Just for the record
 

On 9/26/2011 1:48 PM, wrote:

Being a white guy growing up in a black neighborhood in the 50s and
60s , I knew of both.

You and Harry have something in common. I wonder why Harry is ashamed to
admit it.

Just for the record
 

On 26/09/2011 12:12 PM, Drifter wrote:
On 9/26/2011 1:48 PM, wrote:

Being a white guy growing up in a black neighborhood in the 50s and
60s , I knew of both.

You and Harry have something in common. I wonder why Harry is ashamed to
admit it.

I looked up his address since and the income levels of the area. Sure
didn't look like the upscale neighborhood to me.
--
Eat the rich, screw the companies and wonder why there are no jobs.
-- Obama and the lefty fleabagger attitude

Just for the record
 

On 9/26/2011 5:00 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 12:14:10 -0600,
wrote:

On 26/09/2011 12:12 PM, Drifter wrote:
On 9/26/2011 1:48 PM, wrote:

Being a white guy growing up in a black neighborhood in the 50s and
60s , I knew of both.

You and Harry have something in common. I wonder why Harry is ashamed to
admit it.

I looked up his address since and the income levels of the area. Sure
didn't look like the upscale neighborhood to me.

"Cawlvert" County is where DC people ran to when they wanted to get
away from black people.

Wouldn't that make Harry a racist? It appears that he wasn't forthright
when he expressed his love and admiration for them. He said he wanted
his grandson, the one in Connecticut, I presume, to court and marry one
of them. I guess we need to watch what he does; not what he says.

Just for the record
 

On 9/26/11 5:00 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 12:14:10 -0600,
wrote:

On 26/09/2011 12:12 PM, Drifter wrote:
On 9/26/2011 1:48 PM, wrote:

Being a white guy growing up in a black neighborhood in the 50s and
60s , I knew of both.

You and Harry have something in common. I wonder why Harry is ashamed to
admit it.

I looked up his address since and the income levels of the area. Sure
didn't look like the upscale neighborhood to me.

"Cawlvert" County is where DC people ran to when they wanted to get
away from black people.

Actually, these days and for the last nearly 10 years, Calvert County is
where many people from Virginia moved to get away from the crowding and
congestion of northern Virginia. It's one of the reasons why we moved to it.

Just for the record
 

On 9/26/2011 6:01 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 9/26/11 5:00 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 12:14:10 -0600,
wrote:

On 26/09/2011 12:12 PM, Drifter wrote:
On 9/26/2011 1:48 PM, wrote:

Being a white guy growing up in a black neighborhood in the 50s and
60s , I knew of both.

You and Harry have something in common. I wonder why Harry is
ashamed to
admit it.

I looked up his address since and the income levels of the area. Sure
didn't look like the upscale neighborhood to me.

"Cawlvert" County is where DC people ran to when they wanted to get
away from black people.

Actually, these days and for the last nearly 10 years, Calvert County is
where many people from Virginia moved to get away from the crowding and
congestion of northern Virginia. It's one of the reasons why we moved to
it.

Your hatred of black people had nothing to do with it?
Swear to God?

Just for the record
 

On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 11:49:50 -0600, Canuck57 wrote:

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

Africa's problems are not the result of anti-abortion types. Sometimes you come across as though
your head is where the sun don't shine.

Just for the record
 

On 9/26/2011 1:49 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
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.

Yeah, so lets kill each and every baby we can to make sure we don't get
a bad one... You guys kill me, I just never thought of you as a
progressive, forcing your ideals on women... Cause there is only one
voice that comes from Planned Abortionhood...



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

Just for the record
 

On 9/26/2011 1:45 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
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.

Then why not let the doctors or Planned Abortionhood types discuss
alternatives to Abortion, can't stand up to the scrutiny???

Just for the record
 

On 9/26/2011 1:55 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
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.


So your answer is government funded, and protected "violence"? Remember,
the government pays for abortions, but won't even discuss
alternatives... Again, with no opposition at all, what are you all
crying about?

Just for the record
 

On 9/26/2011 7:07 PM, John H wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 11:49:50 -0600, wrote:

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

Africa's problems are not the result of anti-abortion types. Sometimes you come across as though
your head is where the sun don't shine.

Obviously he is a ideologue when it comes to this subject.. Almost to
the point of acting like a progressive... He thinks he is the ultimate
authority and there is just no room for compromise or other opinion to
the point where he is making up hyperbole as quickly as Krause or the
Plum...

Just for the record
 

On 26/09/2011 5:07 PM, John H wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 11:49:50 -0600, wrote:

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

Africa's problems are not the result of anti-abortion types. Sometimes you come across as though
your head is where the sun don't shine.

Well, where does the anti-abortion and anti-birth control crowd end?

