into campaigns, but they need to pick their battles. There is no point discussing issues in which the other party has an advantage or even if it is an electoral grey area, when there are so many areas of strength to exploit. To take an example, I agree with Abbott on free speech (at least post Doctrine), but I don’t believe he should have said anything about repealing the law until after the election.
Fisky
22 Aug 12 at 7:54 pm
Is the “johanna” at the start of this thread the same “johanna”/”joanna”/”jo-anna” who frequently concern trolls American conservative blogs?
MDMConnell
22 Aug 12 at 8:02 pm
He’s not.
He’s an unelectable idiot based on what he said in a single interview.
The Dems can run demagogic ads in the last two weeks of the campaign only and he’d lose no matter how much he could spend
It’s cruel but it doesn’t make him a crank.
What has specifically destroyed him is the pseudoscience that the woman’s body could fight the insemination and prevent the pregnancy.
That’s a theory he clearly believed in.
His particular pro-life view is common if not mainstream.
The “legitimate rape” mistake was Bidenesque stupid but that specifically didn’t make his hopes of election terminal.
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 8:09 pm
m0nty, would you kindly get back on here and explain your bizarre flip-flopping on race? Please see my comment upthread. Not responding is not an option because we know you are reading this and have yet to account for your endorsement of the “philosophy that individuals can and should be defined by race”.
Fisky
22 Aug 12 at 8:13 pm
Fisk, calm down about Akin.
He’ll be forgotten by next week.
You’ve got to start ignoring America’s right-wing commentariat.
They’re all gun-shy.
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 8:23 pm
I’ve just noticed Jarrah’s last comment.
He’s correct that the question was there – in the middle of the second page and a morass of questions and tables and explanations.
My earlier referenced article rubbishes a Roe v Wade polling where questions are asked without an explanation of Roe v Wade.
I’ll quote again:
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 8:36 pm
MNMConnell – I wouldn’t think so. johanna comments quite frequently on sceptic blogs that I follow, notably Bishop Hill and Climate Audit.
Her contributions are erudite, intelligent and well presented. On the carbon tax/climate change issue her views IMO are identical to most here. To slag her off on abortion demeans all who do so.
Speaking of circumcision, when and if they did the job on Akin they threw the smartest bit away. I hope Romney prevails but this idiot isn’t helping.
GrantB
22 Aug 12 at 8:36 pm
Pedro:
Dover, but there is a period in the early days when the foetus basically doesn’t have a brain, so the argument would be that the life being snuffed is still pretty basic. Obviously that changes, but a very early abortion is quite a different thing from smothering bubby with a pillow.
Hang on, why this focus on the brain? The mere presence of a brain doesn’t entail a person; the two are not identical. The brain doesn’t actualise any of its potentialities for personhood until very much later in its development. That is why Singer and his legion quite openly argue that the difference between abortion and “smothering bubby with a pillow”, namely, infanticide, is no difference at all.
Yikes, a couple of shandies with lunch dover? Obviously people who think only some abortions should be illegal clearly are supporting the abortions not in that category!
Yes, I agree; I was point out the flaw in a line of reasoning, not making it myself. By the way, how dare you imply I drink shaddy!
CL:
But look here, if you want to talk about this in war terms, I’m heartily sick of conservative softcocks who keep lecturing certain Republicans to abandon large swathes of important terrain to the left – to give up – and move the battle to other theatres.
Stop here and fight, you pansies.
Amen, brother
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 8:36 pm
What happened on the sixth of November?
Driftforge
22 Aug 12 at 8:39 pm
Perhaps an electiom?
WhaleHunt Fun
22 Aug 12 at 8:42 pm
Yes google says US election
WhaleHunt Fun
22 Aug 12 at 8:43 pm
I drink shaddy
or shaddy shandy.
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 8:43 pm
foetus has a soul right from conception, so unless you believe and have some Christian faith, abortion may as well happen anywhere in the nine months – makes no diff, it is the snuffing out of life no matter when.
girls/women forced into abortion for desperate and tragic reasons of rape/incest etc need most support from psycholgists and doctors their family, whatever their decision they make regarding their baby. taking the life of your babgy would be no easy thing under any circumstances, especially after it flutters into life.
candy
22 Aug 12 at 8:46 pm
So many issues like this in Australia. The court finds this, the court finds that. BS. Unelected dictatorial pricks that could never get elected slops boy at flophouse are making law. Bring back absolute monarchy. At least their was only one mass-murderer at a time running the show instead of a cacophony of cretins.
