RSSBlack Conservatives Laud Partial Birth Abortion Decision
J.J. Jackson* | April 18, 2007
For Release: April 18, 2007
Contact: David Almasi at (202) 543-4110 x11 or dalmasi@nationalcenter.org
Black Activists Laud Supreme Court’s Ban on Partial Birth Abortion“Partial Birth Abortion, By Its very Name, Admits to a Birth”
“At last, the Supreme Court acknowledges that the right to kill one’s baby has limits,” said Project 21 member Djana Milton. “Although abortion itself remains constitutionally guaranteed, all manners of cruelty in the process are no longer tolerable. This is one of the most civilized decisions in the life and death fight for the unborn.”
In a five-to-four ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Partial Birth Abortion Act that was signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2003. The Act outlaws a late-term abortion procedure in which an unborn baby is partially delivered but then terminated in a process that involves crushing or cutting apart the baby’s skull.
In his majority opinion in the combined cases of Gonzales v. Carhart and Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood, Justice Anthony Kennedy - who is regularly considered the “swing vote” on the Court, wrote that previous lower court opinions and abortion advocates’ arguments against the Partial Birth Abortion Act “have not demonstrated that the Act would be unconstitutional.”
The Court’s decision is not a comprehensive ban on abortion and does not restrict other types of late-term abortions. Statistically, it is estimated that 90 percent of abortions - primarily those scheduled during the first 12 weeks of a pregnancy - will not be affected by the Act or the today’s ruling.
“I applaud this ruling because it outlaws a draconian procedure that has no place in modern medicine,” said Project 21 member Kevin Martin. “Partial birth abortion, by its very name, admits to a birth which - by definition - assumes life. Thus, it inflicts undo suffering.”
“It should be noted that the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutional principles of life, liberty and freedom for all people, including the unborn,” said Project 21 chairman Mychal Massie. “While all humane individuals cannot help but be pleased with this decision, I think it even more important to note that the Court based its opinion on constitutional precepts. This difficult ruling shows the precise reason why we need judges and justices who are willing to strictly interpret the Constitution and not render decision that assuage their colleagues desires or dispense their own political leanings.”
Project 21, a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research, has been a leading voice of the African-American community since 1992.
Contributor's website: http://www.libertyreborn.com
*Content posted by a user may not be completely written by that user. Content from another source is cited in either block quotes, with quotes or with a link to the original material. Content from other sites is posted for commentary and news purposes under fair use. Each user is responsible for their own postings and a particular posting should not be construed as being endorsed by this site or it's owner.
Comments
58 Responses to “Black Conservatives Laud Partial Birth Abortion Decision”
Leave a Reply
By posting a comment you agree to abide by the rules of this site.
Loading ...
-
Recommended Reading:
-
[...] Matthew wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptBlack Activists Laud Supreme Court’s Ban on Partial Birth Abortion“Partial Birth Abortion, By Its very Name, Admits to a Birth”. Washington, DC - Today’s US Supreme Court ruling upholding a legislative ban on the practice of partial … [...]
I was very happy to see this court decision. Now, if we could only get this issue back to the states from whence it came…
Great … not another person who is under the impression that somehow the state has the power to murder children but the feds don’t?
This issue belongs with neither the “states” or the federal government since life is protected under the 14th amendment for all people under the jurisdiction of the United States except for when they have been accused of a crime and found guilty (due process).
Denny - Don’t even try to defend yourself. PinguMama will not respond to any points you may have, no matter now valid they are.
PinguMama and others on this site also believe that the law cannot be enforced because people cannot be forced to do something against their will. Even if their will breaks the law.
So do NOT try to make an intelligent point. Too many unintelligent people will respond.
I think Justice Ginsberg said it best:
“Today’s decision is alarming. It refuses to take Casey and Stenberg seriously. It tolerates, indeed applauds, federal intervention to ban nationwide a procedure found necessary and proper in certain cases by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). It blurs the line, firmly drawn in Casey, between previability and postviability abortions. And, for the first time since Roe, the Court blesses a prohibition with no exception safeguarding a woman’s health.”
