Laz-proof!
Posted on 11/04/2011 3:58:11 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Debbie Wasserman Schultz: Saying Life Begins at Conception Is ‘Extreme and Radical’ By Matt Cover November 3, 2011 Subscribe to Matt Cover's posts
(CNSNews.com) - Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-Fla.), chair of the Democratic National Committee, said Thursday that for states to enact constitutional amendments that say human life begins at conception is “an extreme and radical step.”
“For the vast majority of Americans, including people on both sides of the abortion issue, this is an extreme and radical step,” she said.
Speaking to reporters on a conference call, Wasserman-Schultz said that so-called personhood amendments are a “divisive, dangerous, and destructive” attack on women.
“To American women, their reproductive health and choice is an intensely personal and private issue between themselves, their families, and their doctors,” the DNC chairwoman said. “But Republicans in Washington and across the country have tried to limit these rights, with their assault on Planned Parenthood in Congress and restrictive laws in the states being among several examples.”
“Now," she said, "the effort by the far right [is] to pass these so-called personhood amendments--divisive, dangerous, and destructive laws which would cripple a woman’s right to choose, limit access to birth control, and put the lives of women with difficult pregnancies at risk.”
Wasserman-Shultz called the personhood amendments being considered or petitioned for in Mississippi, Ohio, Texas, Kansas, and Florida “the most extreme assault on a woman’s right to choose.”
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
LOL!
Here’s an exchange on the Senate floor where Santorum was nailing a squirming Barbara Boxer with that very question:
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/notansweringboxersantorum.html
This got down to the partial birth abortion question - whether a baby was “born” if it had one toe still in the birth canal.
I thought it was the conservatives that were supposed to be scientifically illiterate.
They are being intentionally vague because it suits their purpose.
They simply do not value the life of the unborn. They are far too self centered.
The most vehement abortion “rights” defenders are those that have been involved in one - either themselves or someone close to them, or both, have had an abortion at their behest.
This is a very guilt inspiring event - a baby is dead, by your own “choice”, and if the mother was a teen, the guilt is doubled, because the older person encouraged the younger to engage in a murder.
This is why they MUST have NO restrictions at all on abortions. Any restrictions imply that there is something wrong with abortion. If there is “something” wrong, then what is it - this line of reasoning leads directly to “murder of an innocent baby”.
So, better to avoid that path altogether.
Laz-proof!
*LOL*....maybe blindfolded
Debbie Wasserman Schultz is an idiot.
Of course life begins at conception, its self-awareness that doesn't happen until birth.
Since liberals operate on an 'it's all about ME' level, their worldview demands someone who doesn't know they're alive.....isn't.
Like fetuses, old people and the mentally disabled.
Debbie Wasserman-Shultz herself is a good argument for legalizing abortion through the 200th trimester.
This: 
Not this: 
The Wassermann test is an antibody test for syphilis, named after the bacteriologist August Paul von Wassermann.
Obviously not related!
Someone should ask her when does life end. Any answer that includes lack of brain function or heart stopping will tangle her up in those pesky little aborted babies, uh, blobs, uh, cells, uh, or whatever she’s labelled what surely do look a whole lot like once live human beings. Amazing how facts always seem to get in their way.
So, I’m waiting, Debbie. When does life end? That can’t be such an extreme and radical question. Still waiting.... crickets...
Life begins at conception because it’s the only time it can.
Well she just doesn’t care *what* her mouth is used for, does she?
I have a cousin who suddenly disappeared nearly 40 years ago. To this day, my Aunt waits for him to return. Although, common sense tells her he must be dead, until a body is produced and buried, this mother will not have closure. This expresses something deeply and uniquely human. Not only does abortion likely kill a human being, but it certainly kills this essential human quality within anyone who embraces the idea of abortion. . .thus, it kills the soul of a nation that accommodates it
My question to people like little Debbie always is: “If someone kills a pregnant woman have they committed 1 or 2 murders?”. It’s really fun to watch them explain how in that circumstance it’s murder of the “baby” but it’s not murder of the “fetus” if the woman makes the choice!
Live EXISTS BEFORE AND AFTER conception.
Where is the inert non LIVING matter in the equation?
Of course, but the question needs to be turned on them. They can ramble on all day about life beginning whenever and fool some of the people but you can’t fool anyone about when life ends. Death is death. Can’t get around it. IOW, if there’s death then there had to be life. The opposite of death isn’t blobs of cells.
Or ask them when life ends. I got into an argument with a pro "choice" lib and eventually asked her: "If someone has a beating heart, is it OK to bury them?" No more comments from her.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.