http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2013/02/13/rapert-abortion-bill-is-forever Comments On: Rapert abortion bill is forever by Max Brantley en-us Copyright 2013 Arkansas Times. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, Arkansas Times readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact Arkansas Times. robert@arktimes.com (Arkansas Times Webmaster) Sat, 25 May 2013 00:00:01 -0500 Sat, 25 May 2013 21:30:00 -0500 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss
They are not personal attacks, simply ripostes. You should realize when you impugn the sincerity and judgement of others and intimate they are uncaring psychopathic murderers that they will not have a favorable opinion of your logic, beliefs and motives.

As for your statement ". . . In an age where we doubt the justice of capital punishment even for very dangerous criminals . . ." WE?! Unless you have an anti-capital punishment mouse in your pocket, you might find you have made another fallacious judgement of some if not many of your critics and fellow ARTimes bloggers.

I support Roe vs. Wade, a woman's freedom of choice (including yours), and capital punishment by, lethal injection, hanging, firing squad, gas chamber or "old Sparky." The concept of a "cruel and unusual punishment" judgement of how you execute another human being is ridiculous, IMO. But, if I remember right you may find some who doubt the justice of capital punishment.

For all the previous statements, I find the current U.S. policy of assassination by drone without "due process," serial murder and hope we can change that soon.

So realize SalineRepublican, our comments are not personal nor always attacks, just returns and replies to what to us are self-righteous and illogical comments tending more to unthinking ideology than reasoned discourse.
Posted by dottholliday]]> Thu, 14 Feb 2013 00:33:39 -0600 Arkansas Times
SalineRepublican thinks a fetus is a human life. Medical science and about 90% of the American people don't. So SR cranks on, day in and day out, pissing into the wind of this decidedly science-based group of discussants here on the AT blog, for what? Does he think that if he just writes "fetus is a baby" enough times and blows indignant long enough that some or all of us will have an evangelical senior moment, seeing he was right all along, and by the by we will all be saved by HIS god. Or does he do this just because he has some emotional need to do battle with the forces of science, humanism, and/or -- yes -- theologically and socially liberal Christians? Are he and others like him getting some sort of ecclesiastical thrill by "witnessing" to us the hell-bound heathen of the internet?

I hope he/they understands that, at least on the level of giving any credence at all to the redundant, redolent and repugnant (to me) worldview he espouses, the bullshit detector in my brain has been up ever since I read "unborn children"...
Posted by GrizLee Bear]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 19:13:36 -0600 Arkansas Times

http://thedailyhatch.org/2012/01/01/franci…’s-“how-should-we-then-live”-video-and-outline-of-episode-9-the-age-of-personal-peace-and-affluence-schaeffer-sundays/
Posted by SalineRepublican]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 19:04:17 -0600 Arkansas Times
Take at his 27 minute episode "Final Choices on you tube. Here is an outline.
III. Legal and Political Results of Attempted Human Autonomy

A. Relativistic law.

1. Base for nonarbitrary law gone; only inertia allows a few principles to survive.

2. Holmes and sociological (variable) law.

3. Sociological law comes from failure of natural law (see evolution of existential from rationalistic theology).

4. Courts are now generating law.

5. Medical, legal, and historical arbitrariness of Supreme Court ruling on abortion and current abortion practice.

B. Sociological law opens door to racism, abrogation of freedoms,  euthanasia, and so on.

IV. Social Alternatives After Death of Christian Consensus

A. Hedonism? But might is right when pleasures conflict.

B. Without external absolute, majority vote is absolute. But this justifies a Hitler.

V. Conclusion

A. If there is no absolute by which to judge society, then society is absolute.

B. Humanist thinking—making the individual and mankind the center of all things (autonomous) — has led to death in our culture and in our political life.
Posted by SalineRepublican]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 19:01:22 -0600 Arkansas Times Posted by ozarkrazo]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 18:14:45 -0600 Arkansas Times
Well maybe the Woman should have used some common sense and been responsible enough to buy a $0.25 condom. It's called taking RESPONSIBILITY for your actions! OutLIAR says that a fetus is not a person. Really? That's funny, when my wife was pregnant with our child, she would tell people she was "having a baby.". She didn't go around saying "I'm having a fetus. Last time I checked a baby is considered a person.