“Thus, legal challenges to undue restrictions on abortion procedures do not seek to vindicate some generalized notion of privacy; rather, they center on a woman’s autonomy to determine her life’s course, and thus to enjoy equal citizenship stature.”
This is a sad day for American women of all colors.
Thank you MyBodyMyChoice. Finally, a voice of reason. So many people have absolutely no concern for the health of the mother.
Look everyone! Mark has run to a new thread!
Hey Mark are you still upset that the 14th Amendment didn’t say what you claimed it said? That it said that “all people” are guaranteed the right to life not just “citizens” and your entire argument fell apart?
And to MyBodyMyChoice (from planned parenthood judging by the link) you don’t belive in anything except protect the right of people to murder. You don’t care about women because if you did you would be dealing with the fact that abortion kills women. Sure they are very young women but that is beside the point.
You and Mark are a perfect match.
Like Jeff said to you in the other thread, you don’t respect him otherwise you would stop acting like such a baby and deal with facts; not your self delusional fiction!
Look RonniesRayGun, I bowed out of that discussion not because any of you were making valid points, but because so many points in your agruments were completely wrong. When I pointed that out, not even one of you bothered to comment and instead just kept digging a deeper hole with more outlandish statements.
I stand by my comments on the 14th amendment. Read what I said again and pay attention this time.
On other points: Do you still think I can be denied a job (i.e. opportunity) because of my race or religion? Do you still think a pharmacist has a right not to provide medications on the same basis or because they disagree with me and my doctor?
Your lack of concern for the mothers’ health and well being is very disturbing.
MyBodyMyChoice DO NOT presume to speak for me. I am a woman and this is certainly NOT a sad day. The only women I believe which see it as such are women that think that they have the right somehow and somewhere to murder their unborn children. You know, like your precious Planned Parenthood!
Only someone like you Mark would call murdering babies “reasonable”.
Mark you are you for real? I can quote EXACTLY what you said about the 14th Amendmend (which Trigger already did in the other post.
You said (and anyone can look it up): ““You’re arguments that the unborn child has unalienable rights and has constitutional protection are noble and, at first glance, almost valid. However, rights are only granted to citizens of the United States. Like it or not, the Constitution declares that people born in the US are citizens. It does not say concieved, but born. A technicality? No. Imagine the bedlam when people cry out that their child was concieved in the US and thereby should be a citizen. You can try to amend the Constitution to say what you want, it’s your right. Good luck with that.”
THAT IS FALSE! The 14th Amendment says CLEARLY that all “persons” are afforded the protections listed. NOT citizens! As was said in the other thread it take REAL balls to lie and lie and lie again like you.
Now please note that you then tried the same old crap about the fertilized egg not being “alive”. I suggest you at least do a little research first and learn what constituites life. There are seven general conditions that determine if something is “alive”. And the egg once fertilized exhibits each and every one of those properties. Can you name them?
I bet you can’t!
No, you didn’t “bow out” of that conversation for any reason other than you had far too many people setting you straight. And you couldn’t handle it.
“And the egg once fertilized exhibits each and every one of those properties. Can you name them?” -Ron
OOOOOO! I can! and I just posted them in the other thread!
Homeostasis, Organization, Metabolism, Growth, Adaptation, Response to stimuli and Reproduction.
I know “Hemeostasis” might be a big word for Mark but if he looks it up, he will see that the fertilized egg has all these traits.
I want to say something. And this is directed towards this guy “Mark”.
Mark, I found this site yesterday and went through all the comments in the other thread on abortion which you gleefully joined. Today I came back and found this one. I am by far not a regular here so I am going to chime in as someone that is an outsider.
You sir, are a stupid child. I’d call you ignorant, but that wouldn’t be appropriate and an insult to ignorant people. “Ignorance” is when someone doesn’t know better. But you have been presented with pretty much irrefutable evidence that 1) even an unborn child is alive 2) that unborn child is a human (ie a person) and 3) that the 14th Amendment protects all “persons” not just citizens.
