Abortion Debate - Ravenswood, WV

Discuss the national Abortion Debate in Ravenswood, WV.

When should abortion be legal?

Ravenswood says never.
Never
 
22
In all cases
 
13
Exceptions only...
 
6

Vote now in Ravenswood:

lifes a beach

Myerstown, PA

#515 Sep 24, 2012
Brooke Mason wrote:
There are some of us evolved enough to realize that many innocent people die from death penalty laws, and many criminals -are- rehabilitated, every single day. There are some of us evolved enough to realize that just because you fuck up doesn't suddenly mean you are worthless--it means you need to be helped.
And actually, studies have shown that after court fees, cost of keeping a criminal in prison until execution, cost of execution...most of the time, it is more expensive to execute than to keep in prison. Though, why you or anyone else would care about money when it comes to the LIFE OF A HUMAN BEING, I have no idea.
While on the other hand some of us realize that some people are beyond being helped. Most violent offenders are NOT able to be rehabilitated, just based on the sheer numbers. It's actually more expensive to execute them because they are able to file an extraordinary amount of appeals. Sorry but I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you on this one, sometimes its best to just take out the trash.

“The Ice Princess of Topix”

Since: Nov 11

Cabot, Arkansas

#516 Sep 24, 2012
lifes a beach wrote:
<quoted text>
While on the other hand some of us realize that some people are beyond being helped. Most violent offenders are NOT able to be rehabilitated, just based on the sheer numbers. It's actually more expensive to execute them because they are able to file an extraordinary amount of appeals. Sorry but I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you on this one, sometimes its best to just take out the trash.
Except that the risk of killing an innocent person, as history shows, is too great a price for me to go along with it. If you shot every person ever convicted immediately following conviction, the numbers of innocents killed would be ASTRONOMICAL.

In an absolutely perfect legal system, your argument may have some merit. Unfortunately for you, our legal system is not perfect, and therefor, no. I will not risk killing an innocent nor support the risk of killing an innocent.
bacon hater

Westlake, OH

#517 Sep 24, 2012
Check out the Innocence Project. Over 270 death row inmates have already been exonerated. The rest of the developed world ended the death penalty long ago. Most states have done the same, including WV. Just like abortion and evolution, there really is no debate among intellectuals. Some people refuse to move forward. Thankfully, they will all be dead soon anyway.

Since: Sep 11

Charleston, WV

#518 Sep 25, 2012
Brooke Mason wrote:
<quoted text>
Except that the risk of killing an innocent person, as history shows, is too great a price for me to go along with it. If you shot every person ever convicted immediately following conviction, the numbers of innocents killed would be ASTRONOMICAL.
In an absolutely perfect legal system, your argument may have some merit. Unfortunately for you, our legal system is not perfect, and therefor, no. I will not risk killing an innocent nor support the risk of killing an innocent.
Nobody on here suggested killing someone before their due process. I seriously doubt that anyone else would either.
bacon hater wrote:
Check out the Innocence Project. Over 270 death row inmates have already been exonerated. The rest of the developed world ended the death penalty long ago. Most states have done the same, including WV. Just like abortion and evolution, there really is no debate among intellectuals. Some people refuse to move forward. Thankfully, they will all be dead soon anyway.
The 270 you mention is from the last 25 years with the inclusion of DNA evidence. Now that DNA is a regularly used practice in the investigation process, crimes are much easier to prove beyond reasonable doubt. Far less people are being falsely imprisoned in modern times.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777460.html

Much of the "developed world" continues to have the death penalty. I'm not saying this because I'm biased, which I am. I am just stating it because it's fact. The states where it is still permitted are at the bottom of the page. These countries pretty much still rule the modern world, including the US, so you may want to revise your statement.
bacon hater

Westlake, OH

#519 Sep 25, 2012
How many kill retarded people? Just Texas. Yeehaw.

Since: Sep 11

Charleston, WV

#520 Sep 25, 2012
Texas is a different breed. That's for certain. Thankfully, our current government structure doesn't require us all to follow the same rules as every other state. We have a choice to accept how Texas operates or move. If Libs get there way, the centralized government may not allow for an escape to a state with views that more closely resemble our individual beliefs or practices.

“searching myself”

Since: Sep 09

In Charming CA

#521 Sep 26, 2012
Louda wrote:
<quoted text>
As much as I agree that a woman should be allowed to choose whether she has a baby or not, she should also have to pay for the procedures, birth control, etc herself. Why should a person who is sterile have to pay for the 9 abortions of a girl who can't put the dick down? For all the "fair t all.
Did someone tell you life was fair? They lied to you.

I'm not talking about 'fair', I'm talking about right(s).

Rights are enumerated in the Constitution of the United States - not restricted, not appointed, and not opposed.

