I wonder what would happen if the fetus could be transfered to the father’s body?

So a woman’s right to choose murder has been legal for over 30 years. If you want to argue that, I feel sorry for you. You should have learned the difference between right and wrong when in grade school and not from an activist supreme court that history continues to correct.

Comment by joe — June 16, 2007 @ 11:46 am

Hi, Joe–
Let me ask you something. Let’s just go this route, for the sake of argument. Let’s say that your “plumbing”
has some kind of sensor built in that counts the number of your little guys released that turned into a viable fetus…. and the more “hits” the little counter records, your testicles begin to stretch and drag lower and lower. You have to wear specially constructed garments, summer and winter, to contain and secure this stretched flesh mashed against your body. The rest your body starts to break down from the inside out, and before you know it, you are having intrusive surgery to remove internal organs and maybe even sections of your ravaged bladder.
The removal of said organs also affect your “manhood” so you take hormones so that you don’t begint to morph into the opposite sex.
Later, those hormones give you cancer……..sounds OK to you?
I really do not understand why this issue is argued so loudly by MEN, when they really do not suffer any of he consequences–except financial (MAYBE), of course.

THOMPSON: No. I think Roe was fabricated out of whole cloth. I think it represents a bigger problem with the federal judiciary, and that is that too many people get up and decide one day that they want to change social policy in this country that has been there for a couple hundred years. In this case, it was not only bad law, it was bad medicine. I mean, we know a lot of things now about all that that we didn’t even know them. And it was another example of thwarting the notion of federalism, which is an integral part of our constitution — taking things away from the states to decide, by the people, on a local basis, and having a few men in black robes make those decisions. So it’s not only the substance of the decision, but the symbolic effect that it had.

Q: So your position on abortion would be overturn Roe, and put it back to the states. Let the states decide.

THOMPSON: Yeah.

He’s talking about how it is not supposed to be a LAW about abortion, but the judges, who are only supposed to uphold the LAW, pretty much created their own law through this decision. Roe vs Wade pretty much said that laws against abortion are unconstitutional, because of people’s “right to privacy,” which is not in the constitution (prove me wrong if you disagree).
In this argument, I think Thompson is arguing: Judges are not lawmakers, let the states make their own laws about abortion. If someone can or can’t have an abortion let it be because of the laws created by elected officials, rather than unelected judges. That to me sounds much more patriotic and democratic than what people are saying about him.
My opinion on abortion: privacy rights should be protected, people should have a choice UNLESS it conflicts with someone else’s rights. Therefore if the unborn baby has rights, personal choice shouldn’t supercede it. and I definitely think an unborn baby should have more rights than a protected species.

That makes him suicidal as, he IS one.

I wonder what would happen if the fetus could be transfered to the father’s body?

That is something that I have always asked.

If you found a human being growing inside you, what would you do?

I wonder what would happen if the fetus could be transfered to the father’s body?

To answer your question, if Fred Thompson were the only man available, I would choose to remain celibate.
There are all sorts of tastes in this world, but so far I haven’t seen any posts from women or fake women, other than those from the vilevenus/mightyhypocrite troll, here admiring Fred Thompson. I am quite sure he would not have a young trophy wife with those looks if he were just Fred, your local grocer or shoe-repairman. Perhaps only closeted middle-aged men with homoerotic fantasies find Brain-dead Fred “ruggedly handsome.”

also it claims this basis to support another fundamental flaw which is that it bases itself on the idea that noone knows when life as a human person begins, now if this is true one would believe the law should error on the side of safety and give the benefit of the doubt to it beginning at conception rather than risk infanticide which it would be if what we dont know ends up being that life begins at conception

Comment by yep

I said it was at 16% BEFORE the Democrats took control, which has been shown to be absolutely correct. What part of BEFORE the election do you NOT understand? I did not quote a specific date before the election.

And if you care to read back even further, you will find my opinion of when I think life (I think therefore I am) actually begins.

Besides, I am talking about the thing you should, as a conservative, know about. And thats your SOUL or SPIRIT. You know the thing that goes wafting off into heaven when we pass on? Further if you read into my name you should be able to figure out that Stella Octangula refers to the Merkaba. Which happens to be a shape much like the Star of David.

Mer-Ka- Ba

google it.