So as you can easily see, to call you ignorant would be a gross misuse of the term. You are not ignorant. You are stupid. You are stupid because you lack the intelligence God gave even a head of cabage to use the information provided you to form a coherent thought and correct your flawed ideas.
It is ok if you want to believe that you are right but if you want to try and win the argument you are going to have to actually counter those points that I have cited above. You can try. Or you can be another talking head blabbing on without a clue like MyBodyMyChoice who cares not one lick about women “of all colors” but only women of a certain age and moving forward the agenda of their illustrious matriarch Margaret Sanger who saw abortion as the means to eliminate the black race. A race, I might add, which I happen to belong to.
People such as you Mark are the reason why this country is in trouble. Because it is people like you that are too stupid to deal in the currency of truth. Instead you start rambling about religious zealotry in an attempt to discredit those that destroy your opinions. Opinions mind you which are not even worthy to be printed because, as I have said already, they are stupid.
Now for some comments towards Mr. Jackson:
I like what I have seen so far on this site of yours. I’m not kidding. I particularly like how you are bringing up issues and how your members have IQs above that of typical blogs. To be able to use the 14th Amendment to confront this issue plaguing our society is one I never really thought of but it makes the case against abortion even stronger in my mind. Thanks. Keep up the good work and you may have just gained another loyal reader.
I love how murderers like MyBodyMyChoice attempt to speak for all women. MBMC, you don’t speak for me.
As for Mark? Well, what can I say? The man is a rambling lunatic. Because only a rambling lunatic would talk about how he “respects” someone and then runs off on incomprehensible blathering, unwarranted name calling towards that individual and the people that he knows and telling lies that anyone can see as being false Ron. It’s one thing to label people correctly. It’s another to be an arsehole like Mark and to do it under false pretenses to further one’s agenda.
He talks about the life of the mother but like a good little liberal never talks about the life of the child. Partial Birth abortions are brutal procedures that we don’t even do on convicted murderers. They are done on children old enough to live outside of the womb. But Mark doesn’t understand that. He is just a hack.
Mark, you claimed that you left the other thread because people were lying and saying false things. Really it was you that was lying however and are still lying.
Did you really think that we wouldn’t answer you when you started the argument anew in another thread? Are you that dumb to think we’d let you get away with the same lies here?
“Now for some comments towards Mr. Jackson:
I like what I have seen so far on this site of yours. I’m not kidding. I particularly like how you are bringing up issues and how your members have IQs above that of typical blogs. To be able to use the 14th Amendment to confront this issue plaguing our society is one I never really thought of but it makes the case against abortion even stronger in my mind. Thanks.”
Artimus, just so you know, I would say that we learned that argument from Jeff in some of his previous posts. If I am not mistaken, TriggerMama didn’t even accept it at first. But after a little while she realized it was right.
PM, I agree. I LOVE how Mark continues to show his “respect” for me by acting like an ass. I’d hate to see how he shows “respect” to people like his mother and father knowing this.
A thought. I think I am going to have to post a daily thread on abortion just so we can watch Mark act like a fool.
Hey Mark, I’m still waiting for you to apologize to everyone for misquoting the Constitution on what I suspect was purpose. Then going off on a rant rather then ever addressing it. I know that the 14th Amendment basically obliterates what you thought was a good argument but grow up will you?
I can’t understand why you are continuing with the same lies that caused you to run away from the previous thread. Do you think that we won’t go and pull your exact quote to show everyone how wrong and how much of a liar you are?
PM,
Yes, you are correct with regards to my original perception of the 14th Amendment. I thought it said what Mark claimed which was that only “citizens” were guaranteed these rights. Of course I have never really read it which is why. But unlike Mark, I realized that the actual wording was different and accepted it and incorporated it into my debate instead of foaming the mouth like a rabid lunatic.
It seems to me Mark needs to join my favorite alma matter; the UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS! OOOOHRAH!
I say this out of love. Because they can cure you of this attitude problem you have within about an hour.
