On 12 Mar 2005 06:23:27 -0800, "Hyerdahl"  wrote:

>
>Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
>> On 11 Mar 2005 11:44:48 -0800, "Hyerdahl"
 wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >Abortion alternatives bill has broad support in Legislature
>> >
>> >SOFTER APPROACH: This year's marquee abortion bill aims to prevent
>> >abortions by giving pregnant women support they need - including
>> >housing and medical care - that might encourage them to have their
>> >child.
>> >
>> >SHOW ME THE MONEY: Pregnancy crisis centers that counsel women could
>> >apply for $2 million in state grants in 2007 - as long as they don't
>> >mention abortion as an option.
>>
>>
>> This doesn't sound like a measure that you would support, Puke.
>
>
>Actually, I would.  I've always felt that the main reason women CHOOSE
>abortion is because they are in crisis.
>>
>> Are you a closet pro-lifer?  Maybe even a closet fundy?
>>
>:-)   Hardly.  However, you'll notice that this is what I would call a
>'friendly persuasion' and that abortion is still a choice, which is all
>I, as a feminist, insist upon.


But Puke!

This measure states that pregnancy crisis centers could apply for 2
million dollars AS LONG AS THEY DON'T MENTION ABORTION AS AN OPTION.

It's not even WHETHER OR NOT THEY MENTION ABORTION; it's AS LONG AS
THEY DON'T MENTION IT.

There isn't even any "choice" to kill babies that they will be allowed
to allude to.

This is a pro-life bill all the way.  And you're FOR IT?  I GUARANTEE
you that your local NOW is very much AGAINST IT.  Obviously, you
haven't been checking in for bulletins.



>> >BROAD SUPPORT: With anti-abortion majorities in both chambers and
>the
>> >governor's office, the bill seems destined to pass.
>>
>>
>> "Anti-abortion majorities" in government?
>>
>
>Well, I'm not even convinced that Bush is "anti-aboriton" but the
>majority of his voters are.


But Puke; you said that he was "stupid" and that his voters were
"stupid" so how can you possibly agree with him and them on ANYTHING?

And moreover, if those stupid people are rolling you and getting your
support on a pro-life bill, how stupid does that make you?


>> Why, Puke, I thought that women weren't willing to ALLOW politicians
>> to take away their reproductive rights.
>
>There are no rights being "taken away" here, Dave Sim cockpuppet.  A
>woman would still have the right to choose.


"Anti-abortion majorities" suggests popularly-elected officials poised
to make abortion illegal.

>
>>



--------------------------------------
grizzlieantagonist{at}yahoo.com

"Ladies and gentlemen - let's have a round of applause for tonight's
player of the game - FRAN-CIS-CO SAN-N-N-N-TOS!
    - Brian Anthony (P.A. announcer at Grizzlie Stadium), June 11, 2004


"Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their
disposition to put moral chains upon
 their own appetites; in proportion as their love of justice is above their
rapacity; in proportion 
 as their soundness and sobriety of understanding is above their vanity and
presumption; in proportion
 as they are more disposed to listen to the counsels of the wise and good,
in preference to the flattery
 of knaves.  Society cannot exist unless a controlling power upon will and
appetite be placed somewhere, 
 and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without.  It is
ordained in the eternal 
 constitution of things that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. 
Their passions forge their fetters."
     
     - Edmund Burke, Letter to a Member of the National Assembly (1791)


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/12/05 12:56:35 PM ---