On 9/26/2011 10:15 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 25/09/2011 8:26 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/25/2011 9:49 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 25/09/2011 3:41 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/25/2011 11:44 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 24/09/2011 5:11 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 18:31:39 -0400, JustWait
wrote:

On 9/24/2011 6:08 PM, Wayne B wrote:
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 09:57:46 -0400, wrote:

So answer his question. Just when does a fertilized egg become a
human?

At conception.

===

That's a religious view not supportable by any logic or
science. It
even fails the common sense test. You are entitled to your beliefs
as long as you don't try to legislate them for everyone else.


What do you care? We have abortion on demand now, what more do you
want?
You have taken the parents out of the equation, which "even fails
the
common sense test". Like I said before, compromise for abortion
advocates, and most other zealots is just a means to an end.. Now
that
you have it 100% your way you want it to be considered settled law,
and
nobody else can have an opinion on it.. I get it.

It actually was "settled law" until the religious zealots, with whom
you apparently identify, tried to make their religious opinion a
secular law.

There is no such thing as "settled law."

It is sad that parents had to be "taken out of the equation," but
there are parents that, due to religious convictions, will allow
children to starve, go without medical treatment, and other
(secularly) ridiculous actions. Even now, there are parents that
feel
that NOT vaccinating their children (boys AND girls) against HPV,
which causes cervical cancer, will keep then chaste and pure. They
are
even taking their position to court to defend their right as parents
to allow their children to get cervical cancer. But that is sane,
right?

Parents have been taken out of the equation because the liberals
beliefs
are contrary to those of conservatives and the liberals cannot
stand to
let others live their own lives.

Actually, when it comes to abortion and religion, drop the liberal and
conservative thing. Bot sides have their fanatics that feel the
right to
tell others what to do.

Libertarian versus statism might have better alignment. Comes down to
how much do you believe others have the rights to make their own
choices?

What more do they want? They already have abortion on demand as a
"compromise", what is next, will they get to choose who must have an
abortion??

So? What is wrong with the choice being exclusively between the woman
and the doctor?

It isn't your womb after all.

How about government dictating circumcision? (or banning it?)

Or maybe one step further, claim your genetics are not good enough and
you must be sterilized. (an every genome has defects, that is why we are
not the same).

My point is, why are we even talking about it.. How much more
"compromise" do you want, you have abortion on demand now, paid for and
delivered by organizations who have only one solution in their arsenal,
and make a ton of money on it, with no right for any other information
or opinion to the young girl that walks in....? if there is any more
"compromise"... we will be at the point of: "government dictating
circumcision (or banning it?) Or claiming your genetics are not good
enough and you must be sterilized." So, I ask you again, how much more
"compromise" do you want?

No more is really needed, provided the women have access without the
harassment and bully mentality. Their choice.

Yeah, as long as they only get that one point of view... What if it was
the other side that was funded by the Govt and wouldn't allow any talk
of abortion in their clinics? That is to say, what would you think if
Planned Parenthood actually gave information beneficial to a woman who
wanted to say be a parent, and couldn't talk about abortion at all.
Would you think of that as "compromise" too?


Don't get me wrong, I am nether pro nor con in the decision, just
believe it is their right to their body. Government (nor religion)
shouldn't be used to dictate having babies.

Yeah, but if you support Planned Parenthood, you absolutely do not
support a womans right to make an "informed" decision about parenthood.
planned Parenthood is an abortion mill, they have no interest in
"informed" clients, only providing abortions...


It isn't 10,000 BC with a dwindling population of only 4 million world
wide. As of 1825 give or take the population was a billion. Today 7
billion....it can't continue this way as one way or another there are
going to be limits. If anything, in large areas of the world we should
be looking at controls in birth.

So, you want women to make decisions based on that???


Our jobs should be to our family, not to the state to provided breeding
vessels and soldiers.

Abortions don't create families...

In article ,
says...

On 9/26/2011 9:03 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,
says...

On 9/25/2011 9:39 AM, Drifter wrote:
On 9/25/2011 6:57 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 9/24/11 12:47 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/24/2011 12:39 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 11:13:41 -0400, wrote:

In ,
says...

On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 09:08:42 -0400, wrote:

In ,

says...

On 9/24/2011 2:51 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 23/09/2011 6:54 PM, John H wrote:

When your wife asked you to feel the baby kicking, did you argue
that
it was only a fetus?

