Life-at-fertilization initiative has ...

Life-at-fertilization initiative has hope in Miss.

There are 2671 comments on the Centre Daily Times story from Oct 17, 2011, titled Life-at-fertilization initiative has hope in Miss.. In it, Centre Daily Times reports that:

In this June 6, 2011 file photo, Ezekiel Sowell, 7, right,of Tupelo, Miss., sings during a prayer rally for the Personhood Amendment at the Capitol in Jackson, Miss.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Centre Daily Times.

zef

Los Angeles, CA

#2638 Apr 21, 2013
IRYW wrote:
<quoted text>
What makes one an individual that cannot change? Be specific. If every molecule in your body gets replaced, if your personality can completely change, if you can have genetic changes occurring, what defines an individual as unique. Religious answers about a 'soul' don't count since that is la-la-land. Try to answer as an adult.
Do you think the FBI will fail to find you, simply because you've changed your appearance or personality?
No matter how much your body or personality changes, if you are a wanted criminal, you will always be a wanted criminal. Because you will always be the same individual.
Shell

Tupelo, MS

#2639 Apr 21, 2013
zef wrote:
<quoted text>
Allowing a poor child to live is not a penalty, no matter how much disdain you might have for poor children.
==========
You support them, not demand I do. Many become terrorists as they have no reason to live. In the long run they take more lives than their own.
Shell

Tupelo, MS

#2640 Apr 21, 2013
zef wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think the FBI will fail to find you, simply because you've changed your appearance or personality?
No matter how much your body or personality changes, if you are a wanted criminal, you will always be a wanted criminal. Because you will always be the same individual.
==========
90% of crime goes unpunished as they use all their resources on politically motivating crime. Fact is crime seems to pay in many cases because an unwanted child was born.
zef

Los Angeles, CA

#2641 Apr 21, 2013
Shell wrote:
<quoted text>
==========
90% of crime goes unpunished as they use all their resources on politically motivating crime. Fact is crime seems to pay in many cases because an unwanted child was born.
Your nihilistic bigotry and hatred of unwanted children is sickening.
IRYW

Allentown, PA

#2642 Apr 21, 2013
rosesz wrote:
<quoted text>
When I was in school there was No reproductive and definitely no sex education. THERE certainly has been education in the way babies are made since then.. in even the most conservative environments the kids learn how babies are made..These days Tv and the Internet teach kids what goes on..
And with the advent of AIDS education they would have to live under a rock not to know what a condom is..
And what about the girl having multiple abortions..Surely she knows what can happen.. blaming things on the government is ludicrous..politicians who do nothing to fulfilled their promises about the rarity of abortion is another story..
And lets not forget that parents still have a part in their children's lives..
How 'babies are made' isn't sex-ed, it is basic biology. Sex-ed means frank, open discussions of sexuality, puberty, hormonal changes, social attitudes about sex, the differences between how boys and girls approach sex, contraception, understanding and tolerance for gay/bi-sexuality, respect, role-playing, etc. Christian fundamentalists thwart this at every opportunity. Do you know their abstinence programs are a joke? The girls that pledge abstinence have higher rates of anal and oral sex, and STDs, than their peers. So much for abstinence. And I didn't blame the government (other than those that cave in to the puritanical right). I blame conservative christians.
IRYW

Allentown, PA

#2643 Apr 21, 2013
zef wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think the FBI will fail to find you, simply because you've changed your appearance or personality?
No matter how much your body or personality changes, if you are a wanted criminal, you will always be a wanted criminal. Because you will always be the same individual.
That is legal identity. Is that your definition of what an individual is (since that was my specific question)? Your definition of an individual is one that the FBI can find even if your personality and appearance change?
zef

Los Angeles, CA

#2644 Apr 21, 2013
Shell wrote:
<quoted text>
==========
You support them, not demand I do. Many become terrorists as they have no reason to live. In the long run they take more lives than their own.
As Douglas and the other candidates went through with their campaigns, Lincoln was the only one of them who gave no speeches. Instead, he monitored the campaign closely and relied on the enthusiasm of the Republican Party. The party did the leg work that produced majorities across the North, and produced an abundance of campaign posters, leaflets, and newspaper editorials. There were thousands of Republican speakers who focused first on the party platform, and second on Lincoln's life story, emphasizing his childhood poverty.

Andrew Johnson (December 29, 1808 – July 31, 1875) was the 17th President of the United States, serving from 1865 to 1869. Johnson was born in poverty in Raleigh, North Carolina. Apprenticed as a tailor, he worked in several frontier towns before settling in Greeneville, Tennessee.