I agree Ron. Mark needs a swift kick in the ass from our fellow Marines.
Only to a raving madwoman (or maybe a guilty man who wants to be able to have sex without consequences) like MyBodyMyChoice would this be a sad day for all women. A sad day for women who want to murder their babies? Yes! But certainly not for all women. And certainly not for me.
Why can’t Planned Parenthood just be honest and have a name that accurately describes themselves? Something like The National Organization for Murdering Babies? Maybe Mark could join.
Guys (and gals) what do you expect from Mark? This is a guy who thinks “freedom” means that the government should have the power to force you to employ someone you don’t want to employ! Did I miss that power in Article I of the Constitution? Because I have been looking for it all night!
You cannot argue effectively with someone who thinks that the government can exceed its constitutional mandates.
Shammy, you know how these left leaning “government is the answer” types are. They think the government has the right to meddle in anything that they can justify no matter what the Constitution says.
And their defense when someone calls them on it is the same old same old. The call you a religious zealot or some other such erroneous name to avoid answering direct challenges to their claims.
Sounds to me like Mark needs to read jeff’s article from last week “Wassup My Nappy Headed Hos!”!
“This is a guy who thinks “freedom” means that the government should have the power to force you to employ someone you don’t want to employ!”
It’s like I’ve said before. I wonder how these goofballs that say things like Mark said in the other thread would feel when the government decides that in order to suppress unemployment, they themselves have to hire an unemployed person in their own home. Of course it is for the “common good” after all.
The problem is you cannot legislate racism, sexism or any “ism” away. There will always be shallow minded people that will not hire someone because of what they are and will find ways to skirt the law. The only time the government should step in however is when someone’s rights are infringed (like life, liberty, property, etc.). And no, saying you won’t hire someone because they are a certain color is not infringing on someone else’s rights. It is that way because they are capable of working elsewhere or even working for even themselves (perish the thought!).
Is it a hardship to have to deal with it? Yes. But the constitution does not say, nor anywhere imply, that one has a right to go through life without adversity.
“Sounds to me like Mark needs to read Mr. Jackson’s article from last week “Wassup My Nappy Headed Hos!”!”
Yes, everyone should read it over at libertyreborn.com Because it address this exact point about people like Mark who just say whatever they want to attempt to discredit opinions they cannot counter. And FYI it’s “Whassup” not “Wassup” : )
Hey Jeff you know if the government has the right, now this is according to Mark mind you, to meddle with who hires who then maybe the government also has the “right” to force people to buy their goods from certain people as well. You know, since that is a form of “hiring” someone to provide a good or service. You could use this to your advantage!
Start demanding that all the liberals MUST buy (and wear) the goods you sell through Right Things! Think of the possibilities! Government force can help you line your pockets too!
Ron, unfortunately I’m not a Stalinist
Otherwise good idea!
HAHAHAHA! Way to go ron! Give the liberals a taste of their own government mandated actions! But Mark won’t understand it because it is yet another example of how his “logic” creates insanely insane scenarios.
J.J. Jackson said:
“The problem is you cannot legislate racism, sexism or any “ism” away. There will always be shallow minded people that will not hire someone because of what they are. The only time the government should step in however is when someone’s rights are infringed (like life, liberty, property, etc.). And no, saying you won’t hire someone because they are a certain color is not infringing on someone else’s rights. It is not because they are capable of working elsewhere or even working for themselves.”
I want to chime in and say that this is so true. But I want to further ad that in my experience as a man of very dark complexion, racism and sexism is much more prevalent among my own “people” than among other races. That is not to say that I have never experienced racism from whites. I have. But what I see some of my fellow brothers and sisters do is a thousand times worse especially when it comes to hiring anyone who is not “black” to work in their businesses.
But that’s not to say we’re all bad at this. Just that from my own experience it is worse on this side of the fence. Yet the “black activists” are the ones out there trying to force white people to give them special consideration through programs like Affirmative Action.