So if at 7 months, the woman miscarries, you beat her up for
murder with
the bible in hand?

Your tag line is stupid and annoying. And that doesn't start
until 20+
weeks or so.

Well, I dare say you have a lot of nerve going after John for a
sig file
when you are by far the very most prolific poster on the group and
spend
much more time and many more paragraphs promoting your own personal
views on others... But then you go after those of us who pretty
much
keep our beliefs to ourselves...

So, why don't YOU give answers to Wayne's questions? Holier than
thou
John won't.

There are still several unanswered questions out there.

I wholeheartedly agree! BUT, when someone acts like they are
absolutely
SURE that a fetus is a human, then he must know when a fertilized egg
becomes a human.

I don't have a puppy in that fight. ;-)

... nor should the government.


But they did get involved. Rowe vs Wade. It's settled law according to
the Supreme Court, the govt. is involved.


D'uh. What about the conservative states working overtime to outlaw
abortion or to make it nearly impossible to get one? Or are you not
aware of those developments, either?

You have a say in Maryland Politics. Other States' politics are none of
your business. Last time I checked we are still free to move about the
country, unless O/bama changed that.

Apples to oranges troll question, we have abortion on demand anywhere in
the US..

Not true at all.

http://www.abort73.com/abortion_fact...abortion_laws/



OK, so some folks have to spirit the little girls over state lines.. We
have roads and cars now, from almost anywhere, the next state is a
couple hours "that way" with a car...

Guess you didn't read very far then.....

On 9/26/11 10:24 AM, JustWait wrote:

Yeah, but if you support Planned Parenthood, you absolutely do not
support a womans right to make an "informed" decision about parenthood.
planned Parenthood is an abortion mill, they have no interest in
"informed" clients, only providing abortions...



Your ignorance of what planned parenthood does is...staggering. None of
your political pronouncements are based on reality.

On 26/09/2011 8:24 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 10:15 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 25/09/2011 8:26 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/25/2011 9:49 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 25/09/2011 3:41 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/25/2011 11:44 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 24/09/2011 5:11 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 18:31:39 -0400, JustWait
wrote:

On 9/24/2011 6:08 PM, Wayne B wrote:
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 09:57:46 -0400, wrote:

So answer his question. Just when does a fertilized egg
become a
human?

At conception.

===

That's a religious view not supportable by any logic or
science. It
even fails the common sense test. You are entitled to your
beliefs
as long as you don't try to legislate them for everyone else.


What do you care? We have abortion on demand now, what more do you
want?
You have taken the parents out of the equation, which "even fails
the
common sense test". Like I said before, compromise for abortion
advocates, and most other zealots is just a means to an end.. Now
that
you have it 100% your way you want it to be considered settled
law,
and
nobody else can have an opinion on it.. I get it.

It actually was "settled law" until the religious zealots, with
whom
you apparently identify, tried to make their religious opinion a
secular law.

There is no such thing as "settled law."

It is sad that parents had to be "taken out of the equation," but
there are parents that, due to religious convictions, will allow
children to starve, go without medical treatment, and other
(secularly) ridiculous actions. Even now, there are parents that
feel
that NOT vaccinating their children (boys AND girls) against HPV,
which causes cervical cancer, will keep then chaste and pure. They
are
even taking their position to court to defend their right as
parents
to allow their children to get cervical cancer. But that is sane,
right?

Parents have been taken out of the equation because the liberals
beliefs
are contrary to those of conservatives and the liberals cannot
stand to
let others live their own lives.

Actually, when it comes to abortion and religion, drop the liberal
and
conservative thing. Bot sides have their fanatics that feel the
right to
tell others what to do.

Libertarian versus statism might have better alignment. Comes down to
how much do you believe others have the rights to make their own
choices?

What more do they want? They already have abortion on demand as a
"compromise", what is next, will they get to choose who must have an
abortion??

So? What is wrong with the choice being exclusively between the woman
and the doctor?

It isn't your womb after all.

How about government dictating circumcision? (or banning it?)

Or maybe one step further, claim your genetics are not good enough and
you must be sterilized. (an every genome has defects, that is why we
are
not the same).

