Today, Chuckles the Tadpole Queen is in high dudgeon over Rick Santorum noting a certain inconsistency in Chuckles’ god king Ogabe’s rhetoric, saying the following:
“The question is, and this is what Barack Obama didn’t want to answer — is that human life a person under the Constitution?” he said. “And Barack Obama says no.
That’s putting it mildly, Rick. On one of the very few occasions when our Fearless Leader could actually be convinced to vote anything other than “present” during his sinecure as an Illinois lawmaker, he actually voted against prohibiting abortion doctors from “correcting their mistakes” by letting live born, viable babies die from neglect in trash bins.
But at least he didn’t vote in favor of the Gosnell Procedure™ of cutting their spinal cords with scissors to expedite the process.
Well, if that human life is not a person, then I find it almost remarkable for a black man to say ‘now we are going to decide who are people and who are not people.’”
Which is a good point. Once you start drawing the line on who are and who aren’t “people” entitled to the full protections of the Constitution, you need to be very damn careful about where you draw it.
We’re constantly lectured on the “three-fifths of a person” rule in antebellum America and how inhumane it was (ignoring the irony of the fact that that very rule was put in place by damnyankees worried that the slaves, were they counted as full persons, would give the South “too much” representation in Congress) and we positively agree that calling some people more people than other people is against everything that our nation supposedly stands for, but how is that worse than declaring a person “not a person at all?”
All that Santorum is doing is pointing out that:
For decades certain human beings were wrongly treated as property and denied liberty in America because they were not considered persons under the constitution. Today other human beings, the unborn of all races, are also wrongly treated as property and denied the right to life for the same reason; because they are not considered persons under the constitution.
Would somebody please point out to us where the logical disconnect making this an unreasonable point is, because we sure as hell don’t see it. Haven’t we for decades been told that fetuses are nothing more than “clumps of tissue” to be disposed of at will? How is this not considering said fetus the property of somebody else and less than human?
We don’t claim to have The Ultimate Answer™ to the question of abortion. People close to us have undergone the agony of being faced with no good options and being forced to pick the one that seemed the least horrible of them all, but we do believe that it’s a perfectly legitimate question to ask.
But in Chuckles’ sadly Thorazine-deprived “mind”, for lack of a better word, that’s tantamount to saying that anybody even considering having one is a mass murdering psychopath. Which is why we love making fun of him so much. If he didn’t already exist, we’d have to bloody well make him up for our personal amusement.
speaking of Mr. Obama here is some fresh Birther Bait . the new governor of Hawaii vowed to end the debate but can’t seem to be able to find the birth certificate.
The abortion survivors were the thing that no matter what else I could not and would not vote for him. (irrelevant that I hated most of his policies as well) The horrible irony? A ‘friend’ that decided I couldn’t BE her friend (who is an ardent democrat) got tipped over the edge because of my views on Obamacare, where she… Read more »
Abortion is a thorny problem. I don’t know the ultimate solution to it, either.
However, I do believe the Constitution specifically designates all powers NOT mentioned within it… to the states, local governments and the people.
Last I checked, it didn’t say a damned thing about abortion. So, overturn Roe vs Wade and send the question back to the states.
Waaaay off topic, but wanted to give y’all an update on our friend, LOBO: He is doing well at Victory House. He has dedicated his life to The Lord, and is now sober, and hoping and praying for us Rotties. His addy is as follows: Edward Brandon c/o Victory House 2526 Columbus Avenue Ft. Worth, TX 76164 He would LOVE… Read more »
I think this is probably the only sane place on the entire internet. I don’t have the ultimate answer either. I know what I believe personally but I don’t know what to believe about legality for sure, though I AM sure such things shouldn’t be funded by the government. But then most things the gov’t funds are things it shouldn’t.… Read more »
LC Aggie – dropping LOBO a line today, I don’t know him but I’m happy to hear he’s doing well. I know how much letters can mean to someone who is going through tough times, so anyway like I say; it’ll go out today.
LC Anniee451 says: Now I have a question. Was that the only purpose of the 3/5 rule? Because I’m pretty sure it was Laura Ingraham who was talking about it a year or so ago, and she said that part of the purpose of that 3/5 thing was to pave the way for eventual abolition. I mean, I’m not sure… Read more »
LC Anniee451 says:
It’s very simple, the damned Resluglicans are every bit as statist as the fucked up Democraps
I’ve written extensively about the Gosnell matter, these past three days. Not the immediate horror of the thing — anyone can understand that without having it explained to him — but that we’re looking at the logical consequences of legalized abortion, which were predicted back in the Fifties and Sixties when the pro-abortion forces massed for their big push. Few… Read more »