I'll let Mr. Chomsky do the speaking.
Here is a link that might be useful: The man has no principles
Yawn, two people with an agenda, patting each other on the back for agreeing. It was not any better under Bush. And we know Bush didn't have any principles.
Saying "God Bless You" before a crowd of Planned Parenthood supporters who primarily provide abortions is beyond the pale.
Please do not tell me about all the other "wonderful" services this "killing" organization provides...not interested in hearing about it.
They kill innocent babies.
But once these "innocent babies" are born, into poverty, and are the recipients of all those entitlements, they aren't so innocent, are they?
Then they are takers, and we know how much many people on this forum hate takers.
Can't have it both ways.
This post was edited by momj47 on Sat, Apr 27, 13 at 9:32
Who said these babies are born to be "takers"? If the mothers of these innocents were able to think clearly they would give them up for adoption to families willing to love and care for them.
So your presumption that they are all the future welfare recipients is misguided,
Abortion is being used as a measure of birth control now.no doubt about it.
How many adopted kids do you raise?
"But once these "innocent babies" are born, into poverty, and are the recipients of all those entitlements, they aren't so innocent, are they?"
What do you think happens to those babies between the time they are born, and the time they become not so innocent? You mention innocent babies, poverty, entitlements and loss of innocence, but you have not explained what connections you want us to consider.
Give me a break. All those right to life on this forum that love to say Personal Responsibility, and Why are they taking my money. How about why are we giving kids free lunch posts If they cannot get a passing grade in school?
Then they are no longer innocent or of any concern to those who love those innocent babies. They are takers and so are those irresponsible Mothers (not fathers) the fathers are never mentioned. They are those takers that just want my money. Hey they have bill boards up telling them where to get health care for those innocent babies. Do not want to see any of this for those takers and their little crumb snatchers.
If you think women use it as birth control and you don't want that forum of birth control you are going to have to support those takers. If you want to take control then accept the care of that responsibility.
Adoption what a joke. You have people running to Russia, China anywhere but the US kids waiting for a home. How many of you right to life have some of these kids waiting to be adopted in your house?
I wish every right to life hypocrites that say they are in the corner of the innocent was made to take at least one of the little ones into their home whether they could afford to care for the child or not. It is only fair since they are making the choice. They should have the responsibility to care for their choice.
INNOCENT!!! Their is bleeding heart care. I don't think so. That dog won't hunt.
FYI David..I raised 6 children by myself without the need for welfare.
Does that answer your question and snide comment?
So is that the new deflection? A post about civil liberties becomes a post about abortion?
I guess so, Ninamarie--but that's often how it goes around here.
What I find ironic is that I have a Republican granddaughter who has been using Planned Parenthood services for nearly a decade and is absurdly unaware that her party is ready to close them down if they could. But then I don't understand how any woman can be a Republican in the first place.
Posted by brightonborn (My Page) on Sat, Apr 27, 13 at 12:27
"FYI David..I raised 6 children by myself without the need for welfare.
Does that answer your question and snide comment?
No, I asked how many kids you'd adopted. Not how many you'd raised, and I could care less about welfare, and didn't inquire about it.
Because adoption is what you recommend for so many thousands of others. So I was wondering if you'd 'walked the talk'.
What is it with this need to invade others' uteri (plural for uterus) and bedrooms, and tell everyone who they can have sex with, how it must be done, and what one must do with any results that might happen?
Has no one heard the term "mind your own business" before?
This republican/religious notion that everyone else must be controlled, and must be deemed "deserving" is beyond ridiculous.
Why is there so much interest in the mass of cells belonging to someone else, entirely?
They kill innocent babies. But only before they are born. Republicans wait to kill them after they are born.
Consider that many people on this forum don't consider babies, born into poverty, whose parents are getting "entitlements" to be so innocent, once they are born, and therefore not deserving of any help. Even these babies are considered takers by people on this forum.
They want to close down women's health centers because some may provide abortions, but don't want to offer a penny's worth of help to women and their "innocent" babies.
Give me a break, such hypocrisy is sickening.
Mass of cells...... really? We call it what it is, a fetus.
It is a strictly religious belief (and not all religions share it) that conception is the equivalent of "baby" with a "soul" --and the belief in some cases--but not all-- that even stopping conception--that is, using birth control--is a "sin" against "god".
There is absolutely no scientific or medical evidence to back up any of those beliefs, and most religious and non-religious people do not accept those non-scientific "beliefs".
You are entitled to "believe" anything you want about that cluster of cells in the uterus at and after conception, but you do not have the right to FORCE me and other Americans to "believe" that way YOU believe.