Here's a good question for you OutLIAR. When a drunk driver hits and kills a pregnant woman, why are they charged with 2 counts of negligent homicide? Because the fetus is a person you freaking babbling idiot!
Posted by arhogfan501]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 17:17:42 -0600 Arkansas Times
The right-wing evangelical movement was not an immediate backlash to Roe v. Wade. The evangelical community, unlike Roman Catholicism, showed little interest in combating abortion until almost 1980. As Jerry Falwell lamented in 1979, “The Roman Catholic Church for many years has stood virtually alone against abortion. I think it’s an indictment against the rest of us that we’ve allowed them to stand alone.”

Although evangelicals were mostly silent on abortion after Roe v. Wade, they were not silent on other political issues. Paul Weyrich, one of the evangelical right’s most influential founders, recalls that the movement initially emerged to defend racially segregated Christian schools from government intrusion:
[W]hat galvanized the Christian community was not abortion, school prayer, or the ERA [Equal Rights Amendment]. I am living witness to that because I was trying to get those people interested in those issues and I utterly failed. What changed their minds was Jimmy Carter’s intervention against the Christian schools, trying to deny them tax-exempt status on the basis of so-called de facto segregation.

In other words, as Randall Balmer has succinctly put it: “the religious right of the late twentieth century organized to perpetuate racial discrimination.”
Only after the movement was underway did it begin advocacy on abortion. It did so, in large part, based on highly dubious arguments advanced by the popular writer Francis Schaeffer.

Schaeffer held a master’s degree from Westminster Theological Seminary (though he went by “Dr. Schaeffer”) and argued, in 1979’s Whatever Happened to the Human Race? (co-written with the surgeon C. Everrett Koop, and offered as both book and film series), that legalized abortion represented an abandonment of the nation’s Judeo-Christian heritage. He is introduced in the film as “one of the world’s most respected thinkers”—a generous title given that Schaeffer plays loose with history, neglecting to mention that abortion was in fact legal when the nation was founded.

Schaeffer and Koop advance the argument that if evangelicals don’t mobilize to stop abortion, infanticide and involuntary euthanasia will soon become widespread.

They have to go back to Roman theologian Tertullian to reinforce their claim that the “orthodox position” is that life begins at conception, conveniently leaving out the fact that Church fathers Augustine and Aquinas—and most evangelicals up until the 1970s—are on the other side of the argument. As Aquinas put it (in a view that remained the official position of the Catholic Church from the medieval era to the mid-1800s), “The rational soul ought to be united to a body which may be a suitable organ of sensation… before the body has organs in any way whatever, it cannot be receptive of the soul.”

http://www.salon.com/2013/02/09/the_foundi…
Posted by couldn't be better]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 16:36:46 -0600 Arkansas Times Posted by righter]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 16:24:33 -0600 Arkansas Times

“Feminism is the ability to choose what you want to do.”
Nancy Reagan
Posted by Zatharus]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 16:11:41 -0600 Arkansas Times Posted by ozarkrazo]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 15:38:59 -0600 Arkansas Times
The point that Cindi Cobb made about her detractors being rude and engaging in personal attacks is what I was commenting on and you have become an exhibit to prove her point that when people feel they don't have a good argument then they resort to personal attacks. I agree with Cindi on that and it is out there for all the world to see that you resort to personal attacks then hope your opponents will walk away with their feelings hurt. It is not going to work here. Sorry I just keep coming with more logical arguments showing that there is medical and genetic evidence showing that the unborn child deserves our protection.

I will stump you once again with the question that liberals hate to answer: WHEN SHOULD UNBORN BABIES RECIEVE THE LEGAL PROTECTION OF OUR GOVERNMENT AND WHAT IS YOUR BASIS FOR SAYING WHEN THE PROPER TIME IS? We agree it is sometime before birth but is that one minute before the 9 months is up or sometime before that and what is the reason you have picked that time? NOTICE THAT I HAVE ASKED FOR A BASIS FOR YOUR ANSWER.

I would love to hear from any brave soul out that there that wanted to reason with me. I am sure there are some very smart liberals that are capable and willing to do so. All the scared ones and go and hide I guess.
Posted by SalineRepublican]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 15:20:25 -0600 Arkansas Times Posted by Lord MountBatten]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 15:19:28 -0600 Arkansas Times
He and his ilk, by implication, accuse the rest of us who don't agree with him of abetting murder.

He says women who get abortions do it for selfish reasons. How do you think that makes women who have had abortions feel, Saline?

You come on this blog pushing your beliefs/bullshit and then complain when you get push back. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

No one here is pushing their beliefs on you, Saline. You can believe what you want and do what you want about abortions in your personal life. Just leave the rest of us alone to practice our beliefs which are protected by the constitution.
Posted by the outlier]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 14:21:06 -0600 Arkansas Times
Exhibit one: VERLA SWEERE: "Saline--writing on this blog is not getting you the help you need, it is merely raising your blood pressure. Get real and look for a shrink."

