http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills info@washingtonwatch.com http://www.pjdoland.com/chai/?v=0.1 http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#44870 For those who do not believe it is life but mearly a bunch of cells. Please look at the following websites: http://www.sciencehelpdesk.com/img/bg3_4/EmbryonicDevelopmentComplete1.gif http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjNo_0cW-ek The average abortion happens at 10 weeks or less. This is all scientific data.... 44870@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Fri, 10 Oct 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#43893 if this law is about the sanctity of life, then when doesn't it also abolish the Death Penalty?... 43893@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 24 Sep 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#41610 If Roe v. Wade was decided to respect the private decision between a woman and her doctor, then why are the taxpayers funding these "private" decisions through entitlement spending????... 41610@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Thu, 04 Sep 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#41345 hindiko maintindihan kung bakit ganon.ewan ko bahala na.... 41345@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Thu, 28 Aug 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#37143 "Gotta say you've all made me see the light. I've joined a church that says all life is sacred but that the soul resides in the male gamete. As a matter of fact, masturbation is not only a sin but is, in fact, genocide. At least as ar as males are concerned anyway. Be thankful that your father didn't consider you 'just excess sperm'! I pray that ya'll may someday accept the truth of this revelation." Steve, your logic is horribly flawed. That is equivalent to calling flour a cake. Just as not all the ingredients are present in flour, to constitute a cake; not all of the ingredients are present in sperm to constitute a human life.... 37143@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Fri, 13 Jun 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#35650 A zygote is a human being. He/She as a zygote contains all information about that person! If you think a zygote is not a human being--you are an extremist.... 35650@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sun, 25 May 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#33452 The cases of rape and incest are legitimate grievances for pro-choice advocates, but why wouldn't it be for babies already born? If a fetus is nothing more than a part of her body to do as she pleases...then why does it not continue to be a part of her body after it's born? This might seem like crazy logic, but in Ancient Rome the practice of Pater Familias gave the legal power of life and death to a father over his children. Granted it was the father, not the mother, but if it were the mother would it be any different. It was evil "Christianity" that abolished this. Google "Pater Familias," if your don't believe me. If a mother decided to have a child and then runs into economic problems and she cannot properly support that child, wouldn't the humane thing to do be to euthanize the child? There are plenty of medical options whereby a person can be painlessly and quietly "put to sleep"?... 33452@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 30 Apr 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#32504 Tetragenic : Any substance or agent that is capable of interfering with normal embryonic development and can produce non-heritable birth defects. Tetragenic substances are most often radiation or chemicals. Here's a new question: Consider the loose and ever diminishing environmental laws and regulations. Does this mean any government agency that is responsible for the lack of laws, the EPA failing to prevent the numerous chemical and toxic waste by products introduced into the environment and HHS who oversee numerous drug manufacturing laws are subject to prosecution for murder or manslaughter in the event a woman is exposed while pregnant and has a miscarriage? I would think, at the very least, they would be held to the same or higher standards for protecting 'life'-how ever one defines it. I might term this environmental abortion. Those of you who are 'pro-life'...really, or just when it's convenient?... 32504@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Thu, 17 Apr 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#32499 RE comment: "Of course, the woman always has the right to not get pregnant. Nobody's taking that from her. What gives any woman the right to decide she can take a life because she was careless or selfish?" This is a harsh statement in light of incest and rape. Is she to blame for a man's act of hate and violence?... 32499@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Thu, 17 Apr 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#32447 To the non American- Who is to say nine months of pregnancy is so bad? If you are a victim of rape, carrying a child may possibly be a blessing to your future. My mom had me at an extremely young age, considered abortion, and backed out the same day of the opointment. Now, my mom has turned her life around, has a wonderful family and two kids. She claims that i was the reason her life had such a dramatic turn. Yes the nine months was hell, but taking away of life so you dont have to deal with pregnancy? come on, wake up people..there are many obvious alernatives that have to be considered, adoption is a wonderful thing. There are many families who would love to have a child. There are no excuses, whatsoever to consider an abortion.... 32447@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 16 Apr 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#32002 Complicated issue. But the fact remains that the purpose of government is to secure the rights of the people. Therefore, it IS the place of government (representing the will of the people) to determine at what point protection is extended to an "individual." So, we must define, as a people, when individuality begins. There is only one logical conclusion: human life begins at conception, and the government has a mandate to protect that life.... 32002@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sun, 06 Apr 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#31429 I am a maternity nurse in training, and I have seen what an 8 week old fetus looks like and how much it has already developed. What gives us "the right" to choose whether or not a person gets to live or not? Life is a gift, something that shouldn't be taken away.... 31429@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Fri, 14 Mar 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#30705 Before the 14th Amendment, some people were not regarded as "legal persons" and could be treated as though they were mere lumps of flesh. This act would correct a similar injustice with respect to unborn people. Does this mean that a woman could not abort even if her life were in danger? Think about it this way: surgeries are performed to separate conjoined twins, even if it saves the life of one at the expense of the other. This is decided with appropriate deliberation to ensure that the correct choice will be made. This is not the end of choice: it just ensures that the choice is made responsibly.... 30705@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Tue, 19 Feb 2008 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#30708 philosophically speaking, an unborn child, regardless of the age, will have a life like ours, and therefore has his/her own autonomy. Ending that life is to infringe on an individual's autonomy. The human being, in later stages of development, would surely object to his or her life being taken.... 