|
Just for the record
On 9/25/2011 3:09 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 10:56:52 -0400, 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 can't Krause's to know right from wrong when they weren't taught. |
Just for the record
On 9/25/2011 2:53 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 19:15:14 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 18:08:28 -0400, 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. Wholeheartedly agree, let me restate: You are entitled to your religious beliefs, as long as you don't try to make them the law of the land. Why are beliefs based upon religous principles contrary to the public good but beliefs based upon secular humanism are encouraged as good for the public? Typically law comes from a deity thru a king to the people. Or have you forgotten about history, all of history. Spoken like a true Moslem. Sharia law, anybody? Didn't Krause call himself a secular humanist a short time ago? |
Just for the record
On 9/25/11 3:09 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 10:56:52 -0400, 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. My daughter waited longer than that...and she was in her 30s's. Too busy with education and career. |
Just for the record
On 9/25/2011 3:31 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 15:16:38 -0400, wrote: On 9/25/2011 2:53 PM, wrote: On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 19:15:14 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 18:08:28 -0400, 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. Wholeheartedly agree, let me restate: You are entitled to your religious beliefs, as long as you don't try to make them the law of the land. Why are beliefs based upon religous principles contrary to the public good but beliefs based upon secular humanism are encouraged as good for the public? Typically law comes from a deity thru a king to the people. Or have you forgotten about history, all of history. Spoken like a true Moslem. Sharia law, anybody? Didn't Krause call himself a secular humanist a short time ago? No, he didn't, though it makes me wonder if you are the spoofer that did. Did you also spoof NOYB with the wrong name? Wonder all you want but Krause did use that as a handle for a period of time. |
Just for the record
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? |
Just for the record
On 9/25/2011 2:11 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 24/09/2011 5:04 PM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 24/09/2011 7:56 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 9/24/2011 9:08 AM, iBoaterer 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. What's the old saying... "If I have to explain it to you, you wouldn't understand". Being a Christian Liberatarian, I can't condone pushing my religious views on anybody, particularly someone who is only really asking a "gotcha" question anyway... BTW, I noticed you all never answered his question as to weather President Obama is a liar or a hypocrite when it comes to his religion. snerk You really don't want to have a civil discussion, you are looking to further the argument. Didn't work with Tim, isn't working with John, and it probably won't work with anybody else, like I said, "if you don't know, I can't explain it to you". And really, if you don't want to know, why ask? Obama is a Muslim. Pretty obvious. He stated it to George Snuffalufagus. From a Saudi point of view, Obama has been real good. Getting ready for a Islamic fundi middle east state. Look at the leaders who have fallen, no Sharia/Islam as the basis of government. But I suspect the Muslim Brotherhood is an Obama ally. Ally? He is their best weapon... |
Just for the record
On 9/25/2011 3:09 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 10:56:52 -0400, 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. I have three daughters between age 17 and 30, two married and still none of the three have been pregnant... I raised them not to get into a situation where "that" was all there was to do. It was not that hard but it did mean I couldn't spend my evenings on a bar stool or my weekends in front of a TV... |
Just for the record
On 9/25/11 5:30 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/25/2011 2:11 PM, Canuck57 wrote: On 24/09/2011 5:04 PM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 24/09/2011 7:56 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 9/24/2011 9:08 AM, iBoaterer 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. What's the old saying... "If I have to explain it to you, you wouldn't understand". Being a Christian Liberatarian, I can't condone pushing my religious views on anybody, particularly someone who is only really asking a "gotcha" question anyway... BTW, I noticed you all never answered his question as to weather President Obama is a liar or a hypocrite when it comes to his religion. snerk You really don't want to have a civil discussion, you are looking to further the argument. Didn't work with Tim, isn't working with John, and it probably won't work with anybody else, like I said, "if you don't know, I can't explain it to you". And really, if you don't want to know, why ask? Obama is a Muslim. Pretty obvious. He stated it to George Snuffalufagus. From a Saudi point of view, Obama has been real good. Getting ready for a Islamic fundi middle east state. Look at the leaders who have fallen, no Sharia/Islam as the basis of government. But I suspect the Muslim Brotherhood is an Obama ally. Ally? He is their best weapon.. Surely there is a moron chorus somewhere for you two...maybe on youtube, eh? |
Just for the record
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.. |
Just for the record
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?? |
Just for the record
On 9/25/11 5:36 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/25/2011 3:09 PM, wrote: On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 10:56:52 -0400, 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. I have three daughters between age 17 and 30, two married and still none of the three have been pregnant... I raised them not to get into a situation where "that" was all there was to do. It was not that hard but it did mean I couldn't spend my evenings on a bar stool or my weekends in front of a TV... Do they know they probably have to have sexual intercourse to get pregnant? There are several other ways, of course, but I doubt immaculate conception is an excuse that will work these days. |
Just for the record
