La Riva says "I believe in every woman’s right to choose, but to do so early."

"right to choose what, La Riva? Death? Death to the baby in the womb by abortion. So how are you different from Madam Pelosi? She would have innocent babes killed at any time for any reason. You would have babies killed but only while they are blobs of tissue, is that what you are saying? The difference is only timing.

There is no "right to choose" found anywhere in the US Constitution. The 'right to choose" is pure sophistry, a euphemism that has been used by the pro-abortion industry following the 1793 Roe v Wade US supreme court decision. Laws, last I knew. are made by Congress, not unelected Supreme court justices.

Instead the US and state constitutions provide for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. All human beings in the womb, (which by the way is where you and I were once) have an unalienable right to life. No government can rightfully take that from them. Abortion is disgusting.

"Right to choose"? What about the father's choice? What about the baby's right to live? Wouldn't the baby growing in the warm comfort of the womb if given the 'choice', choose life? Would you have? Yet, ever since 1973, a mother's choice of medical terrorism against the life of the babe has made the womb a very dangerous place to be especially in your case if it's in the 'early' stages of life.

There is no "right to choose" found anywhere in the US Constitution.

Is this Bakerstreet posting Anonymously?

(Psst!  I agree BTW).

@the anonymouse poster
done away with a rant?

the right to chose always exists, - Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with it. The founding fathers had no problems shooting deserters and trading slaves, they could not and did not forsee the future.

In an ideal world, I would cite the pro-life message, but you have to keep up with times. I will give you the same response as I give democrats on privacy issues - you have to be able to adjust to modern times, different society, different surroundings. the details is what matters - moving aside personal privacy is and should be allowed for public good but to a well defined degree, at some point the good will become the bad, I would not want to live under very safe totalitarian regime with no privacy at all... The same applies to the choice to abort the pregnancy - once more, - in an ideal world, this would have never happened. This world is far from ideal hence there has to be a reasonable give, but once more, - to a well defined degree. Embrionic stem research and partial birth abortions is where I, personally, draw the line.