My point is, why are we even talking about it.. How much more
"compromise" do you want, you have abortion on demand now, paid for and
delivered by organizations who have only one solution in their arsenal,
and make a ton of money on it, with no right for any other information
or opinion to the young girl that walks in....? if there is any more
"compromise"... we will be at the point of: "government dictating
circumcision (or banning it?) Or claiming your genetics are not good
enough and you must be sterilized." So, I ask you again, how much more
"compromise" do you want?

No more is really needed, provided the women have access without the
harassment and bully mentality. Their choice.

Yeah, as long as they only get that one point of view... What if it was
the other side that was funded by the Govt and wouldn't allow any talk
of abortion in their clinics? That is to say, what would you think if
Planned Parenthood actually gave information beneficial to a woman who
wanted to say be a parent, and couldn't talk about abortion at all.
Would you think of that as "compromise" too?


Don't get me wrong, I am nether pro nor con in the decision, just
believe it is their right to their body. Government (nor religion)
shouldn't be used to dictate having babies.

Yeah, but if you support Planned Parenthood, you absolutely do not
support a womans right to make an "informed" decision about parenthood.
planned Parenthood is an abortion mill, they have no interest in
"informed" clients, only providing abortions...


It isn't 10,000 BC with a dwindling population of only 4 million world
wide. As of 1825 give or take the population was a billion. Today 7
billion....it can't continue this way as one way or another there are
going to be limits. If anything, in large areas of the world we should
be looking at controls in birth.

So, you want women to make decisions based on that???


Our jobs should be to our family, not to the state to provided breeding
vessels and soldiers.

Abortions don't create families...

Abortions don't create starving illiterate homeless children turning to
crime either.


--
First rule of holes: If you're in one, don't keep digging.
So in the hole, why do we insanely want more debt?

On 9/26/2011 11:41 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 8:24 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 10:15 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 25/09/2011 8:26 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/25/2011 9:49 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 25/09/2011 3:41 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/25/2011 11:44 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 24/09/2011 5:11 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 18:31:39 -0400, JustWait
wrote:

On 9/24/2011 6:08 PM, Wayne B wrote:
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 09:57:46 -0400, wrote:

So answer his question. Just when does a fertilized egg
become a
human?

At conception.

===

That's a religious view not supportable by any logic or
science. It
even fails the common sense test. You are entitled to your
beliefs
as long as you don't try to legislate them for everyone else.


What do you care? We have abortion on demand now, what more do
you
want?
You have taken the parents out of the equation, which "even fails
the
common sense test". Like I said before, compromise for abortion
advocates, and most other zealots is just a means to an end.. Now
that
you have it 100% your way you want it to be considered settled
law,
and
nobody else can have an opinion on it.. I get it.

It actually was "settled law" until the religious zealots, with
whom
you apparently identify, tried to make their religious opinion a
secular law.

There is no such thing as "settled law."

It is sad that parents had to be "taken out of the equation," but
there are parents that, due to religious convictions, will allow
children to starve, go without medical treatment, and other
(secularly) ridiculous actions. Even now, there are parents that
feel
that NOT vaccinating their children (boys AND girls) against HPV,
which causes cervical cancer, will keep then chaste and pure. They
are
even taking their position to court to defend their right as
parents
to allow their children to get cervical cancer. But that is sane,
right?

Parents have been taken out of the equation because the liberals
beliefs
are contrary to those of conservatives and the liberals cannot
stand to
let others live their own lives.

Actually, when it comes to abortion and religion, drop the liberal
and
conservative thing. Bot sides have their fanatics that feel the
right to
tell others what to do.

Libertarian versus statism might have better alignment. Comes
down to
how much do you believe others have the rights to make their own
choices?

What more do they want? They already have abortion on demand as a
"compromise", what is next, will they get to choose who must have an
abortion??

So? What is wrong with the choice being exclusively between the woman
and the doctor?

It isn't your womb after all.

How about government dictating circumcision? (or banning it?)

Or maybe one step further, claim your genetics are not good enough and
you must be sterilized. (an every genome has defects, that is why we
are
not the same).

My point is, why are we even talking about it.. How much more
"compromise" do you want, you have abortion on demand now, paid for and
delivered by organizations who have only one solution in their arsenal,
and make a ton of money on it, with no right for any other information
or opinion to the young girl that walks in....? if there is any more
"compromise"... we will be at the point of: "government dictating
circumcision (or banning it?) Or claiming your genetics are not good
enough and you must be sterilized." So, I ask you again, how much more
"compromise" do you want?