We are free to form our own "beliefs"--and our own "conclusions" based on actual scientific "evidence" (something the anti-choicers too often totally ignore). That is our 1st Amendment right.
"Why is there so much interest in the mass of cells belonging to someone else, entirely?"
Well I am glad that your "mass of cells" turned into you, Jodi. You've posted before that you are adopted.
"Republicans wait to kill them after they are born."
That's just hateful. I think you're talking about someone like "the good doctor" Gosnell. Say, I'll bet he's not conservative. Would I say the same as the statement above, inserting the word "democrat" in place of "republican?" Never in a million years.
"Even these babies are considered takers by people on this forum."
I'd really be interested in seeing where you got that, Mom. I'm gonna chalk that statement up to some sort of hysteria.
Avram Noam Chomsky; born December 7, 1928 is an American linguist, philosopher,cognitive scientist, logician, historian, political critic, and activist. He is an Institute Professor and Professor (Emeritus) in the Department of Linguistics & Philosophy at MIT, where he has worked for over 50 years. In addition to his work in linguistics, he has written on war, politics, and mass media, and is the author of over 100 books. According to the Arts and Humanities Citation Index in 1992, Chomsky was cited as a source more often than any other living scholar from 1980 to 1992, and was the eighth most cited source overall. He has been described as a prominent cultural figure, and he was voted the "world's top public intellectual" in a 2005 poll.
Must be well into some stage of Alzheimers. So now he's an ethicist too.
Tell me he's been poppin' out over two books a year for the last 50 years. I bet he runs marathons in records times ...makes Newton and Einstein look like pinheads...and can pop out a fresh peach cobbler that would turn your mom green with envy.
Before it becomes a fetus, it's a mass of dividing cells. This is basic biology class stuff. Would someone please explain the process so we can get past all this rhetorical slogan type stuff? Thanks.
Excuse me......hysteria. Not likely
I believe you'll find an interesting discussion about who receives benefits and why they shouldn't, beginning with the thread linked below. There are, of course, many, many others and it doesn't take much searching to fine them.
And I believe it's the GOP that leads the fight to continue the terrible practice of capital punishment. Fortunately, Maryland has now ended the barbaric practice. And most of the people executed are poor, probably receiving government benefits at some time during their life. And look at the outrage inthis thread about the young man arrested for the Boston Marathon bombing receiving awards and benefits.
Here is a link that might be useful: Link
American Military uses drones to kill innocent babies. Where is your outcry over that?
""Republicans wait to kill them after they are born."
"I believe you'll find an interesting discussion about who receives benefits and why they shouldn't, beginning with the thread linked below. There are, of course, many, many others and it doesn't take much searching to fine them."
Nothin' there about republicans killing babies. You fine 'em and show them to me.
Mom: "And look at the outrage in this thread about the young man arrested for the Boston Marathon bombing receiving awards and benefits."
You look. There is none.
YQ: "American Military uses drones to kill innocent babies. Where is your outcry over that?"
You think that the US military is specifically targeting babies? I doubt that. But I've stated my position as anti-drone before and it stands.
drones have killed many civilians. War used to be between soldiers...but drones make it all so far removed . Drones have killed small children and you know it
I wonder if the old MIT professor of linguistics stopped speaking to honor the MIT policemen who was killed by terrorists after they bombed the Boston Marathon. Remember, they were trying to get to Time Square with another pressure cooker bomb or two.
Really...what about your "dear leader"...;he is okay with killing babies born after an attempted abortion doesn't he?
I don't understand why someone wouldn't be able to start their own topic instead of ruining a perfectly good one with something completely unrelated.
I mean, it's already an anonymous board anyway, but you can't even be bothered to make your own subject line and discuss things there? Can't tell whether this is cowardliness or just plain laziness ...
Perhaps the subject changed abruptly because it's one we don't talk about very much, perhaps not very much is known about it since much of is rather secretive, it's really a frightening thought that we ARE slowly losing civil liberties under various guises... and it's easier to lapse into something we've thrown at the wall a thousand times and it sticks every time, and we're all familiar with the expected responses. I don't really know.
Maybe no one wants to admit that the truth is, the actual President doesn't hold much power... it's distributed into other various powerful hands and agencies, and no one wants to admit that we're coming to a very precarious time in our history as a nation, and as a global entity.
In short, the bigger picture is getting really ugly, and if the people ever hope to hold onto anything they value as citizens, we have to stop infighting and band together.
Or... maybe only a couple of posters were up for a 5 page read... who can know?