Born in poverty, Andrew Jackson (1767-1845) had become a wealthy Tennessee lawyer and rising young politician by 1812, when war broke out between the United States and Britain. His leadership in that conflict earned Jackson national fame as a military hero, and he would become America's most influential–and polarizing–political figure during the 1820s and 1830s. After narrowly losing to John Quincy Adams in the contentious 1824 presidential election, Jackson returned four years later to win redemption, soundly defeating Adams and becoming the nation's seventh president (1829-1837).
zef

Los Angeles, CA

#2645 Apr 21, 2013
IRYW wrote:
<quoted text>
That is legal identity. Is that your definition of what an individual is (since that was my specific question)? Your definition of an individual is one that the FBI can find even if your personality and appearance change?
No, I said the FBI can always find you and courts can always prosecute you, because you are always the same individual, no matter how much you change your appearance or personality. Changing your personality or appearance will never get you out of any trial, because you are always the same individual.
IRYW

Allentown, PA

#2646 Apr 21, 2013
zef wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I said the FBI can always find you and courts can always prosecute you, because you are always the same individual, no matter how much you change your appearance or personality. Changing your personality or appearance will never get you out of any trial, because you are always the same individual.
So you are a coward avoiding the question. I asked what defines you as an individual. If it is your legal identity (a tax-paying entity) then say so. But we know the actual molecules that make up the matter in your body change, your personality can completely change, you can experience certain genetic changes, you can lose body parts, you can lose your memory, etc. So, I will assume you are conceding that an individual is defined by the government as a tax paying entity, since you have not offered another definition.

“Define Necessity”

Since: Mar 13

FOR YOURSELF

#2647 Apr 21, 2013
rosesz wrote:
<quoted text>
Well the prolife people I know are definitely not terrorists. And I have to say most of the PC people I have talked to were not evil. When personalities are kept out of it..I have had some good discussions on the forums in the past..I do believe they are wrong in championing this thing that is supposed to..according to the politicians..become so rare.
Again. With all the education. And birth control available..I find it so sad that so many babies lives are ended. We do lose our sensitivity in becoming this culture. There are other options and if it wasn't such a political and divisive subject..more could be done to make it more rare..IMHO
OF course there are things which would make it more rare. Bringing the gestational mortality rate down in this country, would be a good start. Removing all risk from pregnancy would be helpful in lowering the abortion rate, but that's highly unlikely. A more conscientiously considering attitude toward prevention on the parts of sexually active couples, could go a long way toward reducing unwanted pregnancy, thereby reducing the number of abortions...but so would reducing poverty, and increasing the number of two parent families. There is no easy answer to abortion. Simply outlawing the practice, without reducing the number of toxic or unwanted pregnancies, would take more lives than it would save, IMHO.
IRYW

Allentown, PA

#2648 Apr 21, 2013
dedbebbies wrote:
<quoted text>OF course there are things which would make it more rare. Bringing the gestational mortality rate down in this country, would be a good start. Removing all risk from pregnancy would be helpful in lowering the abortion rate, but that's highly unlikely. A more conscientiously considering attitude toward prevention on the parts of sexually active couples, could go a long way toward reducing unwanted pregnancy, thereby reducing the number of abortions...but so would reducing poverty, and increasing the number of two parent families. There is no easy answer to abortion. Simply outlawing the practice, without reducing the number of toxic or unwanted pregnancies, would take more lives than it would save, IMHO.
This is the problem with the fundamentalist, black and white mindset. If someone says more restrictive gun laws will reduce shooting deaths they shriek that it won't stop ALL shooting deaths and, in their warped logic, demand no restrictions. Imagine someone saying, "Seatbelts don't prevent ALL auto deaths so let's ban seatbelts". So in their lunatic delusion that making abortion illegal will stop abortions they ignore, and in fact directly fight, the policies that are most likely to dramatically reduce unwanted pregnancies and, by extension, abortions. Those include sex education from a very early age, unrestricted access to free or inexpensive contraception (especially long acting such as IUDs), a focus on safe sex instead of abstinence, etc. The 'pro-life' movement (an oxymoron if there ever was one) is doing more to INCREASE the abortion rate than anyone else.

