Link: FOXNews.com – U.S. & World – Judge: Mich. Law Against Type of Abortion Unconstitutional.
A federal judge has declared unconstitutional Michigan’s law aimed at banning a procedure that opponents call partial-birth abortion.
Subscribe
Amazon Search
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
Northern Alliance
Best Photography Sites
Blogs I Follow
- A Photo Editor
- Aaron Landry
- Bencredible
- Bex huff
- Blogumentary
- Confessions of a Photographer
- Garrick Vanburen
- Girl Friday
- Hugh Hewitt
- James Lileks
- Main Site
- Mark Steyn – Steynonline.com
- Minneapolis Metblogs
- MN Beer
- MN Speak
- More Cowbell
- MSP – Chow and Again
- OxRun
- PF Hyper
- pharyngula
- Powerline
- ProLifeBlogs
- St Paul Realestate – Teresa Boardman
- TC Sidewalk
- Tech Surf
- Technology Evangelist
- The Deets
- Uptown Eye Care Blog
News
Speaking of abortion…
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,169295,00.html
This article raises another impactful issue – that one day we won’t need the womb at all to have a baby! The concept is called ectogenesis, and the birthday of this idea may be closer than we think.
Quote:
Science has sped past the current state of debate, and those stuck behind in the rut of discussing Roe v. Wade may find themselves obsolete. Whether or not ectogenesis is ever able to sustain a nine-month human pregnancy, one thing is clear: key issues like viability are being redefined by science. The abortion debate must move into the 21st century, where it may be possible for many pro-choice and pro-life advocates to find common ground.
Food for Thought,
GT
And the people without a conscious will gladly jump on that band wagon especially if it makes them more like gods.
Q: What is Bushs’ position on Roe vs Wade?
A: He doesn’t care how people get out of New Orleans
So Lefty,
Does the mayor of New Orleans and the Governor of Louisiana have any responsibility in this matter?
Of course they have responsibility in this matter, but Bush and his administration dropped the ball, big time.
There is plenty of blame to go around, but the whole episode does point out that in America we still have large numbers of black people in poverty, and they are largely ignored, stereotyped, and vilified. Not only are they at a huge disadvantage (and there is plenty of blame to go around for that, including their own), but they are regularly subjected to withering racism. And the source of that racism, it’s home, is the conservative wing of American politics.
Of course we still have black people in poverty. We also have white people in poverty.
The problem is, the left thinks government can get them out of poverty and the right knows that that is not true.
Let me ask you, what is the # 1 cause of poverty?
I will tell you, having children out of wedlock, or single motherhood. And the left keeps encouraging more and earlier sexualization of our children as appose to a message of wait with sex until marriage. The government does not have the courage to give this message but this is the message that will cure the ills of the world of poverty.
Christian morality will cure the ills of the inner city. Not rejecting God and removing God from our society.
People should be ashamed of their wickedness and they should be held accountable. Not given money for their debauchery.
Having children out of wedlock does not CAUSE poverty, it contributes to it, but it does not CAUSE poverty.
You say the government can not get people out of poverty. 100% incorrect. Wrong. Look at Social Securty — it has dramatically decreased the rate of poverty among the elderly. Or were they in poverty because of out of wedlock births? Yeah, right, 65 year olds having children out of wedlock! You see, wickedness does not cause poverty. Debauchery is more in the world of the wealthy, not the poor — you know that.
Lefty,
I know you have personal experience with grandparents being poor etc and I will give it to you that social security can relieve some of that pain.
But you have to give it to me that some of even that poverty was caused by poor financial judgment; often times spending too much on cigarettes, cable TV, entertainment etc instead of investing etc. I know there are cases of hardship where the husband dies and leaves a poor widow and yes it is wise for a community so support the widows and orphans.
But, If you can not see that having babies out of wedlock is a huge cause of poverty (for the next generation), you are clearly not looking at the facts or choosing to ignore the clear facts.
Some poverty is caused by poor financial judgment, some poverty is caused by having children out of wedlock, but most poverty is caused by a lack of opportunity in many different areas.
There is a structural aspect to our economy that means we will always have people in poverty. To blame poverty on out of wedlock births is ignoring that. (Ignore might be the wrong word)
Why is it governments job to provide opportunity? That is what free enterprise is all about.
If there are no opportunities in an area, move and seek that opportunity. Get trained so that you are able to do a job when that opportunity comes up. Start your own business etc.
And don’t tell me there are no opportunities for training. They are everywhere.
Because the government is supposed to promote the general welfare so all can secure the blessings of Liberty. That is enshrined in our constitution. But you say no, it is not supposed to do that. Wat gives you the right to deny the blessings of liberty?
I assure you, you do not promote the “general welfare” by forcibly taking from one group to give to another group. That is called stealing.
All people have the right to move where they want to and do the job they want to. That is freedom. If they are restrained from doing that by someone, that is where the power of Government needs to come in and promote “General Welfare.”
What gives you the right to take my money or property?
At the same time I would be the first to give to the poor personally. I always have and always will. But that is done by free will.
They are not stealing your money, nor are they forcibly taking your money. Your duly elected representitives are saying it is in the best interests of the nation to care for these people. If you consider that stealing your money, you belong in a nation that has a different government.
Or,
I need to work to change my duly electected representatives or change the way they think. That my friend is why I blog.
Bingo.
there are plenty of people who have come from poor backgrounds but through hard work and perseverance have managed to build a good life for themselves (my dad for example, when he was growing up they often had no money at all and had to go poaching to put food on the table, but now he can earn enough to provide for his family). i believe that the government giving handouts only creates a nation that is so dependant on the those handouts that they can’t cope without them. yes the government should help people to better their situations but i do not believe that handouts are the solution. people need to learn to be less dependant and more self sufficient. the amount of people i know who just live off handouts rather than sorting themselves out and earning some money sickens me. then the people who really do need it never see it.