Oh, this is rich. The View's liberal co-host Joy Behar subbed for CNN's Larry King on May 1, interviewing Ann Coulter. The entire interview was a major hoot, but this exchange was the best:
Behar: OK. All right. I want to know if you want to be waterboarded, because Sean Hannity has volunteered to be waterboarded, but I don't see him sticking his head under the faucet yet.
Coulter: Well, for one thing, about half of the male hosts on Fox News have been waterboarded on TV. I've seen worse on Fear Factor. And, no, I don't want to be waterboarded. Do you want to be...
Behar: Are you sure?
Coulter: Do you want to be aborted, because I think you support abortion? In fact, could we abort the terrorists instead of waterboarding them?
Behar: Oh, that was quite a jump. But you know what; Ann's taking your calls tonight.
Coulter: No, it's not.
[HT: Newsbusters via moderator Jasper]
Brilliant, brilliant, BRILLIANT!Posted by: Patte at May 4, 2009 1:31 PM
Gotta love that exchange..... ;-)Posted by: Doyle Chadwick at May 4, 2009 1:49 PM
Liberals make the most ridiculous arguments and then when their own logical tactics are used on them, they bail!Posted by: Eileen #2 at May 4, 2009 1:52 PM
I thank God that Ann Coulter is ProLife!Posted by: Robyn at May 4, 2009 2:38 PM
Those are two separate issues. I'm all for debate, but let's not cross any wires. Debate 1) is waterboarding torture and if so, should American policy include torture? Debate 2) does life begin at the moment of conception? I don't see a relationship between the two.Posted by: David at May 4, 2009 3:07 PM
Here's the relationship, David:
Liberals like Joy Behar vote for politicians like Barack Obama, who nominate Supreme Court justices who find emanations from penumbras that aren't there in the U.S. Constitution. They all agree that it is just fine to dismember an innocent girl or boy in the womb who feels pain. In Obama's case, he votes that it is ok to finish off a baby girl or boy who somehow makes it out alive after an attempted abortion.
Then these same people fight tooth and nail to prevent brave Americans from "waterboarding" captured terrorists who have information on the next attack. This saves lives and there is no permanant harm to the terrorist...in fact our troops are waterboarded as part of their training so they know what it is like.
So what have we learned? Waterboarding is not torture, it is a useful interrogation technique that has proven to save lives. But Obama's and Behar's beloved abortion and infanticide are most certainly torture for the child, followed by the killing of the child.
And thank God Ann Coulter didn't let this pig get away with what she was trying to pull.Posted by: Heres the relationship at May 4, 2009 3:18 PM
As soon as there is scientific proof that life begins at the moment of conception than we can discuss the rights of a fetus. I'd be more than happy to review a study. If you believe abortion is wrong, don't have one. But stay out of the lives of others.
There has been no evidence of waterboarding producing information that prevented a terrorist attack. Cheney has said there is, but no evidence has surfaced and therefore I don't believe it.
A training exercise is different from waterboarding because the "victim" knows that they are safe and that the waterboarding will come to an end. Waterboarding was a technique created in China under Mao specifically to get FALSE ADMISSIONS OF GUILT for purposes of propaganda.Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2009 3:24 PM
"As soon as there is scientific proof that life begins at the moment of conception than we can discuss the rights of a fetus."
The scientific evidence has been in for quite some time; I believe as far back as the 19th century. So here are some quotes from biology texts.
"Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote). ... The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual." (Carlson, Bruce M., Patten's Foundations of Embryology, 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p.3.)
"The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote." [Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3]
"Zygote. This cell, formed by the union of an ovum and a sperm (Gr. zygtos, yoked together), represents the beginning of a human being." [Moore, Keith L. and Persaud, T.V.N. Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects. 4th edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1993, p. 1]
"Although human life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed. ... The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity." (O'Rahilly, Ronan and Müller, Fabiola. Human Embryology and Teratology, 2nd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996, pp. 8, 29).
"the term conception refers to the union of the male and female pronuclear elements of procreation from which a new living being develops. It is synonymous with the terms fecundation, impregnation and fertilization ... The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life." (J.P. Greenhill and E.A. Freidman. Biological Principles and Modern Practice of Obstetrics. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Publishers, pages 17 and 23.)
"Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being." [Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]
"Embryo: An organism in the earliest stage of development; in a man, from the time of conception to the end of the second month in the uterus." (Dox, Ida G. et al. The Harper Collins Illustrated Medical Dictionary. New York: Harper Perennial, 1993, p. 146.
"every time a sperm cell and ovum unite, a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition." (E.L. Potter, M.D., and J.M. Craig, M.D. Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant (3rd Edition). Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1975, page vii.)
"Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism.... At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.... The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life." [Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943]
"If you believe abortion is wrong, don't have one."
This is a nonsense phrase, akin to saying "don't like rape, don't rape someone" or "don't like lynching blacks? don't lynch one" It completely dismisses the pro-life case and doesn't address anything we say.
"But stay out of the lives of others."
Here is a good example of a self-refuting statement. By telling us to stay out of the lives of others, you are injecting yourself and your view into our lives, thereby not staying out of the lives of others and not satisfying your own criteria.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at May 4, 2009 3:34 PM
Don't like waterboarding?
Don't perform one.
Stay out of the lives of others trying to protect our country.Posted by: Sandy at May 4, 2009 3:36 PM
So get the US Government to recognize that life begins at the moment of conception and then you can akin abortion to murder!
I wonder why that hasn't happened yet...Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2009 3:38 PM
Anon, pick a name. And BTW:
"As soon as there is scientific proof that life begins at the moment of conception than we can discuss the rights of a fetus. I'd be more than happy to review a study. If you believe abortion is wrong, don't have one. But stay out of the lives of others."
How much "scientific proof" would you like? What do you believe an embryo IS? I learned when life begins in junior high biology. Seriously...denial isn't just a river in Egypt.
Staying out of the lives of others...hmm, now there's a concept. The government doesn't do that in any other case where a human being's life is taken, other than in abortion. We put people in jail for murder, we put them in jail for infanticide, we ticket them for not wearing THEIR OWN SEAT BELTS! We tell them they can't use illegal drugs! Golly gee, got a better argument?