If you do it by the book (Muslim or Catholic) your not supposed to use
birth control of any method. Have to out populate the other when war
doesn't work.

This is about religious ignorance and goes well beyond a simple domestic
US clinical abortion. It does get into the bigger picture of population
sustainability and th quality of which children are raised.

Having kids at any cost isn't the answer. It might have been 10,000 or
even 2000 years ago, but it is no longer true today.

--
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 5:14 PM, JustWait wrote:

Yeah, so lets kill each and every baby we can to make sure we don't get
a bad one... You guys kill me, I just never thought of you as a
progressive, forcing your ideals on women... Cause there is only one
voice that comes from Planned Abortionhood...

Answer this, does government have the rights to tell a woman what to do
with her womb?

Simple question. Because if so, it also implies they have the right to
tell you how to use your pecker.

--
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 5:16 PM, JustWait wrote:

Then why not let the doctors or Planned Abortionhood types discuss
alternatives to Abortion, can't stand up to the scrutiny???

Depends how it it done?

Is it as simple as here are your options: (order them how you want)

- abortion now
- have birth and keep the child
- have birth and place for adoption

Of above, presenting the options in a non-bully way without bias, this
is great.

But often it is laced with a guilt trip bullying. "Hey baby killing
bitch, why don't you be a breeding vessel and give it up for adoption
because my religion says so."

Of which I completely disagree. Just another form of verbal bullying.
--
Eat the rich, screw the companies and wonder why there are no jobs.
-- Obama and the lefty fleabagger attitude

Just for the record
 

On 9/26/2011 7:34 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:07 PM, John H wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 11:49:50 -0600, wrote:

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

Africa's problems are not the result of anti-abortion types. Sometimes
you come across as though
your head is where the sun don't shine.

Well, where does the anti-abortion and anti-birth control crowd end?

If you do it by the book (Muslim or Catholic) your not supposed to use
birth control of any method. Have to out populate the other when war
doesn't work.

This is about religious ignorance and goes well beyond a simple domestic
US clinical abortion. It does get into the bigger picture of population
sustainability and th quality of which children are raised.

Having kids at any cost isn't the answer. It might have been 10,000 or
even 2000 years ago, but it is no longer true today.


So your solution is to control the population by making sure young women
only hear one voice, and that voice is yours? Yep, no compromise, no
other opinions or information allowed.. you are a fleabagger yourself...

Just for the record
 

On 9/26/2011 7:41 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:14 PM, JustWait wrote:

Yeah, so lets kill each and every baby we can to make sure we don't get
a bad one... You guys kill me, I just never thought of you as a
progressive, forcing your ideals on women... Cause there is only one
voice that comes from Planned Abortionhood...

Answer this, does government have the rights to tell a woman what to do
with her womb?

Simple question. Because if so, it also implies they have the right to
tell you how to use your pecker.

Answer this. Why don't you want women to at least hear of alternatives?

Just for the record
 

On 26/09/2011 5:18 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 1:55 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
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.


So your answer is government funded, and protected "violence"? Remember,
the government pays for abortions, but won't even discuss
alternatives... Again, with no opposition at all, what are you all
crying about?

So who is going to pay for the alternatives? Oh, you want me to pay.
Nothing to stop the pro-lifers to offer to pay these women to term for
their keep and compensation for missing a year of school or whatever.
Or perhaps pay for 20 years of support. Some might take you up on it if
they thought you were credible.

Present alternatives yes, discuss alternatives is just verbal bullying.
While I am not a woman, I would bet a pregnant woman takes it
seriously and didn't go to an abortion clinic by accident. No need to
bully the choices a doctor and the woman should make.

But we all know religious pushy gets.
--
Eat the rich, screw the companies and wonder why there are no jobs.
-- Obama and the lefty fleabagger attitude

Just for the record
 

On 9/26/2011 7:47 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:16 PM, JustWait wrote:

Then why not let the doctors or Planned Abortionhood types discuss
alternatives to Abortion, can't stand up to the scrutiny???

Depends how it it done?

Is it as simple as here are your options: (order them how you want)

- abortion now
- have birth and keep the child
- have birth and place for adoption

Of above, presenting the options in a non-bully way without bias, this
is great.

Then why won't planned abortionhood or the government allow the second
two options to be explained and explored?

But often it is laced with a guilt trip bullying. "Hey baby killing
bitch, why don't you be a breeding vessel and give it up for adoption
because my religion says so."

Bull****... only one option is discussed so the "fringe" have no other
option but to yell from the sidelines...

Of which I completely disagree. Just another form of verbal bullying.

Kinda' like surpressing the speech and knowledge of alternatives from
even being discussed, yup, it's bullying all right...

