<br /><br />Ken
The anti-rights people don't just want to be against abortion, they want to control people. They want to enforce their brand of morality on others. If they weren't doing it on this subject, they'd be looking for something else to force upon people. They want to abolish most of the Bill of Rights and enforce their religion upon the country.<br /><br />So yes, something that simple is controversial when you involve hypocrites and religious freaks (that doesn't include those who choose to be religious but not try to force it upon others).
<br /><br />For some reason, I dont see abortion as a right guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Nor do I see it as a religious issue. I see it as an issue of life and death, with a defenseless human in the balance.This statement, taken at face value, is true, txs.<br /><br />But, when people take this sentiment to the streets and politicize the Iraq campaign as the radical democrats have done with all this tripe about withdrawing, they aid and abet the enemy and embolden him and further jeopardize their safety of our people, the mission, and the investment we have there already. And it is shameful.<br /><br />I want the troops to come home too, but I want them to come home victorious. To just pull out without finishing the job would be a betrayal of the Iraqi people, destroy our credibility in the world, embolden Iran, jeopardize Israel, jeopardize the world economy, and throw what has been bought and paid for already by American blood spilled on Iraqi soil. That would be shameful.<br /><br />You have said you went to Vietnam. Unless you were always in the rear, it seems to me you would resent the fact that your sacrifices and the sacrifices made by those who were there with you were wasted because of the premature capitulation demanded by the LEFT.
Like I do, but that wasn't the subject. We were talking about removing a parasite from an unwilling host. That's all it is until it becomes a "child" and can exist on its own.<br /><br />
Yes, because in order to enforce your view, you have to abrogate a couple of those rights to begin with. We've long held that the discovery of a "crime" requires a certain process which can't go against those established rights.
Not so fast. You're going to have to elaborate on that. Who's talking about "discovery of a crime?" Seems to me we are talking about definitions. And I want to know specifically which of the first ten Amendments you claim has to be abbrogated, and specifically how!
