Colorado Legislature Passes Ban on Local Interferences With Reproductive Health-Care Decisions


In a 4-3 committee vote Thursday, lawmakers in Colorado passed legislation forbidding state and local government from interfering with reproductive health-care decisions or with access to reproductive health-care information based on “current evidence-based scientific data and medical consensus.”

At a pre-vote hearing before the Health and Human Services Committee Thursday, state Sen. Jeanne Nicholson (D-Gilpin) pointed to a growing list of local laws that restrict abortion or control abortion-related information and testified that her legislation, called the “Reproductive Health Freedom Act,” “is simply saying an individual has the right to make individual health care decisions.”

In response, Natalie Decker, an attorney representing the Alliance Defending Freedom, testified that the measure should actually be called the “Colorado Abortion on Demand Act.”

Decker told lawmakers that the “deceptive” legislation is so “vague” and “broad” that it could “prohibit any restriction to abortion whatsoever.” She particularly objected that terms such as “interfere,” “evidence-based scientific data,” and “policy” were not defined in the short bill.

“Reproductive health care” is defined in the proposed law to mean “treatment, services, procedures, supplies, products, devices, or information related to human sexuality, contraception, pregnancy, abortion, or assisted reproduction.”

The legislation states that “every individual possesses a fundamental right of privacy with respect to reproductive health care decisions.”

State Sen. Kevin Lundberg (R-Berthoud), who voted against the bill, repeatedly asked why the term “individual” wasn’t defined in the legislation and argued that the measure is “meaningless” without such a definition.

The proposed law, which passed in a party-line vote, “presumes an unborn human being has no rights,” Lundberg said during the hearing.

“What individuals are we protecting and which individuals are we exposing to destruction,” Lundberg asked.

If passed, the legislation “would be one of the first and most comprehensive laws to establish state protections for women’s private decisions about reproductive health, and, as such, it could be a model for other states,” said Karen Middleton, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Colorado. It could stop municipalities, for example, in some states from enacting anti-choice policies.

“While many anti-choice bills passed in other states are in clear violation of the U.S. Constitution, Colorado is taking the extra precaution to make sure that they don’t see the light of day,” said Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, in a statement. “This measure is an important protection for women so that their access to comprehensive health care is not limited because of their zip code.”

The bill, which is expected to clear the legislature and be signed by pro-choice Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, has been taking a beating by social conservatives on talk radio.

“This is a clear play by the state legislature to bypass and subvert the will of the people,” said local talk show host Dan Caplis, who runs a small Denver law firm, to his audience on April 9.

“This is a bill that would stop the state from ‘interfering’ with any woman’s decision to have an abortion,” Caplis said on air. “So that could be used potentially to knock out parental notification [or] all these restrictions that Coloradans and other people around the country are now placing on abortion. I hope this is part of the inevitable march of the people of this great nation to saying, ‘Wait a second. We can’t be killing our kids before they’re born. That’s goofy.'”

In fact, abortion rights are popular in Colorado. A 2013 Project New America poll found that “62 percent of voters surveyed agree that a woman should be allowed to have an abortion based on her personal values and her doctor’s advice.” Just 9 percent of voters want abortion banned completely, according to the same poll.

In 2008 and 2010, voters here overwhelmingly rejected “personhood” amendments, which would have banned all abortion.

Abortion is legal in Colorado, and the state constitution prohibits public funding of abortion and mandates parental notification.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

  • red_zone

    Some sanity and rationality in Colorado.

    • Shan

      It’s like they’ve got their own little FOCA going on there. Good on them!

  • Refugee

    If this passes in Colorado, I wonder if they will strike down the law they have that requires life sustaining measure for a pregnant woman (if the fetus is deemed viable) and, therefore invalidates her advance directive.

    • Shan

      Interesting question. I should think that if a woman makes it part of her advance directive that even IF she is pregnant she still wants her wishes followed, it should be considered a protected “reproductive healthcare” decision of that individual.

      • Refugee

        I agree. Unfortunately, 33 states (including Colorado) have laws that do not allow pregnant women to make choices in their advance directives.

        • Shan

          How very creepy.

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      We have that law in PA. I am incensed.

  • Suba gunawardana

    It’s high time to enact a federal law to keep religion out of healthcare.

    • P. McCoy

      Real religion stays in places of worship ; when it moves to the political arena it should be taxed and monitored as a political movement. If they try to impose theocracy then they are guilty of attempting to overthrow in the United States, that is our secular government and should be procecuted as an enemy of the state as well as a terrorist organization.

  • fiona64

    Really? Is there anyone out there who does *not* know what “evidence-based scientific data” means?

    • Lieutenant Nun

      Yep. The asshat who just told me that my description of how implantation works was ‘invented by pro choicers’

  • KMattSchuster

    Seriously disturbing! Heartbreaking and a further decline of the value of the individual in the US. Few countries in the world view a child that resides still in its “mother’s” womb with such indifference, as does the USA. In fact it is only rivaled by the former soviet countries. Of course when children are beaten to death by state institutions, (todays news about the Florida school for boys), it ought not surprise that the same caliber elected people introduce and vote for the destruction of the innocent.

    • Lieutenant Nun

      Few countries in the world view a child that resides still in its
      “mother’s” womb with such indifference, as does the USA. In fact it is
      only rivaled by the former soviet countries.

      citation needed

      Of course when children are beaten to death by state institutions,

      beaten to death by pro-life christian homeschoolers..

      http://www.sott.net/article/268265-Parents-of-Hana-Williams-Sean-Paddock-and-Lydia-Schatz-train-them-to-death-following-teachings-of-Michael-Pearl

      • KMattSchuster

        Lieutenant Nun, you simply sound like an angry person. Perhaps you should ask yourself this question while looking into the mirror, “When is the last time I did something for someone else without expecting a favor in return.” The reference to the 55 bodies that are being exhumed by authorities, as we speak, pertains to a Florida state run boys school. I do believe that any brutality toward children is criminal and punishable by the law.

        Most children that are being aborted in the US are simply the product of careless and therefore selfish sexual activity on behalf of both the male and the female. ABortion is the abdication of individual responsibility in lieu of unprotected sex. The institutionalizing of (abortion on demand) such behavior, calling it a “right” sanctifies the worst irrisponsibility this nation has to offer. How can I respect such abdication of being responsible? So we kill the innocent so the guilty can have irresponsible sex? G, how insane.

        • Lieutenant Nun

          And what is wrong with female sexuality exactly?

          • KMattSchuster

            I do not understand your question.

          • Lieutenant Nun

            Do you believe that women should not have the same sexual freedom as men?

          • KMattSchuster

            I believe that sex should not ever take place at the cost of having to pay for it with an abortion.

          • Lieutenant Nun

            Why do you want to punish female sexuality?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Run your stupid rant on this kind of Dad, Bedwetter. I want to see you get the bitchslapping you so richly deserve.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEFWDYB0rWo

        • Suba gunawardana

          Repeating my response from above:

          First of all it’s not true that “Abortion is caused by irresponsibility of individual citizens”. NOT all unwanted pregnancies are a result of irresponsibility. Only a few are.

