Anti-Abortion ? Read this

[bd]

How can so-called conservatives be anti-abortion and claim to value the sanctity of human life when they endorse testing of pesticides on pregnant women, infants and children?

***********



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Press contact: 202-289-2405
If you are not a member of the press, please write to us at nrdcinfo@nrdc.org or see our contact page.

NEW EPA RULE TURNS PEOPLE INTO LAB RATS, VIOLATING ETHICAL STANDARDS AND THE LAW

Statement by NRDC Attorney Erik D. Olson on Leaked Copy of Final Rule


WASHINGTON (January 23, 2006) -- More humans are about to become lab rats for the pesticide industry, according to a leaked copy of a rule due to be finalized by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency later this week. The document was released by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Reps. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Hilda Solis (D-Calif.) earlier today.

In addition to a profound moral and ethical breach, the final rule also violates a law passed by Congress last August requiring EPA to issue strict rules for such tests, and ban all pesticide tests on pregnant women, infants and children, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council. That law passed overwhelmingly in the House and Senate with strong bipartisan support, which included conservative Republicans, who questioned the ethics of testing toxic chemicals on humans.

EPA expects there to be more than 30 of these tests per year -- far more than ever before.

Below is a statement by Erik D. Olson, an NRDC senior attorney:

"EPA is giving its official blessing for pesticide companies to use pregnant women, infants and children as lab rats in flagrant violation of a new federal law cracking down on this repugnant practice. There is simply no legal or moral justification for the agency to allow human testing of dangerous chemicals. None."

The Natural Resources Defense Council is a national, nonprofit organization of scientists, lawyers and environmental specialists dedicated to protecting public health and the environment. Founded in 1970, NRDC has 1.2 million members and online activists nationwide, served from offices in New York, Washington, Los Angeles and San Francisco.

***********


Don't abort that baby----we need a lab rat.

HYPOCRITES of the highest levels - every one of you who support this immoral adminstration.


The so called conservatives want to do what's right until it gets between them and a dollar.

How can you sleep at night?

And don't start telling me what Bill Clinton did.

This is sick.


bd

[NewXD40fun]

Now Bush is testing pesticides on pregnant women..


You Liberals crack me up.



Tom

[Son of Norway]

I didn't see the name "Bush" mentioned Tom. Could you BOLD it for me?

[mullanman]

YAWN

[mr0w1]

Your argument doesn't make much sense. Your claim seems to be that that since I'm anti-abortion, I must certainly be pro-pregnant-woman-pesticide-testing. I however, am against that as well. Eh?

[Brickboy240]

Are these "tests" voluntary?

If so, I don't have a problem with them. One should be able to do whatever they want with their body and be responsible for the consequences. Smoke all you want, drink all you want, have an abortion...hell, have as many as you want. YOU deal with the consequences. Some might also believe (like me) that you may have to account for your actions in the afterlife. However, if your activities (like drinking too much or doing drugs) somehow impair me or endanger my family, there should and will be consequences, but you should be free to act as you wish as long as it does not affect me or the public in general.

Nobody should be restricted from voluntarily screwing up their own life. Problem is, that most people cannot JUST screw up their own life and involve the rest of us or become a burden on society.

Now, if these tests are being done without the subject's knowledge, I have a big problem with that, but if someone is stupid enough to sign up for such tests, let them. Isn't this how social Darwinism really works? Weed out the stupid, I say.

You see, this is one of the many ways in which I differ from the hardcore conservatives. If you and yours want an abortion, you should be able to do just that. Don't look for my approval (its nothing I would do or want my wife to undergo), don't ask for public monies to fund your decision and YOU live with the decision (and the possible guilt that may go with it) and may have to answer for it later on. I don't want to deny you access to the procedure, but I am not your cheerleader on this decision, either.

- Brickboy240

[NewXD40fun]

Originally Posted by Son of Norway

I didn't see the name "Bush" mentioned Tom. Could you BOLD it for me?

99.9% of bd's political posting are meant soley to discredit President Bush. bd blames everything bad on President Bush.

Did you notice how he concluded that conservatives endorse the alleged testing of pesticides on pregnant women?

Do you believe bd's conclusion?




Tom

[NewXD40fun]

Originally Posted by Brickboy240

Are these "tests" voluntary?

If so, I don't have a problem with them. One should be able to do whatever they want with their body and be responsible for the consequences. Smoke all you want, drink all you want, have an abortion...hell, have as many as you want. YOU deal with the consequences. Some might also believe (like me) that you may have to account for your actions in the afterlife. However, if your activities (like drinking too much or doing drugs) somehow impair me or endanger my family, there should and will be consequences, but you should be free to act as you wish as long as it does not affect me or the public in general.

Nobody should be restricted from voluntarily screwing up their own life. Problem is, that most people cannot JUST screw up their own life and involve the rest of us or become a burden on society.

Now, if these tests are being done without the subject's knowledge, I have a big problem with that, but if someone is stupid enough to sign up for such tests, let them. Isn't this how social Darwinism really works? Weed out the stupid, I say.

You see, this is one of the many ways in which I differ from the hardcore conservatives. If you and yours want an abortion, you should be able to do just that. Don't look for my approval (its nothing I would do or want my wife to undergo), don't ask for public monies to fund your decision and YOU live with the decision (and the possible guilt that may go with it) and may have to answer for it later on. I don't want to deny you access to the procedure, but I am not your cheerleader on this decision, either.

- Brickboy240

I would hold off for now on believing this article. Liberal extremists tend to get carried away with their interpretation of alleged facts.

Clue that this article might be another Liberal lie, "Leaked Copy of Final Rule". Liberals believe that any information that is "leaked" must be true...I wonder why.






Tom

[bd]

Originally Posted by NewXD40fun

99.9% of bd's political posting are meant soley to discredit President Bush. bd blames everything bad on President Bush.

Did you notice how he concluded that conservatives endorse the alleged testing of pesticides on pregnant women?

Do you believe bd's conclusion?




Tom

Would you be in favor of testing pesticides on unborn children?

Just answer one direct question in your life instead of cowardly waffling out of it.

Be a man.

Answer this question.

Would you be in favor of testing pesticides on unborn children?

Don't be scared. Answer it.

bd

[NewXD40fun]

Originally Posted by bd

Would you be in favor of testing pesticides on unborn children?

Just answer one direct question in your life instead of cowardly waffling out of it.

Be a man.

Answer this question.

Would you be in favor of testing pesticides on unborn children?

Don't be scared. Answer it.

bd

IRONY ALERT!

You and your fellow liberasl think it's great that mothers are permitted to kill their unborn children. And now you parrot a story from an environmental whacko activist group about testing pesticides on the unborn. And you expect us to believe you are CONCERNED for the unborn.
You should be happy that someone might use the unborn for pesticide testing, they are worthless life to you Liberals anyway right?



Tom