Spain goes back to 30 years ago with the new Abortion law.

[ohlovelyrita]

Your quote said that if it came to a vote that you WOULD vote pro-life. That doesn't match up to what you were claiming today with whether you felt it should be a legal issue. Looks like a flip flop.

I wasn't saying you were the right that is fearful of big government. This just is a reminder of how a lot of those that scream less government totally act differently when they can manipulate big government to serve their interests.

Yes, I know....if you singled out that quote, it would look that way....but if you read the previous 10 quotes and the 10 quotes after, my stance would be clear. I was responding to a bunch of other quotes in various threads and watching the Eagles game last night when I posted that...heavily distracted.

I don't disagree with what you're saying...a lot of those that scream less government only want big government when it's in their interest.

KK- What are you a Mormon? That wasn't a typo either.

I have nothing against religious people as long as their religion is a hobby and not political bullets.

Hitler, anyone?

Anyways, you got moved to anger too easily. Maybe it's your bedtime. Still there?

No, not a Mormon....not sure where you would get that from.

My religion teaches me separation of church and state...."Give onto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's"....so nope, usually don't bring my religion into politics.

The mere fact that you blame religion when others have different views than yourself is quite intriguing. Do you hate religion and God that much that you will always pin both as your enemy when in reality, neither is?

For the record, I watched a little bit of Joel Osteen this weekend and I like him but we make different conclusions. I like most religious people until they loose control

of their hobby and become soldiers.

If YOU don't believe in ghosts or aliens, do you hate them?

Same answer I bet for me.

You really wanna know if I hate God?

Hmmm......would that make me?

[Ace Nova]

Read the fine print:

Rita...you're so weak sometimes....let's show the entire story...shall we? My quotes in relation to abortion:

"I've already stated my stance on abortion in various threads...but if you must....

I'm personally against abortion....but on the other hand, I think women have free will to choose between right and wrong. If they choose to abort, it's wrong. But they have that option under the law.

Obviously, anyone who considers late term abortions a "woman's right" is no different than a sociopath."

"I would vote to severely restrict abortions (other than if a woman's life is at risk) to the first trimester....and even then, she/they would have to go through counseling from both pro-choice and pro-life advocates beforehand....just so she/they completely understand the ramifications of her/their decision."

What? I outlined for you what I would tolerate.

Since you kept on telling me that I didn't answer how I would vote...when I clearly already did....I started to have fun with you....

"Come to think of it....I think I'm tired of appeasing the pro choice circle...."

"Other than if the life of the mother is at risk....(rape and incest maybe)....I think I'm leaning pro-life. Technology and the fact that hundreds of thousands of people are waiting to adopt....no....women (and men) shouldn't be allowed to use abortion as a form of birth control - which 90% of them are."

"More than likely, if it ever came to a vote, I'd vote pro-life....it's what I believe. "

"You asked what my personal stance was on abortion...like many others I think it's wrong. As far as the law goes, I'm not a lawmaker....but if pertained to me, under the roof of my own house....obviously I'd be pro life. But I'm also a realist and realize that there are a multitude of scenarios in the real world where a woman may want to have that choice....who am I to tell her she can't? I can only influence the people I know, etc."

Personally I'm pro life. But legally speaking, I don't think making abortions illegal is the solution.

So...show me where I "flip flopped" again?

I think I made it pretty clear that I am personally pro life...it's what I believe. Voting for pro life...sure I would vote pro life....because I personally believe in pro life....but as I outlined above, it doesn't mean I would vote to make abortions illegal.

Stop trying to spin and manipulate your cause....it's rather pathetic.

For the record, I watched a little bit of Joel Osteen this weekend and I like him but we make different conclusions. I like most religious people until they loose control

of their hobby and become soldiers.

You're converting, aren't you?

[ohlovelyrita]

Joel's a great speaker. He is helping a lot of people. His final conclusion is delusion.

Okay so you ACCEPT that abortions are legal. Gotcha!

I think you would vote against late term abortions and I also think you would

vote for abortions to be illegal based on this:

"More than likely, if it ever came to a vote, I'd vote pro-life....it's what I believe."- Kasanova KIng

You said making it illegal is not a solution but that doesn't preclude you from voting against it.