On 9/25/2011 3:58 PM, Drifter wrote:
On 9/25/2011 3:31 PM, wrote: On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 15:16:38 -0400, wrote: On 9/25/2011 2:53 PM, wrote: On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 19:15:14 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 18:08:28 -0400, 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. Wholeheartedly agree, let me restate: You are entitled to your religious beliefs, as long as you don't try to make them the law of the land. Why are beliefs based upon religous principles contrary to the public good but beliefs based upon secular humanism are encouraged as good for the public? Typically law comes from a deity thru a king to the people. Or have you forgotten about history, all of history. Spoken like a true Moslem. Sharia law, anybody? Didn't Krause call himself a secular humanist a short time ago? No, he didn't, though it makes me wonder if you are the spoofer that did. Did you also spoof NOYB with the wrong name? Wonder all you want but Krause did use that as a handle for a period of time. Yes, he even had a reference to it in his sig file for a while... |
Just for the record
On 9/25/2011 12:03 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 24/09/2011 5:41 PM, Eisboch wrote: Hmmm. That means we might abort a fetus in one case and abort a human in another. Are we and the scientists smart enough to determine that? Do we have the right? I am not sure we have a choice. Good scientists with high rationality index, good logic and cognitive skills are the best we have in society to make a rational decisions. Probably not smart enough all the same, but sure beats the alternatives. Would you rather be judged by a flippant politician or statism religion zealot make the choice? I would be more in fear of a "secular humanist" like our resident asshole... |
Just for the record
|
Just for the record
On 9/25/2011 11:44 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 24/09/2011 4:54 PM, wrote: On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 18:08:28 -0400, 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. Wholeheartedly agree, let me restate: You are entitled to your religious beliefs, as long as you don't try to make them the law of the land. Wise. Yes, but the "religion" of atheism is taught, uh, pushed in the schools. I guess you are ok with that? |
Just for the record
On 9/25/11 5:40 PM, JustWait wrote:
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.. bull**** |
Just for the record
On 9/25/11 5:40 PM, JustWait wrote:
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.. You're misinformed, but it is interesting that you have that incorrect info "readily available." Good luck. |
Just for the record
On 25/09/2011 3:39 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 9/25/11 5:30 PM, JustWait wrote: On 9/25/2011 2:11 PM, Canuck57 wrote: On 24/09/2011 5:04 PM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 24/09/2011 7:56 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 9/24/2011 9:08 AM, iBoaterer 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. What's the old saying... "If I have to explain it to you, you wouldn't understand". Being a Christian Liberatarian, I can't condone pushing my religious views on anybody, particularly someone who is only really asking a "gotcha" question anyway... BTW, I noticed you all never answered his question as to weather President Obama is a liar or a hypocrite when it comes to his religion. snerk You really don't want to have a civil discussion, you are looking to further the argument. Didn't work with Tim, isn't working with John, and it probably won't work with anybody else, like I said, "if you don't know, I can't explain it to you". And really, if you don't want to know, why ask? Obama is a Muslim. Pretty obvious. He stated it to George Snuffalufagus. From a Saudi point of view, Obama has been real good. Getting ready for a Islamic fundi middle east state. Look at the leaders who have fallen, no Sharia/Islam as the basis of government. But I suspect the Muslim Brotherhood is an Obama ally. Ally? He is their best weapon.. Surely there is a moron chorus somewhere for you two...maybe on youtube, eh? Well he is Islam's best weapon. Uniting the middle easy and arab countries into a mega Islam under Saudi dominance. Libya was Saudi's biggest oil/riches competition. And US citizens protect a non-democratic state of Sharia and slavery. Obama does nothing in countries protected by Saudi politics. Neither did Bush for that mater. Always kind of miffed me why most 9/11 was of Saudi/Yemen descent, known moneys from Saudi/Yemen for terrorism yet so little done. Hey, who funded Osama? Who funds Hamas? -- First rule of holes: If you're in one, don't keep digging. So in the hole, why do we insanely want more debt? |
Just for the record
On 25/09/2011 3:40 PM, JustWait wrote:
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.. Doubtful. How about Utah? FDLS might adopt them. Especially if female and not genetically related to the flock. -- First rule of holes: If you're in one, don't keep digging. So in the hole, why do we insanely want more debt? |
Just for the record
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). -- First rule of holes: If you're in one, don't keep digging. So in the hole, why do we insanely want more debt? |
Just for the record
On 25/09/2011 3:46 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/25/2011 11:44 AM, Canuck57 wrote: On 24/09/2011 4:54 PM, wrote: On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 18:08:28 -0400, 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. Wholeheartedly agree, let me restate: You are entitled to your religious beliefs, as long as you don't try to make them the law of the land. Wise. Yes, but the "religion" of atheism is taught, uh, pushed in the schools. I guess you are ok with that? Lots of things are pushed through the schools. 1/2 the reason big government likes K12 is the brainwashing, government is good, unions are good, statism is good, your government can do no wrong, you can only vote democrat or republican, the two chosen ponies in the socially rigged race of democracy. But the best schools discuss it all, open minded, teach but do not profess, and get the kids to think and choose for themselves without bias. How much sociology do kids get, zero. Do schools discuss media propaganda, herd management, the use of greed and envy by politicians? How about how debt really works? Most can't even later calculate interest on their debt as adults. Fact is K12 has only one real purpose politicians will not discuss frankly. Make herd animals conditioned for government control and benefit of the big government. As socially dependent sheep are far less likely to revolt over the financial slavery and corruption of big government. But th 18 year olds of the last 5 years are a growing discontent that will in time bring DC to its knees, just too much corruption. -- First rule of holes: If you're in one, don't keep digging. So in the hole, why do we insanely want more debt? |