I'm waiting. Do you PCers even *think* about the talking points/propaganda you write before you write it?Posted by: Kel at May 4, 2009 3:39 PM
"So get the US Government to recognize that life begins at the moment of conception and then you can akin abortion to murder! I wonder why that hasn't happened yet... "
Because the world is in the hands of the devil.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at May 4, 2009 3:40 PM
Yay, Bobby! I knew you'd beat me to it. :DPosted by: Kel at May 4, 2009 3:40 PM
"Stay out of the lives of others trying to protect our country."
Well, they get paid with tax dollars and therefore work in the name of US citizens. It's therefore my business what they do. I don't want my country torturing anybody. This isn't the Spanish Inquisition.Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2009 3:49 PM
Well then I must be in league with the devil. And I guess God and Jesus love people who torture others. Forgiveness is so first century...Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2009 3:52 PM
"And I guess God and Jesus love people who torture others. "
I'm not sure how you arrived at this conclusion.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at May 4, 2009 3:57 PM
Thank God for Ann Coulter AND Bobby Bambino!
No need to add anything here, you guys cleaned up!
Posted by: angel
at May 4, 2009 3:58 PM
Is abortion a sin? So sayeth you "yes". Is torture a sin? So sayeth you "no". So God and Jesus approve of torture?Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2009 3:59 PM
"Is torture a sin? So sayeth you "no""
Hmmm.. where did I say that, Anon?Posted by: Bobby Bambino at May 4, 2009 4:01 PM
""And I guess God and Jesus love people who torture others. " I'm not sure how you arrived at this conclusion. "
Actually, I know what you meant, but what you actually said is of course true. He also loves abortionists, rapists, murderers, etc. etc.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at May 4, 2009 4:05 PM
So you believe torture is wrong, then?Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2009 4:06 PM
Stay out of the lives of others trying to protect our country."
Well, they get paid with tax dollars and therefore work in the name of US citizens. It's therefore my business what they do. I don't want my country torturing anybody. This isn't the Spanish Inquisition.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2009 3:49 PM---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Anon, our tax $$$$ are also footing the bill for abortions!Posted by: heather at May 4, 2009 4:07 PM
I have no opinion about torture that I am aware of.
I'm here to discuss abortion. You asked about scientific evidence, and I provided it. I do not know anything about torture nor will I get dragged into a discussion about something I know nothing about.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at May 4, 2009 4:09 PM
So you believe torture is wrong, then?
Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2009 4:06 PM---------------- Can't think of much worse than the torture of an unborn child in the womb!Posted by: heather at May 4, 2009 4:09 PM
Did anyone happen to watch the episode of "The View" where Ron Paul actually got Joy Behar to admit that abortion was murder? She ADMITTED it!Posted by: heather at May 4, 2009 4:11 PM
I have no opinion about torture that I am aware of. - Bobby Bambino
This shocks and saddens me.
he probably doesn't have an opinion on what's going on in Sudan or the whole "there were WMD's in Iraq" issue, either, to name a few.Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2009 4:20 PM
Whoopi Goldberg has admitted to having about 7 or 8 abortions, yet at the same time she always manages to make herself look foolish. One day Whoopi and Elizabeth were going on about the abortion issue. Of course Whoopi HAD to have the final say. She told Elizabeth " Have YOU ever had to make that decision?" Elizabeth: "No." Whoopi: "Then stay out of it, because it's a very difficult choice!!" Audience :Thundering applause!! A difficult choice? Then why would she choose it 8 times??Posted by: heather at May 4, 2009 4:21 PM
I do not have the time nor resources to study ever issue to the extent that I would like to in order to proclaim a public opinion about it. If I am going to say I support or am against something, I feel I must have a very strong case and be able to articulate my position well. Hence, I have to pick my battles.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at May 4, 2009 4:23 PM
"he probably doesn't have an opinion on what's going on in Sudan or the whole "there were WMD's in Iraq" issue, either, to name a few."
Yup, that's right Anon! I don't blast my mouth off about stuff I don't know about.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at May 4, 2009 4:25 PM
that's okay. intelligence is a difficult thing to achieve. that's why some people opt for religion.Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2009 4:31 PM
Ah, OK. I wondered why I belonged to a religion. Thanks Anon. Pleasure talking with you.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at May 4, 2009 4:34 PM
I have noticed among my Catholic friends and family that some hold views that go against the Church on topics such as the death penalty in order to align themselves better with the political Right. They will attemt to come up with excuses and twist words of scripture around to make themselves feel better about it, but bottom line is they are not respecting LIFE, the most important issue, with their views.
As someone whom I deeply respect I sincerely hope you are not that sort of Catholic!
I really don't think you are, but the quote of yours I questioned reminded me of things I've heard from these sorts of Catholics.Posted by: Bee at May 4, 2009 4:41 PM
I believe everything the Catholic Church teaches. In fact, I have absolutely no alligence to the "political right" nor do I consider myself a Republican. Conservative, yes. Republican, no. Whatever the Catholic Church teaches about torture is what I believe, BAR NONE.
Now I assumed that when we were talking about torture above, we were specifically talking about water boarding because that seemed to be the topic at hand. As far as I know, the Catholic Church does not condemn waterbaording as intrinsically wrong. However, if you can show me a Catholic document that specifically condemns it, then I too will condemn it in a heartbeat, no questions asked. This isn't meant to be a "challenge" to you, Bee. Like anything, I can't stay on top of every document the Vatican puts out and if I miss something and certain torture techniques are considered wrong, I unequivocally will condemn them. Believe me, quote any official Church document to me and I will tell you that I 100% agree with it, whether it be against specific types of torture or whatever.
Also, the Catholic Church does not condemn the death penalty as intrinsically evil. I can show you exactly what we believe about it in the Catechism. So personally I am torn on the issue of the death penalty.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at May 4, 2009 4:57 PM
OK Bee, well check this out. Paragraph 2297 in the Catechism states
"Torture which uses physical or moral violence to extract confessions, punish the guilty, frighten opponents, or satisfy hatred is contrary to respect for the person and for human dignity."
So that seems pretty clear to me. There seems to be a lot controversy on the internet about this, but I don't know. I mean, physical violence.... there it is.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at May 4, 2009 5:05 PM
I'm a Catholic as well, though admittedly not a well-read one.
I have noticed a trend in the last ten years for Catholics in my social circle to become more wishy-washy, or "torn," on subjects such as war and capital punishment. I've seen so many fellow Catholics support the war 100%, despite the Vatican's position on it. I can't help but feel it is the influence of politics. This bothers me greatly.
