Just so there is no confusion I believe abortion is MURDER. I have two beautiful children. I saw both on the first ultrasound at 2 months into the pregnancy and I saw my little girl put her hand up at that time.

Also notice I used the terms male and female.
It takes a woman to have and raise children even when it is “inconvenient”. And it takes a man to father those children and to provide and protect them. A male who doesn’t provide and protect isn’t worth the bullet to shoot him.

Already won. Now we are just explaining why the win was not just practical, but also righteous.

OK, now you can have your post-natal abortion.

Apparently, you are unable to debate within the parameters I have set, and are trying to deflect the discussion to some irrelevant parsing of history and some constitution which no one ever followed, including the people who wrote it, at the same time willfully ignoring the larger issues of self-determination.

You say:

I’d say you’re right.

Thanks for the concession to all levels of my superior logic and argument style. This tangent should hereby be aborted and flushed.

We adults

Who are you kidding? You are well into your second childhood.

If you were to say this has nothing to do with some idiot’s editorial on abortion, I’d say you’re right. If “West” Virginia used the arguments you’re using, maybe I’d care to respond to those. The point is that I made a historical assertion about “West” Virginia’s unconstitutional path in supporting tyranny and war. You couldn’t respond within the context of why the traitors did what they did, so you’ve been trying to draw this out into a theoretical debate where you’re more comfortable. The facts at hand suggest you know little to nothing of the history of these traitors, and your attempts to argue other points more than suggests a concession on this point.

IRP is taking the appropriate path on free speech! The Kiddie Corp is free to expose their childish ness! They are literally ‘known’ for it! Too much time for too little brains?

Thanks for agreeing that I’m right, then. Montani semper liberi!

Those that can’t rebut within the context of an argument often resort to other statements, so I understand if you’re conceding. If you can’t win, argue other points, right?

The Declaration was not a matter of guiding law, the constitution was.

I answer to a higher authority

I have been trying to keep this discussion within its realm of argument

And here I thought you went off on a tangent that has little or nothing to do with abortion

Also, Lincoln was a tyrant and the civil war was about indu8strialization and economics, not slavery.

The war had more than one cause. Slavery was one of the issues.

Anarchy is the only morally consistent position

*tosses bomb*

http://anarchywithoutbombs.com/

yet you think the Declaration, which is not a matter of law, is more pertinent?

Yes

I’m not getting into an ideological discussion about self-governance, because that will undoubtedly lead to an anarchy debate.

LOL, don’t go complaining that we are hijacking your Old Virginia plantation aristocracy version of 19th century events to talk about the actual implications of the concept of self determination.

After all, we are in an abortion thread, are we not?

So, we’ll friggin’ talk about anarchy, 9/11 truth, the progressive alliance, bitter veterans homes, LNC drama, and any other crap that comes up.

That’s just what we do.

Not sure how this careened into Civil War revisionism,

RTF called West Virginia “treasonous” for seceding from Old Virginia.

As I told you on our discussion at Next Free Voice

http://pauliecannoli.wordpress.com/2009/02/14/lincolns-legacy/

Given a choice between Lincoln and Davis, I’ll go with Lysander Spooner.

Perhaps RTF would wish to add thoughts to what has been said in the comments there thus far?

*tosses bomb*

The constitution is the basis of the country the traitors decided to side with, and yet you think the Declaration, which is not a matter of law, is more pertinent? I think not. It’s a double standard to say a group of traitors has certain rights outside the constitution while they willingly joined the govt. which used the same very constitution.