WhaleHunt Fun
22 Aug 12 at 8:50 pm
so why do sperm and eggs not have a soul? Remeber the song “every sprem is sacred, every sperm that’s wasted, maked God quite irate”
WhaleHunt Fun
22 Aug 12 at 8:53 pm
“The King’s reach was terrible but it was short”
.
22 Aug 12 at 8:53 pm
If he costs the Senate, you’ll be hearing about him in four years’ time. A dangerous, suicidal and obstructive extremist, he will go down in history as the objective underwriter and bedder-downer of Obama’s agenda. So yes, even if the Love Media do let him off, this could be a much-rued election.
But the toe-sucker thinks the GOP are in line for 53 seats (now down to 52) so we can only cross our fingers and hope.
Fisky
22 Aug 12 at 8:58 pm
Yeah, except he dropped 30 points on in-trade overnight. He’s done. And it was “legitimate rape” that did him.
Fisky
22 Aug 12 at 9:01 pm
Just for the fun of it I’m going to throw this out there:
If we’re going to focus on the brain and the sentient nature of the unborn foetus then we should also take into account the fact that at some point during the childs development it becomes somewhat more advanced than say a whale, monkey, dolphin etc. As far as I can tell humanity decides its ok to kill animals because ummm… they’re not human or the bible says humans are more awesome than animals or rather they’re not as intellectually developed as humans.
Bottom line is that we already do draw a line and determine what life is and isn’t sacred. The argument about abortion is merely an extension of that argument.
Jeremiah
22 Aug 12 at 9:03 pm
“so why do sperm and eggs not have a soul? Remeber the song “every sprem is sacred, every sperm that’s wasted, maked God quite irate””
sperm and eggs don’t have a soul, the embyro does, ‘cos its a baby in progress. sperm or ova on their own can never be people.
candy
22 Aug 12 at 9:27 pm
So how many souls does a chimera have. Remembering that it is made up of two fertilised eggs fused together that grow to make a single adult where different organs have different dna, the classic case being the woman whose children were removed whenher dna tested from her blood did not match her children’s whereas her uterus when later tested did match them.
Does the half approximately of her organs that have one lot of dna have a separate sould to the other organs or, holistically, is she a single soul?
WhaleHunt Fun
22 Aug 12 at 9:33 pm
Akin is a big deal. It was Senator Ryan forcing the beautiful Jeri Ryan to attend sex clubs and watch him having sex with other women that left a senate vacancy in Illinois. Guess which dog eating, Marx loving, vagina avoiding motherfucker took that spot?
A butterfly in the Amazon.
Infidel Tiger
22 Aug 12 at 9:34 pm
That’s a bit like asking ‘is she one person?’.
Of course she is.
The body is the physical self. The soul is the decisive self. The spirit is who we are, have been, and will be; the sum of what we started with and what we have chosen to become since.
Driftforge
22 Aug 12 at 9:40 pm
Whalehunt Fun, according to Aristotelian-Thomism, and Catholic tradition, the soul is the substantial form of the body. The soul in a human being has three parts: vegetative; sensitive; and rational. So a chimera presents no obvious problem.
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 9:49 pm
“Does the half approximately of her organs that have one lot of dna have a separate sould to the other organs or, holistically, is she a single soul?”
one life, one soul
candy
22 Aug 12 at 9:50 pm
“I was point out the flaw in a line of reasoning”
You didn’t point out a flaw, but a corollary.
“foetus has a soul right from conception”
So twins share one soul after dividing?
Jarrah
22 Aug 12 at 10:30 pm
James, is that true? How can it be tested?
JC
22 Aug 12 at 10:35 pm
Well, that seems pretty reasonable to me JC.
.
22 Aug 12 at 10:36 pm
You didn’t point out a flaw, but a corollary.
Yes, you are right.
So twins share one soul after dividing?
If the soul is the substantial form of the body, why would this mean that twins share one soul after dividing? Just as there are now two bodies, rather than the sharing of the one body, there are now two souls (substantial forms).
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 10:39 pm
Why is the feeling of pain important? There is a condition called congenital analgesia which means that the person cannot feel physical pain. They are nevertheless sensitive to touch.
