Ever hear of condoms?

Hey, I'll go knee-deep with whoever wants to. Bring it on.

 

And the award for Word-Twister of the Year goes to...

 

I'm not going "knee-deep" with anyone. That's not my style.

Edit: I'll tell you how I feel, listen to your argument ... and that's that.

 

Tony, you're picking a fight with the wrong person here. She's smarter than you. Hell, she's smarter than me, and I don't admit that about many people.

 

Here's a serious challenge: Go find a person who was born but not conceived. Once you do that, then you can tell me that a baby in the womb isn't a life.

It is a life. And "life" isn't a poster slogan.

 

Except that I've summed up her positon perfectly. Being smart and being wrong are not mutually exclusive.

 

No, you did not sum up my position. You put words in my mouth. There is a difference. And you have still failed to answer a direct question.

I am not arguing about the definition of life. I'm simply arguing that life costs money. Anyone with a child will tell you that. I want to know where the money is going to come from.

If you want to empower parents to be able to provide for their children, the very least you have to do is 1) invest in education, which leads to better jobs and 2) increase the wages paid for mid-level and low-level jobs. That's not creating a socialist state. But in the absence of a living wage, something has to kick in to provide for those lives that do exist.

 

Send all the unwanted children to OT's house. He'll take care of them.

Funny how the most vociferous opponents of a women's right to choose are neither women nor particuarly Christian.

Oh, and Tony, as much as your fevered mind would like to believe it, they're not "children".

 

So we're not already spending billions on education? I sure missed that.

The rest of it is what happens in a free market and you want to change that. And if you don't get your way, then to you it's OK to kill innocent unborn children.

Yes, life costs money. Never said it didn't.

But because it costs money, your position is that if the government doesn't provide for those who don't have money it's OK if they simply decide to kill their unborn.

My position is never-changing: abortion is always the taking of a life. Because I don't give a pass on that point, you try to paint me as uncaring about the poor if I don't endorse government giveaways.

 

Just because you say so? Sorry, doesn't work that way.

You also are free to take the challenge and go out and find someone who was born without benefit of conception. Keep me abreast of your progress.

 

OK, I'm gonna channel Anna Quinlden:

If Roe v. Wade was overturned, what should the punishment be for a woman convicted of having an abortion? Fines? Jail? Death penalty (eye for an eye)?

What about the person (doctor or otherwise, since the practice would be unregulated) who performs the procedure?

What about someone who was an "accomplice", such as the father? Should he receive as harsh a sentence as the mother?

 

So you're against abortion in all cases? Rape, incest, the life of the mother -- those things don't matter to you, re: abortion?