Last Night's Debate and the Dread Scott case - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-10-2004, 07:17 PM   #16
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: full of sound and fury
Posts: 3,386
Local Time: 11:47 AM
Thanks meegannie, someone passed me the links too, and I read them, and I am sorry that I can't observe their mannerisms or speech nuances, cos that would inform me a lot instead of merely their words. Too bad for me. Have a nice day.

foray
__________________

__________________
foray is offline  
Old 10-11-2004, 05:49 AM   #17
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 06:47 PM
Thanks Diane! Very interesting indeed. It sure would explain why he brought it up to begin with, which would otherwise seem like a huge flub!

SD
__________________

__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 10-11-2004, 03:00 PM   #18
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: all around in the dark - everywhere
Posts: 3,531
Local Time: 05:47 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by foray
Do you have links to all, or some, of the transcripts for the debate? I've been looking but all I have found are the veep ones, and I don't have tv. Thanks anyone.

foray
all three of the debates are on apple's itunes music store, available as free downloads. you can listen to GW in all his glory..over and over again!
__________________
Se7en is offline  
Old 10-11-2004, 03:07 PM   #19
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 10:47 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Se7en


all three of the debates are on apple's itunes music store, available as free downloads. you can listen to GW in all his glory..over and over again!
heaven help us!
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 10-11-2004, 03:14 PM   #20
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 02:47 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Diane L
"The reasoning in Dred Scott and Roe v. Wade is nearly identical. In both cases the Court stripped all rights from a class of human beings and reduced them to nothing more than the property of others. Compare the arguments the Court used to justify slavery and abortion. Clearly, in the Court's eyes, unborn children are now the same "beings of an inferior order" that the justices considered Blacks to be over a century ago."
Well, that seems like an interesting issue to discuss....
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 10-11-2004, 03:16 PM   #21
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 10:47 PM
i try to avoid abortion arguments as often as possible. normally i love to argue, but people get way to angry and overheated about it that i just get turned off.
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 10-11-2004, 03:20 PM   #22
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: all around in the dark - everywhere
Posts: 3,531
Local Time: 05:47 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2democrat


heaven help us!


abortion is a touchy subject. i don't think it is as black/white as the one side makes it, nor as grey as the other side makes it. very complicated indeed.
__________________
Se7en is offline  
Old 10-11-2004, 03:21 PM   #23
Babyface
 
Felicity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Northern U.S.
Posts: 24
Local Time: 05:47 PM
Agreed......
__________________
Felicity is offline  
Old 10-11-2004, 05:40 PM   #24
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 02:47 PM



the President demonstrates his
"No Child Left Behind" program.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 10-11-2004, 05:45 PM   #25
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,296
Local Time: 05:47 PM
I am unsure why abortion is even brought up in the debates.

It is an issue which is divisive and people's minds are made up one way or another. There is no way on God's green earth I'd ever vote for Bush based on this issue, and I am sure there are people who would never vote for Kerry for similar reasons. There is nothing here except shameless pandering.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 10-11-2004, 06:20 PM   #26
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 10:47 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram
I am unsure why abortion is even brought up in the debates.

It is an issue which is divisive and people's minds are made up one way or another. There is no way on God's green earth I'd ever vote for Bush based on this issue, and I am sure there are people who would never vote for Kerry for similar reasons. There is nothing here except shameless pandering.
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 10-11-2004, 06:41 PM   #27
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
speedracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: MD
Posts: 7,573
Local Time: 05:47 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Diane L
Sherry,

Dailykos.com has a diary on its site that discusses this correlation. The diarist says that if you Google the terms "Dred Scott" and "abortion," you get the links for anti-abortion websites that have linked the two.

Here is one of the explanations from such a site as reprinted by the dailykos.com diarist:

"The reasoning in Dred Scott and Roe v. Wade is nearly identical. In both cases the Court stripped all rights from a class of human beings and reduced them to nothing more than the property of others. Compare the arguments the Court used to justify slavery and abortion. Clearly, in the Court's eyes, unborn children are now the same "beings of an inferior order" that the justices considered Blacks to be over a century ago."

You can find the full diary at www.dailykos.com It is to the right of the home page, listed under Recent Diaries.

Diane L.
I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that that's pretty much what the Supreme Court declared in Roe v. Wade -- they declared that constitutional protection of a woman's rights trumped a first-trimester fetus but not a third-trimester fetus without bothering to explain why.

I have always thought that Roe v. Wade should be overturned because of its poor foundation and that the question should be returned to the states. We might have states where abortion is completely legal and states where it's illegal except in "hard cases". If 75% of people in 75% of states agree, we might have a constitutional amendment. And so forth.
__________________
speedracer is offline  
Old 10-11-2004, 07:05 PM   #28
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 10:47 PM
The main reason I am pro-choice is because if it were to become illegal again, women would STILL get back-alley illegal abortions. this not only would destroy the fetus, but the woman's life would also be in great danger. women who get abortions today seem to me would be desperate to get an illegal abortion, which is SO deadly. i have conflicts with myself over this issue, but the safety for the woman is my main concern.
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 10-11-2004, 07:34 PM   #29
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
speedracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: MD
Posts: 7,573
Local Time: 05:47 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2democrat
The main reason I am pro-choice is because if it were to become illegal again, women would STILL get back-alley illegal abortions. this not only would destroy the fetus, but the woman's life would also be in great danger. women who get abortions today seem to me would be desperate to get an illegal abortion, which is SO deadly. i have conflicts with myself over this issue, but the safety for the woman is my main concern.
So the fetus's right to live, if it exists, is not inviolate?

If the fetus has an absolute right to live, as born children do, then the government is obligated to protect this right, regardless of the policy consequences (deadly back-alley abortions, poverty, etc). To draw an analogy with slavery, the constitutional abolition of slavery created a lot of social upheaval in the United States, but that doesn't mean it wasn't the right thing to do.

If the fetus does not have an absolute right to live, then there's no problem. However, it seems like you're arriving at this statement backwards by arguing from its consequences. I don't think it's such a good idea to treat questions about fundamental rights this way. If the fetus doesn't have such a right, that fact needs to be established first.

Just my 1/20th of one cent's worth.
__________________

__________________
speedracer is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com