We can all agree that Supreme Court Justice nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor uses words as cleverly as a surgeon uses a scalpel.
Her having been selected by a president who, as an Illinois state senator, voted to let abortion-surviving infants die unassisted, the inference can be drawn that President Obama is comfortable with her abortion views. More indicative of her view is her regular use of the word "anti-abortion" instead of "pro-life." She doesn't replace "pro-choice" with "pro-abortion," which would, at least, level the playing field of words.
Those who call themselves pro-choice see abortion of infants in the womb (fetuses) as reasonable. Their alleged reasoning is that the fetus is not yet "viable" -- able to survive independently.
These folks should be terrified by their own reasoning. Many of us die without any intervening period of dependency on others for survival (non-viability); however, many of us will enter that period long before our death.
Do those who embrace "pro-choice" realize that their own rationalization for abortion is a sound rationalization for euthanasia?
Sotomayor may never take the step on that "slippery slope" to accepting euthanasia, but her apparent views on abortion certainly give encouragement to proponents of that gruesome practice.
Frank Lariscey, Evans
Some people like baby killing and some don't. From the baby's perspective, I wonder which one is "pro-choice".
Life begins at the moment of conception. The right to choose ended when you became pregnant. Abortion is not birth control it is murder of the innocent.
Counseling/training for killing yourself is supposed to be in the Democrats' medical reform package. You kill - literally - two birds with one stone - you reduce the cost to taxpayers for health care and save Social Security from bankruptcy. You also free up productive care givers for more important tasks and add needed funds to the Treasury with the "Death Tax."
drcpstr73, nice scare tactic but not true. I just pays for a counseling exactly as medicare already does. If you guys were seriously concerned you would be trying to get it out of medicare too. It just gives you something to twist to get people scared. This letter is crazy. All she had to do was right a pro choice letter. All the other stuff is just lame assumptions.
Good, concernednative. Keep those eyes closed real tight and nirvana will continue.
Spoken like a wise Latina, drcrapster. It's a good plan but should encourage more old people to die in red states where they are most clueless yet still persist in voting.
studies consistently demonstrate that 27 to 30 percent of Medicare payments each year are for the 5 to 6 percent of Medicare beneficiaries who die in that year. This is from a 1994 New England Journal of Medicine article. If you are going to control health care costs this is the area where you can get the most savings.
I hope everyone who supports Lindsey Graham sees that he voted to confirm this racist, sexist judge to the SC. I hope you have made plans after leaving office Graham, you spineless dirtbag!
concernednative still thinks that the new Obamacare won't drive private insurance out of business...........even though we have posted the EXACT wording of the bill here several times. Don't you just love the educated ostriches around here?
Tigger, it is way to much trouble to educate oneself. people like native and tech, had rather listen to the socialist media and obbamadumbo spin.
Every PRO-choicer I know would is also PRO-gun control. So, it is wierd that if one of them saw some human being abusing a kitten or a dog, they want to shoot them. I cannot make sense out of that, or my enviro-wacky friend who drives a gas guzzler (and has a standby gas guzzler too). He lives in a 4500 square foot house with two refrigerators and a giant freezer, with his wife, who does not recycle, but thinks that everybody else should drive a hybrid car or an electric car and that we should all live the green life. If you are something, be it. Don't just demand or legislate it for everybody else.
It is always good to stand for life and for liberty. These issues should not be in conflict, but the might from time to time. It is up to individuals to do right. Not for legistaion to say.
The Brits and the Euro's have already gotten to this point. Study the systems in Europe and you will see that the "right to die" has beomce the "need to die". If you have family and friends in England or Sweden, have this conversation and you will not believe your ears. You better get yourself into good shape if you are a US citizen over the age of 50 years. By the time you are 70, your head will be on the chopping block. There are tables and charts that determine how your future will be decided by a government employee.
Kramer....if you keep stating facts and giving verifiable examples like you do, the educated ostriches will claim you re yelling "the sky is falling."
Tigger post the exact wording of the bill again The complete section, not just a few sentences. Y'all are great on the insults and buzz words, but short on facts. Personally I have no problem with euthenasia, as long as it's the individual's choice. We won't let a horse or a dog suffer but by God let's force a human to lie in pain for weeks or months against their will. My mom died of ovarian cancer and was in excruciating pain. We tried to manage her pain but the best we could do was numb it some. It was her choice to fight until the end but that was her choice. For some it's too much and they should have the option for a peaceful end vs having to suffer due to other's religious beliefs.
the first bill obongo signed was to fund the death of the unborn. american taxpayers fund death all over the world. perhaps obongo could be the first govt rep to go out and knock on a seniors door to consult with them on their "options". lets call it the "pillow talk". maybe his progressive blood lust will get quenched and he can smother the life out of some"typical white woman" for the good of the state. what right does a lifetime taxpayer have to steal the needed funds for illegal immigrants? and what about the funds needed to pay for the war on the innocent? die milk face............
