Do you want a state ban on birth control?

Rick Santorum says he believes any state ought to be able to ban birth ontrol in the state. Sorta scary thought!

 

Scary no... He's a blithering idiot.

 

Not really sure where he comes off saying such a thing. Kind of like saying any state can ban antibiotics.

 

Why? He was asked if a state has such a right. He said yes, not that he would vote to do so but yes states do have the legal authority to do so.

Do states have the right to ban certain drugs and medical procedures? That is the question.

 

I'm not a Santorum fan, but he's right. They do have the power to do that. Not that I want them to and not that any of the States are even interested in doing that.

The bigger question is why did this even come up? Answer: Because the media is more interested in pushing liberal wedge issues than they are in doing their job.

 

A state should have that right. The federal government has no vested interest in the topic. Then if you dont like the states possition on the issue you can move or get the state to change. THough it would be silly if they did.

 

Neither the state or the Fed has that right. Individuals have the right to take birth control if they wish.

 

no...revealing the truth and lies is the media's job...when they fail to report the facts is when they're not doing their jobs...

 

I agree with Santorum, they should have the right.

It is a red herring though, never would happen.

 

Uh that would depend on the state constitution. Reproductive freedom is not a guaranteed right (at least not one spelled out)

 

If a state wants to ban something, they have the right. If you don't like it find a state where its legal. Vote with your feet.

 

Santorum should join the Taliban, I think he'd feel more at home.

 

The Taliban hates America. I don't think Santorum wants to kill inocent civilians. Why do you attack Santorum like he's the devil?

 

Their job, as they see it and as has been for year immemorial is to trap people (any people) into saying things that will give them a story and enhance their reputations.

The truth, whatever and wherever it is, come a poor second.

Remember the saying 'I don't care what you print, as long as you spell my name right.' That should be on the tombstone of every journalist.

 

He supports "pre emptive" invasions. He supported the war in Iraq and he's pushing for a war with the Persians. Our confrontation with Iraq killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians and so would an invasion of Iran if the purpose reveals itself again to be regime change.

 

He's also obviously wants a Christian theocracy.

 

Well, I believe Roe vs. Wade nullifies that possibility.

I could be wrong though.

 

I do too. Why wait to get hit first?

I did too, I thought Sadam goin on TV giving lotto lookin checks to the familys of suside bombers was bad for all of us who live on Earth.

If Iran wants to start closing international waters, and nuking its nabors, then maybe we should goto war with them.

 

How was Iraq going to hit the United States? That wasn't defensive war. A real pre-emptive defensive war would be Germany attacking the Soviet Union in WWII and yet i'm going to assume you believe that was war mongering while calling what the United States did to Iraq "defensive."

Iraq's camel cavalry was in no position to swim across the Atlantic ocean and attack us. If we now support these wars, as well as pre emptive nuclear strikes against nations that haven't done us harm (something on the table during the Bush years iirc) we no longer have the right to pass judgement on the morals of any other nation, whether that be the Third Reich, the Soviet Union, Imperial Japan, or Communist China.

We weren't attacked by any of them and if we had been, if a suicide bomber had attacked an American bus, spending a trillion dollars and tens of thousands of American lives is not worth attacking a nation just to kill a leader that then gave the suicide bombers family money after the fact.

Or maybe we should start treating them differently so this doesn't happen to begin with? More over, if we are lead back into another war by the neo-cons maybe you should go to the front lines. When you get your arm or leg or face blown off you can spend the rest of your miserable life telling yourself that losing your face was worth it to stop Iran from "closing international waters." Of course, since I doubt it's you who will have to pay any price for the result of all of this blatant war propaganda you're more than willing to go to war and bomb into submission thousands of innocent Persians and lose thousands of American military.

 

No............

 

I don't believe RoeVsWade dealt with birth control. I believe that was Griswold.

Can the state ban happy meals? What if I want to purchase and consume a happy meal, should the government have the right to prevent me?

 

This is why Saddam was removed

(1) On September 22, 1980, Iraq invaded Iran, starting an 8 year war in which Iraq employed chemical weapons against Iranian troops and ballistic missiles against Iranian cities.

(2) In February 1988, Iraq forcibly relocated Kurdish civilians from their home villages in the Anfal campaign, killing an estimated 50,000 to 180,000 Kurds.