One thing about your response really drove home to me a big reason I am not more religious. I hope you don't mind me highlighting it:
However, if you can show me a Catholic document that specifically condemns it, then I too will condemn it in a heartbeat, no questions asked.
Really? No questions at all? I am not being snarky here, I'm just wondering if you ever feel the need to question what the Church hands down, or do you accept it all blindly? Do you ever form an opinion on anything without the Church's input?
This is the main reason I am not as good a Catholic as my mom would like me to be. I have a tendency to question things. :)
I hope you don't mind me rambling, and I hope my questions don't make you angry or uncomfortable. I have been searching lately, and questioning my own faith. Your posts have usually me "warm" feelings about the church, Bobby, so thanks for that!Posted by: Bee at May 4, 2009 5:10 PM
Ah, this is the kind of thing I was looking for as well. From Veritatis Splendor, JP II's encyclical letter, he writes the following in paragraph 80 which quotes part of Gaudium et Spes from Vatican II
80. Reason attests that there are objects of the human act which are by their nature "incapable of being ordered" to God, because they radically contradict the good of the person made in his image. These are the acts which, in the Church's moral tradition, have been termed "intrinsically evil" (intrinsece malum): they are such always and per se, in other words, on account of their very object, and quite apart from the ulterior intentions of the one acting and the circumstances. Consequently, without in the least denying the influence on morality exercised by circumstances and especially by intentions, the Church teaches that "there exist acts which per se and in themselves, independently of circumstances, are always seriously wrong by reason of their object".131 The Second Vatican Council itself, in discussing the respect due to the human person, gives a number of examples of such acts: "Whatever is hostile to life itself, such as any kind of homicide, genocide, abortion, euthanasia and voluntary suicide; whatever violates the integrity of the human person, such as mutilation, physical and mental torture and attempts to coerce the spirit; whatever is offensive to human dignity, such as subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution and trafficking in women and children; degrading conditions of work which treat labourers as mere instruments of profit, and not as free responsible persons: all these and the like are a disgrace, and so long as they infect human civilization they contaminate those who inflict them more than those who suffer injustice, and they are a negation of the honour due to the Creator".132Posted by: Bobby Bambino at May 4, 2009 5:10 PM
I once spoke to the deacon of my church about the death peanalty. His explaination was that a Catholic could only be for capital punishment on the basis of semantics, which would be dishonest.
What do you think of his explaination?Posted by: Bee at May 4, 2009 5:13 PM
So what exactly are you asking me to take away from your quote in regards to my question? :)Posted by: Bee at May 4, 2009 5:15 PM
Anonymous, no more anonymous posts. Please pick a name or I'm asking moderators to delete your posts from this point on.Posted by: Jill Stanek at May 4, 2009 5:16 PM
I know you're very sincere and well meaning.
"Really? No questions at all? I am not being snarky here, I'm just wondering if you ever feel the need to question what the Church hands down, or do you accept it all blindly?"
YES. Unequivocally yes. Absolutely. I accept it because of WHAT the Church is. It is the teaching authority established by Jesus Christ to teach in his name here on earth, which can not err in speaking on matters of faith and morals. When the Church speaks definitively on something, I have more epistemic justification in believeing that to be true than ANYTHING else; be it science or mathematics. I am more sure that Jesus Christ has 2 natures than I am that the fundamental group of the sphere is the integers. I believe what the Church teaches because it is God himself who has revealed it who can neither deceive nor be deceived.
Once one comes to the conclusion that the Church is what Jesus Christ established here on earth to teach in his name with his authority, it becomes automatic that any definitive teaching the Church proposes is true. In fact, if I happen to agree with what the Church teaches, that isn't faith. It isn't faith for me to sit back and say "yeah, I agree iwth the Church on abortion, and Jesus' nature, virgin birth, etc." No, that is me simply agreeing with the Church. Now i DO happen to agree iwth the Church on all it teaches, but the REASON I believe all that is not based on ANY argument I give. Rather, the reason is because the Church proposes it for the faithful. Thomas Aquinas defined faith as the theological virtue which is the ascent of the intellect to conform to the will to hold all the Catholic Church teaches. This is beautiful and paradoxical. It is paradoxical because our intellect is a higher faculty than our will. Normally, our will should conform to our intellect. That is, we desire or crave something (our will) but our intellect knows better and hence our will must conform to teh intellect. However, faith flips that around and says that now our intellect must conform to out will; that is, we will to believe all teh Church teaches because we know it is true because it is revealed by God himself. Hence, our intellect conforms to the will. It is so beautiful and profound.
I appreciate the question so much, Bee. Thank you so much for asking. I REALLY have to go now, but I'll be back on later tonight and we can discuss this more if you wish. I would love to continue talking with you about this. God love you.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at May 4, 2009 5:21 PM
Because the world is in the hands of the devil.
Posted by: Bobby Bambino at May 4, 2009 3:40 PM
really? The devil is in control of the world? yikes...Posted by: Hal at May 4, 2009 5:22 PM
Thank you so much for your answer, Bobby. I have to go as well, and I am not sure if I will be able to stop back by until tomorrow morning.
I'm looking forward to more discussion as well. I am also anxious to hear more about the quote you posted. I just hope Jill will tolerate me hijacking her blog!Posted by: Bee at May 4, 2009 5:32 PM
I have noticed a trend in the last ten years for Catholics in my social circle to become more wishy-washy, or "torn," on subjects such as war and capital punishment. I've seen so many fellow Catholics support the war 100%, despite the Vatican's position on it. I can't help but feel it is the influence of politics. This bothers me greatly.
Well what I have noticed is exactly the opposite. Catholics are not wishy-washy on war and capital punishment. Instead they are wishy-washy on contraception and abortion. They could care less about abortion, hence the vast number of Catholics who have abortions and who contracept and still consider themselves "good" Catholics.Posted by: angel at May 4, 2009 5:35 PM
If you believe abortion is wrong, don't have one.
Another tired cliche by liberals who think if pro life people simply refuse to have an abortion themselves the problem will be solved. The issue is we want to protect unborn, innocent lives. And it's as ridiculous as saying if you think robbing a bank is wrong don't do it.
But stay out of the lives of others.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2009 3:24 PM
I agree we should stay out of the lives of others provided their actions don't affect others. Abortion most definitely affects an innocent baby.
