hate to assult your profile Kartheios, but leviosa censored our little debate there. see, I actually have some respect for you because of the intelligent way you handled our argument, but leviosa didn't want anyone making any ACTUAL points.


The following is what I was about to say to your last reply:
I have an idea. There's no real word for this, but it's basically, when a woman gets "knocked up" and doesn't want to have the child, they CAN AND HAVE move the child to the womb of a volunteer. YES it's possible, and has been done! there's two reasons why it's not well known 1) Abortian got popular and it got sweapt under the rug. 2) it's origional purpose was, in the case that there's unusually high risk to the mothers life, it can be transferred with the idea that the child would be taken back after birth. this proved controversial when some surrogates wanted to keep the child and the procedure got shut down.

It's possible, that if the Pro-"Choice" people would allow a ban that leaves exception to cases of rape or severe danger to the mother, that this procedure could be looked at properly. Eventually, it can becoem the alternative for ALL cases of abortian, effectivly eliminating it as any serious issue. (if this happens, then I'll be for the universal healthcare in a heartbeat, asI'm only really against it because it's basically going to be used to make abortian free once the Democrats get control as soon as Obama takes office)

I know, that's a long shot, and there's occationaly the case where there's no adopting parent willing, but that's soething that can be tackled later, because this really is THE only option right now. to bipass the controvercy weather it's alive or not) entirely so that progress can be made!

For my quote with the legalised rape, the example IS abortian. Sure the dangerous hanger thing happened but it happened SO RARELY it wasn't a serious issue! As soon as it became illegal it happened ALL THE TIME!


As for the other reasones, who's to say that McCains' plan wouldn't have worked!? Obama always said "It's not going to 'trickle down'" etc. and never really explained why it wouldn't! I think his plan would've forced teh rich to be fair with their prices because they'll be competing for customers. all it takes is one company to lower their prices, an all the others have to or risk losing their entire customer base! Frankly, I don't know why he accused Obama or "class warfare" because I think this plan is basically bullying the rich! but alas, our souls belong to the Government now. oh well.

now the wars.. I reeeealy hope we don't leave Iraq. the thing is.. WE are resonsible for that country now. Saddam was a genocidal maniac who had to be stopped. as soon as we leave, the innocent Iraqis will be forced under the rule of a NEW genocidal maniac and who knows how many innocent lives will be lost in this revolution, and after. All we ever did was give the innocent Iraqis hope. and now we're abandoning them. just like in Nam, I expect civilians trying to get on the hellicoptors for fear of their lives! Afghanastan too. :

Thanks for the meeningfull conversation.