Where Rossi Stands on Abortion Rights

“Anything Patty does, I will do counter. I will do anything counter to her.”
*yawn*

“About 17 percent of sexually experienced teen girls say they had used the rhythm method — timing their sex to avoid fertile days to prevent getting pregnant. That's up from 11 percent in 2002.”

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALe…

Rossi is hip.

The kids think when it's time, it's time.

This matters.

I'm not about to let Dino Rossi dictate what I can or cannot do with my own body.

I'm more determined than ever to make sure he loses. Again.

This almost amounts to taking a position – a first for Rossi. And I can see why he doesn't want to.

Today, in Publicola's new topic section, called “Duh!”

Senator Murray supports infantcide and Dino Rossi does not. What a suprise.

Yay, for abstinance only education!

Up yours.

What's with all these websites that claim that Rossi said this, and Rossi said that. I will believe it when it comes from his mouth in the proper context.

This article is an interview–Rossi did say these things, in response to the questions of a journalist. That IS proper context.

And, note, Rossi also opposes family planning, which includes contraception, and education.

Rossi doesn't care what you do to your body, he's only concerned about protecting the baby's body.

Murray, on the other hand, fully supports partial birth abortion.

actually Rossi opposes Government intrusion using taxpayer dollars to promote the idea that really you shouldn't but hey here's your free condom!
I'm paraphrasing, but since you didn't provide a link I feel entitled.

Hmm. The ONE thing that has been proven to reduce unwed pregnancy and abortions is freely available sex education and birth control. Parts of Europe have 1/10th our abortion rate, and it's tied closely to two initiatives. Think about it. We could prevent 90% of all abortions without increasing the frequency of premarital sex. So, why does Rossi proudly oppose reducing abortion?

I'd have opposed #6. None of the others.

But I have what my best conservative friend says is the worst position on the whole thing ever:

Life begins at conception.
As soon as genes mix and that cell starts to divide, it's a human life, made from Mom & Dad but neither Mom nor Dad at that point. A third life.
But the law says that it's legal for that life to be ended, like we allow other lives to be ended: War, self-defense, capitol punishment, ants, etc.
I support the law. I also support people trying to change the law.

But right now it is legal, period.
I'm not religious, and have no opinion on souls or lack thereof.

Rossi is wrong.

Josh “pressing” Dino Rossi to answer his questions and be specific. Will November ever come?
Hey, Josh, get a new gig
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Rossi says Acorn runs the establishment of State of WA…….

http://dailycaller.com/2010/06/18/washington-st…

Sure worked well for Bristol Palin.

How many articles need to be written about this? Rossi is a Catholic conservative. Enough said.

If Rossi is wants to tell us whether or not we have to carry a pregnancy, he is telling us what we can do with our bodies – the ultimate “Big Government.” The government should NOT have a say in our most personal, private decisions. If the government is big enough to force us to carry a pregnancy, it is big enough to require us to end a pregnancy. Welcome to China. Randy, I do, however, agree with you on one point: Rossi doesn't care about a woman's body.

No, Senator Murray believes that women should have sovereignty over their own bodies, not the government! If the government is big enough to force us to carry a pregnancy, it is big enough to require us to end a pregnancy. Scary.

Have you examined the curriculum of your local school? As a public school teacher, I am irritated with all of the assumptions being made about what is being taught in school. Students need the facts, not a white wash. Abstinence-only education doesn't work. Just ask Bristol Palin.

Are these comments supposed to be blue? They hurt your eyes.

Up my what?

No it is not sovereignty it is murder. It is the exact same thing as taking newborn and cutting the baby's throat.

No one is going to teach my kids abuot sex but my wife and myself. I do not want the goverment to teach sex ed to my kids nor do I want them to teach abstinence-only. It is none of there business. If the school I happen to send my kids to did start teaching them they would be pulled out the before the next school day.

Obvious where Dinosaur Rossi stoud on this issue. How about we frame this at pro-choice versus anti-choice.

I say it is pro-infantcide vs. anti-infintcide.

Would you support funding medical cost for economically poor mothers with all the required welfare subsidies in order the battle that high infant mortality rate in the USA or would you rather them live with the consequences of their actions? What do you say? Are you really pro-life or is it just a slogan…

People like you are why the US has one the highest abortion rates of the developed world.

Women should have the right to make their own choice whether or not they have a child. Abortion should not however be treated as a form of birth control.

And Rob McKenna doesn't think that government should be able to force us to take of our bodies by forcing us to buy healthcare. See how most of us are hypocrites when it comes to these issues.