Posted by: Anonymous
at May 4, 2009 6:02 PM
Sorry Anonymous at 6:02 PM was me.Posted by: Joanne at May 4, 2009 6:03 PM
Oh that was an awesome comeback by Coulter!!!Posted by: Bethany at May 4, 2009 6:05 PM
Did anyone happen to watch the episode of "The View" where Ron Paul actually got Joy Behar to admit that abortion was murder? She ADMITTED it!
Posted by: heather at May 4, 2009 4:11 PM
Heather...... I think Joy was referring to partial birth abortion. She agreed it was murder. I think the clip is on Youtube will see if I can find it.Posted by: Joanne at May 4, 2009 6:07 PM
I find it amazing how again and again pro-choicers come in and make blatantly wrong statements, are proven wrong, and then come back and pretend it never happened.
Anon-As Bobby said earlier, life begins at conception. Amphimixis marks the beginning of a unique, human life. There is no debate.
Before we go any further you need to concede to this point.Posted by: Lauren at May 4, 2009 6:35 PM
First of all, I'm amazed that Ann Coulter would even agree to be interviewed by that imbecille Joy Behar...they must have tricked her into thinking she was going to be questioned by someone with half a brain.
Re: the other moron Whoppi Goldberg and her supposed 7 or 8 abortions: This would require her to have been with one (or 7 or 8 ) men to even put her in the position where she'd "need" the abortion(s). She's clearly flattering
herself. I highly doubt that ONE, (much less 7 or 8 ) homo sapien males ever got THAT DRUNK or STONED for it to happen. Talk about horrifying!
Here is the clip of The View ladies talking to Ron Paul. Notice how nicely they treat him as compared to John McCain. However I think a lot of it had to do with Ron Paul's opposition to the Iraq war, since both men agree on the abortion issue.
And Joy said "that's murder" in response to Paul talking about abortions taking place just before the baby is born.Posted by: Joanne at May 4, 2009 6:51 PM
Before we go any further you need to concede to this point.
Posted by: Lauren at May 4, 2009 6:35 PM
since when do proaborts concede to scientific FACT! haha!Posted by: angel at May 4, 2009 7:02 PM
Hey Bee. So to answer your questions, first, let me say how I see the death penalty. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church
"2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."68 "
So from that first paragraph, it is indeed true that the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty. However, as it goes on to read (quoting an encyclical letter of JPII), there is almost no reason anymore in today's society to punish with the death penalty. If I had to give a sort of "summary" of this, I would say that while Catholics are permitted to holding that the death penalty is acceptable, I might say that it is "discouraged" by the Church.
Now this somewhat ties in with what I quoted above from JPII's other encyclical letter Veritatis Splendor. In the context, he is discussing how there are certain things which are non-negotiable; definitive moral issues that the Church proposes that the faithful MUST give the assent of faith to. To emphasize this, he quotes from the ecumenical council Vatican II. The pertinent part, as I saw it, is
"whatever violates the integrity of the human person, such as mutilation, physical and mental torture and attempts to coerce the spirit...are a disgrace, and so long as they infect human civilization they contaminate those who inflict them more than those who suffer injustice, and they are a negation of the honour due to the Creator"
This does seem to pretty strongly condemn torture. However, my guess is that there is debate over exactly how to define torture and what the council means here by torture. But the way I see it, there isn't any sort of statement about torture in certain cases or the "tradition of the church" like we saw in the death penalty quote. The point being that it seems to me that the Church more strongly condemns torture than it does the death penalty. Thus, if I had to guess just based on the encyclical letter and the Catechism, I would lean more towards the idea of the Church unequivocally condemning any kinds of torture.
But one thing that I"m confused about is that I know I have heard some very reliable people in the Church who I trust very much say that Catholics can have varying opinions about this. I think when I say "this" though, we're talking about very specific guidelines for interrogation techniques. You have to admit that a distinction needs to be made between legitimize interrogation techniques and torture. Now I'm not sure where that line is or where the Church draws that line, but I do think that what the Church considers torture, it does condemn. This really should be looked into a bit more. I"ll have a little bit of time to do some reading tomorrow.
Maybe we should start with terms, because if we don't get those good and solid first, we're going to be on completely different wavelengths. Do you know a good definition of torture? I think that is maybe where I can start thinking about this question, but I have no idea how to define it. Maybe the Church offers a definition, I don't know. Wow, I ramble a lot. But that's what I"m thinking.
For you, Bee, I will begin to look more seriously at this issue and try and come to some conclusion, though I can't promise that even if I learn a lot more about it I will be able to come to some sort of opinion about it. God love you.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at May 4, 2009 7:36 PM
Heather...... I think Joy was referring to partial birth abortion. She agreed it was murder. I think the clip is on Youtube will see if I can find it.
Posted by: Joanne at May 4, 2009 6:07 PM------------------------------------------------------------------ Joanne, yep. That's the clip. Thanks for looking. Although it is PBA, Joy still had to admit it was murder. Whoopi would not.................... AND for Mike, I agree with you! LOL! However, this is what she says!Posted by: heather at May 4, 2009 7:54 PM
Mike, LOL! Remember Whoopi and Ted Danson when they were an item?Posted by: heather at May 4, 2009 7:58 PM
I always knew Ted was crazy. That proved it.
And btw...what's up with her lack of eyebrows???
I'll never understand that one...
Let's not say such terrible things about Whoopi Goldberg- disagree with her stance; I do. But, as Gandhi said, "An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind." Treating her like that would only make things worse.
Please don't think that I'm getting on my holy-roller: I've done the exact same thing that I am telling you about now...probably yesterday. I have unflattering comments about people who can really get under my skin, too. Perhaps it would be better if we all stuck to speaking well of humanity and not saying such disparaging things? Again...I'm guilty of this myself so please don't think that I'm attacking you personally. This is for everyone. :).Posted by: Vannah at May 4, 2009 8:42 PM
I get the impression listening to that clip again that Joy could be converted to the pro life cause. She starts out asking about Roe vs Wade which she clearly supports, but she's clearly very much against late term abortions from what she said there.
Also Whoopie should know better than to say there are no late term abortions going on. Apparently she is on the board of directors of PP so if she's not aware of this she sure should be. Of course, most people don't like to face that reality.
