So...a baby in the womb is merely a cluster of cells, which you believe, the mother of said baby can kill whenever she so chooses. Conversely you think a baby living outside the womb is a life worthy of protection. You have no problem with the wanton slaughter of babies in the womb, but outside the womb is causes you concern. And you call me a hypocrite???
If by pro-gun you mean I believe in the Second Amendment....then I am guilty as charged.
If by pro-death penalty you mean I believe heinous murders found guilty should be executed....then I am guilty as charged....yet you do not, but have no concern about murder in the womb....more hypocrisy.
However I am not pro-war. I believe we should bring ALL our troops home, eliminate the CIA, and mind our own business.
You accuse me of a personal attack...and then attack me personally. You libs are too funny.
Again. . .you are putting words in my mouth that I have NEVER said!
A cluster of cell is NOT a baby. No more than an egg is a chicken. No more than a vial of blood is a human, although it contains human DNA.
This is why I am entirely fine with the choice a woman might make to terminate that cluster of cell in the first 12 to 16 weeks. Once the "cluster of cell" does develop a brain stem, and begin to acquire the characteristics that DIFFERENTIATE a cluster of life cells from what makes us human, I no longer believe in abortions, except in the case of serious disability of the NOW fetus, a non-viable fetus, or serious emotional and/or physical danger to the pregnant woman.
And, yes, I do believe that a BORN life is more important to preserve than a fetus at any stage. I have described this before this way: If I had a child, and was also pregnant, and a fire broke out in my house, and I had the choice to escape the fire, and to save the life of my child by jumping out of the window. . .but that decision would without a doubt kill the fetus inside me, I would choose to save the life of my child before saving the life of the fetus I am carrying. . .even in later term of pregnancy.
Re: the second amendment, I do not believe that the "interpretation" given by NRA and other gun enthusiasts to the second amendment is honest. I believe that what our founder stated as the necessity to have a "WELL STRUCTURED militia" to protect our "FREE STATE" doesn't mean "UNSTRUCTURE VIGILANTE INDIVIDUALS" to protect their "PRIVATE PROPERTY" at the cost of human life!
In fact, I do not believe that the founders would have approved of many of the "so called militias" that are sprouting all over this country (White Supremacists, KKK, etc. . .) and would in fact have pointed to that kind of "militia" as the exact cause of danger to "free state!"
While I do not mind people owning ONE gun and/or ONE riffle for hunting, I do NOT think our founders EVERY intended individuals to be in the possession of dozens of extremely deadly fire arms that they couldn't even imagine would every exist in the hands of individuals. . .not even in the hands of government! Obviously, if we keep on going ahead without check, without common sense control, we will end up having individuals in possessions of mini-drones, some with chemical warfare or nuclear capabilities. . .and this doesn't "reduce' the danger to this country and to individuals in this country, but increases it many fold.
And, it is clear that people who possess a gun (or more) have 43 time more chance to have that gun used AGAINST them, their loved ones, or innocent people than to be used for DEFENSE.
This is not my opinion, and it’s not a political or controversial statement. It is a fact. Guns kept in the home for self-protection are 43 times more likely to kill a family member, friend or acquaintance than to kill an intruder, according to a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine. Guns on the street make us less safe. For every justifiable handgun homicide, there are more than 50 handgun murders, according to the FBI. The expanding right to carry concealed guns make us even less safe. So what right is being protected if it is not the right to be safe? The right to feel safe, at the expense of actual safety?
http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/105337/yes-really-ban-all-the-guns#
I wish you would at times make statement that could lead me to believe that you care as much about life children than fetuses or cluster of cells. However, it doesn't seem that you do, or you would not resent the new health care laws, welfare, the cost of education to society, and the cost of environmental impact of big corporations.
You have your pet peeve. . .I have mine. It is clear that we won't ever see eye to eye. And I do not really care! You appear to find me "immoral" for my stand as a "pro-choice" person. . .and I tend to find your "moral" very strange, since you are "pro-fetus," but certainly not "pro-life" in terms of how you express your opinions about "internal wars" that is waged daily in America's inner cities, death penalty, supporting the most vulnerables of our BORN HUMANS, or the environment. And it is perfectly alright that we are diametrically opposed in most (all?) of those issues
But I wish you would stop putting words in my mouth. That is dishonest.