Just for the record
 

On 9/26/2011 7:54 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:18 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 1:55 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
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.


So your answer is government funded, and protected "violence"? Remember,
the government pays for abortions, but won't even discuss
alternatives... Again, with no opposition at all, what are you all
crying about?

So who is going to pay for the alternatives? Oh, you want me to pay.
Nothing to stop the pro-lifers to offer to pay these women to term for
their keep and compensation for missing a year of school or whatever. Or
perhaps pay for 20 years of support. Some might take you up on it if
they thought you were credible.

So, because it's cheaper for you to pay for an abortion, you are cool
with that? Figures, most progressives look at the purse first...


Present alternatives yes, discuss alternatives is just verbal bullying.
While I am not a woman, I would bet a pregnant woman takes it seriously
and didn't go to an abortion clinic by accident. No need to bully the
choices a doctor and the woman should make.

But we all know religious pushy gets.

We all know progressives get pushy, and if they don't get their way,
they get violent and criminal, what's your point?

Just for the record
 

On 26/09/2011 5:50 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 7:34 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:07 PM, John H wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 11:49:50 -0600, wrote:

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

Africa's problems are not the result of anti-abortion types. Sometimes
you come across as though
your head is where the sun don't shine.

Well, where does the anti-abortion and anti-birth control crowd end?

If you do it by the book (Muslim or Catholic) your not supposed to use
birth control of any method. Have to out populate the other when war
doesn't work.

This is about religious ignorance and goes well beyond a simple domestic
US clinical abortion. It does get into the bigger picture of population
sustainability and th quality of which children are raised.

Having kids at any cost isn't the answer. It might have been 10,000 or
even 2000 years ago, but it is no longer true today.


So your solution is to control the population by making sure young women
only hear one voice, and that voice is yours? Yep, no compromise, no
other opinions or information allowed.. you are a fleabagger yourself...

No, fleabaggers are pushy. I just want here rights respected. And that
means no guilt ripping from the religious fruitballs or government
regulation of pussy.

Women have rights. Present the options straight up without the
bull****, then listen. Then she gets to decided without the religious
bull****.
--
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 5:51 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 7:41 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:14 PM, JustWait wrote:

Yeah, so lets kill each and every baby we can to make sure we don't get
a bad one... You guys kill me, I just never thought of you as a
progressive, forcing your ideals on women... Cause there is only one
voice that comes from Planned Abortionhood...

Answer this, does government have the rights to tell a woman what to do
with her womb?

Simple question. Because if so, it also implies they have the right to
tell you how to use your pecker.

Answer this. Why don't you want women to at least hear of alternatives?

Never said that, present the alternatives once without a bigoted biased
opinion, I am all for that. Information is good, religious bully is bad.

Pro-choice, a Libertarian view.

I will even go one step further, if the abortion is for birth control,
give her a pamphlet on more effective birth control pills including a 6
month supply.

--
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 5:54 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 7:47 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:16 PM, JustWait wrote:

Then why not let the doctors or Planned Abortionhood types discuss
alternatives to Abortion, can't stand up to the scrutiny???

Depends how it it done?

Is it as simple as here are your options: (order them how you want)

- abortion now
- have birth and keep the child
- have birth and place for adoption

Of above, presenting the options in a non-bully way without bias, this
is great.

Then why won't planned abortionhood or the government allow the second
two options to be explained and explored?

I would be willing to be the above is discussed with 99% of the doctors
out there without having to see a special government funded religious
crack pot.

Or put it on a website. Most women of breeding age can read in USA and
Canada.

But often it is laced with a guilt trip bullying. "Hey baby killing
bitch, why don't you be a breeding vessel and give it up for adoption
because my religion says so."

Bull****... only one option is discussed so the "fringe" have no other
option but to yell from the sidelines...

I think there is a video on youtube or somewhere, taken undercover of
this very thing. And further, I know someone who has had this bull****
done to them. The mental scares it leaves are a crime really.

Of which I completely disagree. Just another form of verbal bullying.

Kinda' like surpressing the speech and knowledge of alternatives from
even being discussed, yup, it's bullying all right...

Nobody is suppressing anything, other than your need to bully around a
woman in compromised situation. Does it make you feel like a man?

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

Just for the record
 

On 9/26/2011 7:58 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:50 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 7:34 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:07 PM, John H wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 11:49:50 -0600,
wrote:

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

Africa's problems are not the result of anti-abortion types. Sometimes
you come across as though
your head is where the sun don't shine.

Well, where does the anti-abortion and anti-birth control crowd end?

If you do it by the book (Muslim or Catholic) your not supposed to use
birth control of any method. Have to out populate the other when war
doesn't work.