Just for the record
On 9/25/2011 9:43 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 25/09/2011 3:40 PM, JustWait wrote: 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.. Doubtful. How about Utah? FDLS might adopt them. Especially if female and not genetically related to the flock. So, they get in a car, hip hop over the border, and have at it... |
Just for the record
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? |
Just for the record
On 9/25/2011 10:07 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 25/09/2011 3:46 PM, JustWait wrote: On 9/25/2011 11:44 AM, Canuck57 wrote: On 24/09/2011 4:54 PM, wrote: On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 18:08:28 -0400, 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. Wholeheartedly agree, let me restate: You are entitled to your religious beliefs, as long as you don't try to make them the law of the land. Wise. Yes, but the "religion" of atheism is taught, uh, pushed in the schools. I guess you are ok with that? Lots of things are pushed through the schools. 1/2 the reason big government likes K12 is the brainwashing, government is good, unions are good, statism is good, your government can do no wrong, you can only vote democrat or republican, the two chosen ponies in the socially rigged race of democracy. But the best schools discuss it all, open minded, teach but do not profess, and get the kids to think and choose for themselves without bias. Well, unless it's a system of belief held by some 80% of the population, right? I would expect that type of somethingoranother from the progressives here, not so much you... How much sociology do kids get, zero. Do schools discuss media propaganda, herd management, the use of greed and envy by politicians? How about how debt really works? Most can't even later calculate interest on their debt as adults. Fact is K12 has only one real purpose politicians will not discuss frankly. Make herd animals conditioned for government control and benefit of the big government. As socially dependent sheep are far less likely to revolt over the financial slavery and corruption of big government. But th 18 year olds of the last 5 years are a growing discontent that will in time bring DC to its knees, just too much corruption. |
Just for the record
On 25/09/2011 3:43 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/25/2011 12:03 PM, Canuck57 wrote: On 24/09/2011 5:41 PM, Eisboch wrote: Hmmm. That means we might abort a fetus in one case and abort a human in another. Are we and the scientists smart enough to determine that? Do we have the right? I am not sure we have a choice. Good scientists with high rationality index, good logic and cognitive skills are the best we have in society to make a rational decisions. Probably not smart enough all the same, but sure beats the alternatives. Would you rather be judged by a flippant politician or statism religion zealot make the choice? I would be more in fear of a "secular humanist" like our resident asshole... Yep. But the answer also has to do with are you guilty or not and your position in the system. For example, under Sharia law you are twice as right as a Muslim male than a female. And infidels count for nothing, and in fact Sharia courts my toss out factual scientific evidence in favor of a Muslim make. Sort of playing poker with two wilds cards dealt to you and there are only 2 in the deck. Case in point. Malaysian woman working for slave wages for a Saudi Muslim woman, Muslim master does not want to let her go. In an effort to get out, Muslim slave master is killed. Off with the infidels head. The full story. http://globalspin.blogs.time.com/201...-saudi-arabia/ Fact is Saudi Arabia is a slave state. Not a week goes by without an example of required obedience. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_t...n_Saudi_Arabia Yet King Fahd's sons go to the US all the time, and time to keep both you girls and boys indoors. Yet Obama the great ignores this, and goes to Libya with a much better human rights record in the region. As Saudi Arabia is amongst the worst human right offenders in the world. -- First rule of holes: If you're in one, don't keep digging. So in the hole, why do we insanely want more debt? |
Just for the record
In article ,
says... On 9/25/11 3:09 PM, wrote: On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 10:56:52 -0400, 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. My daughter waited longer than that...and she was in her 30s's. Too busy with education and career. Of course, your daughter, like you, is better than every other living creature....... |
Just for the record
In article ,
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/ |
Just for the record
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... |
Just for the record
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. 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. 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. Our jobs should be to our family, not to the state to provided breeding vessels and soldiers. -- First rule of holes: If you're in one, don't keep digging. So in the hole, why do we insanely want more debt? |
Just for the record
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... |
Just for the record
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..... |
Just for the record
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. |
Just for the record
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? |
Just for the record
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... |
Just for the record
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. |
Just for the record
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. |
Just for the record
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 |
Just for the record
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 |
Just for the record
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:19 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com