Techlover...would you mind posting the part that contradicts what I posted. For God's sake...you seem to be implying that I'm taking something out of context. How many pages would you like me to post before you believe it. I'll do you one better. Here's a link where you can read the ENTIRE bill....feel free to find the part that contradicts the part that says NO NEW CUSTOMERS for private insurance. Good luck. -------- ---------- ---------- http://republicbroadcasting.org/?p=3574
Kramer: Every pro-choicer is pro gun control? I guess it depends on what defines gun control. If you mean no restrictions and no registration, I guess you may be right. I have no problem with some restrictions and would like to see the gun show loophole abolished. I do own a 9 mil, 20 gauge, 410, 38, 32, 22 pistol and rifle (cheaper to plink ) so I don't think you could consider me a gun control fanatic.
Kramer didn't say EVERY pro-choicer is pro gun control.....He said "Every pro-choicer I know". There is a difference.
Tech, quit being stupid and lazy and educate yourself--read the freaking bill. Once more just for you, if you read nothing else, read this, eat your words and stfu! HR3200 Title1, subtitle A, sec 102. Simple enough for ya?
tigger: Good grief, don't get your panties in a wad. I haven't seen what you posted, that's why I asked. Are you refering to the BS the right wing groups say about Page 16? If you've got high speed, please C & P, I've got dial up and it's a PITA.
So you admit that you haven't and can't read the bill, yet you feel like you are knowledgeable enough to argue adamantly with those who have? Good grief is right. LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT -- GENERAL
Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual healh insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any indifidual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1. ======= the following only makes allowance for the dependents of those already covered. Now...until you have made the effort to actually read the bill, please stop acting like you know what is in it. the file is 2 mb to download and is well worth you spending the time. The fact that it is 1017 pages is part of the problem.
fullmetal and tigger, there is NO FINAL BILL please stop cherry picking the worst you can out a one draft there are no less than 5 BILLS going through committee. So you can cherry pick one line out of the several being worked on and use your typical fear mongering. I and reasonable people will wait to see the final product and debate that. We want our reps to be up there working and debating things out. God knows they cost us enough.
What BS about page 16 are you referring to? If you haven't read it, how do you know it's BS? Because you don't want to believe it?.............and concerned...Of course there is no final bill...but THIS is the bill that is being debated. If people don't speak out, the worst parts will get approved along with the rest. Get your head out of the sand.
concerned, you are a native of where, idiotsville? Why don't you read the bill too. There is nothing to cherry pick with that pos!
Concerned, Full Metal & Tigger fear the worst. And they want their own way or nothing else. They do not understand that there are a great many Pro-Choice people who are not Pro-Abortion. And they fear so many other things that they really fear death too. But the things they fear are already happening much to their dismay, and someday we'll all be dead too! I want to have the right to die on my own terms, and I have a living will to do just that. I'm beginning to think that we need to change the Party of NO to the Party of FEAR.
Niko...you have no idea what I think. Can you dispute ONE SINGLE THING I have posted, or do you wish to just continue with the personal attacks, as usual? If you can't debate with facts, then why do you try?
I have read big chunks of the bill (including page 16) at my wife's office since they have high speed (her family owns the company so it's legit). Explaination of page 16:Individual health insurance policies already in effect may continue but may not be altered. Employer-sponsored plans have five years to get in compliance with the new regulations. New individual health insurance policies will only be available through the National Insurance Exchange (NIE). The NIE will be a list of plans, both private and the public option, that you can compare and choose from if you don't have the option of employer based insurance. I hope that will allay your fears.
I don't see the big problem with euthanasia. It creates jobs and speeds up the process of funeral homes getting paid before inflation rises. Sometimes,
TechLover, we don't know if that will be the final legislation. But you and I both know nothing would ever past the Senate that eliminated private insurance. The is why I know the people on here on the far right are just promoting fear. The NIE will just prevent companies from cherrypicking you will either offer insurance to everyone or you won't be in the game. And if you use to have an astronomical price the public option will be there. Which is the way it should be.
Tech, i see you still haven't read the portion That in effect will do away with private industry, I see there are two villages missing their idiots this morning!