This is about religious ignorance and goes well beyond a simple domestic
US clinical abortion. It does get into the bigger picture of population
sustainability and th quality of which children are raised.

Having kids at any cost isn't the answer. It might have been 10,000 or
even 2000 years ago, but it is no longer true today.


So your solution is to control the population by making sure young women
only hear one voice, and that voice is yours? Yep, no compromise, no
other opinions or information allowed.. you are a fleabagger yourself...

No, fleabaggers are pushy. I just want here rights respected. And that
means no guilt ripping from the religious fruitballs or government
regulation of pussy.

Women have rights. Present the options straight up without the bull****,
then listen. Then she gets to decided without the religious bull****.

Yeah nice words but you know as well as I do, you are not going to let
her hear any other option, and use one or two protesters as an excuse to
limit the information to your own opinion... But you will just go on and
cherry pick incidents, lie by omission, and protect your own selfish
desire to run the "pussy" as you put it... I am done with you, you are
as honest as Krause in this matter... I have accompanied a young woman
to Planned Abortionhood, it's nothing like you suggest, it's a big lie
to suggest that information can't be available because there "might" be
someone out there with religious views... Yup, you are a fleabagger
bully and a religious bigot, for sure... You should really consider
voting for Obama this time around... He likes "compromise" too, as long
as we remember, "elections have concequences"... but I guess like most
fleabaggers, as long as you get your way, you are cool with it... and I
won't forget, it comes down to dollars and cents with you.. Seeing a
pattern here???

Just for the record
 

On 9/26/2011 8:03 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:51 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 7:41 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:14 PM, JustWait wrote:

Yeah, so lets kill each and every baby we can to make sure we don't get
a bad one... You guys kill me, I just never thought of you as a
progressive, forcing your ideals on women... Cause there is only one
voice that comes from Planned Abortionhood...

Answer this, does government have the rights to tell a woman what to do
with her womb?

Simple question. Because if so, it also implies they have the right to
tell you how to use your pecker.

Answer this. Why don't you want women to at least hear of alternatives?

Never said that, present the alternatives once without a bigoted biased
opinion, I am all for that. Information is good, religious bully is bad.

And suggesting that all anti abortion opinions are "religous bullying"
is just ignorant and bigoted.... To suggest that the only reason for
being against abortion is religious is just as ignorant...


Pro-choice, a Libertarian view.

Yes, and only abortion is a Progressive view... Like I said, I have
accompanied a young woman to a Planned Abortionhood clinic as a young
man (it was a neighbor, I was not the father) so I know how it goes.
there is no other options discussed, you walk in pregnant, you walk out
with an appointment to terminate it... The girl asked about full term
and abortion and the conversation was changed immediately. Remember,
Planned Abortionhood makes it's living killing babies, not saving
them... Either way, I was there, but you can go ahead and spew your
hyperbole as much as you want... but you are still talking out of your
ass, oh, and lying too... and you know it... Later...


I will even go one step further, if the abortion is for birth control,
give her a pamphlet on more effective birth control pills including a 6
month supply.

Just for the record
 

On 9/26/2011 8:13 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:54 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 7:47 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:16 PM, JustWait wrote:

Then why not let the doctors or Planned Abortionhood types discuss
alternatives to Abortion, can't stand up to the scrutiny???

Depends how it it done?

Is it as simple as here are your options: (order them how you want)

- abortion now
- have birth and keep the child
- have birth and place for adoption

Of above, presenting the options in a non-bully way without bias, this
is great.

Then why won't planned abortionhood or the government allow the second
two options to be explained and explored?

I would be willing to be the above is discussed with 99% of the doctors
out there without having to see a special government funded religious
crack pot.

Or put it on a website. Most women of breeding age can read in USA and
Canada.

But often it is laced with a guilt trip bullying. "Hey baby killing
bitch, why don't you be a breeding vessel and give it up for adoption
because my religion says so."

Bull****... only one option is discussed so the "fringe" have no other
option but to yell from the sidelines...

I think there is a video on youtube or somewhere, taken undercover of
this very thing. And further, I know someone who has had this bull****
done to them. The mental scares it leaves are a crime really.

Of which I completely disagree. Just another form of verbal bullying.

Kinda' like surpressing the speech and knowledge of alternatives from
even being discussed, yup, it's bullying all right...

Nobody is suppressing anything, other than your need to bully around a
woman in compromised situation. Does it make you feel like a man?


What makes you think I want to bully a woman? More Progressive smear??

Just for the record
 

On 26/09/2011 6:15 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 7:58 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:50 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 7:34 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:07 PM, John H wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 11:49:50 -0600,
wrote:

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

Africa's problems are not the result of anti-abortion types. Sometimes
you come across as though
your head is where the sun don't shine.