          But let’s assume your premise to correct for a moment. If the person seeking abortion was irresponsible to begin with, what sense does it make to FORCE an innocent child upon an irresponsible parent (who may well neglect/abuse the child)? In your rush to punish the woman, aren’t you punishing the child?

        • Arekushieru

          “Lieutenant Nun, you simply sound like an angry person.” The frack?

          And you would side with the same people that commit these atrocities, then force more unwanted children into an already overburdened system that only makes them even MORE vulnerable to abuse like this. You are a hypocrite.

          So, a single impoverished mother who carries an expensive pregnancy to term at the expense of her EXISTING children’s health and lives is being responsible? Besides, if you think that abortion is the only response to careless and ‘selfish’ sexual activity then I’ve got some swampland in Florida to sell you. Selfish is in scare quotes because nothing is more ‘selfish’ (actually, greedy, which is a sin) than forcing others to labour for someone else’ profit, just so that they can feel satisfied with themselves.

          Again, most women who have had abortions used some form of contraception.

          Abortion is not a ‘right’, illogical Pro-Lifer. The right for each individual woman to determine who uses her body and when and how it is used, via ongoing, explicit and informed consent, even if the use is required to sustain another entity’s life, however, IS. How is a woman responding to an unplanned pregnancy with an informed decision being IRresponsIBLE? That would make either decision irresponsible, as I outlined in a previous post, too, after all.

          Again, a fetus is neither innocent nor guilty. And, again, how can one be guilty of violation of one’s rights prior to that entity’s existence? Oopsies?

        • Jennifer Starr

          So it’s not the babies you care about. It’s the sex you want to punish. Actually, you’re the one who sounds pretty angry.

        • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

          You want to force irresponsible and careless women to be parents? Do you dislike children?

        • goatini

          The angry person here is the one who desires to threaten the civil, human and Constitutional rights of female US citizens. All citizens should stand against the enemies that threaten our rights.

    • Suba gunawardana

      And what happens when the innocent are indiscriminately forced into life, with no thought for their safety and well-being? Who’s going to protect those unwanted CHILDREN (not fetuses anymore) from abuse/neglect/torture by whomever they are thrown at?

      Abortion prevents abuse of a future child. Forced-birth pretty much guarantees it.

      • KMattSchuster

        The innocent are forced into life every day, nobody is asked whether they want to get here or not. So it is with every living thing, for better or for worse. Humans have the unique place in all existence to make a difference and so we do. Only, we have been at it for thousands of years and have gotten none the wiser in many cases. The callousness towards life on earth is growing and the men and women who elevate their right to unprotected few minutes of pleasure over the precious consequences resulting in a human being is deeply disturbing indeed.

        • Lieutenant Nun

          Ovulation does not force anything into existence. You are treating female biology as a crime.

          • Arekushieru

            Pretty much. After all, he couldn’t tell me why a woman must be punished with nine months of forced gestation and hours, sometimes days, of labour because of something that occurs FOLLOWING ovulation AND sexual intercourse, in order to be ‘responsible’, since that is the SOLE person in the equation that would be affected.

        • Lieutenant Nun

          And yeah, you don’t give a flying fuck about prenates. You just can’t stop thinking about how women might have sex that you personally disapprove of. Pervert

        • Suba gunawardana

          The fact that many innocent are forced into horrible lives beyond our control, absolutely does NOT justify repeating the same atrocity when we have the ability to PREVENT it.

          “Nature does it too” is not an excuse to continue any cruelty.

          Yes humans are in a unique place where we can do far better than nature. That’s why we have antibiotics, anesthetics, analgesics, surgical interventions, etc. to reduce/eliminate EXISTING suffering;
          and most importantly, contraception and abortion to PREVENT potential suffering.

        • Jennifer Starr

          The callousness towards life on earth is growing

          You don’t know a whole lot about history, do you?

          • KMattSchuster

            Go ahead, let’s see how we compare.

          • Jennifer Starr

            So you realize that abortion and contraception have been around for as long as pregnancy has existed?

          • KMattSchuster

            Irresponsible selfishness has been around and it needs to be curbed by societal standards.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Once again, HOW would it curb irresponsibility & selfishness to force innocent children on irresponsible people? That will only provide them another innocent victim to neglect or abuse.

          • KMattSchuster

            Your belief-system so concludes that society can not produce a better outcome and will and con not provide the resources to assure reasonable safety and wellbeing for the child.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Society can do that by supporting free and unlimited contraception, thorough sex education in primary grades, and free uncoerced abortion.
            Where those things exist, abortion rates are low and infant/mother mortality is low also.

        • Arekushieru

          And nobody is asked if they WANT to get them here or not. Oops. Selfishness is fine for prenates but not for born humans, ESPECIALLY women.

    • Lieutenant Nun

      Forced pregnancy denies a woman her freedom, and the pursuit of happiness.

      Abortion is social responsibility.

      • KMattSchuster

        Abortion is caused by irresponsibility of individual citizens. Abortion as a “right” to make up for irresponsible sex exemplifies how the US is losing its grip on the most basic human decency.

        • Lieutenant Nun

          Why do you want to control female sexuality?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Because s/he is a sick person who suffers from a paraphilia (sexual perversion) that combines features of narcissism, sado masochism, exhibitiionism and voyeurism.

          • cjvg

            Lovely set of psychological diversions, very apropos

        • Suba gunawardana

          First of all it’s not true that “Abortion is caused by irresponsibility of individual citizens”. NOT all unwanted pregnancies are a result of irresponsibility. Only a few are.

          But let’s assume your premise to correct for a moment. If the person seeking abortion was irresponsible to begin with, what sense does it make to FORCE an innocent child upon an irresponsible parent (who may well neglect/abuse the child)? In your rush to punish the woman, aren’t you punishing the child?

          • KMattSchuster

            In fact MOST abortions result simply from having irresponsible sex. If you have any sense at all you check on the statistics and interpret them accordingly. The only ones’ rushing, are those who lack any sense of responsibility when it comes to having sex. The children that result from such irresponsible behavior are innocent. They deserve our welcome, acceptance and embrace. The constitution of US must await them and offer them equality as citizens.

          • Suba gunawardana

            As I said, EVEN IF you are correct:

            If the person seeking abortion was irresponsible to begin with, what
            sense does it make to FORCE an innocent child upon an irresponsible
            parent (who may well neglect/abuse the child)? In your rush to punish
            the woman, aren’t you punishing the child?

            Every child needs MORE than just a life. They need a GOOD life complete with resources, love and protection. Forcing unwanted children on irresponsible parents would only result in child neglect/abuse.

          • KMattSchuster

            You are so wrong. If your definition of “GOOD” life was going to be the standard of who should and shouldn’t live we would have to exterminate much of the human race. Who are you to be the judge over the innocent? The law is meant to protect the innocent. The only social side to the story is us as a society taking responsibility for the innocent. Just ask any child that grew up in an orphanage or on the street, whether he/she would have preferred to have been aborted.
            We must resist the irresponsible and protect and enable the innocent.

          • Suba gunawardana

            I notice you pointedly ignored my argument on the stupidity of forcing innocent children on irresponsible parents.