No more is really needed, provided the women have access without the
harassment and bully mentality. Their choice.

Yeah, as long as they only get that one point of view... What if it was
the other side that was funded by the Govt and wouldn't allow any talk
of abortion in their clinics? That is to say, what would you think if
Planned Parenthood actually gave information beneficial to a woman who
wanted to say be a parent, and couldn't talk about abortion at all.
Would you think of that as "compromise" too?


Don't get me wrong, I am nether pro nor con in the decision, just
believe it is their right to their body. Government (nor religion)
shouldn't be used to dictate having babies.

Yeah, but if you support Planned Parenthood, you absolutely do not
support a womans right to make an "informed" decision about parenthood.
planned Parenthood is an abortion mill, they have no interest in
"informed" clients, only providing abortions...


It isn't 10,000 BC with a dwindling population of only 4 million world
wide. As of 1825 give or take the population was a billion. Today 7
billion....it can't continue this way as one way or another there are
going to be limits. If anything, in large areas of the world we should
be looking at controls in birth.

So, you want women to make decisions based on that???


Our jobs should be to our family, not to the state to provided breeding
vessels and soldiers.

Abortions don't create families...

Abortions don't create starving illiterate homeless children turning to
crime either.



So, all those aborted kids were gonna' come up bad? I can see this is
futile. Like a Progressive, you are making it a binary issue and you
decide which is 0 and which is 1...

In article ,
says...

On 9/26/2011 11:41 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 8:24 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 10:15 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 25/09/2011 8:26 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/25/2011 9:49 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 25/09/2011 3:41 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/25/2011 11:44 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 24/09/2011 5:11 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 18:31:39 -0400, JustWait
wrote:

On 9/24/2011 6:08 PM, Wayne B wrote:
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 09:57:46 -0400, wrote:

So answer his question. Just when does a fertilized egg
become a
human?

At conception.

===

That's a religious view not supportable by any logic or
science. It
even fails the common sense test. You are entitled to your
beliefs
as long as you don't try to legislate them for everyone else.


What do you care? We have abortion on demand now, what more do
you
want?
You have taken the parents out of the equation, which "even fails
the
common sense test". Like I said before, compromise for abortion
advocates, and most other zealots is just a means to an end.. Now
that
you have it 100% your way you want it to be considered settled
law,
and
nobody else can have an opinion on it.. I get it.

It actually was "settled law" until the religious zealots, with
whom
you apparently identify, tried to make their religious opinion a
secular law.

There is no such thing as "settled law."

It is sad that parents had to be "taken out of the equation," but
there are parents that, due to religious convictions, will allow
children to starve, go without medical treatment, and other
(secularly) ridiculous actions. Even now, there are parents that
feel
that NOT vaccinating their children (boys AND girls) against HPV,
which causes cervical cancer, will keep then chaste and pure. They
are
even taking their position to court to defend their right as
parents
to allow their children to get cervical cancer. But that is sane,
right?

Parents have been taken out of the equation because the liberals
beliefs
are contrary to those of conservatives and the liberals cannot
stand to
let others live their own lives.

Actually, when it comes to abortion and religion, drop the liberal
and
conservative thing. Bot sides have their fanatics that feel the
right to
tell others what to do.

Libertarian versus statism might have better alignment. Comes
down to
how much do you believe others have the rights to make their own
choices?

What more do they want? They already have abortion on demand as a
"compromise", what is next, will they get to choose who must have an
abortion??

So? What is wrong with the choice being exclusively between the woman
and the doctor?

It isn't your womb after all.

How about government dictating circumcision? (or banning it?)

Or maybe one step further, claim your genetics are not good enough and
you must be sterilized. (an every genome has defects, that is why we
are
not the same).

My point is, why are we even talking about it.. How much more
"compromise" do you want, you have abortion on demand now, paid for and
delivered by organizations who have only one solution in their arsenal,
and make a ton of money on it, with no right for any other information
or opinion to the young girl that walks in....? if there is any more
"compromise"... we will be at the point of: "government dictating
circumcision (or banning it?) Or claiming your genetics are not good
enough and you must be sterilized." So, I ask you again, how much more
"compromise" do you want?