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 10:44 pm
“there are now two souls”
So the soul isn’t there from conception. Or there is one soul from conception, and when twins divide, that counts as a new conception for the purposes of the soul development?
Jarrah
22 Aug 12 at 10:46 pm
The most interesting point in all this is the number of Dems screaming and pointing at that fucking stupid foot-in-mouth idiot Akin and the number of Dems not bothering to point out the number of people on his own side who’ve disowned him and told him effectively to fuck off and die.
That’s telling.
perturbed
22 Aug 12 at 10:49 pm
Cruelty, sentience.
Not everyone is religious. Arguing that life begins at conception or that it has a soul preaches to the choir.
I for one, find abortions towards the end of the term increasingly unpleasant and undesirable.
The morning after pill might be the same to religious people on spiritual grounds, but it is not a full blown abortion procedure.
.
22 Aug 12 at 10:53 pm
Emryologically the nervous system is developed from 8 to 24 weeks with limb movements by 12 weeks.
Withdrawal from noxious stimuli is ~18-20 weeks but the brain structure to appreciate pain emotionally is all there by 24 weeks but wakefulness in the way we understand it is somewhat later again.
In Victoria any woman can abort up to 24 weeks no questions other than technical for health-care are allowed to be asked.
After that she can abort with 2 doctors approving with no limit.
It’s one of the most disgraceful abortion legislation in the world today.
John Brumby is a c*nt.
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 10:56 pm
“So twins share one soul after dividing?”
the zygote is programmed for some reason to split into 2 or 3 etc
and souls are ready. it sounds daft i know, but if you know people with twins, you know they are separate personalities, separate souls religiious sort of thing – i know sounds daft
candy
22 Aug 12 at 11:03 pm
Jarrah, in order to understand the classical conception – the soul is the substantial form of the body – you have to put aside the modern understanding of the soul that begins with Descartes. According to the former, the soul of a human being, as I understand it, is distinguishable from the body, but inseparable from it. Only a fragment of it survives death, the rational part, the vegetative and sensitive soul perish. That is why a physical resurrection is required to resurrect you or me; without it, all we remain is that fragment. According to the modern conception, the soul and the body are both distinguishable but also separable.
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 11:04 pm
Nothing to do with choirs or preaching.
Life begins at conception.
This is a scientific fact and it’s to be found in the medical text books.
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 11:22 pm
Cruelty, sentience.
Sentience isn’t the ability to feel pain; just the ability to feel. But why is this important as a mark of being a human person? It isn’t for Singer and his legion, that is why he would denounce the killing of a baboon, but not raise a finger if a parent was throttling their new-born daughter.
Not everyone is religious.
And nor is everyone a materialist? Still, the argument that life begins at conception is not religious. In my arguments up to 5pm, I never raise religious arguments.
I for one, find abortions towards the end of the term increasingly unpleasant and undesirable.
Yes, but I don’t find abortion merely unpleasant or undesirable, but a moral wrong. It’s not like a bad odor, weak beer or cold fish; its like murder, theft, rape, arson, treason, and the like.
dover_beach
22 Aug 12 at 11:26 pm
Back to the topic…
There are a lot of headlines on Akin defying the GOP and Mitt Romney.
Good press for Romney.
This bloke may have done more good than harm.
C.L.
22 Aug 12 at 11:42 pm
The Hill with video: Akin says Ryan asked him to exit, slams ‘party bosses’ over pressure
JamesK
22 Aug 12 at 11:56 pm
Like most of these nominally ‘difficult issues’, it boils down to valuing human life.
There are lot of hard decisions that have to be made regarding life; where evil slips in is when people start to dehumanise other humans.
Doesn’t matter whether its a human embryo, human fetus, human child, human adult, human elderly.
Doesn’t matter whether they of another race, or currently ‘the enemy’, or a evil murdering bastard.
Dehumanisation is the crime, because it means the full cost of the action is not borne.
Driftforge
22 Aug 12 at 11:57 pm
Maybe Akin is a GOP ploy to boost RoRy.
C.L.
23 Aug 12 at 12:04 am
Wow. That would be some play.
dover_beach
23 Aug 12 at 12:07 am
Gold!
C.L.