Posted by: Joanne
at May 4, 2009 9:04 PM
Vannah, I do agree with you. ..Joanne, Believe it or not, I thought the same thing about Joy! And Mike, I just happen to feel that Whoopi is a classless act. She's not a bad actress, but she's a typical lib when it comes to the abortion issue, and she really doesn't do her side any justice.Posted by: heather at May 4, 2009 9:38 PM
Also, there is a book out called "The Choices We Made"..in that book, Goldberg claims that she gave herself a coathanger abortion at the age of 14. However, things must have gone off without a hitch, because she did not require any medical treatment after her self aborting procedure. Hmmmm..I smell a rat there. Also, if Whoopi aborted herself without incident, then why is she fighting to keep abortion legal? Heck, what do we need abortionists for??Posted by: heather at May 4, 2009 9:44 PM
I think a lot of these ladies are exaggerating their stories about the days when abortions were illegal. So many celebrities have done this. Margot Kidder, Anne Archer, Whoopi Goldberg,and Linda Elerbee, just to name a few. Shock value anyone?Posted by: heather at May 4, 2009 9:49 PM
And Linda Elerbee battled breast cancer, but of course there is NO LINK between abortion and breast cancer. Couldn't be.Posted by: heather at May 4, 2009 9:52 PM
One more post. Actress Rita Moreno also had an abortion and battled breast cancer.Posted by: heather at May 4, 2009 10:32 PM
Do any of these women say they regret their abortion? The only celeb I know of that has publically said she wished she had not aborted her baby is Sharon Osborne.
I suspect many other celebs have had abortions but aren't saying so publically. However most are pro abortion. In fact very few are pro life. Patricia Heaton is one exception and for the men I believe Mel Gibson is and Stephen Baldwin. Dont know of any others sadly.Posted by: Joanne at May 4, 2009 11:32 PM
Meant to say I agree with you about Whoopie claiming she had a coat hanger abortion. Especially at the age of 14.... we are supposed to believe she was able to do this without harming herself? Not to mention of course the poor baby. I find that story hard to believe also.Posted by: Joanne at May 4, 2009 11:34 PM
When all you've got left is Palin, Coulter, and Randall Terry I think you're in serious trouble as a movement. But given her low remark about a baby being killed for having its diaper changed in the WH, I don't think Jill quite realizes that yet.Posted by: Yo La Tengo at May 5, 2009 1:22 AM
Yo La Tengo said, "I think you're in serious trouble as a movement."
Do you mean a bowel movement? as in a bowel movement in the White House?Posted by: Jon at May 5, 2009 2:14 AM
Do you think that some Americans would cry, "Torture!" if terrorists were forced to wash dirty diapers in the prisons? (Do you remember the old cloth diapers such as the ones my mother used on me?) I know that waterboarding is far worse, but there are also far worse things than waterboarding, e.g. dismemberment, whether as an adult by a terrorist or as a child by your mother's abortionist.
Americans, especially the ones who are liberals, need to get a sense of proportion. They also need to remember the meaning of war, a war which their former leader--President Bush--did not lightly enter into (even if they themselves did). He took the defense of America quite seriously.Posted by: Jon at May 5, 2009 2:26 AM
Hi Heather 9:44PM
Great point about Goldberg's alleged illegal abortion going off without a hitch. Amazing that a 14y/o girl could do this without harming herself or her capacity to have children. Didn't Margot Kidder claim she did the same thing?
I think all these ladies have to say is "illegal abortion" and people's imaginations run wild.
My cousin had her illegal abortions done in her doctor's office. They were called "menstrual extractions" and she's still alive and doing very well.
I remember getting a PP mailing with an illegal abortion story from actress Joanne Woodward as well.
Did you ever get the movie "The Detective Story" with Kirk Douglas? We talked about it on another thread.
Celebs say abortion hurts women, that Roe v. Wade is wrong
January 22, 2005 is the 32th anniversary of the landmark Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion in all 50 states. Since that day, the U.S. government reports that more than 43 million abortions were performed on some 27 million women. It's estimated that approximately 43 percent of women who've reached the age of 45 have had an abortion.
Kathy Ireland says, "I used to be pro-choice."
While appearing on the TV show "Politically Incorrect," Kathy Ireland participated in a debate about abortion "rights" and whether or not Florida should approve "Choose Life" license plates. Kathy is against abortion and she defended babies in the womb by saying: "I was once pro-choice and the thing that changed my mind was, I read my husband's biology books, medical books, and what I learned . . . At the moment of conception, a life starts. And this life has its own unique set of DNA, which contains a blueprint for the whole genetic makeup. The sex is determined. We know there's a life because it's growing and changing."
On a 1990 Barbara Walters TV special, Gibson stated his opposition to birth control, infidelity and abortion. He said, "God is the only one who knows how many children we should have, and we should be ready to accept them. One can't decide for oneself who comes into this world and who doesn't. That decision doesn't belong to us."
Patricia Heaton of the hit comedy, Everybody Loves Raymond, fights abortion
Emmy winning actress, Patricia Heaton, strongly opposes abortion. She speaks publicly against abortion in media interviews and on college campuses as the Honorary Chairperson of Feminists for Life.
Heaton says, "Indeed the tragedy of abortion haunts women from all walks of life. Abortion advocates are spending millions to package their tired rhetoric and half-truths in cutting-edge advertising campaigns targeted to young women. Please join me in supporting FFL's efforts to provide complete information, practical resources, and true choices through the College Outreach program."
"The early feminists were pro-life. And really, abortion is a huge disservice to women, and it hasn't been presented that way. As Feminists for Life-what we're trying to do is support women, and so what we want to do is-reach women on campus-college campuses so that, when they get pregnant, they can find housing. They can find money they need to stay in school."
(Sources: www.feministsforlife.org and an appearance on The O'Reilly Factor - Sept. 2002)
Actress, Margaret Colin, has appeared in Three Men and a Baby and the sci-fi blockbuster, Independence Day, and on TV in Chicago Hope, Now and Again and Madigan Men. A pro-life activist since the eighth grade, Margaret credits her parents with empowering her and her siblings to promote pro-life values. At a Congressional Briefing in Washington DC on July 17, 2002, Margaret spoke about abortion. Following are excerpts:
"We marched here to support all women and to protest the violence against them, legislated by Roe v. Wade. And while many will remember the 40 million [aborted] American children that were never born, I want us to also remember the 25 million women and girls in America today who have personally experienced an abortion."
"And we remember the women who have been rendered infertile or died from legal but lethal abortions…This is violence against women…This is the failure of our American society to help and protect women."