Exactly, why can't a woman continue to have sovereignty over her new born that is part of her body that became detached? We'll just call it post-natal abortion.

Abortion is not a form of birth control.

So your stance is that if as a society we make it legal or have no stance on it then there is nothing wrong with it and if we say that it is wrong it is wrong, period.?

It is an okay stance to have although I disagree, but just want clarification.

I used to think this way, back in the early '70s. What convinced otherwise me are a couple of facts:
We don't treat a miscarriage the same as a death, legally or culturally.
At least 10% of fertilized eggs are spontaneously aborted in the first month.
Abortion by various methods has been practiced since antiquity in most cultures.

Clearly there is at least some disagreement on the 'life begins at conception' issue. It's a nice, easy inflection point, a very visible line to draw in the sand. However that alone is not enough; it's a kneejerk decision that argues against the very uncomfortable truth that consciousness (and, by extension humanity) is not binary, yes/no state. The current legal definition of life does NOT begin at conception, but uses a sliding scale that roughly corresponds to viability outside the womb.

Changing this will be difficult – it's more than just a 'law', it's based in the entire body of philosophy, ethics and law throughout our shared history. The simplest way, shifting the Supreme court to the right has been in effect for the past 30 years. Check out retiring justice Stevens. Appointed by Richard Nixon in the 70's, he was a conservative at appointment. At his retirement, without changing views he is one of the most liberal justices on the Supreme Court. Not that I approve of the shift, just noting that it has occurred.

Hmm. Yes, you can say it. Doesn't make it true. That's not the definition of abortion used in the law OR by the majority of the population – and some 80% of women believe it to be a choice to be made by the pregnant woman. You ARE aware that legalizing abortions didn't increase the abortion rate, aren't you?
If you REALLY want to reduce abortions work for science-based sex education and readily available birth control. We could prevent up to 90% of abortions in the US, whereas moralizing about the problem has changed nothing.

Thanks, N8, for the chance to explain, although I'm not much of a writer.
And I'll try to fit in something for Randy.

The stance that life begins at conception, apart from any legal stance, is just plain biology to me. And to think of this life as “part of the mother” as some say is really not understanding that basic biology.
“consciousness (and, by extension humanity)” is something I've also never heard in any biology class. But it gets close to something I've heard from my always-trying conservative Christian friend.

I hope I can explain my stance a little bit by saying that when I moved into my house I was dead-set against using any type of chemical that would harm anything. No weed&feed, or Roundup, or even soap. I was going to go all loving to all fellow creatures.
But a group of yellow jackets was busy building a very large nest in a retaining wall next to one of our raised beds. No problem at all, for awhile. Then one day my fourteen year old girlfriend (I mean she's fifty. We've been together for fourteen years) did something to piss them off. They attacked ruthlessly and she had to shed clothes while running around the yard, and they stung her I'm not sure how many times; but a bunch.
So being pro-choice I bought a can of y.j. killing spray and over three days emptied the entire can into the nest until the last of the buzzing was gone.
It was legal.

And as an aside, if I chose to do something that WAS illegal that is also my choice. I just might have to deal with the legal system at that point.
But that wouldn't stop me if my conscience dictated it.

But trying to draw lines between what is tissue and what is life is some serious bullshit, in my very humble opinion. Kill it, but know that it is killing, not clipping a fingernail.

“We don't treat a miscarriage the same as a death, legally or culturally.”

And in my opinion we shouldn't treat the girl who spits out a kid and tosses it in the dumpster as a criminal.

That is choice, my friend.

By your absurd religious standard, your god kills a lot more babies through miscarriage than abortion ever will.

And up yours, again (Google the phrase if you need to figure out which orifice I'm talking about)

Move to Texas, then.

This is a losing issue for Rossi, he knows it, and that's why he's been evasive about it in every (losing) campaign he has run.

Sorry, my friend. I didn't hear it, so it carries not weight.

It's quoted in the article to which we're all supposedly responding.

To lighten this up a bit:

A gamete, a zygote and a morula walk into a bar…

Infantside requires an infant. You abort a fetus, not an infant

Cute. Nothing to say about the fact that for most people miscarriages aren't treated as a death, so you just throw a Red Herring out there?

One thing that bothers me about the “tissue” argument is that it only seems to apply to unwanted fetuses. If I punched a woman in the stomach to get her iPod and she lost a very much wanted baby I'll bet it wasn't just tissue then.

