The first settlers may have been religious pilgrims, but the founding fathers were largely secularists and made a point of separating church and state.

Why should laws that govern everyone be based on fiction anyway? Common sense laws based on a shared interest are

Human life (all life) is only subjectively valuable anyway - we are all, each and every one of us, just a bunch of cells from the moment we slip out of our mothers to the moment we die. But getting back to the point ...

It's illegal after 22-24 weeks, I believe. That is about the earliest a fetus can survive outside the womb if born prematurely. About 91% of all abortions are performed in the first trimester (i.e. 12 weeks gestation or earlier). A first trimester fetus is no more 'alive' than a sperm cell is.

Attempting to 'humanize' partially developed fetuses is a classic pro-life tactic designed to try to give a reason for someone to poke around in the uterus of a woman they have no business telling how to live. If you didn't put your dick in her, you don't get to put your religion in her. Simple as that.

Why is it preferable to force a woman to have an unwanted child, who will then have to live their entire life when that pregnancy can be terminated early and safely and allow them to have a child on their own terms, should they so desire. There are enough of us running around as it is anyway. Why should a woman who is raped be forced to carry that pregnancy full term, so a reminder of that rape can come out of her? What purpose does that serve for a party/religious group that doesn't give one single shit about that child after it is born?

Let's get real. There is no god. Plain and simple. So if someone wants to base how they live their life on fiction and lies - good for them. But keep it out of real life.

To quote Thomas Jefferson....The world would be a better place if there were no religion in it.

Most of the signers of the Constitution were Deists and did not believe in organized religion or the biblical stories. The believed God created the world and then had no further involvement. They were very much against any connection between government and religion.

You might also consider this. Very appropriate in todays political environment.




History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.
-Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, Dec. 6, 1813.

Case against Trump's campaign manager dropped, now there is a surprise.

Also these

Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814

In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Horatio G. Spafford, March 17, 1814

Damn facts ruining a good argument again!

I like to toss this in the face of the idiots that claim the country was founded in Christian principles. It was unanimously approved by Congress.

ARTICLE 11. Of the Treaty of Tripoli ending the war with the barbary pirates.

As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

Pre-debate (Clinton/Sanders) blah blah on CNN ( it starts at 9:00est)

Could do without their eyeballs generator, breathless hype....

Nice rant

Who mentioned rape, btw? I didn't. That's a whole different argument and one that shouldn't be casually thrown in with the general pro choice debate. There is a world of difference between a 20 something women who forgot to take her pill or make her lover wear a condom and an unfortunate victim of rape. A world of difference

Hope he brings up CPT.

I am not even sure that much needs conceding. Where the inhabitants of Jamestown pilgrims?

Such a pitifully weak field, a couple of career politicians, one so old he should be in a retirement home and the other in jail, both trying to outdo each other by being the most left wing, or in their own words, "progressive"

Sanders' economic proposals have been analyzed ad nauseam and everyone is in agreement they don't add up. His promises to separate the banks would require unrepresented intervention by the federal government - they're private corporations, not public bodies and then his solution on what happens after they're separated is basically to let them get on with it

He would be a lame duck president, there can be no denying that. And even if the Dems won back the senate after 2 years, there's no evidence they're in favour of tearing up Obamacare that they fought tooth and nail to pass in the first place to start over which is what would have to happen to even contemplate introducing Sanders' healthcare proposals

As for Clinton, just a bunch of hollow words to get the Dem fan base moist. Banging on about New York values and how it's her wish to ram them down the throats of the rest of the country via Washington should she become president. Er, no. America is not New York and middle America does not share liberal New York values, that's why both the senate and congress are controlled by Republicans. No wonder Sanders is wiping the floor worth her among ordinary people

As long as we're on the subject of Christian values:
During a recent interview, Trump was asked what his favorite Bible verse was.
He said: “If you give a man a fish, it will feed him for a day but, if you deport him, you’ll never have to feed him again.”

Apparently Monica Lewinsky won't be voting for Hillary Clinton this election
She says the last Clinton presidency left a bad taste in her mouth

Is there? Surely if you believe life begins at conception, then abortion is murder regardless of how the conception came about? And if you don't believe life begins at conception, what is your issue with a woman choosing what to do with her own body?