"The 1970's women's movement robbed us of our political birthright by changing the feminist platform to support abortion…Abortion hasn't fixed the litany of problems that women were promised would be resolved." Colin encourages others to defend the unborn, "You have to be brave -- the one who speaks out for a baby so she or he can come into this life."
Kathy Ireland also spoke about abortion on the Hannity and Colmes FOX-TV show (September 2002). Ireland said:
"Is it all right for the government to allow the murder of an innocent human being? The evidence I see tells me the unborn is a human being. From the moment of conception, a new life comes into being with a complete genetic blueprint. The sex is determined. The blood type is determined… the moment that I learned that the unborn was a human being, not part of the woman's body but its own individual human being, I have no choice but to defend the most vulnerable among us."
Dolores O'Riordan: Lead Vocalist, The Cranberries:
"It's not good for women to go through the procedure [abortion] and have something living sucked out of their bodies. It belittles women. Even though some women say, 'Oh, I don't mind to have one,' every time a woman has an abortion, it just crushes her self-esteem smaller and smaller and smaller."
(Source: You! Magazine, June/July 1996)
Lakita Garth - Former Miss Black California 1995 and Runner-Up for Miss Black America.
Lakita says, "If you're pregnant, don't compound the problem by seeking an abortion. Getting an abortion doesn't solve anything. You are much better off in that situation to put the baby up for adoption because you might be able to help a couple that can't have children." Regarding saving sex for marriage, Lakita says: "I look forward to the day I can look my husband in the face and say, 'I loved you before I even knew you. I saved myself just for you.'"
On July 16, 1998, Lakita Garth spoke to a Congressional Subcommittee on the high costs of sex outside of marriage and teen pregnancy. To read Miss Garth's insightful testimony, and to go to a link with her photo, a short biography and speaking contact information, click on: Miss Black California
Has abortion been good for America? For women? For babies?
Did abortion "liberate" women and free them from "male oppression?" Did it give them "control" over their bodies and lives as some feminists promised? Or, has abortion hurt women, bringing them pain, shame, guilt and regrets?
Of 260 women surveyed by post abortion syndrome expert, Dr. David Reardon, Ph.D, 28 percent told him they attempted suicide because of grief they felt over their abortions. (See www.afterabortion.org)
Former "Cover Girl" model and actress, Jennifer O'Neill, can testify to the pain. She says, "I had the abortion and paid for it all my life."
Many women are now speaking about their abortions. Carna Spinella of Seattle, WA says, "Having an abortion was the biggest, most tragic mistake of my life." Lisa Burroughs of Buena Park, CA adds, "After abortion -- the guilt, shame and loneliness is horrible."
Star Parker of Los Angeles had several abortions and says they led to promiscuous, destructive relationships, "I used abortion as birth control until after my fourth abortion…abortion destroys self-worth and dignity." Cecilia Gomez of Tustin, CA says her abortions also contributed to "extremely promiscuous and self-destructive" behavior. She adds, "With each abortion, I became more and more depressed."
Numerous celebrities have seen how abortion hurts women. And although they've not had abortions themselves, they are now publicly opposing abortion and Roe v. Wade.
Actress Margaret Colin, in a recent interview with the National Catholic Register, said, "pro-choice women just took over the idea of feminism in the 1960's and said that you must end this child's life." The true feminist heritage, she said, opposed abortion as a denial of femininity. Gone now, she said, is the feminist ideal of having "the right to bear your child and protect you child."
"It's life. It's fundamental," Colin said. "You should be born. You should be taken care of," said the actress who appeared in Three Men and a Baby and Independence Day.
Feminists for Life, a national pro-life women's recently honored Colin and other female celebrities that they call "Remarkable Pro-Life Women."
Actress Patricia Heaton was another pro-life woman recognized by the organization. Receiving awards is nothing new for Heaton. When she accepted an Emmy for Outstanding Actress in a Comedy Series, she thanked her mother for "letting me out, because life is really amazing."
Known as the mother on CBS's "Everybody Loves Raymond," Heaton defended motherhood in a debate on the Oxygen network.
A doctor on the program had told the audience that the "morning after" pill would allow women "the opportunity -- instead of having babies every year -- they could actually do something with their lives." To which Heaton, a mother of four, responded, "Having and raising children is doing something with your life!... And I have to say that having your kids is one of the greatest things you can do."
But defending life can sometimes be very difficult says another honoree, Kate Mulgrew, star and Captain in the television series Star Trek: Voyager.
"I practiced my belief at great cost to myself," the actress told the American Feminist, a publication of Feminists for Life. Mulgrew had become pregnant at an early age and decided to place her baby girl for adoption. They were reunited two years ago.
She said that though "adoption or abortion almost always promises the mother a legacy of shame and regret, I have to be frank about my experience, I survived it. Women often don't believe that they can survive nine months of pregnancy and place the child with an adoptive family. Life is not always easy."
Kate Mulgrew went on to say,
"Life is sacred to me on all levels. Abortion does not compute with my philosophy."
Journalists are also speaking out against abortion. Columnist, Michelle Malkin, born of Filipino immigrants, worked for the Seattle Times and now writes a twice-weekly column syndicated nationwide.
Michelle says: "For three decades, the pro-abortion lobby has succeeded in squelching doubts and dissent about the mass destruction of human lives -- 40 million so far -- in the name of choice. But the truth is seeping out. And according to an account in the pro-choice publication American Medical News, abortion clinic workers often wonder if the fetus feels pain…Haunting auditory hallucinations. Voices from the womb. This is the pro-abortion movement's worst nightmare. Imagine the roar of 40 million tiny voices, all in unison…crying out: 'I want to live. I do not want to die.'"
How many more babies will die? How many more women will be injured? Let's work together to ban abortion. It's time to speak up for women and their babies. For more information, please visit the many web sites listed in LoveMatters.com. They provide tons of information and helpful counseling hotlines.Posted by: heather at May 5, 2009 7:48 AM
Joanne, the above post is for you. Another coming your way.Posted by: heather at May 5, 2009 7:52 AM
Brooke Shields, Actress and Supermodel: "Too many people use abortion as a form of birth control. And that's very wrong. I could never, ever have an abortion." (Source: Redbook Magazine, 8/91)
Susan B. Anthony (1889), abolitionist and early leader of the women's suffrage movement, opposed abortion, saying: "Sweeter even than to have had the joy of caring for children of my own has it been to me to help bring about a better state of things for mothers generally, so their unborn little ones could not be willed away from them."