No more is really needed, provided the women have access without the
harassment and bully mentality. Their choice.

Yeah, as long as they only get that one point of view... What if it was
the other side that was funded by the Govt and wouldn't allow any talk
of abortion in their clinics? That is to say, what would you think if
Planned Parenthood actually gave information beneficial to a woman who
wanted to say be a parent, and couldn't talk about abortion at all.
Would you think of that as "compromise" too?


Don't get me wrong, I am nether pro nor con in the decision, just
believe it is their right to their body. Government (nor religion)
shouldn't be used to dictate having babies.

Yeah, but if you support Planned Parenthood, you absolutely do not
support a womans right to make an "informed" decision about parenthood.
planned Parenthood is an abortion mill, they have no interest in
"informed" clients, only providing abortions...


It isn't 10,000 BC with a dwindling population of only 4 million world
wide. As of 1825 give or take the population was a billion. Today 7
billion....it can't continue this way as one way or another there are
going to be limits. If anything, in large areas of the world we should
be looking at controls in birth.

So, you want women to make decisions based on that???


Our jobs should be to our family, not to the state to provided breeding
vessels and soldiers.

Abortions don't create families...

Abortions don't create starving illiterate homeless children turning to
crime either.



So, all those aborted kids were gonna' come up bad? I can see this is
futile. Like a Progressive, you are making it a binary issue and you
decide which is 0 and which is 1...

A good number of them would, because whether we like it or not, a good
number of them would come from unwed, unsupported, inner city welfare
recipients.

On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 18:15:20 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 16:26:52 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 15:09:08 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 10:56:52 -0400, Drifter wrote:

On 9/25/2011 10:49 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 9/25/11 10:44 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 08:30:20 -0400, wrote:

Should men have to pay child support when they wanted the fetus
aborted?


Yes,

Why? They didn't want the fetus carried to term.


They should have kept it in their pants or used a rubber. Actions have
consequences

People with BAR's religious beliefs are against mechanical or
pharmaceutical contraception.


So what did you do when your offspring came crying to you "Daddy I'm
pregnant"

It is far too late then. Your job as a parent is to make sure your
kids know what causes babies and is responsible enough to make good
choices. I know it is a strange concept but my daughter and her
husband waited almost 3 years after they got married to start having
babies.

You reckon it took them that long to figure it out?

It took them that long to figure out if they were financially stable
enough to start adding mouths.
I may be in the minority but I have a daughter and a son in law who
are more mature than most of the people out there. They have dodged
the debt trap that grips most families for a start.

I can say that for one of mine, but not the other.

On 26/09/2011 10:00 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 11:41 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 8:24 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 10:15 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 25/09/2011 8:26 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/25/2011 9:49 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 25/09/2011 3:41 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/25/2011 11:44 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 24/09/2011 5:11 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 18:31:39 -0400, JustWait
wrote:

On 9/24/2011 6:08 PM, Wayne B wrote:
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 09:57:46 -0400, wrote:

So answer his question. Just when does a fertilized egg
become a
human?

At conception.

===

That's a religious view not supportable by any logic or
science. It
even fails the common sense test. You are entitled to your
beliefs
as long as you don't try to legislate them for everyone else.


What do you care? We have abortion on demand now, what more do
you
want?
You have taken the parents out of the equation, which "even
fails
the
common sense test". Like I said before, compromise for abortion
advocates, and most other zealots is just a means to an end..
Now
that
you have it 100% your way you want it to be considered settled
law,
and
nobody else can have an opinion on it.. I get it.

It actually was "settled law" until the religious zealots, with
whom
you apparently identify, tried to make their religious opinion a
secular law.

There is no such thing as "settled law."

It is sad that parents had to be "taken out of the equation," but
there are parents that, due to religious convictions, will allow
children to starve, go without medical treatment, and other
(secularly) ridiculous actions. Even now, there are parents that
feel
that NOT vaccinating their children (boys AND girls) against HPV,
which causes cervical cancer, will keep then chaste and pure.
They
are
even taking their position to court to defend their right as
parents
to allow their children to get cervical cancer. But that is sane,
right?

Parents have been taken out of the equation because the liberals
beliefs
are contrary to those of conservatives and the liberals cannot
stand to
let others live their own lives.