Biden/Rand debate '12 on abortion:

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: My religion defines who I am. And I've been a practicing Catholic my whole life. And it has particularly informed my social doctrine. Catholic social doctrine talks about taking care of those who — who can't take care of themselves, people who need help.With regard to — with regard to abortion, I accept my church's position on abortion as a — what we call de fide (doctrine ?). Life begins at conception. That's the church's judgment. I accept it in my personal life .But I refuse to impose it on equally devout Christians and Muslims and Jews and — I just refuse to impose that on others, unlike my friend here, the congressman. I — I do not believe that — that we have a right to tell other people that women, they — they can't control their body. It's a decision between them and their doctor, in my view. And the Supreme Court — I'm not going to interfere with that. With regard to the assault on the Catholic Church, let me make it absolutely clear. No religious institution, Catholic or otherwise, including Catholic Social Services, Georgetown Hospital, Mercy — any hospital — none has to either refer contraception. None has to pay for contraception. None has to be a vehicle to get contraception in any insurance policy they provide. That is a fact. That is a fact. Now, with regard to the way in which the — we differ, my friend says that he — well, I guess he accepts Governor Romney's position now, because in the past he has argued that there was — there's rape and forcible rape. He's argued that, in the case of rape or incest, it was still — it would be a crime to engage in having an abortion. I just fundamentally disagree with my friend.

MS. RADDATZ: Congressman Ryan.

REP. RYAN: All I'm saying is if you believe that life begins at conception, that therefore doesn't change the definition of life. That's a principle. The policy of a Romney administration is to oppose abortion with exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother. Now, I've got to take issue with the Catholic Church and religious liberty.

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: You have, on the issue of Catholic social doctrine, taken issue.

REP. RYAN: If they — if they agree with you, then why would they keep — why would they keep suing you? It's a distinction without a difference.

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: (Chuckles.)

MS. RADDATZ: I want to go back to the abortion question here. If the Romney-Ryan ticket is elected, should those who believe that abortion should remain legal be worried?

REP. RYAN: We don't think that unelected judges should make this decision; that people, through their elected representatives and reaching a consensus in society through the democratic process, should make this determination.

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: The court — the next president will get one or two Supreme Court nominees. That's how close Roe v. Wade is.Just ask yourself: With Robert Bork being the chief adviser on the court for — for Mr. Romney, who do you think he's likely to appoint? Do you think he's likely to appoint someone like Scalia or someone else on the court, far right, that would outlaw Planned — excuse me — outlaw abortion? I suspect that would happen. I guarantee you that will not happen. We picked two people. We picked people who are open-minded. They've been good justices. So keep an eye on the Supreme Court —

REP. RYAN: Was there a litmus test on them?

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: There was no litmus test. We picked people who had an open mind, did not come with an agenda.

And kids, THAT is how Paul Rand lost the Republicans the 2012 election and how Kassanova King lost this thread!!

Edited December 31, 2013 by ohlovelyrita

[Dazey]

Paul Rand eh?

[November_rain]

Well...

Since Spain are being arseholes about Gibraltar, serves them right that they've been dragged back 30 years, if things got any worse at the border, I'd say Franco was back.

LOL what does Gibraltar have to do with abortions?. And let´s not start with that ... the Brits are not sisters of mercy either.

Question :

(especially for Kasanova King and Shades)

"If abortion is made illegal, what should be the penalty for women who get illegal abortions?"

1) jailtime - specify amount of time and crime (murder?)

2) fine

3) sterilization

4) two of the above

5) none of the above

6) other

That's that's gotta be the most "baited" question I've seen around here in months.

Should they be made completely illegal? Probably not. Like others have said, if a woman really wants one....she'll find a way to get one done. So making them completely illegal doesn't make much sense to me.

Didn't you already say you'd vote again a woman's right to choose?

Where have you left her but to commit an illegal act?

That's a logical conclusion that a crime would be committed.

So how would you prosecute it?

Now THIS is a baited question:

You enter a burning building you only have time to grab either

1) ten embryos

2) one 7 year old

Which do you save?

Now tell me if there are 10 babies and 1 seven year old?!!!!

(I found that question on-line and there are more if you like)

Actually, I never stated I would vote to make abortions illegal. I stated that I was personally pro life and I didn't think women should use abortions as a form of birth control. Making abortion illegal isn't the solution, imo.

Are you serious? Do you really think women use abortions as a form of birth control?. No offense but this sounds exactly as what the radicals in Spain say. They speak as if having an abortion was like spitting m&ms. There are ways to avoid getting pregnant and just because a small amount of people are irresponsible ( teenagers...etc) doesn´t mean that the government has the right to impose this prohibition to all the women. There are different reasons and circumstances that lead women to interrupt their pregnancies like deformities and severe illnesses, lack of means to support the child...etc.