“Define Necessity”

Since: Mar 13

FOR YOURSELF

#2649 Apr 21, 2013
IRYW wrote:
<quoted text>
This is the problem with the fundamentalist, black and white mindset. If someone says more restrictive gun laws will reduce shooting deaths they shriek that it won't stop ALL shooting deaths and, in their warped logic, demand no restrictions. Imagine someone saying, "Seatbelts don't prevent ALL auto deaths so let's ban seatbelts". So in their lunatic delusion that making abortion illegal will stop abortions they ignore, and in fact directly fight, the policies that are most likely to dramatically reduce unwanted pregnancies and, by extension, abortions. Those include sex education from a very early age, unrestricted access to free or inexpensive contraception (especially long acting such as IUDs), a focus on safe sex instead of abstinence, etc. The 'pro-life' movement (an oxymoron if there ever was one) is doing more to INCREASE the abortion rate than anyone else.
There are actually people who claim a pro-life stance, who own property and rent it to abortion clinics. Catholics, who take the most public stance against abortion, make up the largest group seeking abortion, of women who claim a religious affiliation. And then there are those who scream "abortion is murder" with the same lungs they use to propel shrieks of "stay off m' guns!!" As if rescinding rights is fine in one instance, and abhorrent in another.

Both the right to bear arms, and the right to make one's own medical choices, are equally important - and the Constitution of the United States is not in the business of rescinding rights, but in recognizing them.
rosesz

Pompano Beach, FL

#2650 Apr 21, 2013
IRYW wrote:
<quoted text>
How 'babies are made' isn't sex-ed, it is basic biology. Sex-ed means frank, open discussions of sexuality, puberty, hormonal changes, social attitudes about sex, the differences between how boys and girls approach sex, contraception, understanding and tolerance for gay/bi-sexuality, respect, role-playing, etc. Christian fundamentalists thwart this at every opportunity. Do you know their abstinence programs are a joke? The girls that pledge abstinence have higher rates of anal and oral sex, and STDs, than their peers. So much for abstinence. And I didn't blame the government (other than those that cave in to the puritanical right). I blame conservative christians.
CHRistans do believe in abstinence. Which if practiced would prevent pregnancy.. Thst does not mean they all practice it. I would be a hypocrite to preach this..as unfortunately I did not practice it..I just thank God there was no Roe decision when I was sixteen..

but these programs you speak of if they are in schools are not that old. DURING the Clinton admin the Health secretary was on record extolling the teaching using bananas and condoms.. and the abortion rates grew and grew.,........and there are commercials and billboards for safe sex..

I still say in this day and age kids know a whole bunch more than ever before. GEESH its on Tv programs. And yes their parents should tell them things..but from what they know from Tv and Internet..heck I learn stuff from Tv I never knew..And what I see is decades of kids learning that abortion is the fall back. So its ok. If you get pregnant..its not a life.. just end it.
It is a culture that does Not value life..and we are paying for it and by we I mean women also as well as the mmillions of unborn children who are denied life..

In my life alone I have known 2 women who have had abortions. One had 3 and another 5..just plain craZY. Their reasons for not using birth control made me crazy..basically the abortions were the method..It is most sad ..I just cannot imagine anyone going thrum that more than once..
rosesz

Pompano Beach, FL

#2651 Apr 21, 2013
dedbebbies wrote:
<quoted text>OF course there are things which would make it more rare. Bringing the gestational mortality rate down in this country, would be a good start. Removing all risk from pregnancy would be helpful in lowering the abortion rate, but that's highly unlikely. A more conscientiously considering attitude toward prevention on the parts of sexually active couples, could go a long way toward reducing unwanted pregnancy, thereby reducing the number of abortions...but so would reducing poverty, and increasing the number of two parent families. There is no easy answer to abortion. Simply outlawing the practice, without reducing the number of toxic or unwanted pregnancies, would take more lives than it would save, IMHO.
But the majority of elective abortions occur. Not due to health reasons. A lot are for convenience which using contraception should indeed eliminate.. there are a lot of things that would help..I just wish America had not chosen this path of sacricing the lives of the unborn..The strange thing is that the pill came into use within a short time of the Roe decision..this astronomical amount of abortions need never have happened..but now it is a fixture and a huge business. And a huge political platform. It is a shame.
zef

Los Angeles, CA

#2652 Apr 21, 2013
IRYW wrote:
<quoted text>
So you are a coward avoiding the question. I asked what defines you as an individual. If it is your legal identity (a tax-paying entity) then say so. But we know the actual molecules that make up the matter in your body change, your personality can completely change, you can experience certain genetic changes, you can lose body parts, you can lose your memory, etc. So, I will assume you are conceding that an individual is defined by the government as a tax paying entity, since you have not offered another definition.
I never said individuals are always the same. I said people are always the same individual. I never said anything about what defines us as an individual, because that is irrelevant, since we are always the same individual no matter how we are defined. If you can't understand simple English, that is no fault of mine.
IRYW