Well, where does the anti-abortion and anti-birth control crowd end?

If you do it by the book (Muslim or Catholic) your not supposed to use
birth control of any method. Have to out populate the other when war
doesn't work.

This is about religious ignorance and goes well beyond a simple
domestic
US clinical abortion. It does get into the bigger picture of population
sustainability and th quality of which children are raised.

Having kids at any cost isn't the answer. It might have been 10,000 or
even 2000 years ago, but it is no longer true today.


So your solution is to control the population by making sure young women
only hear one voice, and that voice is yours? Yep, no compromise, no
other opinions or information allowed.. you are a fleabagger yourself...

No, fleabaggers are pushy. I just want here rights respected. And that
means no guilt ripping from the religious fruitballs or government
regulation of pussy.

Women have rights. Present the options straight up without the bull****,
then listen. Then she gets to decided without the religious bull****.

Yeah nice words but you know as well as I do, you are not going to let
her hear any other option, and use one or two protesters as an excuse to
limit the information to your own opinion... But you will just go on and
cherry pick incidents, lie by omission, and protect your own selfish
desire to run the "pussy" as you put it... I am done with you, you are
as honest as Krause in this matter... I have accompanied a young woman
to Planned Abortionhood, it's nothing like you suggest, it's a big lie
to suggest that information can't be available because there "might" be
someone out there with religious views... Yup, you are a fleabagger
bully and a religious bigot, for sure... You should really consider
voting for Obama this time around... He likes "compromise" too, as long
as we remember, "elections have concequences"... but I guess like most
fleabaggers, as long as you get your way, you are cool with it... and I
won't forget, it comes down to dollars and cents with you.. Seeing a
pattern here???

Nope, just a libertarian, leaving the person with the choices that has
to live with the choice. And should be without the strong arm of
politics or religion.
--
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 6:20 PM, JustWait wrote:

And suggesting that all anti abortion opinions are "religous bullying"
is just ignorant and bigoted.... To suggest that the only reason for
being against abortion is religious is just as ignorant...


Pro-choice, a Libertarian view.

Yes, and only abortion is a Progressive view... Like I said, I have
accompanied a young woman to a Planned Abortionhood clinic as a young
man (it was a neighbor, I was not the father) so I know how it goes.
there is no other options discussed, you walk in pregnant, you walk out
with an appointment to terminate it... The girl asked about full term
and abortion and the conversation was changed immediately. Remember,
Planned Abortionhood makes it's living killing babies, not saving
them... Either way, I was there, but you can go ahead and spew your
hyperbole as much as you want... but you are still talking out of your
ass, oh, and lying too... and you know it... Later...

I never once suggested abortion is the only option.

Just that the person that has to live with the decision should be
allowed to make the decision without other opinionated and biased busy
bodies that will not be there to live with the decision.

But out. Respect the decisions of others without the crap.

--
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 5:58 PM, JustWait wrote:

So, because it's cheaper for you to pay for an abortion, you are cool
with that? Figures, most progressives look at the purse first...

I have heard it said it takes $250,000 in todays dollars to raise a
child property. Food, medical, dental, cloths, school fees, books,
computers, sports.....and more I have likely missed. Plus the cost of
yourself.

So you are a fool if you think money doesn't mater. Say your 16, old
man kicks you out because your knocked up or no resources for another
kid, you haven't finished high school or college, boyfriend is a dead
beat and gone. There you sit, you have to decide. Here comes some pro
lifers that will not be around for the next 20 years advising her that
she would be a murder for aborting a 3mm long fetus that has no heart
and no brain it is months off from developing.

So why not get an abortion, continue with school after a few sick days,
put your life together then when married, stable and fiscal income then
have them? Sure beats living on welfare in the slums for 20 years to life.

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

Just for the record
 

On 9/27/2011 12:20 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 6:15 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 7:58 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:50 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 7:34 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:07 PM, John H wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 11:49:50 -0600,
wrote:

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

Africa's problems are not the result of anti-abortion types.
Sometimes
you come across as though
your head is where the sun don't shine.

Well, where does the anti-abortion and anti-birth control crowd end?

If you do it by the book (Muslim or Catholic) your not supposed to use
birth control of any method. Have to out populate the other when war
doesn't work.

This is about religious ignorance and goes well beyond a simple
domestic
US clinical abortion. It does get into the bigger picture of
population
sustainability and th quality of which children are raised.

Having kids at any cost isn't the answer. It might have been 10,000 or
even 2000 years ago, but it is no longer true today.


So your solution is to control the population by making sure young
women
only hear one voice, and that voice is yours? Yep, no compromise, no
other opinions or information allowed.. you are a fleabagger
yourself...