Actually, when it comes to abortion and religion, drop the liberal
and
conservative thing. Bot sides have their fanatics that feel the
right to
tell others what to do.

Libertarian versus statism might have better alignment. Comes
down to
how much do you believe others have the rights to make their own
choices?

What more do they want? They already have abortion on demand as a
"compromise", what is next, will they get to choose who must have an
abortion??

So? What is wrong with the choice being exclusively between the woman
and the doctor?

It isn't your womb after all.

How about government dictating circumcision? (or banning it?)

Or maybe one step further, claim your genetics are not good enough
and
you must be sterilized. (an every genome has defects, that is why we
are
not the same).

My point is, why are we even talking about it.. How much more
"compromise" do you want, you have abortion on demand now, paid for
and
delivered by organizations who have only one solution in their
arsenal,
and make a ton of money on it, with no right for any other information
or opinion to the young girl that walks in....? if there is any more
"compromise"... we will be at the point of: "government dictating
circumcision (or banning it?) Or claiming your genetics are not good
enough and you must be sterilized." So, I ask you again, how much more
"compromise" do you want?

No more is really needed, provided the women have access without the
harassment and bully mentality. Their choice.

Yeah, as long as they only get that one point of view... What if it was
the other side that was funded by the Govt and wouldn't allow any talk
of abortion in their clinics? That is to say, what would you think if
Planned Parenthood actually gave information beneficial to a woman who
wanted to say be a parent, and couldn't talk about abortion at all.
Would you think of that as "compromise" too?


Don't get me wrong, I am nether pro nor con in the decision, just
believe it is their right to their body. Government (nor religion)
shouldn't be used to dictate having babies.

Yeah, but if you support Planned Parenthood, you absolutely do not
support a womans right to make an "informed" decision about parenthood.
planned Parenthood is an abortion mill, they have no interest in
"informed" clients, only providing abortions...


It isn't 10,000 BC with a dwindling population of only 4 million world
wide. As of 1825 give or take the population was a billion. Today 7
billion....it can't continue this way as one way or another there are
going to be limits. If anything, in large areas of the world we should
be looking at controls in birth.

So, you want women to make decisions based on that???


Our jobs should be to our family, not to the state to provided breeding
vessels and soldiers.

Abortions don't create families...

Abortions don't create starving illiterate homeless children turning to
crime either.



So, all those aborted kids were gonna' come up bad? I can see this is
futile. Like a Progressive, you are making it a binary issue and you
decide which is 0 and which is 1...

Not a binary issue at all. What the woman and the doctor decide to do
is none of my (or your) damned business. It is just a liberal bullying
of people from the fanatical emotional knee jerks.

--
Eat the rich, screw the companies and wonder why there are no jobs.
-- Obama and the lefty fleabagger attitude

On 26/09/2011 10:42 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,
says...

On 9/26/2011 11:41 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 8:24 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 10:15 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 25/09/2011 8:26 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/25/2011 9:49 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 25/09/2011 3:41 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/25/2011 11:44 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 24/09/2011 5:11 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 18:31:39 -0400, JustWait
wrote:

On 9/24/2011 6:08 PM, Wayne B wrote:
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 09:57:46 -0400, wrote:

So answer his question. Just when does a fertilized egg
become a
human?

At conception.

===

That's a religious view not supportable by any logic or
science. It
even fails the common sense test. You are entitled to your
beliefs
as long as you don't try to legislate them for everyone else.


What do you care? We have abortion on demand now, what more do
you
want?
You have taken the parents out of the equation, which "even fails
the
common sense test". Like I said before, compromise for abortion
advocates, and most other zealots is just a means to an end.. Now
that
you have it 100% your way you want it to be considered settled
law,
and
nobody else can have an opinion on it.. I get it.

It actually was "settled law" until the religious zealots, with
whom
you apparently identify, tried to make their religious opinion a
secular law.

There is no such thing as "settled law."

It is sad that parents had to be "taken out of the equation," but
there are parents that, due to religious convictions, will allow
children to starve, go without medical treatment, and other
(secularly) ridiculous actions. Even now, there are parents that
feel
that NOT vaccinating their children (boys AND girls) against HPV,
which causes cervical cancer, will keep then chaste and pure. They
are
even taking their position to court to defend their right as
parents
to allow their children to get cervical cancer. But that is sane,
right?