Having an abortion is not an easy decision and as Angelica and others have stated, it might have health risks and it also has psychological consequences for a lot of women.

Religious beliefs aside, this law is a violation of women´s idividual rights. Who are others to impose what a woman has to do with her body?. What do they know of each woman´s life, feelilngs, circumstances or health?.

Edited December 31, 2013 by November_rain

[Aaron_H]

Wait there, you think having a kid with deformities should be reason to abort it? Whatever happened to the whole "all life is sacred" thing?

Similarly, not having the means of financially supporting the child is a reason to do the same?

...These don't seem like decisions that should be made after one gets pregnant, they should be considered beforehand. Anything otherwise is clearly using abortion as an late contraceptive in my opinion.

And it's not about "a woman's right to do as she wants with her body", it's about "a woman's right to kill another (potential) human being"

[DieselDaisy]

Typical. I clicked on the last page of this only to see it is about religion.

[Snake-Pit]

Well...

Since Spain are being arseholes about Gibraltar, serves them right that they've been dragged back 30 years, if things got any worse at the border, I'd say Franco was back.

LOL what does Gibraltar have to do with abortions?. And let´s not start with that ... the Brits are not sisters of mercy either

Because it's funny as hell that Spain's been dragged back to the 1980's when Spanish moves on Gibraltar are anything but funny.

It's like you guys want to go back to the 1980's, and that is funny as Hell to me. - which as I said serves you guys right for;

taken 2013 in Gibraltar by Spanish police.

If you really want to know.

[Ace Nova]

@ Rita....I have no idea what you're talking about. Voting? Losing elections and threads like Rand? Apparently you and I live in two completely different worlds.

[ohlovelyrita]

@ Rita....I have no idea what you're talking about. Voting? Losing elections and threads like Rand? Apparently you and I live in two completely different worlds.

I don't doubt you are clueless. The rest of us watched that debate.

For the rest who might not be aware of how religious zealots are loosing ground in the U.S.:

Paul Ryan single-handedly cost the Republicans the White House with that quote I highlighted.

[Dazey]

It's amazing what man can accomplish when he's not got anything to worry about from 9-5.

That goes for you too Snakes though I'm still waiting for the evidence!

Wait there, you think having a kid with deformities should be reason to abort it?

Yup! Flush stick that fucker down the khazi and flush the chain given that it's not too late term.

@ Rita....I have no idea what you're talking about. Voting? Losing elections and threads like Rand? Apparently you and I live in two completely different worlds.

I think that at this point she can't even tell the difference between Paul Ryan and Rand Paul so the rest is moot no?

Edited December 31, 2013 by Dazey

[ohlovelyrita]

FYI: I read a woman has to be "between 15-17 weeks a blood test can be taken to test for levels of alphafeto protein (AFP). This test take into account your gestation and age to predict if you are at increased risk of carrying a baby with a neural tube defect (NTD) or down's syndrome (trisomy 21). It cannot tell you that you do have a baby with a NTD, just that you are at increased risk. You will then need to decide if you will have further, more invasive tests to determine if in fact you do have a child with Down's or a NTD. That is why there seem to be so many false positives...these women screened as at increased risk, which then needs to be ruled out by further testing.

Which begs the question...if you are not considering terminating a pregnancy based on the information you receive from the testing why have the test? Just something to think about. Some women like to know, so they can prepare for a handicapped child and some like to know so they can terminate the pregnancy. Others still would rather not know and enjoy the pregnancy and are happy to accept into their lives what they are blessed enough to receive."

This is why anyone who would vote to ban an abortion after the first trimester (if it came to a vote) is a bad, bad person. Anyone aware how hard it is to take care of a special needs kid would look at this situation realistically.

The people who say women use abortions as birth control are the most misinformed and pathetic.

Edited December 31, 2013 by ohlovelyrita

[DieselDaisy]

Gibralter is so absurd. Even the Argies have a better case with the Falklands than what the spanish do with the rock of Gibralter. Clue to the Spanish: do not cede (perpetually) something to someone else in a treaty and expect at, some date, to get it back. I do not believe the Treaty of Utrecht contained a recipt haha.

[Dazey]

Gibralter is so absurd. Even the Argies have a better case with the Falklands than what the spanish do with the rock of Gibralter. Clue to the Spanish: do not cede (perpetually) something to someone else in a treaty and expect at, some date, to get it back. I do not believe the Treaty of Utrecht contained a recipt haha.