No, fleabaggers are pushy. I just want here rights respected. And that
means no guilt ripping from the religious fruitballs or government
regulation of pussy.

Women have rights. Present the options straight up without the bull****,
then listen. Then she gets to decided without the religious bull****.

Yeah nice words but you know as well as I do, you are not going to let
her hear any other option, and use one or two protesters as an excuse to
limit the information to your own opinion... But you will just go on and
cherry pick incidents, lie by omission, and protect your own selfish
desire to run the "pussy" as you put it... I am done with you, you are
as honest as Krause in this matter... I have accompanied a young woman
to Planned Abortionhood, it's nothing like you suggest, it's a big lie
to suggest that information can't be available because there "might" be
someone out there with religious views... Yup, you are a fleabagger
bully and a religious bigot, for sure... You should really consider
voting for Obama this time around... He likes "compromise" too, as long
as we remember, "elections have concequences"... but I guess like most
fleabaggers, as long as you get your way, you are cool with it... and I
won't forget, it comes down to dollars and cents with you.. Seeing a
pattern here???

Nope, just a libertarian, leaving the person with the choices that has
to live with the choice. And should be without the strong arm of
politics or religion.

Right, but the strong arm of atheism is ok.... I got it...

Just for the record
 

On 9/27/2011 12:23 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 6:20 PM, JustWait wrote:

And suggesting that all anti abortion opinions are "religous bullying"
is just ignorant and bigoted.... To suggest that the only reason for
being against abortion is religious is just as ignorant...


Pro-choice, a Libertarian view.

Yes, and only abortion is a Progressive view... Like I said, I have
accompanied a young woman to a Planned Abortionhood clinic as a young
man (it was a neighbor, I was not the father) so I know how it goes.
there is no other options discussed, you walk in pregnant, you walk out
with an appointment to terminate it... The girl asked about full term
and abortion and the conversation was changed immediately. Remember,
Planned Abortionhood makes it's living killing babies, not saving
them... Either way, I was there, but you can go ahead and spew your
hyperbole as much as you want... but you are still talking out of your
ass, oh, and lying too... and you know it... Later...

I never once suggested abortion is the only option.

Just that the person that has to live with the decision should be
allowed to make the decision without other opinionated and biased busy
bodies that will not be there to live with the decision.

But you are fine with Planned Abortionhood, the biggest, best funded
bullies on the block...

But out. Respect the decisions of others without the crap.

Just for the record
 

On 9/27/2011 6:40 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/27/2011 12:23 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 6:20 PM, JustWait wrote:

And suggesting that all anti abortion opinions are "religous bullying"
is just ignorant and bigoted.... To suggest that the only reason for
being against abortion is religious is just as ignorant...


Pro-choice, a Libertarian view.

Yes, and only abortion is a Progressive view... Like I said, I have
accompanied a young woman to a Planned Abortionhood clinic as a young
man (it was a neighbor, I was not the father) so I know how it goes.
there is no other options discussed, you walk in pregnant, you walk out
with an appointment to terminate it... The girl asked about full term
and abortion and the conversation was changed immediately. Remember,
Planned Abortionhood makes it's living killing babies, not saving
them... Either way, I was there, but you can go ahead and spew your
hyperbole as much as you want... but you are still talking out of your
ass, oh, and lying too... and you know it... Later...

I never once suggested abortion is the only option.

Just that the person that has to live with the decision should be
allowed to make the decision without other opinionated and biased busy
bodies that will not be there to live with the decision.

But you are fine with Planned Abortionhood, the biggest, best funded
bullies on the block...

But out. Respect the decisions of others without the crap.



Yup, typical fleabagger. As long as she only has access to your opinion,
you are cool with it..

Just for the record
 

On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 17:34:18 -0600, Canuck57 wrote:

On 26/09/2011 5:07 PM, John H wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 11:49:50 -0600, wrote:

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

Africa's problems are not the result of anti-abortion types. Sometimes you come across as though
your head is where the sun don't shine.

Well, where does the anti-abortion and anti-birth control crowd end?

If you do it by the book (Muslim or Catholic) your not supposed to use
birth control of any method. Have to out populate the other when war
doesn't work.

This is about religious ignorance and goes well beyond a simple domestic
US clinical abortion. It does get into the bigger picture of population
sustainability and th quality of which children are raised.

Having kids at any cost isn't the answer. It might have been 10,000 or
even 2000 years ago, but it is no longer true today.

I will agree that the religious prohibition of birth control (the prevention of conception) is
absolutely horrendous.

Just for the record
 

On 27/09/2011 4:39 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/27/2011 12:20 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 6:15 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 7:58 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:50 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/26/2011 7:34 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 5:07 PM, John H wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 11:49:50 -0600,
wrote:

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

Africa's problems are not the result of anti-abortion types.
Sometimes
you come across as though
your head is where the sun don't shine.