30708@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Tue, 19 Feb 2008 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#30693 I agree with both sides of the table, but there is one thing that stays in my mind. Personally, I would never ever do that to my own child, but I would rather have the right to say no then not have the right at all. It doesn't matter if abortion is illegal or not, if a woman wants to abort her fetus, she is going to find a way no matter what. Maybe people should start teaching the mothers who are thinking about abortion about the different routes they can take and that they are not alone. And as for the "feeling guilty about the decision", that is on a person's own conscious if they decide to even go through with the abortion. Women should have the right to decide whether to end it or not and fully understand the magnitude of what they are about to do.... 30693@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Mon, 18 Feb 2008 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#30626 I would wonder if anyone that has commented here, that is "pro-choice"....has any problem feeling guilty about the decision? I would find it very difficult to believe that somebody would have no remorse or regret the morning after. Misery loves company...don't encourage someone to do something you know id completely wrong all the wat the core!... 30626@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sun, 17 Feb 2008 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#29548 Those who don't understand law do not understand this bill properly. The bill states that reason and science have lead us to believe with some likelihood that there MAY be a case to say that human life begins at the moment of conception. Thus we must protect unborn human liberties as much as we protect the liberties of a 2 year old or 14 year old for that matter. The way to do so is to define by law the moment of the beginning of life to be conception, to ensure that any POTENTIAL liberties of that human are not being violated. The courts may continue to use R.v.Wade as a precedent means to protect the rights of individual EXCEPTIONS to this law, such as those aforementioned by various pro-choicers in opposition to this bill. Learn how law works before you go ranting about your choice. This is America, not anarchy!... 29548@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Tue, 22 Jan 2008 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#29423 FYI A "zygote" doesn't remain a "zygote" for long. Most, if not all, babies that are aborted are past the "zygote" stage. If you really think that a fetus is just a "piece of flesh" you really need to do some more research. The number of abortions done in connection with rape/abuse is a very small fraction, somewhere around or under 1%. If you really think abortion is OK you NEED to look at the 4D ultrasound pictures at: http://prolifeamerica.com/4D-Ultrasound-pictures/ You should also look at some photographs of aborted babies/fetuses (or developed "zygotes" as you may call them) I couldn't stomach seeing only a few these and had the gag reflex and nearly vomited at the atrocity of it. Here is the link, you "pro-choice" people: www.100abortionpictures.com... 29423@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Mon, 21 Jan 2008 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#28667 This bill does not allow for abortion of a fetus with extreme and painful handicaps. Those that could be determed through ultrasound, DNA tests, etc. How much federal or state involvement would be given to raising these children? Nothing is more horrible for a mother who wants a child than having to abort her fetus but sometime it is truely in the best interest of the child. There are worse things in this world than death. Let the mother decide. God has given mothers the best instincts regarding their babies. This bill is clearly against God's will. It is cruel and unusual punishment for the most innocent in our society.... 28667@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Tue, 15 Jan 2008 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#28554 Does anyone else know that Norma McCorvey, also known as Jane Roe, who helped make abortion legal in the first place in now a strong pro-life advocate? Hmmmm....doesn't that tell you something?... 28554@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#28555 So when will a man be given the choice to abandon his duty a father? A woman has the option to terminate her pregnancy regardless of the fathers feelings, women don't get pregnant without the participation of a male counter part, so the decision of abortion should also be decided by both parties. A man who fathers a child has no choice weather or not the child is terminated during pregnancy, and will be prosecuted as a dead beat dad if he tries to escape his duty as father. The current abortion laws are biased, un-fair, and sexist. If women can terminate the life of their developing child, men should be given the right to abandon his responsibility as father.... 28555@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#28055 Women: we would be taking an enormous step back if we were to allow our CHOICE be taken away. Any law that forbids us as women to make informed decisions about our bodies is dangerous. "A child is the only good thing that comes out of rape"? Are you insane?! A child that was born from violence, pain, and shame?? A child who was not intended and may possibly now be foreced to grow up with a mother who was not ready financially, emotionally or physically to care for him or her? Yes, there will always be individuals who abuse the system and elect to have numerous abortions for the wrong, irresponsible reasons. But they are in minority. Pro Choice is just that. The freedom to choose.... 28055@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Fri, 11 Jan 2008 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#27631 You Americans really live in a different world. How can such an advance nation be so backward sometimes? How can so many of you support a woman suffer for 9 months after she was raped? Why to cause so much pain for a child to be raised knowing his father was a rapist and he might have a genetically mental problem that would make him more likely to become one too. And how can you say a bunch of human cells are a person, it’s less a person than a piece of your skin, it take a fetus few months to resemble human and more to have basic conscious. Anyway the only countries you may find similar opinions are in the fanatic Muslim countries such as Iran and Afghanistan before you came there so you are not in a good company…... 27631@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 09 Jan 2008 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#26893 If the federal government decides when "life" begins is just as unconstitutional and repugnant to me as Roe vs. Wade. If this bill passes and life is legislated to begin at conception, you have: a)States cannot pass pro-abortion laws since you can not legislate FOR murder-the federal government already legislated a zygot IS human life. b)If a state does OK abortion, it has opened the door to other terminations" of life such as elderly, retarded, catatonics, chronic drug users. c)It justifies further federal legislation to prevent abortions in ALL states. Also, which of the 18 things in the Constitution the federal government is allowed to do relates to giving it the authority to determine when life begins? The only winners with this legislation are the tyrannical elite whose plan is to cut the population down anyway because we're pretty worthless and they are really the only things that counts. Operative word here is “THINGS”:-)... 26893@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1094.html#26259 Thanks, let's get some more SCIENCE OF LIFE input. With all due respect to those with religious reasons, law cannot be biased towards any one religion but science can and should be the basis. Intelligence and knowledge overrides choice, which is just another feeling and opinion. Science is legitimate.... 26259@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Fri, 04 Jan 2008 00:00:00 EST