(3) On March 16, 1988, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iraqi Kurdish civilian opponents in the town of Halabja, killing an estimated 5,000 Kurds and causing numerous birth defects that affect the town today.

(4) On August 2, 1990, Iraq invaded and began a 7 month occupation of Kuwait, killing and committing numerous abuses against Kuwaiti civilians, and setting Kuwait's oil wells ablaze upon retreat.

(5) Hostilities in Operation Desert Storm ended on February 28, 1991, and Iraq subsequently accepted the ceasefire conditions specified in United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 (April 3, 1991) requiring Iraq, among other things, to disclose fully and permit the dismantlement of its weapons of mass destruction programs and submit to long-term monitoring and verification of such dismantlement.

(6) In April 1993, Iraq orchestrated a failed plot to assassinate former President George Bush during his April 14-16, 1993, visit to Kuwait.

(7) In October 1994, Iraq moved 80,000 troops to areas near the border with Kuwait, posing an imminent threat of a renewed invasion of or attack against Kuwait.

( On August 31, 1996, Iraq suppressed many of its opponents by helping one Kurdish faction capture Irbil, the seat of the Kurdish regional government.

(9) Since March 1996, Iraq has systematically sought to deny weapons inspectors from the United Nations Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM) access to key facilities and documents, has on several occasions endangered the safe operation of UNSCOM helicopters transporting UNSCOM personnel in Iraq, and has persisted in a pattern of deception and concealment regarding the history of its weapons of mass destruction programs.

(10) On August 5, 1998, Iraq ceased all cooperation with UNSCOM, and subsequently threatened to end long-term monitoring activities by the International Atomic Energy Agency and UNSCOM.

(11) On August 14, 1998, President Clinton signed Public Law 105-235, which declared that `the Government of Iraq is in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations' and urged the President `to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations.'.

(12) On May 1, 1998, President Clinton signed Public Law 105-174, which made $5,000,000 available for assistance to the Iraqi democratic opposition for such activities as organization, training, communication and dissemination of information, developing and implementing agreements among opposition groups, compiling information to support the indictment of Iraqi officials for war crimes, and for related purposes.

Now if you are asking if Saddam was a threat as far as a direct attack on US soil.

Read here

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/889pvpxc.asp

 

Just because someone supports an ability does not mean that they support what that ability is used for.

Either way ---- Sontorum sucks!

 

*sigh....*

Ok, so when we start bombing Iran you'll think that justifies someone invading us and bringing about regime change? And what do you care if the Iraqis and Iranians go to war? How does this translate into attacking America?
And since when do we use events from 23 years before to justify actions?
Why are you even repeating this junk? This propaganda is designed for stupid people.

......and so 15 years later America MUST sacrifice its blood and treasure to put a stop to the killing of Kurdish civilians (that were killed with weapons given to Saddam by America) from happening even though it already happened!

.....The United States of America gave Saddam these chemical weapons....
Is this Idiocracy? This is really embarrassing...

Right, and everyone knows Kuwait is America. Wait, no it isn't, and the U.S. dealt with that at the time.

Right.... which they did.

Yikes. Let's go to war with them, than.... 10 years later! Are you really using this as a justification? Honestly, let's travel back in time and tell the American people "we want to invade Iraq because 10 years ago they wanted to kill Bush 41. Everybody in?" and let's see how many people say yes.

.....and never invaded..... Are you the guy coming up with this propaganda or just the guy accepting it?

TO WAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!

Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. They weren't hiding anything. Further more, would you lose YOUR life, YOUR arms, YOUR legs, YOUR face, YOUR jaw, YOUR ability to walk, because Saddam told a few U.N. weapon inspectors to get out of his country 7 years earlier? I seriously doubt it.

Blah, blah, blah...

Blah, blah, blah...

The weekly standard is run by a bunch of Israeli-firster scoundrels and they come up with moronic rationals for war like the ones you've listed here. I doubt Bill Kristol would be willing to trade his son or his limbs for the return of weapon inspectors to Iraq when they had no weapons of mass destruction, were crippled by war, crippled by sanctions, and on the other side of the planet. The weekly standard is chicken-hawk central.

 

In the interest of not leading the thread off topic i've made my point on Iraq and there's nothing else to say on the matter.