Mother Teresa said:
"The greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion, which is war against the child. The mother doesn't learn to love, but kills to solve her own problems. Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want."Posted by: heather at May 5, 2009 7:53 AM
Celebs on saving sex for marriage:
Brett Butler - Former Los Angeles Dodger Great:
"Making love is a wonderful thing between a husband and wife in marriage. God promises that He will bless that relationship. The marriage relationship will not be as fulfilling if you don't abstain from sex before marriage. There is a danger of bringing emotional scars into marriage if you have sex in relationships prior to marriage." (Source: Pro-Life America interview 1997)
A.C. Green, NBA's Ironman, Former Basketball Star with the World Champion Los Angeles Lakers:
"I'm proud to say that I am a virgin, and I don't hide the strength God has given me. You have to learn to respect yourself before you can start respecting other people."
(Source: A.C. Green Youth Foundation, Inc., 1-800-AC-YOUTH)
Eric Clapton: Musician:
"It sounds strange for me to be saying this, but I've come around to the idea that sex really is for procreation."
(Source: You! Magazine, 8/95)
Dan Torweihe, former leader of The Thunderbirds, an elite Air Force Flying Team:
"If I used drugs, had bad grades or had a child out of wedlock, there is no way I could be where I'm at now. Stay focused...do not offer evil a foothold in your life."
(Source: Breakaway, 7/97)
Joanne, we also have supermodel, Kim Alexis on our side. There are some good apples out there!Posted by: heather at May 5, 2009 7:56 AM
@ Mary, I am going to get that movie without a doubt!! And yes, I believe that Margot Kidder did make the same claim. I also remember when she was found cowering in a wood shed in someone's back yard. Like a nervous breakdown type of a thing. Truth is, a lot of these women wanted a career and no kids. Telling all of these eyebrow raising stories is all about their abortion justification to themselves.Posted by: heather at May 5, 2009 8:04 AM
@ Joanne, I did hear the Sharon Osborne story. So sad that her mother made her do it. God bless her for telling the truth.Posted by: heather at May 5, 2009 8:13 AM
That movie is a very intense drama, I found it emotionally draining. I'm sure you can get it fairly cheap on Amazon. Its the subplot of his wife and how they handle it with the censorship rules of that time that is especially interesting.
I'm not certain it was even censorship so much as social norms.
With Margot Kidder's history of mental illness I would be highly skeptical of her tale of an illegal abortion as well. I told you the story of Nancy Spungen, the woman killed by punk rocker Sid Vicious, as told by her mother Deborah. Nancy was mentally ill and a seriously troubled child and teenager.
She did "abort" herself with a coathanger, except the doctor told Deborah that Nancy was never pregnant. Until she died, Nancy would maintain she had an "illegal abortion". Her mother saw this whole incident, self mutilation, insistance that she had an "illegal abortion", as just another manifestation of Nancy's mental illness.
I understand the late actress Judy Garland was pressured to have an abortion she didn't want by her mother, husband, and studio boss.
That woman't life was incredibly tragic.
Anyway, when she was pregnant with Liza, she made a comment, directed at her mother, about how she finally had permission to have a baby.
There was no mistaking her anger.
Full disclosure: I am not Catholic. While I respect what the Catholic church has to say, I do not consider proclamations of the church equal to the Scriptures, and if I felt they were in conflict with the scriptures (which if the Catholic Church is the one true church, of course, would never be the case) I would ignore those Catholic teachings.
One of Bobby's posts listed illicit reasons for torture, the most relevant of which was for "extracting confessions."
So there are two questions:
Is waterboarding considered torture?
Is seeking information the same as extracting confession?
My thoughts on torture is that, while current parlance would include sleep deprivation and loud music, these are not what has been traditionally considered torture. So either torture does not include everything now commonly put under that umbrella, or I find some kinds of torture acceptable and some kinds unacceptable. I do not find physical or sexual humiliation, infliction of physical damage, or infliction of any permanent harm to be acceptable. But keeping someone from sleeping scarcely falls into the same category, and I don't think waterboarding does either. It does not cause permanent harm. I do not think this is inconsistent with the Vatican's description of acts which involve: "mutilation, physical and mental torture and attempts to coerce the spirit." Again, though, it is debatable exactly what "mental torture" would entail.
Also, I suspect "extracting confessions" is meant to refer to confessions of deeds already done--not of deeds that were being plotted, for the purpose of stopping them. So I am not sure the ruling of the Vatican applies to "torture" inflicted for the purpose of gaining information on future attacks in order to save lives.
At any rate, the fact is that these acts are perpetrated on known, dangerous terrorists. And abortion is perpetrated on a baby who usually presents no serious danger, and has no choice in where he is, and is permanently harmed by being brutally murdered. The child is innocent of everything but being small and inconvenient. It is not comparing apples to apples.
Also, the vatican has always, repeatedly, clearly stated that abortion is wrong, except as an unintended side effect of a procedure which saves the mother's life.Posted by: YCW at May 5, 2009 8:45 AM
Heather, thank you so much! I am thrilled to learn that Kate Mulgrew is pro-life.Posted by: YCW at May 5, 2009 8:49 AM
Someone on another forum I visit mentioned their objection to waterboarding as being that it would "escalate the tactics used on our people who are taken hostage". Think about that for a moment.
Would waterboarding be an escalation from being beheaded while blindfolded and bound? I asked that question, but no answer so far....Posted by: Doyle Chadwick at May 5, 2009 8:59 AM
YCW, Don't mention it. Actually, I never knew that Brook Sheilds was pro-life either!Posted by: heather at May 5, 2009 9:03 AM
Mary, agreed. Also, how many times have the rabid pro-deathers maintained the lie about Becky Bell? They still claim to this day that Becky died from an illegal abortion. The truth is, there is no evidence of this, and her official cause of death was listed as pneumonia. In fact, the coroner reported that there WAS NO ABORTION!! I think a coroner ought to know.Posted by: heather at May 5, 2009 9:13 AM
I think you bring up some great points, YCW. Like I said above, these are questions that I need to dive deeper into and see if there are any common definitions offered. God love you.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at May 5, 2009 9:18 AM
I want to thank you so much for your thoughtful post. I read it very carefully and it gave me a lot to think about. I'll admit, I am still processing much of it.