The Constitution of the United States, is in the business of RECOGNIZING rights, not dismantling them.......regardless of interpretation.

JMO........tee-hee.

“searching myself”

Since: Sep 09

In Charming CA

#522 Sep 26, 2012
Trainwreck wrote:
Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger was a complete racist
Does this mean you have incontrovertible proof that she was a 'complete' anything?
Trainwreck wrote:
who favored aborting mixed race babies. She spoke at Klan rally's and shared the same influences as Hitler,
So did Lincoln, and every President until Clinton. What's your point?
Trainwreck wrote:
Why do liberals oppose choice when it comes to educating your child?
Because the ones who can individually choose to privately or personally educate their kids, have a private revenue source, and those whose revenue source relies, even partially, on tax dollars, have little choice but to put their children in Public School, or rely on religious organizations, to provide them with curriculae. Most of the folks with children in Public School, are two-parent, two-job families.

This is why charter schools work. Parents who value education, make that clear to their children. Those are the parents who show up on parent teacher conference night. The ones who attend PTA meetings, show up for volunteer time, and sponsor or accompany field trips. The ones who make sure teachers are recognized as good or bad. The parents who critique, rather than correct, their children's homework.(NOt the ones who do it for them. Shame on you, whoever you are.)
Even though some 'Governors' want to make single parenthood a FELONY, and other 'Governors' want to forensically investigate miscarriage, and still others think pregnancy, in terms of its termination, should begin before one is pregnant..........I personally believe that Public Schools should not only have full parental involvement, but full parental Administration.

But that's just me?????
Trainwreck wrote:
Why is it illegal to abort a bald eagle egg, but not a fetus?
Just curious.
Because there are way fewer Bald Eagles than Humans, and the eagles are every bit as valuable in the grand scheme of things as we are -- the only reason for this, is our decision to declare ourselves the top of the evolutionary ladder...otherwise it would be self-evident, and we would have populated the moon a long time ago, or self regulated our population. We've done neither, and we're not ready to.

But one of these days.........

:)

Have a great night.

Since: Sep 11

Charleston, WV

#523 Sep 26, 2012
shovelhead72 wrote:
<quoted text>Did someone tell you life was fair? They lied to you.
I'm not talking about 'fair', I'm talking about right(s).
Rights are enumerated in the Constitution of the United States - not restricted, not appointed, and not opposed.
The Constitution of the United States, is in the business of RECOGNIZING rights, not dismantling them.......regardless of interpretation.
JMO........tee-hee.
That goes both ways. If life isn't fair, they need to stop mentioning "fair share" all the time.
lifes a beach

Lewistown, PA

#524 Sep 26, 2012
Brooke Mason wrote:
<quoted text>
Except that the risk of killing an innocent person, as history shows, is too great a price for me to go along with it. If you shot every person ever convicted immediately following conviction, the numbers of innocents killed would be ASTRONOMICAL.
In an absolutely perfect legal system, your argument may have some merit. Unfortunately for you, our legal system is not perfect, and therefor, no. I will not risk killing an innocent nor support the risk of killing an innocent.
True and that's why I'm very glad we do not adhere to that type of knee jerk justice. With DNA evidence as it stands today, it has greatly reduced that risk. Since being incarcerated in the 90s, can you name a convicted death row inmate who has since been exonerated and found to be innocent? Thankfully DNA has helped to exonerate many people who were wrongfully found guilty.
lifes a beach

Lewistown, PA

#525 Sep 26, 2012
bacon hater wrote:
Check out the Innocence Project. Over 270 death row inmates have already been exonerated. The rest of the developed world ended the death penalty long ago. Most states have done the same, including WV. Just like abortion and evolution, there really is no debate among intellectuals. Some people refuse to move forward. Thankfully, they will all be dead soon anyway.
Since what year and up until what year? Most were prior to DNA evidence reaching the capacity it has now. Sorry but the only people who refuse to debate differing views in these are the pseudo-intellectuals, who believe they are "above" such debates. And before you start I'm pro-choice and I believe in evolution to an extent but that is not to say I am so close minded as to not hear out opposing views and analysis.
lifes a beach

Lewistown, PA

#526 Sep 26, 2012
shovelhead72 wrote:
<quoted text>Did someone tell you life was fair? They lied to you.
I'm not talking about 'fair', I'm talking about right(s).
Rights are enumerated in the Constitution of the United States - not restricted, not appointed, and not opposed.
The Constitution of the United States, is in the business of RECOGNIZING rights, not dismantling them.......regardless of interpretation.
JMO........tee-hee.
Sorry Shovel but I'm going to have to agree with the addressed poster on this one. It is about personal responsibility and I am frankly tired of women arguing that all forms of birth control should be free or that their abortions should be subsidized. I believe birth control should be partially subsidized but one should be able to handle the financial consequences of it if the birth control should fail.