            “The law is meant to protect the innocent.” Except it doesn’t. A child is abused every 10 seconds; and over 4 children a day die from child abuse, in the US alone. And these are only the REPORTED cases. The US foster system is always flooded, and thousands of children die in foster care every year.

            Throwing more children into an overburdened system WITHOUT ensuring the safety and well-being of each child, is to knowingly promote child abuse.

            Unless YOU personally step up to protect & care for each child, you have no business forcing other people’s unwanted children into life. All you give them is misery, and they didn’t ask for it.

            BTW I have heard MANY accounts of unwanted children who would rather have been aborted than live the life they were forced into, being abused/raped/tortured by uncaring adults. Many of them end up attempting/committing suicide, or scarred for life & living sad unproductive lives.

          • Arekushieru

            How are forcing an unwanted child on irresponsible parents living in poor conditions and having a very much wanted child raised by responsible parents, albeit in similar poor conditions, the exact same thing, again?

            We want to protect the innocent. Women. You want to punish them. How can irresponsible sex be a crime or, at least, a violation of the human rights of a fetus, that warrants a penalty that can only be paid by women, when it doesn’t even exist, yet, after all?

            Death is even more ‘natural’ than pregnancy. And there are worse things than death. SMDH.

          • goatini

            A fetus cannot be innocent, nor can it be guilty.

          • Lieutenant Nun

            In fact MOST abortions result simply from having irresponsible sex.

            citation needed

          • Arekushieru

            Fetuses are neither innocent nor guilty.

            If a pregnancy is unwanted, how are you going to ensure that a child is going to be wanted? You think women will just magically want the babies that were forced on them? That’s one of the most disgusting forms of misogyny I’ve seen, yet. After all, women DO have more desires than just wanting to be pregnant and have babies all the time (such as myself. I’m asexual and never want to be pregnant, but you are saying that if I’m raped, I should be forced to endure a nine-month form of rape simply because a male who will never be in the same position that I am says I must. Before you say its different for rape, someone who claims a fetus is innocent should realize that a fetus that comes as a result of rape is JUST as innocent, in their view, as a fetus that comes as a result of consensual sex. But, ugh, I just barfed).

            Those who ‘lack any sense of responsibility’ when it comes to having sex only do so because people oppose affordable and easily accessible contraception, comprehensive sex ed, supports for pregnant women on welfare, etc….

            You want to give a fetus MORE rights than any other human is granted in the US constitution. Sorry to tell ya, but that’s NOT equality.

          • KMattSchuster

            The persons on this site are stereotypical in their replies. You are not really addressing me at all in what I have stated in my posts. You are addressing some mind monster that has been placed into your feeble brains by those who exercise political power over you.
            In fact, in none of my deliberations have I indicated to be against contraceptives. It would be ludicrous if I had, considering the argument that I made. I also have not spoken to rape victims whatsoever. I simply addressed the deeply disturbing reality of the hundreds of thousands’ irrisponsibility that women and men bring to their sexual encounters, producing unwanted children leading to their destruction via abortion.
            A society that supports such irresponsibility ought not wonder why every new generation becomes more callous and selfish towards life and more dependent on government. It is a vicious cycle and what I hear here in your responses is ugly indeed.
            How can the killing of a child be an act of responsibility? How? How?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            There is no child until I make it out of my flesh and pain.
            Given that gestation is 14 times more dangerous than having an abortion, I will decide when and if to gestate any fertilized ova to term. YOU will decide nothing and you will keep you sick perverted nose out of my HooHah.
            And my religion mandates abortion if the fetus will main/kill the pregnant woman.

          • KMattSchuster

            The deeply disturbing reality remains the same. Just read your own responses. You elevate a few minutes of unprotected sex over the preciousness of life that results.

          • Lieutenant Nun

            So if a woman uses birth control or is raped, you would allow abortion yes?

          • Suba gunawardana

            Simple question: Why is life “precious”?

            To sustain every new human life created, millions of animals/plants have to be killed.

            By actively creating more life, you actively promote the destruction of existing life.

            So of life is indeed precious, you should not be creating more life, which would destroy MANY more existing lives.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Why would you want to force a moral degenerate like me to give birth? Fooking sexpig. Your most florid delusion is the idea you will be seen as compassionate and sane.

            And here is what my RELIGION mandates:

            Jewish law not only permits, but in some circumstances requires abortion. Where the mother’s life is in jeopardy because of the unborn child, abortion is mandatory.

            An unborn child has the status of “potential human life” until the majority of the body has emerged from the mother. Potential human life is valuable, and may not be terminated casually, but it does not have as much value as a life in existence. The Talmud makes no bones about this: it says quite bluntly that if the fetus threatens the life of the mother, you cut it up within her body and remove it limb by limb if necessary, because its life is not as valuable as hers. But once the greater part of the body has emerged, you cannot take its life to save the mother’s, because you cannot choose between one human life and another. – Judaism 101

          • KMattSchuster

            Apparently you have not been taught to read and respond in kind. My argument is singly focused on the growing callousness of men and women who represent the vast majority of abortion cases. The majority numbers of abortions are deeply disturbing as they represent humans’ choices of momentary unprotected sexual pleasure ignoring the precious consequences. I am not interest in a religious debate. Humans can figure this out all on their own. That life is precious ought not too difficult for those with mental faculties to agree upon, unless of course you are some kind of Nazi I guess.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Do you notice you have a way of pointedly avoiding the arguments to which you have no rebuttal?

            As I asked several times:

            -What’s ethical/responsible about forcing children on irresponsible parents?
            -Why is life precious? And if it is indeed precious, shouldn’t you REFRAIN from creating new life so as to avoid destroying existing life?

          • KMattSchuster

            1. You need to read the responses I have given and not ask the same question w/o responding in kind.
            2. The avoidance of new life is exactly what I am arguing…!? What is your point? You sound like the 2nd kind of manager, the kind that always puts out fires. I would not hire one of those, I want the kind that solely operates to prevent it.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Let’s go with that example.

            -With all the modern technology in place today to PREVENT fires, are all the fires prevented?

            -Do fires still occur?

            -If they do, is it always from irresponsibility?

            -Regardless of the reason, when fires occur, are you supposed to put them out, or LET THEM RUN THEIR COURSE, as you seem to suggest regarding fetuses?

            In other words, do you realize that putting out fires is just as important (even MORE important) than preventing them?

          • KMattSchuster

            I have not heard a single argument that is hopeful toward the eradication of the cause: Human irresponsibility.

          • Suba gunawardana

            I already answered that above.

            RELIGION. Get rid of that, and there will be far fewer unwanted pregnancies.

          • KMattSchuster

            Religion is human.

          • Suba gunawardana

            So what? Murder is human too, so is HIV. We can live without both

          • KMattSchuster

            For every murderer there are thousands that are kind. Belief-systems have everything to do with both.

          • goatini

            We clearly see that your belief system makes you very unkind.

          • Arekushieru

            Which, of course, does not address Suba’s point.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I just love how you feel entitled to opine and stand in judgment regarding the reproductive choices and pregnancies of women you’ve never even met.

