In article ,
says...

On 3/15/2013 10:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/15/13 9:55 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 3/15/2013 9:54 AM, Wayne B wrote:
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 07:51:39 -0400, BAR wrote:

========

The Roman Catholic church, led by the pope, has been a regressive
force against every attempt a population control. A major portion of
the world's problems are the result of over population and it's just
going to get worse until a majority of people recognize the issue.

One of the primary teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and most
other
christian churches is the sanctity of life.

====

No reasonable person would argue against the sanctity of life. The
problem arises because your particular church, and some others,
believe that life begins at conception even though there is not a
shred of scientific evidence to support that notion. That's what
makes it a religious belief: It is based on faith. You are
entitled to your religious beliefs of course, and I support that
right. However, when you start advocating and lobbying for laws that
support your beliefs, you are trampling on the rights and beliefs of
others.

No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world
just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs.


Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions?


Look, everyone knows you are not very well educated or sophisticated,
nor do you bother to research before you post, but...

The Roe v. Wade decision has nothing to do with you being forced to "pay
for someone else's abortions."



You are as dense (dishonest) as kevin...

They're all kevin.... Please show where Roe v. Wade has anything to do
with you having to pay for someone else's abortion. That is bull****
stupidity.

On 3/15/2013 9:54 AM, Wayne B wrote:
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 07:51:39 -0400, BAR wrote:

========

The Roman Catholic church, led by the pope, has been a regressive
force against every attempt a population control. A major portion of
the world's problems are the result of over population and it's just
going to get worse until a majority of people recognize the issue.

One of the primary teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and most other
christian churches is the sanctity of life.

====

No reasonable person would argue against the sanctity of life. The
problem arises because your particular church, and some others,
believe that life begins at conception even though there is not a
shred of scientific evidence to support that notion. That's what
makes it a religious belief: It is based on faith. You are
entitled to your religious beliefs of course, and I support that
right. However, when you start advocating and lobbying for laws that
support your beliefs, you are trampling on the rights and beliefs of
others.

No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world
just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs.

Have a look at what you are advocating, if you dare.

http://www.100abortionpictures.com/A...ortion_Photos/

In article ,
says...

On 3/15/2013 11:25 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:55:57 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute
wrote:

No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world
just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs.


Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions?

The $500 abortion is a lot cheaper than 18 years of welfare and a life
time of prison costs.


Can't argue with that... but it's not my issue here. My issue is why
it's ok for folks to lobby congress to get laws passed that force me to
pay for abortions, but I can not lobby congress to change that law?

You've been asked and asked WHAT LAWS "force you to pay for an
abortion"????

In article ,
says...

On 3/15/2013 12:23 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/15/13 12:09 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 3/15/2013 11:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/15/13 11:52 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 3/15/2013 11:25 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:55:57 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute
wrote:

No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world
just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs.


Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s
abortions?

The $500 abortion is a lot cheaper than 18 years of welfare and a life
time of prison costs.


And more specifically which women in the US don't have access simply
because there is an so far unsuccessful lobby group out there?


As just one example, there is a single abortion provider in the state of
Mississippi, and next month the state will hold a license hearing on the
facility in an attempt to shut it down.

I think Kansas and several other backwards states are moving in similar
directions, and I know there are attempts in Virginia to shut down
clinics.

So, there is an answer to your question. Women of Mississippi may soon
lose the one clinic in their state that provides abortions, and
therefore they will have no access unless they have a way to get to
another state.

Perhaps you should expand your research venues.

Yes, the answer to my question is there are no women in the US who don't
have access because of the Church.

If that Mississippi clinic is forced to close, lower income women in
Mississippi will not have reasonable access to a clinic, especially
since other southern states are proceeding similarly.

Let me know when it happens...

Why, are you going to bomb it, you insane low class fool?

On 3/15/2013 12:52 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 12:35:56 -0400, Meyer wrote:

On 3/15/2013 12:30 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 12:23:30 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 3/15/13 12:09 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 3/15/2013 11:55 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/15/13 11:52 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 3/15/2013 11:25 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:55:57 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute
wrote:

No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world
just to comply with someone else's religious beliefs.


Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s
abortions?

The $500 abortion is a lot cheaper than 18 years of welfare and a life
time of prison costs.