Exhibit two: SOUND POLICY: "It's ironic how our resident forced-birther is the most unchristian poster on this blog."
Posted by SalineRepublican]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:40:38 -0600 Arkansas Times Posted by Jake da Snake]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:40:19 -0600 Arkansas Times Saline--writing on this blog is not getting you the help you need, it is merely raising your blood pressure. Get real and look for a shrink.
Posted by Verla Sweere]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 12:59:57 -0600 Arkansas Times
The MIT survey "found that only 11 percent of Americans belong to religions openly rejecting evolution or our Big Bang." The oft-mourned "conflict" between science and religion actually only applies to some 11% of Americans.

For 90% of us, in other words, it's a no-brainer.

So the 11% fundamentalist minority who yells the loudest and causes all the trouble for women, gays, physicians, gun regulation, climate change, evolution, science, abortion, stem-cell research, education, Social Security, Medicare, unemployment, unions, the economy, et al., are in fact the dumbest, most backward, superstitious, fascist, tribal tiny minority in the country.

Over the past few decades, they have succeeded in placing their own in high places (including the SCOTUS). But they're STILL only a tiny minority of fear-mongering fundamentalists who cannot win elections legitimately and so must resort to underhanded tactics.

The fundamentalist minority is useful to Big Money because their emotional appeals to false sentiment, religious myths, self-victimization persecution complexes and tyrannical bullying are easily manipulated in accord with Big $'s interests.

But the notion that fundamental religionists have any REAL numeric power is entirely false. Their apparent "power" is illusory and, fundamentally (that word again), deceitful.

It is time and past time for the majority of rational Americans--including rational Arkansans--to call these fundamentalist American Taliban (yes, a facile coinage, but true) exactly what they are.

Terrorist throwbacks.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-tegmark/…
Posted by Norma Bates]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 12:44:08 -0600 Arkansas Times
Let me get you straight, I shouldn't force my morality on another person until I walk down the path she has to walk down first. Would you feel comfortable forcing your morality on a mother who was physically abusing her three-year-old?
Posted by SalineRepublican]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 12:22:53 -0600 Arkansas Times
“Brevis esse laboro, Obscurus fio.”
Quintus Horatius Flaccus
Posted by Zatharus]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 11:14:57 -0600 Arkansas Times Posted by Sound Policy]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:58:44 -0600 Arkansas Times Posted by the outlier]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:40:52 -0600 Arkansas Times
Having human cells does not mean you are living. Go peak in a casket if you don't believe that. Those are just hand me downs from another. The only part of you that is new is your conscious awareness and ability to think.

If you think forcing an unwanted fetus into the world is noble, perhaps you should walk the path of one that was done to. It's a fate I'd never ever force on anyone else.
Posted by Cindi Cobb]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:30:28 -0600 Arkansas Times
This issue is one of human rights and is the unborn baby a human being or not. Yes, there are sad cases where the mother is "emotionally and financially" troubled. However, do we allow drastic measures to be taken because of the mother's hardships? How about adoption? I like what Baylor University philosopher and bioethicist Baruch Brody had to say about this case that you bring up Outlier:

In an age where we doubt the justice of capital punishment even for very dangerous criminals, killing a fetus who has not done any harm, to avoid a future problem it may pose, seems totally unjust. There are indeed many social problems that could be erased simply by destroying those persons who constitute or cause them, but that is a solution repugnant to the values of society itself. In short, then, if the fetus is a human being, the appeal to its being unwanted justifies no abortions.
Posted by SalineRepublican]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:14:39 -0600 Arkansas Times
If you believe that you're better than everyone else because you represent the One True God and the Truth it stands for, and that anyone or anything that differs from your interpretation of that Truth is by definition evil, then there can be no basis for moderating or even questioning the political goals and social rules that we ALL must live by -- and be FORCED to live by.

On the other side is the evidence-based world that grants multiple truths (and Truths) and accepts that the world probably can't function without permanent war unless reasonable accommodation can be made for those differences. Accommodation that relegates religion to the realm of the personal relationship of the individual to his or her concept of God instead of the imposition of religious faith and practice by self-appointed clerics on all members of society.
Posted by GrizLee Bear]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 09:43:50 -0600 Arkansas Times Posted by cecil]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 09:38:46 -0600 Arkansas Times