          • KMattSchuster

            I am not addressing here the individual cases of women living in nasty relationships. I am addressing the majority of humans that make irresponsible choices because they have a natural urge and are given a card blanch for such with dire cosequences.

          • Jennifer Starr

            It’s carte blanche. And what makes you think that you’re qualified to make decisions and judgments about any woman’s reproductive choices?

          • KMattSchuster

            Are you from Quebec. Lol.
            I am totally qualified to argue against selfish, irresponsible choices that result in the destruction of life on earth.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Quebec? What does that even mean?

          • Suba gunawardana

            As I said, to create more life is to willfully destroy much of the EXISTING life.
            And no, you are not speaking FOR contraception, but AGAINST abortion. There’s a big difference.

          • KMattSchuster

            You are defeatist in your argument. I oppose defeatists in every argument I have made here. The abdication that results from your arguments is nothing short of rejecting your own human responsibility.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Criticizing the argument itself instead of RESPONDING to the argument is a typical deflective tactic of those without a rebuttal.

            You are not my first rodeo.

          • KMattSchuster

            Your responsibility is to prevent, before you put out the fire. Putting out the fire should never be at the expense of the innocent. Abdicating this responsibility as a society is ultimately its own death.

          • Lieutenant Nun

            So you are promoting birth control? And when birth control fails, the woman can get an abortion because she was responsible yes?

          • KMattSchuster

            ? You are wanting your cake and eat it too. When you take a risk you must weigh its consequences. The number of unwanted pregnancies that are caused by failure of contraceptives are miniscule in comparison to irresponsible unprotected sex. First be willing to call a spade a spade. Most pregnancies are do to humans’ lack of responsibility.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I assume you have sources to back up your assertions.

          • Suba gunawardana

            You keep repeating an erroneous statement “The number of unwanted pregnancies that are caused by failure of contraceptives are miniscule in comparison to irresponsible unprotected sex.”

            EVEN IF this statement were true, forcing irresponsible people to have children only punishes the children.

          • KMattSchuster

            Your belief system dictates that a child and future citizen at that would necessarily be raised by irresponsible parents. That is self-defeating. Your belief-system disallows for societal resources to provide for this child.

          • Suba gunawardana

            WHAT societal resources? If they do a good job why do so many children end up neglected/abused/killed?

            A child is abused every 10 seconds, and over 4 children die from abuse every day in the US alone. Foster systems are flooded, and thousands die in foster care every year. Millions of unwanted children live miserable lives all over the world.

          • KMattSchuster

            Meaning what exactly? Your argument from what you believe leads you to give up.
            One of our adopted daughter’s father was killed when trying to help a person who was being mugged and robbed in a dark alley in Kathmandu, Nepal. We could conclude that it was wrong to do so since he died, or we could applaud him for standing in the gap and seek to do the same for others.
            I see you being of the former persuasion in your arguments.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Meaning: All that child abuse/neglect is a DIRECT result of excessive numbers of unwanted children being forced on irresponsible or uncaring adults.

            Stop forcing more children onto an already overburdened system; let them take care of the EXISTING children the best way they can.

            Unless & until there is a responsible caring adult ready & willing to care for every single incoming child, STOP throwing more unwanted children into the system. Duh!

          • KMattSchuster

            May I ask whether you are one of them? “Caring adult” that is and if you consider yourself such, why not pitch in and make yourself available?

          • Suba gunawardana

            I am certainly a caring adult, which is why I promote PREVENTION of more children being thrown into the system.

            As to directly adopting children, no. I have my hands way too full with rescuing abused animals, who are even MORE helpless & vulnerable than children.

          • KMattSchuster

            lol, what else is new

          • Suba gunawardana

            Meaning?

          • KMattSchuster

            The stereotypical is a never ending disappointment. It is definitively particularly a US phenomena. It is hard to have a real conversation in a country that is divided politically to the point of INSANE.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Just a lot of blather in an attempt to avoid the point.

            If you have truth & logic, nothing can prevent you from defending your argument.

          • Arekushieru

            Suba’s not the one creating the problem. Typically, the one’s creating the problem should be adopting all the children they can. Essentially putting their money where their mouths are. Stereotypically, that doesn’t happen in the US, because of people like you.

          • goatini

            Oh, I get it, you’re one of the radical theocratic Dominionist “Child-Catchers”. Kathryn Joyce recently wrote an excellent book about these vultures.

            Christian adoption activists have added moral weight to a multi-billion dollar adoption industry intent on increasing the “supply” of adoptable children, both at home and overseas. “The Child Catchers” is a shocking exposé of what the adoption industry has become and how it got there, told through deep investigative reporting and the heartbreaking stories of individuals who found that their own, and their children’s, well-being was ultimately irrelevant in a market driven by profit and now, pulpit command.

          • KMattSchuster

            ??

          • Jennifer Starr

            You mean the societal resources that ‘pro-life’ conservatives try to cut every chance they get?

          • Suba gunawardana

            You are avoiding the point again. A responsible society does not commit child abuse or neglect. YOU are promoting those very things.

          • KMattSchuster

            Not at all, I simply believe that giving up is self-defeatist. We should address the wrong to make it better, not buying into the status quo of selfishness.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Actively PREVENTING abuse of future children is not giving up.

            Breeding children willy nilly & abandoning them in a hostile world is the height of irresponsibility & selfishness.

            You want to address the wrong? Work to get rid of RELIGION (more specifically Chistianity) who opposes birth control & sex education. You will see a magical improvement.

          • KMattSchuster

            It is quite evident from your mind set where you have been birthed. I do not understand why most of you people here always talk religion. Why can you not stick with the subject?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Where she’s been birthed? What are you blathering about now?

          • KMattSchuster

            The mind-set.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Elaborate, please. I can’t wait to hear this.

          • Suba gunawardana

            OK where have I been birthed?

            Religion is very relevant to the subject, considering it’s the major cause of overpopulation, lack of contraception and sex education.

            Besides it was YOU who asked what was the root cause for unwanted pregnancies. There’s your answer, it’s the lack of comprehensive sex-ed, and lack of access to contraception, both DIRECT results of religion.

          • KMattSchuster

            You are very religious in you arguments. Its all about what you believe.

          • Suba gunawardana

            I just saw this one. Now where have I been “religious”? You also never told me where I was birthed?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yeah, I was hoping he’d explain that, because I don’t understand that whole birthing thing at all.

          • Arekushieru

            Sorry, but it is YOUR ilk that talks about religion, quite a bit, on here. Also, YOU are the ones who want to impose YOUR selfishness on others, which is, essentially, greed.

          • Lieutenant Nun

            Citation needed, liar.

            And you refused to answer my question, COWARD.

            YOU ARE NOT QUALIFIED TO ARGUE THE PRO LIFE POSITION.

          • Suba gunawardana

            No one here is against contraception. What is your point?

            But when an UNWANTED pregnancy happens for whatever reason, throwing those children into life with no concern for their safety & well-being is NOT the answer. Actually that’s one of the worst things to do to an innocent child.

          • KMattSchuster

            Your argument that that life has to be necessarily without safety & well-being is self-defeatist and typically indicates the abdication of responsibility.

