McCain Wasn't in a Cone of SilenceFollow

Considering the fact that biologists haven't been able to concretely define what it even means to be alive I think it's an acceptable answer. I'd prefer he find out exactly where the line should be to allow for certain things, such as birth control, before making a definitive statement on his position. McCain's, "at the moment of conception" response technically labels the vast majority of birth control methods as murder.

He didnt' say that though. He said he's not qualified to answer a critical question about a tug-of-war issue. I don't think his response was wrong. It just didn't answer the question, nor make any kind of statement about his convictions on the issue of abortion, which is obviously what the question was meant to root out. Maybe it was intentional as to not disenfranchise folks on either side of the aisle, but it could just a easily be said it was a lost opportunity to pick up votes from pro-choicers.

Edited, Aug 19th 2008 5:09pm by Elinda

For anyone who's choice of candidate hangs on them being pro-choice Obama is the their only option. I'd argue he has all the pro-choice support he's ever going to have. His eloquent dodge, if you want to call it that, was an effort to appeal to the middle, and in my opinion it was the right way to go. Pro-lifers already know he's pro-choice. He's not been quiet about this, but at least he's now the pro-choice guy willing to make a sincere effort at reducing abortion figures. The goal is to appeal to the widest audience possible, not stir up your core group of fervent followers at every opportunity.

------------------------------------------------------------------

nor does it belong to you or any other right wing conservative yahoo who thinks they should have the last word on whats right and wrong. infact, it is a decision that no man has any standing or rights at all in making one way or another.

i find it ironic you want to condem the very thought of gun controll but wave your banner about taking a womans rights to her own body away from her. since when does the freedom to bear arms any way you choose more important than a womans rights over her own body?

one word sums up the entire republican party. hypocritical.

as far as this debate and every other ever aird in public......a politician lied and cheated? no, say it isnt so. keep talking like that and you will have nixon rolling in his grave.

Edited, Aug 19th 2008 12:07pm by shadowrelm

Knoxsouthy, if someone told you you have prostate cancer, you'd want it removed right? What if they told you that you couldn't have it removed, even if it might kill you?

That's what laws against abortion without health exception for the mother say. "Nevermind that the ectopic pregnancy you have means you'll die from an infection, you can't have it terminated. Have a nice afterlife."

Take your finger, and scrape along the inside of your cheek. See that scum? That's skin cells. That's your DNA, your own genetic material you just scraped off, and a significantly larger volume of cells than exists in a blastocyte shortly after fertilization.

Personally, I define "life" separately from "human being." There's no doubt that an embryo is alive. But it's not a separate human being til it can exist on its on, and that's not until week 25 or so in general.

By the by: I'm getting my tubes tied the second I turn 30 and they'll let me. Childfree hardcore here. I'm voluntarily eliminating myself from the gene pool.

Honestly I thought the "above my paygrade" remark was a nice religious nod without being too obvious, but to each their own I suppose. And, yes it was wishy washy. Even so, you knew where he stood by the end of the response. The only thing he left off was a specific week or point in development, and those are the kind of details you don't want to put on the record without being well prepared.

It's a difficult question for anyone who can't just say, "as soon as the sperm hits the egg!!".

You're assuming I'm a Paulian Christian. I'm not.

Saint Paul was the father of all mysoginy. I'll take my Christanity without him, please.

As to why 30? That's when health insurance will cover it. :)

Edited, Aug 19th 2008 12:30pm by catwho

As soon as that doesn't require a parasitic dependency on a hostile host, they do! Lucky them!

Nexa

I think if you check, you'll find that having sex for reasons other than procreation is quite popular, even among self-righteous okra farmers! Sometimes something goes wrong and you catch something...like a pregnancy! Well, you don't, so I guess it's easier for you to tell those who can to suck it up and deal.

Nexa