Artimus, watch out. Someone might call you an “Uncle Tom” or other such slur to try and discredit you without actually providing any facts :):)
Mark, are you really as lonely and desperate for attention as you come over as? Because it is either that or you are one mentally f’ed up person.
I think I have this figured out. It’s not that Mark flees threads because of how stupid he claims we are but rather how stupid he actually is.
Check this out.
He continued to post in both abortion threads (which he made an uber ass of himself in both) until the day they dropped off the front page. Apparently once a post leaves the front page Mark is not capable of finding it to respond. Guess the search function is too complicated for him.
LOL Red!
Tap it is sad when someone like Mark is allowed to walk the streets freely. Because you never know when that mental instability inside of them will snap and they will kill a bunch of people.
Heck I’m still waiting for him to admit that he misrepresented what the 14th amendment said. It’s sad when someone makes a claim, the actual wording is presented to refute that claim and then said someone’s (ie Mark) only response is to blow up about religion and the religious beliefs of people which were never brought up in the discussion so there is no way he could no if his accusations are true or not!
At least when Jeff and others on this site talk about people being “this” or “that” such “names” are founded in actual fact. Sure the left doesn’t like being called socialists and commies but the truth is that is their ideology.
This is why political discourse has disintegrated. Because those like Mark are not willing to just accept when they are wrong and just throw labels around that have no berring in fact.
Hey everybody! I’m back. I took a few days off to relax, play some golf and get some work done around the house - and to reflect on how to reply to all of you.
BTW - I do know how to navigate this site.
I have read all your replies and I must say it’s fun to watch some of you “spin up.”
Ok, down to business. I’ll respond to the “freedom” topic that keeps comming up first. It may surprise you, but I do not believe in Affirmative Action. When making my arguments, I was referring to what the gov’t currently has the power to do. Should you be forced to employ someone you don’t like because you’re a stupid fool and hate people based on race, religion, etc? No, you shouldn’t. However, none of you can successfully argue that government intervention wasn’t necessary to correct the institutionalized racism that was once prevalent in this country. Simply declaring that slavery was illegal and declaring them free men and women didn’t actually make them “free.”
Do I think we need Affirmative Action today? No, absolutely not. I hope this clears up this issue for you.
I stand firm on my argument about pharmacists, however. They are hired to supply people with the medicine prescribed by their doctors. If they can’t do that, they should be fired. Get another job if you can’t perform the duties of the position you have taken.
On the 14th Amendment - I thought about making an argument that your definition of “life” also applies to an acorn. That you could no more call a just fertilized egg a “person” anymore than you could call an acorn a tree. I only mention here to let you know what I was thinking in an attempt to have a “snappy” comeback (in case you haven’t noticed, I like to stir the pot just a little).
I believe the outcome of that argument would be a pitiful failure. To Tigger and Pingu, I did NOT intentionally misquote the 14th. There are many who would love to use a similar argument. So, with that, I humbly concede that your reading of the 14th is correct!
Wake up! Are you ok?
However, there are concerns that come into play that make me think you can’t win with such a “black and white” argument. Believe me, my opinions are usually very “black and white” in nature, except maybe this one.
I’ll try to explain well enough not to get flamed. Should abortion be another form of birth control? NO! Absolutely not. Should abortion be outlawed? Mostly, yes. As a form of birth control is definitely should be against the law. As a necessary medical procedure to protect the life of the mother it should still be legal. Let me give you a few scenarios to explain my point.
A pregnant woman is diagnosed with cancer. Doctors determine that, without treatment before the pregnancy is carried to term, the mother will die. Now, for the sake of this argument, this mother has a husband and two other children. The question is this: is the life of the unborn child more important than the life of the mother? Consider the impact her death will have on her existing family. To me this is an easy decision. The life of the mother must come first.
I know that you’ll come back with all kinds of options. “The mother could wait until the fetus is viable outside the womb.” Maybe, but maybe not - that decision is not yours to make.
There are countless other medical reasons that might justify an abortion as being “medically necessary” to save the mothers life. So as this type of procedure, abortion must be kept legal.