          • Suba gunawardana

            On the contrary, throwing innocent children into life without ensuring their safety & well-being is the height of irresponsibility.

            Babies/children are vulnerable individuals who cannot take care of themselves. If you have the gall to force them into life, you BETTER be prepared to provide for & protect them for as long as necessary.

            To force children to life and abandon them in a hostile world is the worst abdication of responsibility. Unlike a fetus, a child FEELS pain. They are SENTIENT.

          • Lieutenant Nun

            He has been ignoring me ever since I pointed out that his only goal is to control female sexuality.

            I was wrong though. He has one other goal. To cause children to suffer. A noble goal.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Yes, forced-birth nuts usually have only one of three motives.
            -Control (subjugation of women)
            -Pleasure (abuse/molestation of children)
            -Profit (breeding & selling children to the abusers).

            I have yet to meet one with a motive different from the above :)

          • KMattSchuster

            You know that you are not telling the truth here. Scientific evidence is clearer than that. Children in their wombs feel pain. (Scientific American article, I can research to find it from a couple years ago)
            Abdicating societal responsibility is the death thereof. Hiding behind the statistics is self-defeatist. Also, ask the vast majority whether they are glad to have survived an abusive childhood. (This question you can ask me and also a quasi daughter who lived with us for three years, after having been raped repeatedly during her childhood.)

          • Lieutenant Nun

            No dumbfuck, they don’t feel pain. Current studies have demonstrated that the capacity to feel pain is not present until at least 35 weeks, well after abortions occur. Furthermore, the fetus is sedated by hypoxia whilst in utero.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Fetal pain has not yet been conclusively established. Regardless, fetal pain even if present, is NOT a reason to abolish abortion. That’s what anesthesia/analgesia is for.

            Childbirth involves pain, as do all surgical procedures. Would you abolish the procedure due to pain, or use a technique to eliminate pain?

          • KMattSchuster

            It was your argument that I questioned. You insisted that fetuses in contradistinction to children (post birth) do not feel pain. I simply questioned that sentiment.

          • Lieutenant Nun

            http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(11)00885-2

            They don’t feel pain, you ignorant fuck.

          • Suba gunawardana

            The available evidence shows fetuses don’t feel pain until the end of the last trimester. Even then, conscious pain perception is still not conclusively established.

            Regardless, it is common sense than a child is definitely MORE sentient than a fetus in every way. If you really cared about the feelings & pain of an individual, that individual should be the CHILD not the fetus.

          • KMattSchuster

            It was not my argument I simply responded to yours with what is being scientifically analyzed these days.

            http://anes-som.ucsd.edu/VP%20Articles/Topic%20C.%20Anand.pdf

          • KMattSchuster

            Whether euthanasia is painless or painful ought not to be the standard in the first place.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Of course it should. If euthanasia were painful it defeats the purpose.

            Once you decide to kill an individual for whatever reason (one the killing is justified and accepted) it is very important to minimize pain. Particularly if the very purpose of the killing is to end existing pain, as in euthanasia. But even otherwise, it is still ethical to minimize pain. Hence the lethal injection in death penalty.

          • KMattSchuster

            “the killing is justified and accepted” lol, talking about a slippery slope. Just discuss this with some neo-nazies, you will have a captive audience. Perhaps you ought to take your angst toward certain religious people to its full conclusion while you are at it? Good grief, let’s make you the standard?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Hitler was actually anti-choice–he banned abortion for some and mandated it for others. And maybe you’ve never heard of Gisella Perl, the Jewish gynecologist who was sent to Auschwitz and provided abortions for pregnant prisoners to prevent them from being tortured and experimented upon?

          • goatini

            Gisella Perl is one of my heroes.

          • KMattSchuster

            I know all about the IIIrd Reich. More importantly, I consider the choice, that you are promoting similar to that which was dictated by the same. You should know and I bet you do that abortion is a racist institution. I believe the Democrats in the US want their cake and eat it too.

          • Jennifer Starr

            And I think you’ve just proven that you don’t know much. Keep rocking on with your fact-free self, though. Want to give us your opinion of Gisella Perl?

          • KMattSchuster

            What 5 times more likely than white is not worth a real reply. COWARD!

          • goatini

            Yes, you are a coward.

          • Jennifer Starr

            You want to parse this reply into legible English for me?

          • KMattSchuster

            The CDC reports that during the 1970’s, roughly 24% of all U.S. abortions were perfumed on black women. That percentage rose to 30% in the 1980’s, 34% in the 1990’s and 36% in the 2000’s.
            WAY TO GO PLANNED “PARENTHOOD”!
            The word COWARD is not really good enough for you guys.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Which again, has nothing to do with my post on Gisella Perl.

          • goatini

            You are a racist who does not believe that women of color are qualified to make their own health care decisions.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            So if a black woman is having a white baby, is it okay for her to get an abortion?

          • Suba gunawardana

            And what’s wrong with that? If these stats are true, all it shows is that more & more black women are actuating their rights. i.e. the right to be secure in her person; the right to NOT be a breeding machine against her will.

            Shouldn’t you be happy for these women?

          • Arekushieru

            Planned Parenthood isn’t the only place that provides funding for abortions. Boy, are YOU ignorant.

            The majority of services that Planned Parenthood provides are for things OTHER than abortion, like… wait for it… wait for it… CONTRACEPTION.

            And Black women tend to have more unplanned pregnancies than white women, a big part of that being because Pro-Lifers like YOU cut supports for maternal and child welfare. OOPS?

          • goatini

            But since the Third Reich criminalized contraception and safe, legal pregnancy termination; forced females out of the workplace and academia; and conducted breeding experiments on female citizens – the fetus fetish forced-birthers would be the group aligned with said Reich’s goals.

          • KMattSchuster

            Let’s see, are you advocating the issuance of fetal tissue for stem cell research at a price? Isn’t that one of the lucrative side businesses?

          • Jennifer Starr

            You really need to work on your reading comprehension and stop throwing out erroneuous and false assumptions in order to avoid answering questions. Coward.

          • goatini

            Red herring to distract from the very, very lucrative MAIN business of the radical theocratic forced-birther fetus fetishists – the billion-dollar global human trafficking adoption syndicate.

          • Arekushieru

            You cannot ‘dictate’ a choice.

          • Suba gunawardana

            All forced-birthers whine about the killing of fetuses, while merrily condoning & applauding all other legal killings that make their lives easy. Talk about hypocrisy.

            If you are fine with self defense, property rights, gun rights, war, security, and of course, killing millions of animals and plants to sustain our lives (not just for food but also for mere convenience and pleasure), then you have absolutely no justification for opposing the killing of fetuses alone. Its all killing.

          • KMattSchuster

            How do I fit this?

          • Suba gunawardana

            Well, all your arguments so far indicate that, as all forced-birthers, your “concern” for life begins at conception and ends at birth. Otherwise you would not be promoting child abuse by throwing more children at an overburdened system, or at irresponsible parents just to punish them for having sex.

            If you are truly pro-life, you should cherish ALL life, not just the life of fetuses from conception to birth, Otherwise you are just a forced-birther who’s out to control women.