Well, where does the anti-abortion and anti-birth control crowd end?

If you do it by the book (Muslim or Catholic) your not supposed to
use
birth control of any method. Have to out populate the other when war
doesn't work.

This is about religious ignorance and goes well beyond a simple
domestic
US clinical abortion. It does get into the bigger picture of
population
sustainability and th quality of which children are raised.

Having kids at any cost isn't the answer. It might have been
10,000 or
even 2000 years ago, but it is no longer true today.


So your solution is to control the population by making sure young
women
only hear one voice, and that voice is yours? Yep, no compromise, no
other opinions or information allowed.. you are a fleabagger
yourself...

No, fleabaggers are pushy. I just want here rights respected. And that
means no guilt ripping from the religious fruitballs or government
regulation of pussy.

Women have rights. Present the options straight up without the
bull****,
then listen. Then she gets to decided without the religious bull****.

Yeah nice words but you know as well as I do, you are not going to let
her hear any other option, and use one or two protesters as an excuse to
limit the information to your own opinion... But you will just go on and
cherry pick incidents, lie by omission, and protect your own selfish
desire to run the "pussy" as you put it... I am done with you, you are
as honest as Krause in this matter... I have accompanied a young woman
to Planned Abortionhood, it's nothing like you suggest, it's a big lie
to suggest that information can't be available because there "might" be
someone out there with religious views... Yup, you are a fleabagger
bully and a religious bigot, for sure... You should really consider
voting for Obama this time around... He likes "compromise" too, as long
as we remember, "elections have concequences"... but I guess like most
fleabaggers, as long as you get your way, you are cool with it... and I
won't forget, it comes down to dollars and cents with you.. Seeing a
pattern here???

Nope, just a libertarian, leaving the person with the choices that has
to live with the choice. And should be without the strong arm of
politics or religion.

Right, but the strong arm of atheism is ok.... I got it...

I am actually agnostic, I do believe in a supreme being, but believe
that man made religion has *******ized it for political purposes as it
is often used for conquest and not uncommon sense.

I am pro-choice. I respect the choice of the woman to make her own
choices. Even god in the bile acknowledges this.

Trouble is many a fanatical emotional basket cases just like sticking
their nose where it does not belong.
--
Eat the rich, screw the companies and wonder why there are no jobs.
-- Obama and the lefty fleabagger attitude

Just for the record
 

On 9/28/2011 2:08 AM, Canuck57 wrote:


I am pro-choice. I respect the choice of the woman to make her own
choices. Even god in the bile acknowledges this.

I am pro-choice too... I just believe a woman should have the
opportunity to make an informed choice.. If you have a religious zealot
in the crew, kick 'em out, but if you have a narrow minded "abortion is
the only route" which you see a lot more of than 'religious zealots'
then they should be replaced too... but of course, they are ok because
"you" agree with them...

Just for the record
 

On 9/28/11 7:00 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/28/2011 2:08 AM, Canuck57 wrote:


I am pro-choice. I respect the choice of the woman to make her own
choices. Even god in the bile acknowledges this.

I am pro-choice too... I just believe a woman should have the
opportunity to make an informed choice.. If you have a religious zealot
in the crew, kick 'em out, but if you have a narrow minded "abortion is
the only route" which you see a lot more of than 'religious zealots'
then they should be replaced too... but of course, they are ok because
"you" agree with them...


Most women are smart enough to make their own choice about what they
want to do without being lectured to by some anti-choice moron or seeing
a video prepared by anti-choice morons. If a woman *wants* additional
information, it is readily available.

--
I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one.

Just for the record
 

On 9/28/11 2:08 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/09/2011 6:15 PM, JustWait wrote:


Yeah nice words but you know as well as I do, you are not going to let
her hear any other option, and use one or two protesters as an excuse to
limit the information to your own opinion... But you will just go on and
cherry pick incidents, lie by omission, and protect your own selfish
desire to run the "pussy" as you put it... I am done with you, you are
as honest as Krause in this matter... I have accompanied a young woman
to Planned Abortionhood, it's nothing like you suggest, it's a big lie
to suggest that information can't be available because there "might" be
someone out there with religious views... Yup, you are a fleabagger
bully and a religious bigot, for sure... You should really consider
voting for Obama this time around... He likes "compromise" too, as long
as we remember, "elections have concequences"... but I guess like most
fleabaggers, as long as you get your way, you are cool with it... and I
won't forget, it comes down to dollars and cents with you.. Seeing a
pattern here???


Nope, just a libertarian, leaving the person with the choices that has
to live with the choice. And should be without the strong arm of
politics or religion.