Dunno what their problem is really. I mean we're still doing them a massive favour by sending all our most obnoxious cunts over there on holiday to keep their economy going. It's great for us too cuz "Tevvo from Berwick Hills and hiz meeerts" don't have any ASBO violations for a couple of weeks a year.

Edited December 31, 2013 by Dazey

[Ace Nova]

@ Rita....I have no idea what you're talking about. Voting? Losing elections and threads like Rand? Apparently you and I live in two completely different worlds.

I don't doubt you are clueless. The rest of us watched that debate.

For the rest who might not be aware of how religious zealots are loosing ground in the U.S.:

Paul Ryan single-handedly cost the Republicans the White House with that quote I highlighted.

Just stop....I really don't want to get into a war of words with you but you breathe ignorance with your statements. Rand had little to nothing to do with Obama retaking the White House.

This is why anyone who would vote to ban an abortion after the first trimester (if it came to a vote) is a bad, bad person. Anyone aware how hard it is to take care of a special needs kid would look at this situation realistically.

The people who say women use abortions as birth control are the most misinformed and pathetic.

AGAIN....you're ignorance is astounding. Now you're promoting abortion for women who have children with special needs. So let's kill off all the children with special needs in the world...because they have no rights to life.

You're freakin' sick.

[Ace Nova]

Are you serious? Do you really think women use abortions as a form of birth control?.

Uhm....yes....many women do use abortion as a form of birth control. I've lived through and seen it first hand. I grew up witnessing several "friends" of mine that were on their 2nd and 3rd abortions by the time they were 21.

What would you call that?

[ohlovelyrita]

@ Rita....I have no idea what you're talking about. Voting? Losing elections and threads like Rand? Apparently you and I live in two completely different worlds.

I don't doubt you are clueless. The rest of us watched that debate.

For the rest who might not be aware of how religious zealots are loosing ground in the U.S.:

Paul Ryan single-handedly cost the Republicans the White House with that quote I highlighted.

Just stop....I really don't want to get into a war of words with you but you breathe ignorance with your statements. Rand had little to nothing to do with Obama retaking the White House.

This is why anyone who would vote to ban an abortion after the first trimester (if it came to a vote) is a bad, bad person. Anyone aware how hard it is to take care of a special needs kid would look at this situation realistically.

The people who say women use abortions as birth control are the most misinformed and pathetic.

AGAIN....you're ignorance is astounding. Now you're promoting abortion for women who have children with special needs. So let's kill off all the children with special needs in the world...because they have no rights to life.

You're freakin' sick.

Why do you think people have the test?

You are really iost and in the dark.

Name-calling shows you have lost this debate. Bow out gracefully!

[Ace Nova]

Why do you think people have the test?

You are really iost and in the dark.

Name-calling shows you have lost this debate. Bow out gracefully!

LOL...they test for a variety of disorders so that the parents can prepare. I'm not going into personal details but I have family members with special needs and the parents were aware of it before the child was born. It's to prepare the parents.....of course, they may have a choice....but most ethical parents would choose to keep their child.

How can I lose a debate when it's based on my opinion? Are you really this delusional?

Edited December 31, 2013 by Kasanova King

[izzygirl]

Gibralter is so absurd. Even the Argies have a better case with the Falklands than what the spanish do with the rock of Gibralter. Clue to the Spanish: do not cede (perpetually) something to someone else in a treaty and expect at, some date, to get it back. I do not believe the Treaty of Utrecht contained a recipt haha.

The isthmus was never ceded to anyone but it's occupied by an airport and whatnot. The Treaty is clear. AAnd without the isthmus, Gibraltar would really be just only monkeys. Also, under what conditions was the Treaty made? And, finally, UN resoultions and Interantional Law say you're wrong.

Anyway, meh Gibraltar. All yours.

The problems lately are due to certain practises carried out by the Gibraltar government like throwing concrete blocks to the sea or floating fuel stations that damage or are a big danger for the Spanish fishing or the environment in general. But if you read the british newspapers, yes, Spain is bad, and silly and wants to steal what is yours.

That said, I will use another post to comment about abortion.

[Dazey]

Without the isthmus, Gibraltar would really be just only monkeys.

Nah, that's just Ibiza and Majorca and not all year round cuz we have to keep them on benefits for the rest of the year.

[ohlovelyrita]

Why do you think people have the test?

You are really iost and in the dark.

Name-calling shows you have lost this debate. Bow out gracefully!