          • Arekushieru

            Nope, you will have a captive audience with Neo-Nazis because they believe that only killing of themselves is unjustified because they are superior, while killing those that are inferior is always justified. Here, and now, killing is justified and accepted in defense of rights that are presently equal across the board, and is unjustified and unacceptable when it violates someone else’ rights. That last is what Pro-CHOICE supports. SFS.

          • Arekushieru

            You want to do quite a bit at the the expense of the innocent. Seriously, you are a fucking hypocrite.

          • Lieutenant Nun

            You are arguing against female sexuality only.

          • Jennifer Starr

            The only pregnancies that you are ‘totally qualified’ to speak about are your own. Feel free to do so next time you get pregnant. And no, I’m not from Quebec or from a French speaking nation. I just know how to spell words properly.

          • KMattSchuster

            Sigh

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yawn

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            You come anywhere near me on my way to the women’s clinic to argue with me about anything at all and I will kick you square in the gonads.

          • Arekushieru

            You are arguing for the destruction of EXISTING life on earth, as Suba said.

          • Suba gunawardana

            For the 10th time, if these people are so irresponsible, how does it help to force children on them? You are actively and purposefully HARMING those children.

          • KMattSchuster

            You have difficulty to move beyond your fixation. You imagine that harming children with life on earth is greater than destroying them before they are given a chance to pursue their constitutional rights. The responsibility is human societies’ and as such we must embrace our failure to have produced irresponsible citizens in the first place.

          • Lieutenant Nun

            Zygotes cannot feel. They have no brain. Children can feel. They have brains.

            Now explain why a zygote suffers more than a suffering born child

          • KMattSchuster

            You are arguing that suffering must be avoided. If that be the case no human should live. Suffering is a means by which we learn and it ought to direct our steps towards better and kinder choices.

          • Suba gunawardana

            According to that logic, we should NOT treat diseases & injuries, nor rescue people from car crashes, nor intervene in crimes like rape, assault, torture, murder.

            We should just let all the bad things happen, since suffering is there to teach us,

            Teach us WHAT?

          • KMattSchuster

            If you follow the argument correctly you will conclude that suffering is part of human existence by virtue of the same. There is however a positive side to suffering, it teaches us to seek solutions. These solutions, when avoiding our own responsibilities lead to further suffering. However, when we do realize our responsibilities, it can lead to better life for all.

          • Suba gunawardana

            ” There is however a positive side to suffering, it teaches us to seek solutions”

            For once I agree. The excessive suffering of millions of unwanted children through the ages should have taught us one thing. STOP the vicious cycle. Stop throwing more unwanted children into misery.

            Protect future children from unnecessary abuse/neglect, by promoting contraception and abortion today.

          • Arekushieru

            I notice that all this suffering that is supposed to teach us to seek ‘solutions’ is suffering experienced by OTHERS, not yourself. Is this an alternative to ableist inspiration porn?

          • Lieutenant Nun

            So torturing you would not be a crime. It would be a favor to help you grow as a person. Good to know.

          • Suba gunawardana

            If there came a day when every single unwanted child could be GUARANTEED a good life complete with all resources and loving devoted parents/caregivers, you would have an ETHICAL argument against abortion. (Not a legal one yet).

            That day is not today, when a child is abused every 10 seconds, the foster system is flooded and thousand of children die in foster care every year. That’s in the US, and only the REPORTED cases. There are millions of unwanted children all over the world, being abused, neglected & some dying in the streets.

          • KMattSchuster

            I would think our energy ought to be toward changing the cause. The after the fact fixation is counterproductive. Let’s call a spade a spade and find a cure!

          • Arekushieru

            No, Suba wants to prevent it from happening before it happens. You want to fix it after the fact, hence your fixation on using others to teach YOU how to prevent suffering. *BLECH*

          • Arekushieru

            You want them to pursue GREATER constitutional rights than anyone born, especially women (your argument only affects women, notably not men, after all). Death is not the worst thing that can happen to someone. Get over your own existential crisis and accept that fact, already.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            It is “carte blanche.” English equivalent is “blank check.”
            Who died and gave you carte blance to mess anyway you can with my family and sexual life.
            Are you in favor of criminalizing abortion?

          • KMattSchuster

            Are you in favor of preventing abortion?

          • Jennifer Starr

            You first, sunshine.

          • KMattSchuster

            It used to be the right of citizens to have slaves. Hmmm Then it became a constitutionally recognized crime. Hmmm

          • Jennifer Starr

            Last time I checked, slaves weren’t inside someone’s uterus–they were born persons.

          • goatini

            Since you are an advocate of stripping female US citizens of their civil, human and Constitutional rights, and of subjecting US females between menarche and menopause to mandatory gestational slavery, you are the supporter of slavery here.

          • KMattSchuster

            Hardly. The only slavery that is promoted here is the slavery that you create by advocating and perpetuating irresponsible sexual behavior that results in the destruction of human beings. Disgusting! Not only that but you promote abortion as a racist institution. Are you also employed by Planned “Parenthood”? Must be nice to have such a secure job when so many Americans are out of work.

          • goatini

            Mandatory gestational slavery, the goal of the radical theocratic forced-birth fetus fetish movement, results in the destruction of living, breathing female human beings.

          • KMattSchuster

            You mean to say that the promotion of abortion prevention leads to the destruction of selfish, sexually irresponsible human activity? I wholeheartedly! We agree completely.

          • goatini

            Mandatory gestational slavery is the binary opposite of free and independent female US citizens having unimpeded access to exercise their civil, human and Constitutional rights to privacy in their healthcare decisions.

          • Arekushieru

            It’s not ‘human’, but FEMALE, sexual activity that you are fixated on. After all, no cismale has ever gotten pregnant. Ergo, you only wish to punish women for having consensual sex for purposes other than procreation.

          • cjvg

            Irrelevant unproven personal attacks are not arguments, they merely expose the paucity of the position you have taken

          • Arekushieru

            You advocate for increased maternal, therefore infant, mortality rates. I would not accuse you of upholding slavery for THAT reason, however. Oops. Fetuses are not human beings/persons. And the reason most Americans are out of jobs is people like you, who are fixated on abortion while promoting Corporate IRRESPONSIBILITY and lower minimum wages along with fewer employment opportunities.

          • goatini

            I’m in favor of female US citizens being able to exercise their civil, human and Constitutional rights without obstruction or interference.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            You answer my questions and I will answer your question.

          • Arekushieru

            Criminalizing abortion does not prevent it, sweetie.

          • Arekushieru

            Yup, you want to punish women for ovulating, having vaginas, having sex, having their eggs fertilized and having those same fertilized eggs implant into their uterus. Your abhorrence for females’ reproductive biology, that was developed without their consent, is so very evident. After all, the ‘consequences’ (what a thing to label a child, btw) that you refer to, and that you are so fanatically obsessed about, are ones that only affect women.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            I think you need to get a new set of friends.

          • goatini

            As the child of a survivor, I feel qualified to tell you that you have NO respect for the victims of the Holocaust, and NO respect for the civil, human and Constitutional rights of female US citizens.

