Obama's comment on when life begins.......

RMRK wrote:

<quoted text>
Here is his retort to your post. McBush was not in the controlled green room. He was in a secret service motorcade, and thus had access to Obama's answers.
The truth is this. Sen. Jon McCain was indeed en route to the event in a secret service motorcade, but did not "sneak a peek" as they do on "Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader". It is a claim levelled by the Obama Campaign and carried by the lapdog leftists in the Media. The Obama campaign and the Media are trying to cover for that fact that this appearance was a disaster for Obama.
Bye Bye Barry. Try running for president when you actually have more than 142 days in the senate and our experience as a community organizer on your resume'.

Judged:

1

Whuteva wrote:

<quoted text>
Get off your high horse. We kill little brown babies all the time in Iraq and other places. Not sickening though huh? Just casualties of democracy.
Yes I settled so easily on the fact that it is legal.....BECAUSE IT IS!!!!

Mark wrote:

<quoted text>
Nope, not CRC. CRC holds to the doctrine of common grace. They gave that belief up officially in 1924. The CRC believes that men can do good.
My beliefs are that while people may be moral--from our viewpoint--they are not moral or righteous before God, because of their sins and sinful nature. If they are not performing good works or being moral to glorify God, it is not a good work. While good works can be done--through the work of the Spirit--they are still sinful in nature.
Does that help?

Judged:

1

Driven wrote:

It's called birth control. The pill, condoms, IUDs, diaphragms, abstinance. Whatever you have to do. Babies are 100% preventable. Abortion is never an acceptable alternative to using birth control.

Mark wrote:

<quoted text>
OK, fine, let's say the women have the right to choose to kill their child. Then the sperm donors (or father as it may be) should also have the right not to support that child after birth, after all, they can't have any say in whether it is carried to full term or not.
Once again, you can't have it both ways.

Judged:

1

1

1

Mark wrote:

<quoted text>
Absolutely. There is no place for religion in gov't or gov't in religion.
But, gov't should be and is governed by morals. And morals are from God.

Judged:

2

2

1

placid water wrote:

<quoted text>
You are full of it women get pregnant all the time on birth control. And the reason for taking the BC is to not get pregnant..so if she does, there is a option.

MichiganMom wrote:

<quoted text>
He has already very clearly said that he is pro-choice. This is a position that people either agree with or don't. Not too many ways to waffle it. I believe he was saying it was above his pay scale on defining at what point a baby gets "human rights." There are many different views expressed on this just in this short blogging. He didn't at least try to state that his definition was the absolute correct one. He also said he believes women don't make this kind of decision casually, and he believes the best approach, no matter which side of this argument you are on, is to work at reducing the number of abortions. He's in favor of limits on late term abortions if there are exceptions for the mother's health. That to me is a fundamental respect for all life. He wants to increase the options available for women so that they don't view abortion as the only choice left.

placid water wrote:

<quoted text>
Morals aren't from God. And God does not send gifts into the belly of a woman.

aimNfire wrote:

<quoted text>
All the time? That is quite the statement.
What happened to adoption as an option?

Dee wrote:

<quoted text>
Who does? UPS?

Dee wrote:

<quoted text>
He gave a non answer,probably because it would not play well with that particular audience and in that venue. I'm sure he has probably stated that he is pro-choice when he is speaking to a more liberal group. If he had said life begins at conception, people would wonder why on earth he is pro-choice. If he said it didn't begin at conception, he would appear not to know simple biology. He was in a "no win" situation (voterwise) so he just dodged it.

Judged:

1

Dee wrote:

<quoted text>
Who does? UPS?

Gone South wrote:

<quoted text>
He did actually say the words "I'm pro-choice" when in that interview, I'm sure knowing that it wouldn't be received well. He was in a no-win situation, but I do think he at least stood by his position. He didn't go on and on about it.. I grant that. He said it and tried to move it along to the next topic. The forum was not set up to get into a debate mode about abortion rights. From my understanding, the majority of the audience (or the more vocal portion) held anti-abortion positions. It would have been foolish of him to try to debate his way through. Just as this forum shows - there really isn't anyone on the fence on this issue. And regardless of debating, it isn't likely anyone will ever have their mind changed unless they face a situation personally that makes them take a deep breath and maybe respond in a way that they didn't think they would. And that could be either side.

Mark wrote:

<quoted text>
I never said I wouldn't use medical advice and the abilities of the doctors to do their best to save both lives. I am not one of those fruitcakes that does not believe God put doctors and medicine on this earth to be squandered.
But to choose one over the other? That's a decision I couldn't make, either.
And we must factor in the human factor of doctors as well. While they are intelligent, they are by no means infallible, so how can they really say for sure that the mother will die if the baby is not aborted? How many stories are there of people outliving any predictions of doctors. I go to church with a girl who has numerous afflictions, the doctors told her parents she wouldn't live past 4 years. She's 19 today. And a blessing to anyone who meets her as she always has a smile on her face.
And we are to abort someone like her because she isn't 'normal' like the rest of us? Sad commentary on our society.

Judged:

1

scpsr1 wrote:

At least in the animal world, when a mother kills her young she eats it.

Judged:

1

Whuteva wrote:

<quoted text>
Its easier when you know what questions are going to be asked. Obama didnt have that option.

placid water wrote:

<quoted text>
Thats an option. But some don't want to carry a baby they will not keep, free country. I'm still ticked about the seatbelt law.