Strollerderby

This woman drives me nuts! I used to have a HUGE crush on her when she was on Survivor but then someone gave her a forum to spew her crap and now I can't even stand the sight of her. Seriously, what color is HER sky?

I Cannot stand her...she is such an idiot..why is she still allowed to be on the View!!???

Sadly, I've known people like her in real life; any topic can be turned into an abortion rant.  Poor people starving on the streets?  At least they weren't ABORTED!  War killing hundreds of thousands of innocents?  At least they aren't babies being RIPPED FROM THE WOMB?  Your favorite TV show canceled?  There's an abortion taking place RIGHT NOW!

Yeah.  We call them "people to be avoided at all costs."

I can't believe I actually have to explain this one.  Many people do not view abortion as a "choice". They view it as killing an innocent child.  Elizabeth Hasselback is one of them.  With that in mind, it is easy to see where she can get upset with the people who denounce killing wolves, but think it is perfectly acceptable to kill unborn children.  

She sets my teeth on edge.

I htought the reduction of the numbers of wolves was meant to protect the Moose as they migrate.  The moose numbers were dwindling fast so they had to reduce the number of wolves who were killing them for food since food for the wolves was scarce.  Rather than send hunters on foot, ricking their lives in the frozen wilderness and possibly risking the lives of those sent to rescue or recover their remains, the state decided to allow aerial hunting.  This decision was made by several people in Alaskan government, not just Gov. Palin.  See this is how stupid rumors become urban lore.  

Hasselback is entitled to her opinions but I wish she had more than one.  

I see her point. We are ready to crucify people who harm animals and defend those who abort babies. As always, abortion is such a hot topic so relating things to it will always be shaky ground.

As for The View, I believe people become dumber watching it. Just a bunch of old biddy liberals and one blonde conservative. Not really a fair, balanced or educated argument going on with that crowd.

alice, thanks for the explanation. That puts a whole different twist on it.  Reminds me of people who would want to ban deer hunting, thus letting thousands of deer starve to death because their natural predators are no longer in area. Usually something more going on than just mean-spirited killing of animals.

I totally agree with Twyla. When I was morning sick and stuck on the couch, I'd watch the show just to see what amazing fight would happen (as oppposed to getting any valid, informed perspective as to what was going on). While the women themselves may possess some measure of intelligence, together they are all ridiculous and catty.

You don't "actually have to explain this one", another_mom.  Trust  me, we get it.  It has been explained about 100,000,000 times.  The problem you're running into is that not everyone agrees, and bringing it up 100,000,000 more times isn't likely to change anyone's opinion.  

"I can't believe I actually have to explain this one.  Many people do not view abortion as a "choice". They view it as killing an innocent child.  Elizabeth Hasselback is one of them.  With that in mind, it is easy to see where she can get upset with the people who denounce killing wolves, but think it is perfectly acceptable to kill unborn children."

You didn't have to explain this one, we're not stupid. The argument in general is the problem. Pro-lifers don't seem to respect the life that is here, right now. Like the wolves, who clearly need protecting, they already exist in this world; and the war, which clearly needs ending, people are dying every day in the war, civilians, babies...

If you want to call yourself pro-life, then you need to fight for all life, respect all life: fight against the death penalty, support victims of war and genocide, animals being hunted in clear unsportsmanlike like ways; not just abortion because abortion is a debate which may never be solved, and there are real crisis here and now with living and breathing human beings and animals. If you don't want to crusade for real life then give up the pro-life activism, because it's bullshit.

EH is a twit. I don't know why I even watch. Sometimes I have to turn the volume off, but other times I listen just to torture myself. I must secretly be a masochist.

I understand and support the humane culling of certain percentages of animals, but what is going on in Alaska is simply not that.

First of all, there is a deer season in which hunters can kill a certain number of deer. This is not the case in Alaska. Any number of wolves can be hunted and a bounty is even in place (or being proposed, I'm not 100% up on this yet, so be free to make me eat my words) of something like 100 to 200 dollars.

People who hunt deer are usually hunting for food, not for profit. People who are paid to kill wolves out of helicopters or airplanes sound more like hired assassins than weekend warrior hunters.

Cull the animals, sure, but don't shoot them like fish in a barrel and get the job done the first shot. Also, don't compare honest licensed hunters who are responsible and pretty humane to whatever mess is going on in our most 'socialist' of states.

Alice, do some homework. The wolves aren't being killed to "protect migrating moose". They are being killed because the Alaskan government has concluded that the wolves are taking too much game and making it harder for hunters. The Governor has defended her position by saying the game numbers need to be preserved so that native peoples that depend on game as their their primary source of protein aren't at a disadvantage. HOWEVER, the hunters are primarily out of state trophy hunters and sport hunters.

Very similar to the issue the settlers had in the late 1800's where coyotes and wolves were killed off in droves in order to protect cattle. The result was wolves being declared extinct in huge parts of the country. For about a decade, wolves have been being introduced back into Yellowstone and igniting a huge debate. Ranchers versus environmentalists.

Alice, no issue is black and white. Think and more importantly READ, before you dismiss something for "urban lore". Blogs and uninformed comments are what spread them.

Let's use a more appropriate term for someone like EH--she is anti-choice...NOT pro-life.  Pro-life people do not kill doctors and write death threats to those that disagree with them.

Kyle: Did EH kill a doctor or write a death threat? She just doesn't seem to be that way.