          • KMattSchuster

            Oh really? I am the child of a survivor also. So much for that argument. You brought up your religion and my reference was meant to distinguish between those who have no scruples to euthanize others and those who hold human life precious.

          • goatini

            Ethnicities and religions other than the Jewish religion also perished in the Holocaust. You hold the lives, and the civil, human and Constitutional rights of female US citizens, in utter contempt.

          • KMattSchuster

            Where?

          • goatini

            Thanks for proving you were full of BS on that claim.

          • KMattSchuster

            You hold the lives, and the civil, human and Constitutional rights of female US citizens, in utter contempt.

          • KMattSchuster

            Where?

          • goatini

            Fetuses are not citizens. Rights accrue to citizens at birth.

          • Jennifer Starr

            It’s very telling that you sent this reply to yourself.

          • cjvg

            Are women not also lives? why are you not holding these existing lives as precious?
            There is not one single doctor on this earth who is willing to guarantee that you will be alive at the end of a pregnancy, regardless of how healthy you are or how normal the pregnancy is progressing.
            What gives you the right to dictate that women must risk their lives and health for a pregnancy, regardless of how small the risk might be it is there for every single pregnancy and birth!
            There are no laws that mandate that a woman must donate her organs to safe the life of an existing living breathing child, even if she can do so without any risk to her health or life. However you think it is acceptable to mandate that she must risk her life and health for a potential that might never even realize (still birth, miscarriage etc.) where is the logic in that?

          • Arekushieru

            Henry Morgentaler, himself, was a survivor of the Holocaust. Who, before his death, not only received the Order of Canada, but was a prominent late-term abortion provider in this country. Wonder why that is…? Maybe because he considered women precious human lives? If you prefer to see someone tortured without ending except through death by not allowing them to die, then, no, you do not believe human lives are precious.

          • Arekushieru

            You have the mental faculty of an existential fascist. Precious is a qualitative not quantitative description, yet you dictate that all life is precious then seek to establish a space where women’s lives are bartered, bought and sold as mere commodities on a free market scale of manufacturing (gestation), labouring (childbirth) and servicing (child rearing). Therefore, in order to make fetal lives more ‘precious’ you are actually making women’s lives less ‘precious’ then ignoring their suffering in favour of your own selfishness (greed), especially since you will never be forced into a similar position by virtue of your male biology. Henry Morgentaler had more respect in his little finger for women than you would ever have in your entire lifetime. He was not a misogynistic hypocrite like you, after all.

          • goatini

            YOU elevate a single-cell fertilized egg over a living, breathing female US citizen.

            And over 50% of those cells never even implant in the uterine lining, and are sloughed off as bodily waste.

            So in the end, YOU elevate bodily waste that is flushed down the toilet over a living, breathing female US citizen.

            Stop interfering with our civil, human and Constitutional rights.

          • KMattSchuster

            Euthanasia is not the answer to irresponsible and therefore selfish, uncaring sex. You can follow that, can’t you? Or are you also one of the Planned “Parenthood” employees who must defend what you are doing in order to get tomorrows hefty paycheck by automatic deposit?

          • goatini

            Your mind is a fetid cesspool.

          • Arekushieru

            So, again, we see that you would prefer that a child be tortured endlessly because of ‘irresponsible’ and ‘selfish’ ‘uncaring’ sex that brought them into existence. But, it seems, its fine when the sex involved what YOU ‘prescribe’ as ‘responsible’ ‘unselfish’ and ‘caring’. How that is considered rational or compassionate in ANY way I have no fucking idea.

            Btw, not all Planned Parenthood’s provide/fund abortions. OOPS?

          • cjvg

            NO, we elevate (and rightfully so) the existing living breathing aware fully cognizant woman above the POTENTIAL of fetal tissue!
            You on the other hand are disturbingly comfortable in dismissing the fact that a woman is a life!

          • Suba gunawardana

            You still haven’t addressed my point.

            IF you claim most unwanted pregnancies result from irresponsibility, HOW is it ethical/ responsible to force an innocent child on such irresponsible parents? Knowing that the child would be neglected/abused?

          • KMattSchuster

            Your question begs to establish the prerequisite: Define “irresponsible parents”

          • Lieutenant Nun

            That would be a s1ut who has sex that you disapprove of, right?

          • Suba gunawardana

            Parents who would put themselves first and not the child (or anyone else). The same type of people who are too irresponsible to use contraception.

          • KMattSchuster

            Fair enough. Why would you not put all your efforts into prevention by extirpating the cause? So what is the root of the cause?

          • Suba gunawardana

            RELIGION. Get rid of that, and there will be far fewer unwanted pregnancies.

          • KMattSchuster

            I have not encountered, by definition a human who does not believe in something. By that definition all humans are necessarily religious. Only, some of those religions/worldviews/belief-systems tend to be more helpful than others.

          • Suba gunawardana

            OK then CHRISTIANITY, which specifically opposes contraception and sex education, and promotes subjugation of women. Islam is the same.

            Get rid of those, and there will be far fewer unwanted pregnancies.

          • KMattSchuster

            I just have no interest in discussing this here. I think you have a fixation that avoids the real problems: Irresponsible sexual behavior that leads to the destruction of human beings who society should embrace, grant its safety and provide well being to them.

          • Suba gunawardana

            I have pointed out the REASON for the problem, and the fact that there are no other practical solutions that don’t harm living breathing sentient children. In the current situation, the best available solution for unwanted pregnancy IS abortion.

            If you disagree, what is your solution?

          • goatini

            The laws of our nation embrace, grant safety, and provide well-being to FEMALE US CITIZENS. Stop attacking our rights.

          • KMattSchuster

            So they did once for slave owners.

          • goatini

            You’re the slavery supporter here.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Slave women were forcibly impregnanted by their owners and often performed abortions on themselves. Do you think that was wrong?

          • Arekushieru

            Nope, you have a fixation that puts all the onus on the backs of female citizens to correct a situation that was imposed on them by people like you and biological evolution. You know what the opposite of solving a dilemma that you created, all on your own, is called? Irresponsibility and avoiding the REAL problems. Oops.

          • Arekushieru

            Look up religious. It does not mean what you think it does. SMDH,

          • Jennifer Starr

            You first, since you were the one who introduced the phrase.

          • KMattSchuster

            Avoidance might be based on profitability?

            Americans may be surprised to learn that Planned Parenthood has plenty of money, and taxpayers are contributing a large part of it. In 2005-06 it took in nearly $1 billion and boasted a surplus of $55 million. More than one-third of its income — $305 million — came from government subsidies. Its president receives an annual compensation of almost $1 million.

            Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/mar/26/the-abortion-industry/#ixzz2zFzNSRt9
            Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

          • Jennifer Starr

            Going off on a tangent here. And the Washington Times is about as credible as World Nutjob Daily.

          • KMattSchuster

            Or the Washington Post?

          • KMattSchuster

            WHy do you not answer the question? Are you not employed by Planned “Parenthood”?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Where did I ever say that I was? Not that it would be any of your business either way.