I have two kids, but my current partner (who chose the option to end the life of one fetus years ago) and I found ourselves with a very much wanted pregnancy about nine years ago. We got all the books, because this was her first. We had prenatal vitamins. We quit drinking and smoking. And we cried and worried every time the spotting started.
But the ultrasounds always said things were fine.
Then, when the BIG spot came we went to the ER to have our child looked at by a pathologist. He or she is probably still treading formalin on some shelf today (the fetus, not the pathologist…)

We cried a bunch, and spread the news to family members that the game was over.

The next one, a year later, got the goldfish treatment.
And only one family member was ever told.

I'm crying as I re-read this.
We bought our house to raise that kid. Had names picked out.

While I am sorry for your lose, and cannot say what you yourself feel, for most people a miscarriage is mourned more for what could have been, then for what was.

Did you have a funeral service and purchase a grave spot for the fetus?

You know I didn't purchase a grave spot.

And the lines governments draw are for expidiency. They're arbitrary.
Like a seventeen year old can't buy cigarettes; but one day later, they can! F-cking magic, right?

Government is linear. They couldn't function without lines.

Biology, human beings, and life in general doesn't play.

Depends. In Alabama we had to go to Florida to buy smokes at 18 (19 is the age of majority in Alabama).

But yes, lines have to be drawn, that is the nature of governance. You can't govern a nation of 360 million people on a case by case basis.

However I hope see the point Randy was making that we as a society see miscarriages as something different than a death. Even though in some states you can be charged for injury that causes a miscarriage to my knowledge it is applied much less often and the penalties are much less than those handed out for similar acts committed on an infant.

I'm dragging your ass down here, Anc. It's getting crowded up there.

I think I've said I'm pro-choice.
But let's look at that choice:

My ex-wife and I were strangers. She wanted NOT to go to school or to go to work, so she got pregnant on purpose, she admits. And I married her, after some internal struggle. She knew I would.
I'd have advised an abortion, for my own reasons. Couldn't stand her.

If my daughter got pregnant and didn't want it, I'd have advised abortion as the top option. I would have driven her to the clinic. And if she hadn't saved enough babysitting money, I'd have paid for it.
But she wanted it, and I now have a two year old grandson.

The sex of the baby is decided at conception, so at least half of aborted fetuses are female. Maybe that means that besides lowering the crime rate (as Freakonomics suggests) were lowering the percent of women likely to abort. And hopefully lowering the percent that would get pregant on purpose to boot. Anything helps.

Will you let the schools teach spelling and grammar?

I finished the joke today while waiting at the stop light to turn from Columbian Way onto Rainier.

A gamete, a zygote and a morula walk into a bar.

Bartender says “Hey gamete, can't you read? No tissue allowed!”

Gamete says “Tissue. Story of my life…”

It's a Kleenex joke.

You see, the gamete is…I mean, the juxtaposition of the…oh, forget it.

A fetus is an infant, both are very young humans, it is just semantics.

LMFAO. I'm sorry, but clearly you are very, very uneducated about the development of fetuses (not babies, FETUSES).
It's not a baby. There is nothing to protect.
And partial birth abortions aren't as easy to get as first trimester abortions. PBA's are only done if the MOTHER'S LIFE is in critical danger, or if the baby is PROVEN to have such terrible birth defects that it would die shortly after birth (or during birth).
Nobody enjoys abortion. It is not like going to the ice cream store. We are not “pro abortion”.
We are pro CHOICE.
Whatever happened to us being a free country?
If a woman can't do with her body what she pleases, then there is no hope for the world.
After all, God IS the number one causes of miscarriages. Aren't those the same as abortions?
MY God is pro choice, thank you very much.

…and if people would pull their heads out of their rectums and donate more money to comprehensive sex ed, perhaps women would understand that the pull-out method DOESN'T work, and abortion rates would go down.
I agree that it should not be treated as a form of birth control. It is not. Like any surgical procedure on the planet, the more times you have it done, the riskier it gets as that part of the body weakens.

It is not the same. You people scare me. You are the ones who will some day determine that being killed with a gun doesn't “count” as murder, and other B.S. ideas similar to such.
The fetus-IT IS NOT A BABY-is not “alive” in the sense you are thinking. Everything is alive. The meat you eat was once alive. But sure, that's fine. The vegetables and fruits you eat were once alive–but sure, that's fine, too.
Life only matters when people like you want to say it does. And even if another country of HUMANS like yourself doesn't agree with you, you think it's okay to just go shoot them up in a war.
So basically, if you are pre born, you're fine, if you're post birth, you have no hope.
Notice: the fetus does not feel pain until the second trimester. The fetus does not think until roughly the same time. Nor do all of its organs function properly.
You need to take a women's health class, and hell, why not thrown in a fetal development course. Any pre school level will do, what with how little you know already.