23 Aug 12 at 12:08 am
For an economist Steve you do love pointing to outliers when it comes to Polls. (Apart from Wisconsin one) The race hasn’t changed, Akin has publicized what was already GOP policy, but won’t make too much difference in November. The GOP establishment never wanted him in the race to start with, and he just gave them a chance to put the screws on to try get rid of him. Give it a month, and if he’s still within shouting distance of Mccaskill the money will come back.
There won’t be any kind of blowout, Obama will win by 30 to 50 electoral votes or Romney will win by 10 to 20. Not because it’s harder for Romney but because of the vagaries of the electoral college.
The election will be determined by voter turnout, with states like PA, OH and NC being key (and now maybe WI).
WadeJ
23 Aug 12 at 1:27 am
Bollocks you pillock.
The rest of your woefully elaborated opinions which you masquerade pathetically as analysis are nothing more than meaningless hyper-partisan drivel as well.
JamesK
23 Aug 12 at 1:46 am
Judge Napolitano (a libertarian): New Jersey’s Abortion Laws Are ‘Regrettably’ The Nation’s Most Liberal
JamesK
23 Aug 12 at 1:54 am
So James, when Paul Ryan co-sponsored a bill giving no exceptions for rape, or when the the party platform will include the same strict ban on all abortions, not matter how the pregnancies occurred, that isn’t representative of GOP Policy?
In your quest to disagree with anyone/everyone on the other side of the aisle you really say some moronic things.
WadeJ
23 Aug 12 at 1:55 am
i don’t knowe the link you are using because you don’t risk providing it but no it doesn’t follow it’s GOP policy.
Did it pass the House?
Did it pass the Senate?
Did any Dems vote for it?
And of course Roe vs Wade would make any bill making abortion illegal for rape at any other gestational age below that deemed by the SCOTUS as a woman’s ‘privacy provision’ right as unconstitutional.
How could such a bill pass if it is unconstitutional?
Did Ryan introduce an unconstitutional bill to the House?
Why are you such a leftist clown Wadey?
JamesK
23 Aug 12 at 2:15 am
Not especially. Just angling for a bite. Thanks for obliging, James. But then again I knew you couldn’t resist.
Oh come on
23 Aug 12 at 2:17 am
LOL
JamesK
23 Aug 12 at 2:24 am
C’mon, you gotta admit it was a good one. I agree it was a stupid comment, but then again it was supposed to be.
Oh come on
23 Aug 12 at 2:26 am
No, he has lost a Senate seat and Romney will probably win anyway.
Fisky
23 Aug 12 at 2:28 am
Romney’s campaigning has improved heaps since Ryan turned up.
It’s quite dramatic.
Obviously a psychological thing.
And interesting to observe.
I’m fighting to not get overly confident but I think they are favourites if not yet at the bookies.
JamesK
23 Aug 12 at 2:31 am
James, now you’re going into deeply bollocksy territory. Romney hadn’t put a foot wrong on the campaign trail since Santorum pulled out (except for his wildly over-stated “gaffes” on his world tour, which actually yielded several significant fillips – not that the MSM cared to notice). Putting Ryan on the ticket was the continuation of a trend, not the beginning of a new one.
Oh come on
23 Aug 12 at 2:40 am
James,
Here’s some links and quotes:
http://www.wxow.com/story/19332958/paul-ryan-co-sponsored-legislation-with-todd-akin
House Resolution 5939, a 2010 piece of legislation designed to ban all taxpayer funded abortions, except in cases of what the authors defined as “forcible rape.” (Failed but was co-sponsored by Ryan)
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr212ih/pdf/BILLS-112hr212ih.pdf
Another bill co-sponsored by Ryan, that would potentially outlaw IVF.
Link about GOP platform’s position on Abortion is below. While this is not Romney’s policy it’s a pretty clear statement from the Party on what their POLICY would be relating to Abortion. This doesn’t meant that the law could pass, but I didn’t say that, I said it’s the GOP’s policy.
http://news.yahoo.com/gop-platform-draft-odds-romney-abortion-015921311.htmlrape/z8RUoesNCeEfX5N0BXqWtJ/story.html
One key piece of article “Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, chairman of the RNC’s Committee on Resolutions, said the platform “reflects the views of the grassroots leaders of the Republican Party.”"