Parents have been taken out of the equation because the liberals
beliefs
are contrary to those of conservatives and the liberals cannot
stand to
let others live their own lives.

Actually, when it comes to abortion and religion, drop the liberal
and
conservative thing. Bot sides have their fanatics that feel the
right to
tell others what to do.

Libertarian versus statism might have better alignment. Comes
down to
how much do you believe others have the rights to make their own
choices?

What more do they want? They already have abortion on demand as a
"compromise", what is next, will they get to choose who must have an
abortion??

So? What is wrong with the choice being exclusively between the woman
and the doctor?

It isn't your womb after all.

How about government dictating circumcision? (or banning it?)

Or maybe one step further, claim your genetics are not good enough and
you must be sterilized. (an every genome has defects, that is why we
are
not the same).

My point is, why are we even talking about it.. How much more
"compromise" do you want, you have abortion on demand now, paid for and
delivered by organizations who have only one solution in their arsenal,
and make a ton of money on it, with no right for any other information
or opinion to the young girl that walks in....? if there is any more
"compromise"... we will be at the point of: "government dictating
circumcision (or banning it?) Or claiming your genetics are not good
enough and you must be sterilized." So, I ask you again, how much more
"compromise" do you want?

No more is really needed, provided the women have access without the
harassment and bully mentality. Their choice.

Yeah, as long as they only get that one point of view... What if it was
the other side that was funded by the Govt and wouldn't allow any talk
of abortion in their clinics? That is to say, what would you think if
Planned Parenthood actually gave information beneficial to a woman who
wanted to say be a parent, and couldn't talk about abortion at all.
Would you think of that as "compromise" too?


Don't get me wrong, I am nether pro nor con in the decision, just
believe it is their right to their body. Government (nor religion)
shouldn't be used to dictate having babies.

Yeah, but if you support Planned Parenthood, you absolutely do not
support a womans right to make an "informed" decision about parenthood.
planned Parenthood is an abortion mill, they have no interest in
"informed" clients, only providing abortions...


It isn't 10,000 BC with a dwindling population of only 4 million world
wide. As of 1825 give or take the population was a billion. Today 7
billion....it can't continue this way as one way or another there are
going to be limits. If anything, in large areas of the world we should
be looking at controls in birth.

So, you want women to make decisions based on that???


Our jobs should be to our family, not to the state to provided breeding
vessels and soldiers.

Abortions don't create families...

Abortions don't create starving illiterate homeless children turning to
crime either.



So, all those aborted kids were gonna' come up bad? I can see this is
futile. Like a Progressive, you are making it a binary issue and you
decide which is 0 and which is 1...

A good number of them would, because whether we like it or not, a good
number of them would come from unwed, unsupported, inner city welfare
recipients.

I am sure if the anti-abortion types raised the money and paid these
women to have the children. Oh wait, the idea is for someone else to
pay for it. Ya, right.

As I said, the anti-abortion movement is just another form of bully
mentality of idle fanatical minds. Last thing the world needs is
another starving, neglected, welfare sucking, poorly raised delinquent.

Look at Africa, billion new babies or so in the next 10 or 12 years to
add to the starvation and poverty they already have. Brilliant. /sarcasm

--
Eat the rich, screw the companies and wonder why there are no jobs.
-- Obama and the lefty fleabagger attitude

On 26/09/2011 10:33 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 09:41:09 -0600,
wrote:

Abortions don't create starving illiterate homeless children turning to
crime either.

Nuck, you have a point
Maybe they are just not framing the issue correctly.
They should say abortion is the most effective way to increase the
high school graduation rate, cut the crime rate and reduce the number
of people on welfare.

And Africa/Haiti are good examples of what happens with excessive ouof
control breeding of unsupportable children. Decay results as population
over runs resources.

But the reality is religion uses this as a way to out populate the
competition. No secret why Catholics are officially not to use birth
control.

In fact, in the past kings would have wars to deal with young population
growth to cut down the young aggressive male population and maintain
control for their kingdoms.

Why do people think the middle east and parts of Africa are a mess?
Somalia for example, go in there 20 year ago and feed, they breed and
now the problem is worse as you have a new crop of gang banging thugs
hyped up on the need for violence in their misery.

--
Eat the rich, screw the companies and wonder why there are no jobs.
-- Obama and the lefty fleabagger attitude