As I’ve already stated, I do like to stir the pot. I like to see if people can validate their stance on issues. You’ve all, well most of you (some of you just sit on the sidelines and shout “yeah - take that”), done very well. You have changed my reading of the 14th Amendment.
FYI - I am in no way a “lefty” as many of you have stated. I think the gov’t has way, way, too much power. I think the borders should be locked up tight and the illegals tossed out. I think the taxes placed on us are way too excessive. I belive gun control is a steady hand. Anyway, you get the point.
J.J. - You’re readers are very intelligent. I will continue to challenge you and them when I think a point is missed, however. The first thread all started because I was attempting to challenge your contention that the government never has the right to force someone to do something against their will. I believe some form of Affirmative Action was necessary 40-50 years ago because back then, even the government was racist.
Mark Said:
“On the 14th Amendment - I thought about making an argument that your definition of “life” also applies to an acorn. That you could no more call a just fertilized egg a “person” anymore than you could call an acorn a tree. I only mention here to let you know what I was thinking in an attempt to have a “snappy” comeback (in case you haven’t noticed, I like to stir the pot just a little).”
Mark, you just don’t know when to quit your little attempts huh? This statement proves that you must be a disciple of Noam Chomsky with your attempt to twist words and their meanings.
This analogy is flawed and glaringly so. Because “person” does not relate to the age of the human being like “tree” and “acorn” relate to the relative age of the relative fauna (an oak in this case). An acorn is just a young oak tree like a fetus is just a young human (i.e. person). You are making the argument here that a “person” is not a “person” until they reach a certain age. That isn’t a biologically sound argument and it is the same argument liberals use to justify abortion.
I know that you got your ass handed to you over your claim of the 14th amendment only extending the right of life to citizens but come on. Stop digging yourself a deeper hole.
Trigger! OMG. What is your problem? I also said, which you somehow failed to acknowledge: “I believe the outcome of that argument would be a pitiful failure. To Tigger and Pingu, I did NOT intentionally misquote the 14th. There are many who would love to use a similar argument. So, with that, I humbly concede that your reading of the 14th is correct!”
Just who is digging a deaper hole here? I concede the argument and you just can’t let it go! Why don’t you move on to some of the other points instead of beating the 14th Amendment issue, which I’ve already acknowledged your stance is correct, into the ground?
I can see it now. Mark was sitting in his room all alone racking his brains to try and justify his stance and after coming up with this thought he had it. But all he has done is show us all that he still doesn’t have a clue.
As for what you call “stirring the pot” Mark, all that is is a polite way of saying you are a troll and that you are trolling. If you would read “the rules” (although reading certainly doesn’t seem to be your strong suit) you would notice that “trolling” is prohibited and leads to banning. You may want to consider that before you ever post again.
Trigger - I also said: “…You have changed my reading of the 14th Amendment.”
Do you enjoy beating dead horses?
Mark, I think that it is time you gave it a rest. You’ve pissed off enough people here what with your acting like an asshole and all.
I suggest you take Ron’s warning about trolling seriously.
You insulted nearly everyone here. You’ve flipped and you’ve flopped more times than John Kerry on the campaign trail. You call people here unintelligent (see fist post in this thread by you) and then you try to pretend as if you see them as actually being intellegent. But all you are doing is trying not just my patience but the patience of everyone here.
You are continuing to beat the dead horse and you deserve every verbal ass beating you’ve gotten.
PinguMama:
“J.J. - You’re readers are very intelligent. I will continue to challenge you and them when I think a point is missed, however. The first thread all started because I was attempting to challenge your contention that the government never has the right to force someone to do something against their will.” – Mark
He never made that contention you retard. Mark why don’t you just give it a rest!? You are making more and more of a fool of yourself with each passing day. Go back and reread what he said. He was talking about a specific issue. How you jump from that discussion to the assertion that he claimed government never has the right to force something to be done is beyond stupidity.
And now you are calling people here intelligent? That’s at odds with your first post. Stop trying to save face. You think by now you might have learned that we can quote everything you say which contradicts you but you haven’t.