You should be thankful the mindless little turd is down with you.
Ingerfool says he is pro-choice, but obviously not at the point of
delivery of services.

--
I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one.

Just for the record
 

On 28/09/2011 5:00 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/28/2011 2:08 AM, Canuck57 wrote:


I am pro-choice. I respect the choice of the woman to make her own
choices. Even god in the bile acknowledges this.

I am pro-choice too... I just believe a woman should have the
opportunity to make an informed choice.. If you have a religious zealot
in the crew, kick 'em out, but if you have a narrow minded "abortion is
the only route" which you see a lot more of than 'religious zealots'
then they should be replaced too... but of course, they are ok because
"you" agree with them...

Ya, right. After a good guilt trip is placed on the woman for your
personal preferences.

As I said, present the options in a clear uncluttered unbiased way...
and she makes the choice. This means without the religious nonsense and
without the strong arm verbal bullying.

Something I doubt you or other zealots would support. As it is about
being bully pushy ass holes.

Why I know is that I have someone close to me that has experienced it.
She had an abortion, she already had one child she was raising on here
own, the father being a delinquent you couldn't count on the loser to
flush the toilet.

Well, she spent 30 minutes with some religious crack pots, talk of baby
murder and nonsense. She then had the abortion, but years later the
self esteem damage is still there. Does it make people like you feel
better to be verbal bullies?

Yet many of you support Obama-Bernanke debt fraud and corruption. Go
figure, as it is about your arrogance and lack of respect for others.
--
Eat the rich, screw the companies and wonder why there are no jobs.
-- Obama and the lefty fleabagger attitude

Just for the record
 

On 9/28/2011 5:09 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 28/09/2011 5:00 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/28/2011 2:08 AM, Canuck57 wrote:


I am pro-choice. I respect the choice of the woman to make her own
choices. Even god in the bile acknowledges this.

I am pro-choice too... I just believe a woman should have the
opportunity to make an informed choice.. If you have a religious zealot
in the crew, kick 'em out, but if you have a narrow minded "abortion is
the only route" which you see a lot more of than 'religious zealots'
then they should be replaced too... but of course, they are ok because
"you" agree with them...

Ya, right. After a good guilt trip is placed on the woman for your
personal preferences.

As I said, present the options in a clear uncluttered unbiased way...
and she makes the choice. This means without the religious nonsense and
without the strong arm verbal bullying.

ARE YOU ****ING RETARDED? THERE IS JUST AS MUCH BULLYING FROM PP AS FROM
ANY RELIGIOUS GROUP! WALK INTO AN OFFICE SOME DAY AND SEE FOR YOURSELF.
THERE IS NO NEED TO LIVE YOUR WHOLE LIFE COMPLETELY UNINFORMED....!!!

Something I doubt you or other zealots would support. As it is about
being bully pushy ass holes.

Yeah, I am a zealot... dumb ass... I support a womens right to choose,
and even accept that my tax dollars may be used for it.. You are the one
who will accept no other voices... you are the only zealot here in this
discussion...

Why I know is that I have someone close to me that has experienced it.
She had an abortion, she already had one child she was raising on here
own, the father being a delinquent you couldn't count on the loser to
flush the toilet.

So why did she **** him again, sounds pretty stupid to me...\

Well, she spent 30 minutes with some religious crack pots, talk of baby
murder and nonsense. She then had the abortion, but years later the self
esteem damage is still there. Does it make people like you feel better
to be verbal bullies?

I have never tried to talk any woman out of an abortion, your dishonest
hyperbole (made up bull****) is really no better than the other guy who
said he saw "Jesus on a stick". I told you the woman I know still has
nightmares because of what the bullies at PP did to her... But of course
you will write that off..

Yet many of you support Obama-Bernanke debt fraud and corruption. Go
figure, as it is about your arrogance and lack of respect for others.

More bull****.. I guess you are just not honest enough or informed
enough to waste any more time with...

Just for the record
 

On 28/09/2011 4:25 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 11:45:48 -0600,
wrote:

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

Or let the rich and companies continue to horde the money that America
desperately needs to restore economic health. If you completely
eliminated ALL taxes of ANY kind on American business they still could
not compete on an even playing field with China and the Pacific Rim.
Can't be done.

Funny, there is investing and loosing money. Looking at the stock
market this week looks like USA is a looser. Companies better off just
to hold out spending until Omama-Bernanke both get their walking papers.

Only solution is to move the money back to the middle class where it
will be spent and jump start the economy. Create tariffs and taxes
that will level the playing field. Invest in technology and education
the way we did during the Sputnik era. That will make us strong,
again.

Good luck with your new lower standard of living with those new excise
and tariff tax hikes. The reason geed government likes them is it gets
the 47% that don't pay income tax.

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