“The Ice Princess of Topix”

Since: Nov 11

Cabot, Arkansas

#527 Sep 26, 2012
West Memphis Three. No DNA evidence (even when DNA evidence was being USED), and they were -still- convicted. It took two decades, TWO DECADES, for them to be exonerated.

“searching myself”

Since: Sep 09

In Charming CA

#528 Oct 6, 2012
lifes a beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry Shovel but I'm going to have to agree with the addressed poster on this one. It is about personal responsibility and I am frankly tired of women arguing that all forms of birth control should be free or that their abortions should be subsidized. I believe birth control should be partially subsidized but one should be able to handle the financial consequences of it if the birth control should fail.
Well frankly, I'm tired of all the insistence that women should bear ALL the personal responsibility for unwanted pregnancy. If we're going to outlaw abortion, let's enforce sterilization on guys who get a woman pregnant when she doesn't want to be.

How about we just 'temporarily' sterilize everyone, male and female alike, at birth, until the age of about 25, at which point one can apply to have it reversed -- following completion of at least 30 college hours of parenting classes -- and then require both non-sterile parties to sign a consent-to-pregnancy form before each and every sex act, regardless of marital status?

That'd enforce some 'personal responsibility' on both participants.
bacon hater

Cleveland, OH

#529 Oct 6, 2012
We need to get the government out of our lives, not give them more tools to get in it. When women have access to education and healthcare, they do the right thing.

And to the posters that think there are less capital convictions made erroneously in recent years, you're just dead wrong. The practices that cause innocent people to get gassed are as prevalent now more than ever. Police do not use scientific methods in their investigation, and once they presume a subject is guilty, they target their investigations to reach that conclusion. DNA matching technology has been around for a long time. Way longer than when most Innocence Project-released prisoners committed their alleged crimes. But who cares. Not one person would ever claim that all inmates put to death are guilty. And one is all it takes to make the practice absolutely wrong. Especially if you're the one who didn't do it.
fitness-guru

Norman, OK

#530 Oct 6, 2012
abortion ? lol, its a meal ticket.
lifes a beach

Myerstown, PA

#531 Oct 10, 2012
shovelhead72 wrote:
<quoted text>Well frankly, I'm tired of all the insistence that women should bear ALL the personal responsibility for unwanted pregnancy. If we're going to outlaw abortion, let's enforce sterilization on guys who get a woman pregnant when she doesn't want to be.
How about we just 'temporarily' sterilize everyone, male and female alike, at birth, until the age of about 25, at which point one can apply to have it reversed -- following completion of at least 30 college hours of parenting classes -- and then require both non-sterile parties to sign a consent-to-pregnancy form before each and every sex act, regardless of marital status?
That'd enforce some 'personal responsibility' on both participants.
Women ideally shouldn't; however, you can't change biology (well I guess you can in some cases but you know what I mean). I'm not for mandatory sterilization of anyone (although I must admit crackheads who have crack babies I am tempted). I would NEVER propose outlawing abortion btw. Not EVER.
lifes a beach

Myerstown, PA

#532 Oct 10, 2012
bacon hater wrote:
DNA matching technology has been around for a long time. Way longer than when most Innocence Project-released prisoners committed their alleged crimes.
That's not entirely an accurate statement...

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,859...

DNA analysis wasn't refined until into the 1990s in regards to criminal cases.

Most of the reported exoneration cases through the Innocence Project were tried in the 1970s, 80s and 90s.

http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/In_25...

http://www.innocenceproject.org/know/Browse-P...

I'm just saying...
got my i on u 2

Bronx, NY

#533 Oct 11, 2012
It's not something that someone has given a lot of thought to, if they say they are 100% against abortion. My niece had a pregnancy in her tubes. If it was not aborted, she would have possibly died, and the baby would have never matured. It's cases like this and many others that is an abortion that has to be. Death is the only outcome in this case, For both the baby and mother without abortion. So don't be so simple minded and tunnel visioned that you don't look at the big picture and put your feet in someone else's shoes. I totally disagree with a healthy baby being aborted after a very short pregnancy. There needs to be guide lines to an abortion.
bacon hater

Springfield, OH

#534 Oct 11, 2012
Until all pro-lifers agree to provide and care for a child with severe mental disbilities for the rest of the child's life, abortion will remain legal.

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.

Ravenswood Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
drug raid 1 hr Naylor 7
How about that football team 3 hr Devil fan 19
Cari Speece 3 hr 90210boi 1
Create your own Forum 6 hr u sure 788
Trump for president? 10 hr sam 24
calling off work Thu bacon hater 27
Looking for a old friend plz help Thu English 2
Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]