I support abortion on necessity. And necessity is defined and decided by the pregnant woman and her doctor. No one else. Period.

And you are correct in your “extreme medical requirement” statement. You and your liberal pals will lower that bar as far as will be tolerated by the public to allow abortion on demand, without calling it abortion on demand.

No. I will not lower any bar because the only bar that exists is the woman's health and life, and the only person who decides where that bar is set, is the woman involved and her doctor. I don't decide that. My liberal “pals” don't decide that. You don't decide that, and your right-wing pals don't decide that.

Would you and they take in all the women who are not wanted? The ones whose bodies have been battered and damaged by being forced to carry a pregnancy to term in the presence of a serious health condition because a government bureaucrat decided he knew better than the woman's doctor? Will you take in their children whom they cannot care for because they are too ill? Will you take in the children of the women who die in childbirth because a doctor could not give a 100 percent guarantee that the woman would die? Will you comfort the fathers and the families of these women?

Do the lives of women and the well-being of the children they already have mean NOTHING to you? Really? There is only ONE human life involved when an abortion takes place, and that is the life that hasn't been born yet?

You LOVE spouting off exceptions, yet you won't come right out and say that you support “abortion on demand”. That is true cowardice.

And you are correct in your “extreme medical requirement” statement. You and your liberal pals will lower that bar as far as will be tolerated by the public to allow abortion on demand, without calling it abortion on demand.
Baby has downs syndrome? Kill it.
Baby has one arm? Kill it.
Baby has a wart on it's butt? Kill it.

I'd take a Downs Syndrome child in a heartbeat.
Many Christians out here would take just about ANY child that is not wanted.

You have made it clear many times that you believe that situations in which abortion is necessary to save a woman's life, OR, situations in which a woman's health would be seriously damaged by full-term pregnancy, are extremely, exceedingly rare. That they almost never happen. The absolute, incontrovertible fact is, you are wrong. But of course you will never accept that or believe it.

The point is that no one other than the woman involved and her doctor are in a position to know what constitutes “extreme medical requirement.” Women must be allowed to make that decision. No one else has the right to make it. No one else CAN make it. You are simply not in a position to make a judgment that any given woman is having an abortion “on demand” (whatever that even means — as opposed to not demanding it?).

That is what I am telling you. Your entire concept of something that you call “abortion on demand” is fraudulent.

So am I do presume from that comment that you are against abortion except in the case of the life of the mother, incest, rape, or extreme medical requirement?

No?

You have said that you do not want ANY legislation preventing a woman's “right” to choose to murder what's inside her uterus.

That, Kathy, IS abortion on demand!

This is what you said before. LOL. But I have not “defended abortion 'on demand' for any reason.” You make a claim and then don't even attempt to support and then just repeat it. Nice work, if you can get it.

Based upon your past comments, I have no doubt that you had no problem with partial birth abortion. I don't know this to be true, but it is a good presumption.

Not at all. I would not dream of such a thing. If a woman in her second or third trimester is diagnosed with cancer, I would tell her to forget about radiation treatment and chemotherapy (it could hurt the baby, you know), and just put the whole thing out of her mind until her baby is born. Absolutely, it would be unconscionable for her to end the pregnancy if that was the only way she could safely get the treatment she needed. Same thing if her kidney failed, or she went into diabetic shock, or she had a stroke, or a life-threatening embolism (whatever that is, something to do with a woman, not with the baby).

Kathy. You have on countless occasions said that very thing about “abortion on demand”.
You have stated that it is “not anyones business to fetter the “choice” within a woman's body nor the reasoning WHY”. You give no rights to the fathers of aborted children. You give a passing wave of indifference to physical or psychological damage that abortion has upon those who choose it. You have on countless occasions defended abortion “on demand” for any reason. Based upon your past comments, I have no doubt that you had no problem with partial birth abortion. I don't know this to be true, but it is a good presumption.

In fact, most of your posts are about abortion or homosexuality. You occasionally wax about a sentimental tune or your daughter (which I actually enjoy, by the way), but most others are about abortion or homsexuality, as if you were getting a kickback from the ACLU.

That is oh, so very ironic coming from you, on this topic, right now, especially, Kathy.  Very ironic.

Another poor soul who has fallen through the looking glass and does not know up from down. I have never said anything about abortion “on demand.” I agree with Jill that it's not even a concept that exists on the pro-choice side. The only people who ever talk about “on demand” as a concept relating to the subject of abortion are people like you who think abortion is murder and want it to be illegal. And that “one of many” bit is even more hilarious. You're just making things up as you go along.

You have no idea what's important, DLS. You're not even interested in health care reform, and you really know nothing about either the forest or the trees. You are, however, extremely good at playing the concern troll.

Lefties choosing to make abortion a truly hot issue risk sending the whole forest (effort) up in smoke.

DLS, you have truly fallen through the looking glass. It's Ben Nelson and Bart Stupak who are “choosing to make abortion a truly hot issue,” not liberals, progressives, or “lefties.”

Appreciate your note acknowledging.

and blessed holidays to you and your loved ones JD

dr.e

Appreciate it

and blessed holidays JD

dr.e

The left of center side still has more voters on it than the right of center – and both sides have tens of millions of people who populate them. I am speaking the truth based on my experience, Jefferson, I'm not going to fabricate. I have never been in the presence of anyone – online, in person or otherwise, who advocates something they or anyone else I've been in the presence of calls “abortion on demand.” They may speak more to my left of center consistency, versus being further out on the left, but there you are. Or, I suppose, there I am.

Thank you archangel. Sorry for repeating it, but I was offended by its use as well.