LMAO. Agreed, thank you.
God is the number one causes of “abortions”–MISCARRIAGES! Those existed long before surgical abortions.
But wait, it's this fairy-tale creation that is excused from everything. Even damning young children to hell.
My bad. God can kill babies, even if he doesn't live down here. But I can't remove a fetus that can't think, feel pain, breathe, or SURVIVE outside of my womb, from MY body.
Gotcha.
I'll just go kill myself now, I suppose, before I have to read any more “God” stuff. -.-

It is not. Otherwise, by the same concept, I can call a salad a bowl of murdered vegetables and arrest you for it.
Vegetables and fruits are alive, by your silly little half-cocked idea.
A fetus is not an infant.
Please try again.

LOL!!! Anc, don't fret, the stupid ones all get weeded out eventually.
Notice, this guy probably dropped out of school at the age of 10. He used the incorrect form of 'their”, instead spelling it “there” which indicates some kind of place, rather than “their” which indicates ownership, and for some stupid reason say “out the before”, which just makes no sense.
Epic fail mathe. Try again…

rofl. I'm sure whatever education our friend Bristol got will lead to a decline in teen pregnancies. not…XD

“If I punched a woman in the stomach to get her iPod and she lost a very much wanted baby I'll bet it wasn't just tissue then.”
First of all, you'd be a dick if you did that.
Second of all, it's different. The same way intending to kill a person is murder, and doing so “accidentally” is manslaughter.
Murder is murder, intentional or not. Stupidity is stupidity, and tissue is tissue.
I strongly disagree with the people who sue for the “death” of a fetus. That is an anti-choice argument, I don't care what the circumstances.
This is the same reason doctors have to now practice defensive medicine: because every time someone gets hurt, they want to blame someone for ALL of it, even if NONE of it was that person's fault. Ugh.

Wow, you are uneducated to what an unborn baby is all about. Do you know it’s legal to “kill” an unborn baby for any reason up to the end of a full term pregnancy? Many of those babies can live outside the womb, but it is killed inside the womb. That’s ok for you?

It’s not your body that dies, it’s the baby that dies.

Tell me how trying to protect unborn children equals not caring about a woman’s body? I care a lot about every woman’s “body”, mind and soul. I’m telling you she is much worse off after having an abortion (especially in the mind and soul) than having a baby – even is she gives it up for adoption. People who are pro-life cares for both baby and mother!

The main concern is not what women do with their own body. The REAL concern is that women are ending the lives of babies they are carrying. The “choice” crowd is following a wicked and selfish delusion.

To correct your theological point… death entered the world when SIN entered the world.
To correct your moral argument… it doesn’t matter at what point of the life cycle when a life is ended. If you were killed at 1 day after conception you’re still dead. God knows.
With your line of reasoning and desire for a free country you better hope your neighbor isn’t “free” to get rid of you if he/she doesn’t want you around.
How sick to call murdering a baby…. a “choice”.

so you say the baby has a body and is a real person? And you still want to kill it? The mother doesn’t get killed! All she has to do is let the baby live. The baby dies…..can’t you get that through you thick skull!!!???

so you say the baby has a body and is a real person? And you still want to kill it? The mother doesn’t get killed! All she has to do is let the baby live. The baby dies…..can’t you get that through you thick skull!!!???

You’re an idiot. The baby is not developed so if you want to think of it that way, a guy is murdering babies anytime he jacks off. Why let a child be born to parents that don’t want them? That’s cruelty. Rossi is restricting our abilities to control our future and women will result to much more dangerous forms of abortion if they are that determined to get rid of a kid. Not to mention, this will happen much more with Rossi’s cut on funding for contraceptives. Also, he is contributing to our overpopulation already. I agree with Jay and Shelliebear.

a baby is formed and able to comprehend. a fetus is not. its an overgrown sperm still. youre killing babies when you jack off or have sex where you dont knock up the girl (if you can even get a girl that is)

Rossi’s an idiot that is going to make us more overpopulated than we already are. He wants to keep women as only being good for baby machines.

Being Realistic is not the same thing as being right.
A guy jacking off (ahem) is spilling cells. Half-cells. Not life.

A fetus is a human life.
Kill it if that is the best thing. Got no problem with that.

But don’t lie just to get a vote.