          • goatini

            The GOTP house organ (and mouthpiece of radical theocratic nut job Sun Myung Moon) “Washington Times” is not a credible news or fact source.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I had forgotten that it was a Moonie newspaper.

          • Arekushieru

            And? Pregnancy, labour and delivery are FAR more expensive than abortion. CPCs probably earn more than any Planned Parenthood EVER could, and they ARE in the business of making profits, unlike Planned Parenthood.

            Finally, CPCs destroy parenthood more than the PPs ever could, if they did. CPCs separate parents and children unwillingly, tearing them from their mothers’ arms in the most cruel and callous fashion imaginable. After all, abortion causes far less REGRET than relinquishment has caused guilt/depression, etc…, even in women who initially wanted to terminate their pregnancies. Also, for women who decide to raise the child, CPCs provide little to NO support, at all, anyways.

          • Lieutenant Nun

            The only thing you have addressed is your perverted obsession with controlling and punishing female sexuality.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            It is a pukefest. The sexual sadism sticks out all over it.

          • goatini

            No children have ever been harmed in any way during a safe, legal pregnancy termination, because all children, ever, have already been born. Hope that clears things up for you.

          • Arekushieru

            Oh, yes, feeble brains because women are not intelligent enough to have strong, MENZ brains. “Feeble brains”. What dafuq is that?

            Of course, the anti-choicer chooses projection over actual arguments, like we have ACTUALLY been doing.

            MOST anti-choicers DO oppose contraception as well as abortion, claiming that BOTH are ‘irresponsible’, btw. Nor did I say that you, yourself, opposed contraception. I said “PEOPLE, LIKE YOU”. That’s it, that’s all. Perhaps this is why you have not addressed my points, and chose to project that behaviour on to me instead, but reading comprehension IS your friend.

            That you haven’t spoken to rape victims is actually evidence of your hypocrisy. So sorry.

            And you have YET to prove that abortion, or lack of contraceptive use due to factors controlled by the fascist Pro-‘Life’ movement, IS being irresponsible. Neither does abortion involve children.

            Surprising that you consider us the reasons why people have become more selfish and callous towards life, when you are the ones who callously and selfishly impose upon women (iow, using greed) something that destroys their lives and that would never affect cismales like yourself. Dependent on government? You mean like the Pro-‘Life’ politicians who want a government so small that it could fit inside a woman’s uterus? Dependent on government? You mean like those who support Obamacare because it, y’know, actually SAVES LIVES? The ACA that Pro-Choicers in general support, but Pro-Lifers, like you, generally oppose? Ah, right, I forgot, you are a hypocrite.

            If not using contraception is what defines irresponsibility, then you have called many women who chose to continue their pregnancies irresponsible. Seriously, how ignorant do you have to BE, before the message will not get through your thick skull, EVER? Besides, more women continue their pregnancies than those that terminate, and that INCLUDES Pro-Choice women. SFS.

            Supporting slavery and rape, like you do, is the most ugly thing I can imagine.

            How can the (actual) killing and destruction of a once (actual) child, such as a pregnant woman, be an act of responsibility? How? How?

            As for the rest, I have answered your question, but, I see, you ran away before you could see it, which is SO unsurprising.

          • Jennifer Starr

            By giving rights to a fetus, you are taking rights away from born women.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            You want to force a married couple to give birth when they have decided they do not want and/or cannot afford to feed another child BY LAW? That is Nazi behavior. Married sex is irresponsible?
            You are a sick perverted monster. And your sexual fantasies are appalling.
            FBI LOOK SHARP. This one has fantasies of hurting “irresponsible” young single women.

          • cjvg

            Women have a very good (and personal) reason to want/need an abortion, just because those reasons are not kmattschuster approved that does not make them invalid

        • Arekushieru

          Most women who have had abortions were using some form of contraception. So, that pretty much disproves your theory about irresponsibility. Besides the fact that you cannot prove that abortion is not responsible.

        • Jennifer Starr

          Having an abortion is taking responsibility.

        • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

          Abortion is caused by sex.
          Everybody but the sexually dysfunctional (YOU) knows folks have sex from the time of their sexual hormonal maturity until their death. Sex is jolly.
          Sex is not irresponsible, indecent or criminal. It is human.
          Sexpigs like you need to be carefully watched by the authorities.
          NSA AND FBI LOOK SHARP. This is the Roeder personality. They hurt people.

        • cjvg

          So what you really mean is that “irresponsible” sex must be punished by a forced pregnancy, without the opportunity of the woman having an easy way out of that punishment by having an abortion?!

          Well I think abortion is a very responsible choice if you become pregnant but are not ready or willing to have children. Why do you think your personal believes should intruded upon the private lives of others?

          What makes your personal believes so superior that they should replace the rights of others to their personal believes?

    • Arekushieru

      Actually, it’s the other way around. Those who oppose gun laws are typically Conservative Fundamentalist Christians. They’re also the ones that support the status quo against anyone who is not white, male, Aryan, Christian, married, cisgender/sexual, heterosexual and wealthy.

      Canada is my country. In most cases it does not view women with the same indifference that YOU do. After all, abortion is decriminalized, here. And, guess what, abortion rates are comparable if not lower than those of the US. So sorry.

    • Jennifer Starr

      Actually, it’s good news, which is not disturbing or heartbreaking at all.

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      Liar liar pants on fire.

    • cjvg

      You are dead wrong, pretty much all of Europe considers abortion, comprehensive sex education and access to contraception a basic human right!
      You know all these European countries that have much lower child and maternal mortality and much higher rate of survival of BORN children, and much higher quality of life for all their citizens
      Yeah that’s right most European countries actually think women are human beings too. Human beings who have the same basic human and civil right to consider the sanctity of their bodies inviolate just like men, human beings who have the unabashed and lawfully protected right to make their own health care decisions, human beings who can not be forced to donate the use of their bodies to a third potential person just because they had sex!

  • KMattSchuster

    Here is my last entry. Thank you for your kind and considerate dialogue and readiness to seek real solutions to endemic societal selfish, irresponsible behavior that leads to the destruction of children in the womb. Good bye.

    • goatini

      Take your vicious misogynistic sarcasm and hit the road. Go make the Stations, pat yourself on the back, and tell yourself how very much you suffer like Christ on the Via Dolorosa, you vile sexist hypocrite. The Christ actually liked females, unlike you.

    • Jennifer Starr

      Flounce, flounce. Flounce away.

    • Suba gunawardana

      How come you never presented a viable solution despite plenty of opportunity?

      • Jennifer Starr

        I wondered that myself. Because for all the words he used, he actually presented very little in the way of substance. Instead he went off on tangents and/or used personal attacks and accusations in order to deflect and avoid giving straight answers to any questions.

        • Lieutenant Nun

          And he had been ignoring me since last night. Ever since I asked why he wants to control female sexuality.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yeah. he totally avoided or deflected any direct questions.

    • Lieutenant Nun

      You are not qualified to argue the pro life position because you are utterly incapable of debating honestly.

      Youre a sad incompetent joke.

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      Don’t let the door . . . well you know.

  • Rainbow Walker

    Some places are rapidly progressing while we in TX are rapidly sinking back into the Middle Ages.