Allentown, PA

#2653 Apr 22, 2013
zef wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said individuals are always the same. I said people are always the same individual. I never said anything about what defines us as an individual, because that is irrelevant, since we are always the same individual no matter how we are defined. If you can't understand simple English, that is no fault of mine.
So you are just a troll and a cretin with no interest in debate. You twist other posters' words, you lie through your teeth, you dodge real questions, you make things up and pretend you didn't. Maybe you are a Poe and maybe you are for real; either one is pathetic for a human being. I'm done with you.
IRYW

Allentown, PA

#2654 Apr 22, 2013
dedbebbies wrote:
<quoted text>There are actually people who claim a pro-life stance, who own property and rent it to abortion clinics. Catholics, who take the most public stance against abortion, make up the largest group seeking abortion, of women who claim a religious affiliation. And then there are those who scream "abortion is murder" with the same lungs they use to propel shrieks of "stay off m' guns!!" As if rescinding rights is fine in one instance, and abhorrent in another.
Both the right to bear arms, and the right to make one's own medical choices, are equally important - and the Constitution of the United States is not in the business of rescinding rights, but in recognizing them.
The religious right doesn't care about the constitution. They think their individual interpretations of a book written by a bunch of ignorant goatherds 2,000 years ago define what is right without question. The example of guns is perfect because it wasn't until recently that SCOTUS actually ruled that the 2nd amendment extended to homeowners as individuals. Yet the gun nuts will shriek that they have had that right since the constitution was written.
IRYW

Allentown, PA

#2655 Apr 22, 2013
rosesz wrote:
<quoted text>
CHRistans do believe in abstinence. Which if practiced would prevent pregnancy....
Eating fewer calories than you burn in exercise causes weight loss. Easy, right? Everyone can simply eat less.
rosesz wrote:
<quoted text>
DURING the Clinton admin the Health secretary was on record extolling the teaching using bananas and condoms.. and the abortion rates grew and grew.,....
Actually the abortion rate peaked in 1981 and has dropped by about 50% since then, approaching the level when RvW was enacted. Is if fun making up bulls**t statistics to support your opinion?
rosesz wrote:
< .And what I see is decades of kids learning that abortion is the fall back. So its ok. If you get pregnant..its not a life.. just end it..
But in fact that is not what is taught in school. Avoiding pregnancy is taught but since we know kids are going to be sexually active we teach that proper contraception is the best choice.
IRYW

Allentown, PA

#2656 Apr 22, 2013
rosesz wrote:
<quoted text>
But the majority of elective abortions occur. Not due to health reasons. A lot are for convenience which using contraception should indeed eliminate...The strange thing is that the pill came into use within a short time of the Roe decision..this astronomical amount of abortions need never have happened..
That is correct. But you should look in the mirror because the religious right has been the single biggest contributor to the original spike in abortions and the still high number compared to other developed countries. Because at every turn they fight sex-education and readily available, inexpensive or free contraception. There have been studies showing that if you give poor, uneducated women free access to contraception that they will overwhelmingly choose the most reliable, long acting methods like the IUD. No forgetting to take the pill and no arguments over condom use (STDs are a separate discussion). So what are you people actually interested in? Reducing abortions or obsessing over the bronze-age teachings of an ignorant, misogynistic, male dominated culture?
Ocean56

AOL

#2658 Apr 22, 2013
zef wrote:
Reproductive means to reproduce. Reproductive rights means we have the right to reproduce.
And reproductive rights ALSO means we (including women) have the right NOT to reproduce if some of us don't CHOOSE to do so. Of course that's the part of the equation you don't like, which is why you purposely omitted it.

Reproduction is OPTIONAL, not required. That means a woman or a man can consciously choose NOT to reproduce, for any reason. Obviously, preventing unwanted pregnancy is the more desirable option, but ALL forms of contraception can and DO fail. When BC fails and a pregnancy results, the ONLY person who decides whether or not to continue the pregnancy is the WOMAN who is pregnant. Not YOUR pregnancy? Not your decision, simple as that.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jackson Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Negroes in Customer service! 19 hr ThomasA 5
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 20 hr TRUTH TOLD 21,376
The NAACP is over Jan 16 three blocks 1
Winn-Dixie, Northside Dr, Clinton (Oct '13) Jan 13 The Rock 3
Martin Kang Jan 12 Dixie 2
News With Trump, some African Americans to skip Miss... Jan 12 Jerry 12
kang day Jan 10 Calhoon 1

Jackson Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Jackson Mortgages