“FYI - I am in no way a “lefty” as many of you have stated. I think the gov’t has way, way, too much power. I think the borders should be locked up tight and the illegals tossed out. I think the taxes placed on us are way too excessive. I belive gun control is a steady hand. Anyway, you get the point.” – Mark
Yet you agree with Planned Parenthood that murdering a child is valid and just. I don’t buy it. You argue like a lefty. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck. You know the rest.
It’s easy after the words are out to claim otherwise. But the words you have writen are out there. And we all see them.
FYI the only person “spinning up” around here is you.
Like TM said we all wonder how big of a hole you are willing to dig.
Oh - So now RonniesRayGun pulls out his whip to help Trigger beat the dead horse. Who’s trolling, Me or you?
Man, I concede to your reading of the 14th Amendment. In the process I tell you what I was thinking - followed immediately how I had already discounted that argument as a pitiful failure - and all you people can do is pull out your whips and continue the flaming without even bothering to mention the rest of my post.
Just what is it that you want? Apparently, you cannot be satisified with your victories. You have to maim your victims even after they admit defeat.
You’re still the one trolling Mark.
One more time. And the ban stick comes out.
Retard?!? He never made that contention?
Here’s the quote:
“Don’t worry. Soon Big Daddy Government will simply force the doctors to carry out the murder of innocent children otherwise they will be thrown in jail, fined, not allowed to practice, or some other obscene coercion. It’s the way of the bureaucrat and the Nanny State don’t ya know?”
Focus on the last sentence. That’s exactly the point he was making. My first thought after reading that was about the pharmacists that won’t provide medication.
Wow - I take a little time to reflect on an issue and you cannot deal with it. Not even you, J.J. Frankly, I expected more…
Hey, J.J. Ban all you want. If I want a real debate I’ll post somewhere else. You guys don’t want debate. You want total capitulation.
Mark I am begining to believe you are the prime definition of “retard”.
You said “The first thread all started because I was attempting to challenge your contention that the government never has the right to force someone to do something against their will.”
Note the word you used. You said “never”.
And to attempt to justify that comment you site this:”Don’t worry. Soon Big Daddy Government will simply force the doctors to carry out the murder of innocent children otherwise they will be thrown in jail, fined, not allowed to practice, or some other obscene coercion. It’s the way of the bureaucrat and the Nanny State don’t ya know?”
But nowhere in that quote is what you claim said actually said.
Now, I’ll give you have one chance to appologize. If you will not, welcome to the banned list.
Mark, what is you malfunction! Is English your second or possibly your third language? No one with an ounce of intelligence and a basic understanding of the English language would draw the conclusion you did from that sentence!
ROFL! So now we’ve gone from intelligent people to people you don’t want to debate with?
You haven’t “debated” since you got here. All you’ve done is act like an ass. Welcome to the banned list.
FYI if you attempt to post under another IP or even user name to get around the ban your service provider will be notified and action taken against your account.
ROFLMAO!
Appologize! Every last one of you can kiss my ass!
A screaming moonbat to the last
I guess my question was answered. Mark is definately one f’ed up dude!
Looks like someone forgot to take his medication.
Tappy,
Mark’s got his own little world. He goes from anger to spitting like a fool to claiming to respect people to having his head explode in plain view.
Probably was hoping that no one would be monitoring this thread for his return. Thank God for RSS with comment updates
Aw. We’ll miss the moonbat. No, not really.
Wow. A complete moonbat meltdown.
Ooookaay. Mark, this certainly has been well interesting to say the least. I don’t think I’ve seen this big of a meltdown since Three Mile Island.
Listen, Lord knows Jeff and I have had our differences over the years but you don’t have a difference of opinion with him. The real problem is the two of you are in different universes.
I have to agree. I do not see how you justify your statement based on the paragraph you quoted as justification. It just doesn’t make any sense.
But you’re gone now it seems so we will all be spared further lowering of our intelligences.
I take it by this that the Cuckoo has been made extint?