And Nixon (the lying bastard) had a great civil rights record. He is chiefly responsible for integrating southern schools (you can look it up). And he invented Affirmative Action. That was an Executive Branch policy — is to this day. Nixon’s baby.

But Nixon was so liberal he might as well have been a Democrat compared to Reagan. He was more liberal than Carter or Clinton. He was our last really liberal President. Ironic as hell, eh?

And there is only one party that really accepts both pro-Life and pro-Choice voters, and that is the GOP. Pro-Life voters have next to no voice in the Dem party, but look who spoke just before Sarah Palin at the GOP convention: Rudy (pro-choice) Giuliani.

Who else did McCain consider for Veep? Tom Ridge and Joe Lieberman — pro-choice.

The Republicans have a splendid record on Civil Rights. The only ones standing in the way of minority rights — EVER — have been Democrats. It was not until brave Democrats like HHH and LBJ were willing to alienate the Dixiecrats (e.g. Robert Byrd, former KKK leader still in the Senate, Sam Ervin, Al Gore, Sr. and Wm. Fulbright) and were willing to join with Republicans, was there any hope of passing the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act. Republican Party was founded to end slavery and since Lincoln have supported Civil Rights. Democrats have only helped blacks since the mid-60s. FDR did shit for blacks.

And, Wilson was a Democrat. He supported the 19th amendment, but it was blocked in the Senate before he left office. Presidents have no explicit role in Constitutional amendments (just have the “bully pulpit”). The amendment passed the following year with broad bi-partisan support.

And no way is he the stupidest President. Nobody could come close to Jimmy Carter. Please!

(And I voted for Carter twice! I was young and stupid).

If someday ages from now one of my daughters wants an abortion and comes to me for help, by all means, I will make sure it is as safe as possible.

But I will also plead with her not to kill the human life inside her.

I should mention that I completely agree that the Executive can accomplish very little to affect abortion law. It is unlikely that a pro-life amendment could ever pass.

I think Roe is horrible law. I believe that it is the primary cause of the 50/50 political split in the country. This is what happens when you remove important matters from legislative consideration.

My god, even slavery was ended by legislatures, not by judges. Judges only prolonged it! Even Lincoln could not free the slaves except those states that had rebelled. Civil rights were granted by Congress (opposed mostly by Democrats, sad truth be told).

The Executive alone cannot change things.

But cutting off fuel to Ukraine would seriously damage Russia in short order. What a wake-up call that would be to the rest of Europe about the insecurity of relying on Russia for fuel!

As for ethnic Russians’ loyalty to the Putin regime, they are by no means homogeneous. My impression (being married to one) is that they are incredibly cynical, even after the Orange Revolution. True of all FSU. No deep trust or loyalty to anybody outside the family. No trust in the democratic process, rule of law, banks, police, military, Russians or Americans.

But my what devoted capitalists they have become.

A transplanted heart is alive, but not a being.

A fetus is human, alive and (almost always) a whole and distinct being (those that are not generally do not survive, in any case). It is not a matter of dispute whether an abortion (almost always) ends the life of a human being.

The more important political question is like the one posed to Obama, the one he said was “above his pay grade”. That question is, at what stage of development should a human life be protected by law?

Of course, there is tremendous disagreement on that question.

Hence, the description of a human fetus living in her mother’s womb as a parasite tends to imply that it is not of the same species, or that it was artificially implanted there, or that it has attached itself in some unnatural way. These would be bizarre descriptions of the typical fetus within the uterus.

Still, none of that changes the fact that the fetus is human and alive. It is a human being — just not fully formed — and just not a human being whose life you care to protect.

You also err about breathing. Humans do not cease to be human when they stop breathing. It is a somewhat common occurrence for people to have their blood mechanically oxygenated for them — usually via their lungs, but sometimes not. Do they stop being human when they are put on such apparatus? If so, could I kill them with impunity (or only if I were their mother)?

Your analogy about cars and tomato plants is flawed, but worth exploring. The chief difference between a fetus and a born baby is that the fetus is not yet fully formed. This does not mean the fetus is not a living human being, just not fully developed. A wrecked car is no longer organized as a car, but a fetus is extraordinarily well-organized as a human being. At a very early stage of development, it has human features — girls even have ova at a very early stage. And left to grow, the organization generally produces a healthy living baby — one that can breathe (I know how important that aspect is to you).

The argument that men should have no say about abortion law is only valid if one has determined that the life of a fetus is not worthy of protection. Your view is clear, however, you have no more say about that decision than do I. You cannot make decisions for the rest of society — to do so removes choice for the rest of us. We as a society decide what rights we imbue and to whom. It makes no difference whether the person accorded those rights is someone you respect and acknowledge.

So you are hearless enough to halt the heartbeat of another human being. Wear that badge with pride. I cannot. But there are millions who disagree and they too want to have their voice heard.

I believe abortion should be legal for the same reason I believe heroin should be legal: because the alternative is worse. If people are dumb enough to inject drugs, let us not compound the problem by forcing people to get unregulated drugs from criminals. I say this even though my son killed himself by overdosing.

Similarly, I think that people who care to rid themselves of the human life growing inside them, although that be a cruel and heartless thing to do, should not have to worry if the procedure will be safe (well, safe as possible).

That said, many people disagree with me and — being pro-choice, I do not wish to disenfranchise them. Roe is very undemocratic.

The matter of whether to protect unborn human beings is not something to be left only to those who profess the heartlessness to stop a beating human heart. I don’t care what your chromosomes are.

Moreover, the decision as to whether to protect the males and females that result from conception is not something only a woman can decide. It is something for a society to decide — and that would include men and women.

The notion that a woman in primarily interested in protecting her body when she chooses to abort a baby is laughable. She is primarily interested in ridding herself of the fetus. Her body has already been invaded. Her body already contains another human being. If we are to concern ourselves blindly with protecting all human bodies, we would have to concern ourselves with the baby’s body.

So it’s really not about maintaining the integrity of the human body. It’s about preserving the right of the mother to kill the fetus. That may be a right worth protecting. Feel free to argue that case to your heart’s content.

But this in no way contradicts the fact that almost every abortion kills at least one human being.

BTW, I am not inclined to F*ck off when people tell me to f*ck off. Does that work with anybody you know?