It looks like a lot of it does come down to semantics, and what different people see as the definition of "torture." Waterboarding is something that comes up a lot. I have heard it described as nothing more than pouring water on someone, yet many authorities consider it torture. I honestly don't know, as I've only heard biased descriptions of it by those with strong opinions or agendas.
For you, Bee, I will begin to look more seriously at this issue and try and come to some conclusion, though I can't promise that even if I learn a lot more about it I will be able to come to some sort of opinion about it. God love you.
I have to admit, I'm terribly flattered. I hope you don't think I'm demanding some sort of opinion from you. I know maybe it came across that way yesterday. I respect your opinions and your knowledge about the Catholic Church. Like I said yesterday, I'm kind of in the middle of a "religious identity crisis," unfortunately, and you've been extremely helpful, even in the past, though you didn't know it! God love you, too!Posted by: Bee at May 5, 2009 9:18 AM
Bee, keep at it! I also have struggled with a Religious identity crisis, so you are not alone. And God bless!Posted by: heather at May 5, 2009 9:34 AM
Kate Mulgrew: She said that though "adoption or abortion almost always promises the mother a legacy of shame and regret, I have to be frank about my experience, I survived it. Women often don't believe that they can survive nine months of pregnancy and place the child with an adoptive family. Life is not always easy."
What a great quote. Thanks for posting all those heather!Posted by: angel at May 5, 2009 9:43 AM
"I hope you don't think I'm demanding some sort of opinion from you."
Absolutely not! I mean, this is part of how I learn. In the back of my mind, I have about 1000000 things that I plan on learning about or studying someday. This is one of the ways I decide what to look at. For example, a few weeks ago LDS missionaries come to the door- I've always wanted to study the LDS church, so I've been reading the book of Mormon and other information on the LDS for the past several weeks.
So yeah, this discussion will prompt me to see what's out there about torture. God love you.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at May 5, 2009 9:46 AM
Ann Coulter lives in a world of her own in other words she is crazy. I pity who ever chooses to listen to this ridiculous woman. Useless woman!! Not worthy listening to ,if her mind was a hard drive i would have formatted it or worse still sent it to the dumpster.Posted by: MPLA at May 5, 2009 12:18 PM
MPLA, I believe that the same could be said about Behar.Posted by: heather at May 5, 2009 12:19 PM
Behar and all of her silly liberal drivel on The View irritates me to no end.Posted by: heather at May 5, 2009 12:21 PM
Actually, Anne Coulter is usually remorselessly logical. She has a lawyer's training, after all. As a woman, she might be prone to emotive outbursts, but she seems to govern her feelings well.Posted by: Jon at May 5, 2009 12:51 PM
Coulter and Behar are a perfect match for debate. I hope we see more of them together.Posted by: Janet at May 5, 2009 1:10 PM
Bobby, if Anon can't figure out that life begins at conception (duh, when *would* it begin? can previously dead things suddenly become alive? and where was Anon in junior high biology?), you're going to have to, like, dumb it down a bit.
Or maybe a lot.
Anon, you should try going back to the old argument that you don't know when *souls* are formed, and therefore, when their rights begin, because that's a bit fuzzier (you can't see a soul, prove its existence, etc.).
Of course, in order to support abortion, you've got to be a bit fuzzy on where your *own* soul begins and ends, as paying someone to kill your own child is pretty gruesome stuff. Considerably more gruesome than waterboarding, or quite frankly, any other torture.Posted by: DA at May 6, 2009 11:24 AM
It depends what you mean by "dead." By some definitions, reanimating a "dead" lower life form may be possible.
There are also several examples--at least three--recorded of dead human beings returning to life: most notably Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living God.Posted by: YCW at May 7, 2009 7:33 AM
"As soon as there is scientific proof that life begins at the moment of conception than we can discuss the rights of a fetus. I'd be more than happy to review a study."
As usual, someone has beaten me to the draw. Please see any of Bobby Bambino's citations if you're looking for a "study." The evidence is overwhelming, even when some would rather wish that it doesn't exist.
"If you believe abortion is wrong, don't have one. But stay out of the lives of others."
...which is kind of like...
"If you believe [rape] is wrong, don't [commit] one. But stay out of the lives of others."
"If you believe [abusing your wife or husband] is wrong, don't [do it]. But stay out of the lives of others."
See what that looks like?Posted by: bmmg39 at May 7, 2009 11:26 AM
YLT: "When all you've got left is Palin, Coulter, and Randall Terry I think you're in serious trouble as a movement."
Last I checked (and I checked about three minutes ago), that's far from all they've "got left." Thanks for the consultation, YLT. I know you only have the pro-life movement's best interests at heart.
""Those are two separate issues. I'm all for debate, but let's not cross any wires. Debate 1) is waterboarding torture and if so, should American policy include torture? Debate 2) does life begin at the moment of conception? I don't see a relationship between the two.""
It comes as one issue when Joy asks Ann the "how would you like it" stance.
Is water boarding torture? yes.
Should we include waterboarding and other torture?
yes, if that's what it takes!
Robyn said on May 4th, 2009:
"I thank God that Ann Coulter is ProLife!"
Why then, Robyn, did Ann Coulter support one of the most pro-baby slaughtering presidential canidates this country has ever seen by the name of Mitt Romney?
Do you really know the TRUTH regarding Mitt and Ann's little PRO-abortion background??Posted by: Scia Ciantee at May 14, 2009 8:05 PM
Ann Coulter supports abortion. Just look at who shhe endorsed for president of the United States Mitt Romney who established 50 dollar co-pay abortions as a "healthcare benefit" in his socialist healtcare plan.
Listen for yourself as apoplectic Ann fumbles when asked by 4 conservative talk show hosts how she can claim to be "pro-life" given her support for Mitt Romney. You have to hear her in HER OWN WORDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Posted by: Gregg at May 14, 2009 8:46 PM
it's funny Anonymous would speak about intelligence when he stated earlier that waterboarding "was a technique created in China under Mao"...so I guess the Japanese WWII soldiers tried and convicted for it were time travelers who learned that ancient Chinese Secret from the good Chairman. How about this from abcnews.com "Earlier in 1901, the United States had taken a similar stand against water boarding during the Spanish-American War...(found here http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigation/story?id=1356870). I could provide more examples of even more ancient uses of it, but that would be to easy. So I think I know why your name is Anonymous; I wouldn't want the misinformation you spew associated with my real name either.Posted by: Michael Guzman at May 23, 2009 7:56 AM