Author Topic: Judge Alito is against the death sentence... (Read 855 times)

ironglow · « **on:** November 02, 2005, 12:11:48 AM »

Got you thinking didn't I..
...But judge Alito IS, I would opine, against the death sentence...for pre-born boys and girls.

Some stupid senators are "outraged"" that judge Alito once insisted that a husband should be notified if his wife intends on aborting one of their babies...

One facet of deductive reasoning is to " put the shoe on the other foot "...

So..let's reverse the situation...

Should a husband at the least, notify the wife if he intends on killing one of their babies ?

For an answer...a simple YES or NO will suffice...

..Don't need no 'steenking' liberal excuses..or whining...LOL

PA-Joe · « **Reply #1 on:** November 02, 2005, 03:24:42 AM »

But he is for machine gun ownership!

magooch · « **Reply #2 on:** November 02, 2005, 04:49:46 AM »

I guess I have a more liberal view of abortion. I would like to see all liberals aborted and I wouldn't have it restricted to a certain time after conception; anywhere from conception to old-age would be good, but the sooner the better.

FWiedner · « **Reply #3 on:** November 02, 2005, 04:50:44 AM »

Quote from: PA-Joe

But he is for machine gun ownership!

Not exactly.

He opinied that the Constitution does not give the Congress sufficient authority to regulate "machine guns" as an issue of interstate commerce just because Congress says it should.

Not exactly pro-2nd Amendment, but definitely pro-Constitution.

An outlook in short supply in the federal judiciary these days.

:-)

AlaskaHippie · « **Reply #4 on:** November 02, 2005, 12:34:30 PM »

Banning abortion will do nothing more than re-create the non-sterile butcher shops of the pre Roe v Wade decision.

A step backwards is not progress.

Haywire Haywood · « **Reply #5 on:** November 02, 2005, 01:28:07 PM »

Quote from: AlaskaHippie

Banning abortion will do nothing more than re-create the non-sterile butcher shops of the pre Roe v Wade decision.

Much like banning guns will result in only the criminals having them. The end result being worse than the original problem.

Ian

ironglow · « **Reply #6 on:** November 02, 2005, 05:50:49 PM »

TM7..I agree with you..I don't agree with the killing of ANY little boys or girls; be they born, preborn or during the birth process; the latest manifestation of the holocaust !!

Now come on Hippie and Heywood..you did not answer my question with a YES or NO as requested...but came across with those excuses..

PAjoe..Where did you get the idea that he was in favor of machine guns ?
I did hear one addle headed liberal woman make that accusation on TV...but you know as well as I do that to some of those big city Liberals, a Ruger 10/22 is a machine gun !!

Now..getting back to tyhe original question...is your answer YES or is it NO...?
..Not too difficult to answer..

AlaskaHippie · « **Reply #7 on:** November 02, 2005, 06:53:16 PM »

OK. If thru some convoluted freak occurence of nature a husband where to possess a uterus. And his wife was capable of clitoral ejaculation, with said ejaculate having viable sperm, and stretching it even further, they conceived a child. Then NO I'd say it is ultimately the husbands choice
on what he wants done to his body.

The preceding far fetched scenario is my way of exemplifying the mentality of those that equate aborting a fetus in the first trimester to killing a child.

Obtuse questions deserve obtuse answers.

Haywire Haywood · « **Reply #8 on:** November 02, 2005, 10:43:53 PM »

Answering that question yes or no is assuming we live in a Black and White world. We don't.

It's like asking the question: Is it OK for me to shoot my neighbor? The answer could be yes or no depending on the circumstances.

Ian

Brett · « **Reply #9 on:** November 03, 2005, 12:32:17 AM »

Quote from: AlaskaHippie

The preceding far fetched scenario is my way of exemplifying the mentality of those that equate aborting a fetus in the first trimester to killing a child.

Okay AH, so in your mind when does that fetus, a cluster of living cells become a human being in your mind? :?

With all the couples who want children but are unable to conceive in this world I just do not see a need for on demand abortion.

The time to think about whether or not you want children is before the act not after. You close the barn door to keep the horse from getting out of the barn, you don't shoot him once he's out.

DanielWGriggs · « **Reply #10 on:** November 03, 2005, 02:12:39 AM »

Horse is good eating, the gene pool needs cleansing,and my neighbors shouldn't live so close.
At conception it is a child.
My wife and I discuss all decisions of that magnitude.
my beliefs need not be yours and vice versa.

to answer your question yes[/b]

Lawdog · « **Reply #11 on:** November 05, 2005, 11:35:14 AM »

Quote from: AlaskaHippie

Banning abortion will do nothing more than re-create the non-sterile butcher shops of the pre Roe v Wade decision.

A step backwards is not progress.

So very, very true. :yeah: Seeing that the abortion issue concerns everyone why not leave it up to a vote of the people to see if Roe vs. Wade stays or gets abolished? Lawdog

FWiedner · « **Reply #12 on:** November 05, 2005, 02:31:54 PM »

Quote

Should a husband at the least, notify the wife if he intends on killing one of their babies ?

Good question. Did Abraham bother to tell Sarah that he was going to kill their only son? Should men have to tell women why they do anything?

Quote

when does that fetus, a cluster of living cells become a human being in your mind?

When it starts to talk back, begins eating my groceries in copious amounts, owes me money, or wants to marry my daughter. Other than that, it will always be nothing more than a useless mass of unwanted tissue.