WTF are you spewing about? I'd call this spam, but at least spam has a point. Yours appears to be....every leader is evil and all people are stupid (besides you, of course). Solutions? Suggestions? Waste of energy to type this pointless, meandering rant.

Katie Why do you waste your time, our time, and this space by writing about the blind ideological bloviating from this woman? What else would you expect her to say? "Guess what kids? We really screwed the constitutional pooch with this bill. You guys have no idea how unconstitutional this POS is." C'mon, surely there's something other than conservative red meat you can write about.

You argue that obesity is a financial strain on society. Abortion limitations would result in...a financial strain on society. So all "social issues" are really financial issues to you, huh? Life has no more meaning than how much does it cost? I believe that life is defined by choices. Responsible, accountable choices. And that we all have choices to make, well before the consequences of our actions. And life is a beautiful, amazing, wondrous gift....yes a GIFT. And yes, from a God who loves us. You see dollar signs....I see a future Booker T. Washington; Martin Luther King, Jr.; Denzel Washington. Thanks for clarifying.

Rare instance.....I am close to actual agreement with you. Totally agree that legislating from a "religious perspective" is anthema to my faith, which tells me to judge myself, not others. My faith drives my belief system, which drives my political viewpoints....but to use my faith as the argument, cheapens my relationship with God, who I believe to be above all this silliness. That being said my main objections are 3fold: 1 - There is no constitutional right to privacy as cited by the SCOTUS in 1973. 2 - The PEOPLE have spoken repeatedly...and been shot down by courts every time. 3 - The choice side is unwilling to debate, scientifically and medically exactly when does life actually begin. Aside from that, abortion is peachy!

Frank156 wrote: "However, that being said, the abortion decision is a private matter which doesn't affect society at large, but the clear obesity problem in this country does impact everyone." So, here's an argument: The 2010 census has the US population at 312,000,000 and "Black" percentage is 13.5% (42,000,000 ttl). Abortions since 1973 - 55,000,000ish Percentage of abortions that are performed on black women - 36% Total direct impact to the black population - 19,800,000 As a percentage of the total black population of 2010 - 47% If all of NYC and Chicago combined were black...we just aborted both cities total populations. So...really? Abortion has no impact on society at large? Really??

So, Frank, I look forward to seeing your response. No doubt it'll be a hoot.

And BTW - yes, abortion is legal but we continue to try and change that. Legally. Usually peacefully. And, dare I say, we will continue to pursue this agenda because it is in line with our beliefs. But you mean to tell me that you libs cannot even concede that ending a life because you don't like their gender is conceivably....malevolent? What about ending a life because the child would have cleft palate? Spina Bifida? Cerebral Palsy? It seems like you believe that any and all unborns can be "terminated" for whatever reason the "mother" chooses. And yet you have the unmitigated gall to attack conservatives for being ideologues. Monster

Frank156 - reposting because I'd really like an answer: I've been seeing your posts and choosing to stay out of it with you, because you obviously drink someone's kool-aid, but I have to jump in here Frankie. So, I went to the article about NY banning big gulps and noticed you weren't posting anything on there about how big gulps are legal and people should just mind their own business. Also noticed you not posting the same thought process on the article where FLOTUS is proposing more regulations around what people eat. So, just curious if a Dem were to advance a "non-issue" around something that were legal...would you oppose that? Or is it simply because what we're pursuing disagrees with what YOU want that you apply this "logic"?

BTW - yes, abortion is legal but we continue to try and change that. Legally. Usually peacefully. And, dare I say, we will continue to pursue this agenda because it is in line with our beliefs. But you mean to tell me that you libs cannot even concede that ending a life because you don't like their gender is conceivably....malevolent? What about ending a life because the child would have cleft palate? Spina Bifida? Cerebral Palsy? It seems like you believe that any and all unborns can be "terminated" for whatever reason the "mother" chooses. And yet you have the unmitigated gall to attack conservatives for being ideologues. Monster

So, I've been seeing your posts and choosing to stay out of it with you, because you obviously drink someone's kool-aid, but I have to jump in here Frankie. So, I went over to the article about NY banning big gulps and noticed you weren't posting anything on there about how big gulps are legal and people should just mind their own business. Also noticed you not posting the same thought process on the article where FLOTUS is proposing more regulations around what people eat. So, just curious....if a Democrat were to try to advance a "non-issue" around something that were legal...would you oppose that? Or is it simply because what we're pursuing disagrees with what YOU want that you apply this "logic"?