Sam: Whoa, buddy, one subject at a time. The worst argument is the one that compares abortion to the death penalty. The men and women who are justly sitting on death row forfeited their right to live. When you take someone's life, you willing give up yours (obviously except in war so please don't even try that one). Pro-life says that no child should be given the sentece of death for a mistake the mother makes. This is very different than the death penalty. That person is given a sentence of death for a choice they made.

On the animal point, you are debating a pro-life point. Typically pro-lifers are from a religious background. That same background teaches dominion over animals. It is a bit sad that we have decided to humanize creatures. They are not humans. They are not valued as a human is. Don't get me wrong, I am very good to my dogs, but they are still dogs. The stray cats that I have been feeding on my porch are wonderful. I do, however, let them sleep outside in the cold. Is that bad? I don't allow my kids to sleep outside in the cold. That is because the cats are creatures and my kids are humans. Big difference.

1) Yes, EH is reaching. I miss Lisa Ling!

2) This question is above my paygrade so I'm not touching it.

3) Hasselbeck is a pin-head.

I would take EH's reaching over Lisa Ling's vicim personality any day.

Yet, I still don't watch it.

Wolves love abortion. Fewer humans = Improved enrivonmental stability for wolves.

A wolf puppy is more sentient than a human embryo. I say we give wolves Personhood status, and then the vote. Could make a big difference in Alaska's state policymaking.

I'd rather hang out with a wolf than a pro-lifer. At the very least, an argument with the wolf would end rather quickly.

I wonder what percentage of wolves volunteer and donate to Planned Parenthood, on average? I know they can't exactly cough up the cash, but I bet they make fabulous security guards and Clinic Escorts.

Maybe that's a solution to the issue of wolf overpopulation in AK... we can relocate wolves to refuges throughout the nation, where they can then be trained to provide vital security support to abortion providers and clinics targeted by anti-abortion zealots.

Twyla, I think you're great. I don't think that we'd agree on everything, but the above answers to Kyle and Sam were dead-on. Also, aren't you the woman with four kids, who is very good at "whatever it is that causes kids"? =) It's nice to be not the only more conservative thinker around here.

Cole Gamble wrote:

"2) When does conscious, valuable human life begin?"

Is human life only valuable when it is conscious?

I read them as a package deal.

The "valuable" designation is important in light of Twyla's above post re: death row. Those who are anti-abortion but pro-death penalty obviously have no problem with designating people as either valuable (and therefore worthy of life) or value-less (and therefore worthy of death). I have a lot more trouble with that than I do with abortion, given that I don't view fertilized eggs, embryos, and pre-viable fetuses as equal to humans who can live independent of a single woman's body.

Lula: It's not that simple, as you probably know. People who advocate for the death penalty argue that the act committed by the convict was so horrible as to warrant the penalty. I don't know that people would view the convict as "without value", but they would argue that that person has forfeited their "right to life" under the laws of our justice system. An aborted baby, however, has committed no such wrong; his life is ended by the mother's preference (sometimes, in cases of imminent death or extreme risk to health, this may be warranted). There IS a difference.

And for what it's worth, I'm completely against the death penalty AND adamantly pro-life (except in cases of risk to mother's life).

The difference *I* see is that one action is linked to vengeance (execution), and the other action carries no ill will whatsoever (not wanting to have a baby). People are put to execution out of a desire to punish them. I don't know anyone who's had an abortion because they wanted to punish their conception. In fact, abortion is often motivated by the desire *not* to punish, i.e. not to bring a new life into crappy circumstances.

So yeah, I agree that it's not that simple, and that there is a difference.

Is a grape a raisin?

Maybe not, but it's a nice philosophical conundrum anyway. Potentialization vs. actualization.

The answer to this issue is so clear, I'm surprised noone else has mentioned it. We OBVIOUSLY need to make the terrible, sinful abortion-women carry and deliver wolf pups to repent for their misdeeds, which we can then give to the families of soldiers, death row convicts, and Holocaust victims to ease their suffering. Jeesh- too easy. Hey, think the OctoDoc is available for some canine IVF?

lol You guys crack me up.  seriously, having spent 27 months in Iraq and being a father of a 7-month old, I can attest that there is indeed a difference between those that are shooting at you and those that are in the womb.  Having just returned from my second tour, you should know that the most dangerous place on earth is not Iraq, Afghanistan, or any other faraway land.  The most dangerous place is in a woman's womb, where the death rate is far higher (more abortions in the US alone since 1 Jan 2009 - just over 60 days ago - than military servicemember deaths since 11 Sep 2001 - a full 7.5 years ago!) and you don't have a fighting chance.  

Please, don't cry for me or any other servicemember: 1) nobody forced any of us to join, 2) we are well-equipped to handle our security, if not the security of an entire nation, and 3) the news you get back here is not entirely reflective of the actual situation on the ground.  I remember having good feelings when I was guarding a poll during Iraq's free elections.  I remember women being allowed to not only vote, but to actually run for and eventually hold office.  I always thought the schools we built were probably good for the children of that powerful nation.  I guess I should have spent more time thinking of myself and what I'd rather be doing (pretty much anything else) than what we actually effecting in that nation.

The logic of "well, XYZ is another wrong and she's not out crusading against XYZ, so she's a hypocrite" is thoroughly invalid.  It's juvenile to justify failure to make a stand on a similar yet wholly unrelated issue as a reason to denigrate her on an issue such as abortion.  

Tell you what: I promise to never go hunting or perform any other act against another living creature, save for self defense of me, my team and any other American, if you will give up abortion on demand, save for defense of the mother's life.  I'll even quit the service and stop fighting for life of me, my team, and any other American (to include the unborn) and shut up about the 1.5-3% of abortion performed for the interest of the mother's life.

Do we have an accord?