And more specifically which women in the US don't have access simply
because there is an so far unsuccessful lobby group out there?


As just one example, there is a single abortion provider in the state of
Mississippi, and next month the state will hold a license hearing on the
facility in an attempt to shut it down.

I think Kansas and several other backwards states are moving in similar
directions, and I know there are attempts in Virginia to shut down
clinics.

So, there is an answer to your question. Women of Mississippi may soon
lose the one clinic in their state that provides abortions, and
therefore they will have no access unless they have a way to get to
another state.

Perhaps you should expand your research venues.

Yes, the answer to my question is there are no women in the US who don't
have access because of the Church.

If that Mississippi clinic is forced to close, lower income women in
Mississippi will not have reasonable access to a clinic, especially
since other southern states are proceeding similarly.

There are many other methods of birth control besides killing a baby. If there's only one clinic,
then very few folks have reasonable access to it anyway (remember all the problems you mentioned
yesterday?). Can they not get medical care at their local hospital? Perhaps education is the key.


Salmonbait

--
Hope you're having a spectacular day!

Doesn't seem to be a religious problem at all. It's the state
interfering with woman's rights.

Maybe it's the state protecting the baby's rights!


Salmonbait

--
Hope you're having a spectacular day!

It's not the state's business. There are already laws on the books
dealing with murder.

On 3/15/2013 10:58 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/15/13 10:45 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:55:57 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute
wrote:

Kinda' like Row vs Wade forcing me to pay for someone else s abortions?

===

That's nonsense.

Of course it is, it's Scotty!!


Who, in his 50's, is married, presumably loyal, and still wears condoms
because...



What makes you an expert? You sold condoms and whiskey door to door. You
are no expert on the subject.

On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 10:27:32 -0400, J Herring
wrote:


If the legislation promoted the killing of babies, then the Church did as it should.

=====

If the church is gong to act as a lobbyist for a faith based belief,
then they should lose their tax exempt status. Those bingo games and
carnivals bring in a lot of revenue which has nothing to do with the
church's mission.

On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 15:46:32 -0400, Wayne B wrote:

On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 10:27:32 -0400, J Herring
wrote:


If the legislation promoted the killing of babies, then the Church did as it should.

=====

If the church is gong to act as a lobbyist for a faith based belief,
then they should lose their tax exempt status. Those bingo games and
carnivals bring in a lot of revenue which has nothing to do with the
church's mission.

The Church may lobby against killing. Nothing wrong with that.

What did you say when your wife said, "Feel the baby kicking!"


Salmonbait

--
Hope you're having a spectacular day!

On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 20:24:57 -0400, J Herring
wrote:

On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 15:46:32 -0400, Wayne B wrote:

On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 10:27:32 -0400, J Herring
wrote:


If the legislation promoted the killing of babies, then the Church did as it should.

=====

If the church is gong to act as a lobbyist for a faith based belief,
then they should lose their tax exempt status. Those bingo games and
carnivals bring in a lot of revenue which has nothing to do with the
church's mission.

The Church may lobby against killing. Nothing wrong with that.

What did you say when your wife said, "Feel the baby kicking!"


=========

That's different. We've had this discussion before and I'm not going
to chase your circular reasoning. Be ready to start paying taxes on
those bingo earnings.

On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 23:14:07 -0400, Wayne B wrote:

On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 20:24:57 -0400, J Herring
wrote:

On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 15:46:32 -0400, Wayne B wrote:

On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 10:27:32 -0400, J Herring
wrote:


If the legislation promoted the killing of babies, then the Church did as it should.

=====

If the church is gong to act as a lobbyist for a faith based belief,
then they should lose their tax exempt status. Those bingo games and
carnivals bring in a lot of revenue which has nothing to do with the
church's mission.

The Church may lobby against killing. Nothing wrong with that.

What did you say when your wife said, "Feel the baby kicking!"


=========

That's different. We've had this discussion before and I'm not going
to chase your circular reasoning. Be ready to start paying taxes on
those bingo earnings.

Oh, 'that's different' - but only when it's *your* baby!

OK, enough is enough.

I'll gladly pay taxes on any gambling winnings I have at bingo games. Paying my taxes is not
something I do joyfully, but it *is* something I do!


Salmonbait

--
Hope you're having a spectacular day!