LOL...they test for a variety of disorders so that the parents can prepare. I'm not going into personal details but I have family members with special needs and the parents were aware of it before the child was born. It's to prepare the parents.....of course, they may have a choice....but most ethical parents would choose to keep their child.

How can I lose a debate when it's based on my opinion? Are you really this delusional?

Not everyone who wants a baby has the means to raise a special needs child. Many end up in foster care.

You are entitled to your opinion but you are not a good person to put your ideas of what constitutes religious salvation

on innocent women by voting against their right to choose. There is karma for being a putz.

Women are using abortion as contraception is your most depraved talking point.

Seriously, no real man would vote against a woman's right to choose. The sickness is bubbling over. Good day!

[Ace Nova]

Not everyone who wants a baby has the means to raise a special needs child. Many end up in foster care.

You are entitled to your opinion but you are not a good person to put your ideas of what constitutes religious salvation

on innocent women by voting against their right to choose. There is karma for being a putz.

Women are using abortion as contraception is your most depraved talking point.

Seriously, no real man would vote against a woman's right to choose. The sickness is bubbling over. Good day!

You must have missed the parts that I stated that by "law" making abortions illegal isn't the solution. My personal view is pro life.

When you come on a forum belligerently talking about pro choice...as if it's as easy as taking a pill....and you vehemently only show one side of the story...as if there is no other....you show how little you know and understand about the world.

Let's look at Angela, for example - she is absolutely pro choice....and she made a statement in which I objected to because she did not tell both sides of the story. Instead of her coming here and harping how it's only this....not that....she explained herself....and she brought a balanced, well thought out thought process - which I could understand. She understands both sides but chooses to be pro choice. Unfortunately for you....you only see your side and can't contemplate the other side. That's why you fail in debates like these.

Edited December 31, 2013 by Kasanova King

[Dazey]

It's to prepare the parents.....of course, they may have a choice....but most ethical parents would choose to keep their child.

I think that very much depends on your point of view and your opinion of the definition of a "child" based on how late term the abortion is. Please don't make me agree with Rita fella! You're better than that!

[Ace Nova]

I think that very much depends on your point of view and your opinion of the definition of a "child" based on how late term the abortion is. Please don't make me agree with Rita fella! You're better than that!

You better not agree with Rita....

Most married couples (that I know of) would more than likely choose to keep their child. I can only go by personal experiences. Obviously, if there are cases of a single mother (for example)....she may choose not to keep the child. Personally, I can understand how a single mother may not want to make the sacrifice - although I understand, doesn't mean I agree with it....but unless I'm in her shoes....who am I to say what she should do?

Edited December 31, 2013 by Kasanova King

[DieselDaisy]

Gibralter is so absurd. Even the Argies have a better case with the Falklands than what the spanish do with the rock of Gibralter. Clue to the Spanish: do not cede (perpetually) something to someone else in a treaty and expect at, some date, to get it back. I do not believe the Treaty of Utrecht contained a recipt haha.

The isthmus was never ceded to anyone but it's occupied by an airport and whatnot.

You have obviously not been to Gibralter haha. The whole town is located past the isthmus, straddling the rock. Also the most important thing about Gibralter, the naval base - its strategic value, i.e. why the British wanted it in the first place - is located on the other side of the rock, facing the sea!

Also, under what conditions was the Treaty made?

The Treaty of Utrecht (1713) was not a treaty signed under coercion by any side as the war it ended, the Spanish War of Succession (1701-14), was inconclusive. You maintained your Bourbon monarchy under the proviso that it would not be joined with the French monarchy - remember, Britain-Austria had been fighting for the Hapsburg claimant to the Spanish throne (it was sort of, the point of the war!).

And, finally, UN resoultions and Interantional Law say you're wrong.

I do not believe it was the purpose of twentieth century international bodies to overide former treaties unless there was a significent cry on either human rights or self-determination and as we know, with Gibralter, there is neither.

At the end of the day (my italics).

The Catholic King does hereby, for himself, his heirs and successors, yield to the Crown of Great Britain the full and entire propriety of the town and castle of Gibraltar, together with the port, fortifications, and forts thereunto belonging; and he gives up the said propriety to be held and enjoyed absolutely with all manner of right for ever, without any exception or impediment whatsoever.

- Treaty of Utrecht (1713)

This would usually be case close, except in the case of Spaniards when their economy is up the shitter and they need to divert public attention!

Edited December 31, 2013 by DieselDaisy