And one last thing James, bills do pass the House and Senate that are unconstitutional, remember Congress isn’t the final arbitrator of the constitutionality of the law that’s the Supreme Court. You may have remembered a minor court case recently on the ACA, otherwise known as Obamacare. /sark
WadeJ
23 Aug 12 at 3:05 am
One last thing, you seem to suggest that only things passed into law reflect the policy of political parties. That just doesn’t make sense. the Democrats and the Republican’s opposing views/policies on Immigration is just one example.
WadeJ
23 Aug 12 at 3:07 am
Wadey’s ‘claim’:
From Wadey’s first link:
and
So a majority passed the bills in the House?
LOL!
You’re not the sharpest tool are you Wadey?
JamesK
23 Aug 12 at 8:01 am
Is the “johanna” at the start of this thread the same “johanna”/”joanna”/”jo-anna” who frequently concern trolls American conservative blogs?
———————————–
No. Grant B has correctly identified me.
Like many women of a conservative economic bent, I am very disappointed that the Republicans have once again shot themselves in both feet because of their (predominantly male) fixation on this issue. I had great hopes of Ryan in the economic sense, but I would never, ever, ever, vote for a candidate who would force women to endure unwanted pregnancies. That’s why I made my comment, since another term of Obama would be a tragedy for the US – and to a lesser extent, us.
I merely note yet again that there is a clear gender divide on this question – those who are most affected by it have substantially different views than those whose position is primarily theoretical. If the day ever comes that a woman can transfer pregnancy and breastfeeding over to the sperm donor who opposes the abortion, there would be some basis for discussion.
johanna
23 Aug 12 at 1:56 pm
Joanna. please read Dennis Prager’s response.
The intellectuals in the right in the US want the Republicans to learn from this Takin balls up.
This is very similar in tone to the response from Powerline:
Token
23 Aug 12 at 2:01 pm
Hi Token
I don’t see that your links get us much further. Atkin is a fool, well der. And Bryan has medieval views about abortion, which if I were a US voter, would be a very significant problem for me.
My point is, as long as economic conservatives shackle themselves to people whose views are opposed by the majority of women, they will continue to lose elections that they would otherwise romp in. And, if they think that the majority of women are wrong about this issue, which primarily affects them, then they probably deserve to lose.
johanna
23 Aug 12 at 11:05 pm
You lying c**t, wade.
Ryan will pass bills to cut the deficit.
.
23 Aug 12 at 11:18 pm
The overwhelming majority of women in the US have views in radical opposition to Obummer’s preference for publicly funded late term abortion and infanticide.
So you are talking bilge as usual, johanna.
What you actually mean – even if you don’t realise it – is that the GOP would get less Dem and MSM demagoguery.
But you would be quite mistaken in that.
Malcolm Turnbull suffered that delusion until he threated the Left’s real heroes as Opposition Leader.
JamesK
23 Aug 12 at 11:22 pm
the Republicans have once again shot themselves in both feet because of their (predominantly male) fixation on this issue.
I know, you probably find it surprising, but some of us, men AND women, actually care for human life. Shocking, I know, but there it is.
I merely note yet again that there is a clear gender divide on this question
Actually, the gender-split in the pro-life movement tends to favour women; again, shocking, I know, but in reflection unsurprising, since many woman, the majority, I guess, actually find the idea of destroying their own child morally outrageous.
but I would never, ever, ever, vote for a candidate who would force women to endure unwanted pregnancies.
Ah, yes, to prevent a woman from killing even her own unborn child in the third trimester is to “force women to endure”. And I suppose to oblige a mother to care for her own new-born child is to also “force women to endure”.
dover_beach
23 Aug 12 at 11:39 pm
So the soul isn’t there from conception. Or there is one soul from conception, and when twins divide, that counts as a new conception for the purposes of the soul development?
Does that mean that in cases of twin resorption, where one of the twins dies in utero and is absorbed by the other, that are now two souls in the one body? The surviving fetus has in the very least cannabilised its former twin, at the worst may have even contributed to its(no gender at this point) death.
The soul has been destroyed with the body.
Dead Soul
24 Aug 12 at 12:01 am
If the soul is the substantial form of the body, it, firstly, doesn’t mean there are two souls since there are no longer two bodies following absorption, and secondly, yes, the soul of the cannibalized foetus would have been destroyed with the body since they are inseparable.
dover_beach
24 Aug 12 at 12:16 am