Yes, but they still had these. Are you suggesting that if it had been, Obama would not be here today?
I don't think they have coat hangers in Kenya, they don't have clothes to hang up or houses to hang them up in. Not really any point in hanging your loincloth in a hut now is there.
Whether in Hawaii or in Kenya, abortion would have been illegal. So are you suggesting this law is what Obama owes his life?
I have no comment. Discussing the life of a current President is a sure way to flag big brother on you. I don't want something like that added to the large file I'm sure they already have on me. I am going to bow out of this conversation now.
What a silly post. The Federal government, let alone the executive - should have nothing at all to do with abortion, it's an internal states matter. Obama has nothing to do with it. Abortion is remarkably similar to the slavery issue, but before you start raging at me give me a chance to explain. It's similar in the sense that the Federal government since the 70s has employed a similar strategy toward abortion as Pierce and Buchanan did toward slavery with the 1850 compromise and similar actions: they want to enforce the will of their preferred states onto the rest. The Fugitive Slave Act got the Federal government into the business of picking and choosing state policy, and while it was arguably passably constitutional, it was simply bad policy and in large part led to the civil war that followed. Similarly, modern Presidents and the Supreme Court have tended to enforce the constitutional interpretation of the preferred subset of politics onto the rest of you. Again, parts of the program are constitutional, but that's beside the point - centralized tyranny should still be opposed in the face of the terrible reconstruction amendments. The fact that the Federal government may have the power to do something does not mean it should. Clearly with slavery the correct solution was to allow the states to determine their own state policy, but not use questionable Federal enforcement to push the whim of the slave states on the others. In this way slaves would gradually move toward the northern states and slavery would cease to be a contentious issue - support for it in slave states would eventually erode voluntarily. Similarly, with abortion the Fed should let the states determine their own policy, but allow women to travel interstate to seek out abortions if desired. In this way the pro-life states will cease to have power over their pro-choice citizens, and eventually either abortion tourism will become common enough to render the issue moot, or more likely those states will eventually go ahead and voluntarily legalize abortion. And the insinuation that pro-choice families only by chance didn't kill their kids completely misses the point. Beings gain moral consideration and the right to freedom from coercion when they gain a) sentience, and b) the ability to have subjective preferences and make non-predetermined choices. Liberty and self-determination are self evident given the nature of man: sentience and choice, not the arbitrary species label of Homosapiens. To say that any child of pro-choice parents only barely escaped extermination and thus such measures should be prohibited is akin to arguing that we only barely existed and that our parents could have chosen to have sex at any other time, and thus people should be forced into 24/7 copulation because people have a right to exist even before they gain the properties that separate them from non-self determining animals. In that sense this thread is more of a childish attack than a rational discussion. Sorry man, try harder.
I agree, but Federalism is dead. The truth is that the Executive runs the show with his rubber stamp appointed SCOTUS. So my post is thus valid. - - - Updated - - - Ah yes, the new political correctness.
Obama's mother was desperate to become impregnated by a third worlder in order to validate her ideology and that of her parents. After she got through with Obama Sr. she turned to an Indonesian. Obama's birth was the triumph of leftist ideology.
But third world is exactly where the libertarian tea party GOP wants to recreate here in the USofA. A Somalia to call your own... That isn't a liberal dream. Liberals love capitalism for one and all which leads to a better col for all. Third world is the libertarian/KOCH dream from which cheap labor from people with low expectations will spring eternal. You're welcome.
A liberal pregnancy? Only in the minds of extreme ideologues is there such as thing as a liberal or conservative pregnancy.
What are you babbling about? Just because libertarians do not wish to impoverish the masses with wars abroad and troops in over 70 countries around the world in no way means they wish to live in a third world. Of course, lucky for you neither party will see to stopping that, so I guess the world is your oyster!!!
