"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Fine. But what about the women who, in the absence of any
underlying
health
risk to her or the infant, insist upon having the right to an
abortion
at
*any* stage in the pregnancy? Is forcing her to have the baby
after
the
first trimester done "just to teach her a lesson"? Or is it to
protect
the
life of the baby?

I thought my statement was clear.

It is anything *but* clear. Simple question:

*Why* do *you* oppose abortion after the first trimester?


I don't.

In the absence of any underlying health risk to the mother or infant,
why do
you oppose abortion after the first trimester?

It isn't an issue of concern. Very, very few abortions are performed
after the first trimester except for medical reasons.

According to the CDC (1997 statistics), 14% of abortions occur after the
first 13 weeks. That's a little over 166,000 abortions. You're probably
the only person on Earth who thinks 166,000 lives is "very, very few".

NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Fine. But what about the women who, in the absence of any
underlying
health
risk to her or the infant, insist upon having the right to an
abortion
at
*any* stage in the pregnancy? Is forcing her to have the baby
after
the
first trimester done "just to teach her a lesson"? Or is it to
protect
the
life of the baby?

I thought my statement was clear.

It is anything *but* clear. Simple question:

*Why* do *you* oppose abortion after the first trimester?


I don't.

In the absence of any underlying health risk to the mother or infant,
why do
you oppose abortion after the first trimester?

It isn't an issue of concern. Very, very few abortions are performed
after the first trimester except for medical reasons.

According to the CDC (1997 statistics), 14% of abortions occur after the
first 13 weeks. That's a little over 166,000 abortions. You're probably
the only person on Earth who thinks 166,000 lives is "very, very few".





They're not lives.

--
Email sent to is never read.

Harry Krause wrote in message news:bspgiu$f8b1v$1@ID-
The unanswered question? How many were the result of daddy messing with
his little gal. Incest is a big problem among you righties.

Yeah, maybe not. Why is it then that it is the leftys that want
abortion on demand with every opportunity for the father of the child,
and pro abortion folks to convince the 13 yo girl to do something and
at the same time, make every effort to keep that girl from even
hearing an opposing viewpoint? I still say it is so adult men can
inpregnate little children and cover it up with guilt trips laid on
the little girl and keep her from telling on them. That's what this is
all about, again, the left trying to aviod accountability.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Fine. But what about the women who, in the absence of any
underlying
health
risk to her or the infant, insist upon having the right to an
abortion
at
*any* stage in the pregnancy? Is forcing her to have the baby
after
the
first trimester done "just to teach her a lesson"? Or is it to
protect
the
life of the baby?

I thought my statement was clear.

It is anything *but* clear. Simple question:

*Why* do *you* oppose abortion after the first trimester?


I don't.

In the absence of any underlying health risk to the mother or infant,
why do
you oppose abortion after the first trimester?

It isn't an issue of concern. Very, very few abortions are performed
after the first trimester except for medical reasons.

According to the CDC (1997 statistics), 14% of abortions occur after the
first 13 weeks. That's a little over 166,000 abortions. You're
probably
the only person on Earth who thinks 166,000 lives is "very, very few".





They're not lives.

I'm not sure that you are sure that you agree with that...or why else do you
oppose abortions (in the absence of health risks to the mother or *fetus*)
after the 1st trimester?

Backyard Renegade wrote:
Harry Krause wrote in message news:bspgiu$f8b1v$1@ID-
The unanswered question? How many were the result of daddy messing with
his little gal. Incest is a big problem among you righties.

Yeah, maybe not. Why is it then that it is the leftys that want
abortion on demand with every opportunity for the father of the child,
and pro abortion folks to convince the 13 yo girl to do something and
at the same time, make every effort to keep that girl from even
hearing an opposing viewpoint? I still say it is so adult men can
inpregnate little children and cover it up with guilt trips laid on
the little girl and keep her from telling on them. That's what this is
all about, again, the left trying to aviod accountability.


You go right ahead and fulfill your fantasies with and about little
girls. Me, I'd prefer their mommies. You are some piece of work.

--
Email sent to is never read.

Harry Krause wrote in message ...
Backyard Renegade wrote:
Harry Krause wrote in message news:bspgiu$f8b1v$1@ID-
The unanswered question? How many were the result of daddy messing with
his little gal. Incest is a big problem among you righties.

Yeah, maybe not. Why is it then that it is the leftys that want
abortion on demand with every opportunity for the father of the child,
and pro abortion folks to convince the 13 yo girl to do something and
at the same time, make every effort to keep that girl from even
hearing an opposing viewpoint? I still say it is so adult men can
inpregnate little children and cover it up with guilt trips laid on
the little girl and keep her from telling on them. That's what this is
all about, again, the left trying to aviod accountability.


You go right ahead and fulfill your fantasies with and about little
girls. Me, I'd prefer their mommies. You are some piece of work.


It is no fantacy of mine or anyone elses, it is fact, it happens.
Adults get little girls pregnant, and this law will enable that
further and allow those criminals to get away with it. No fantacy, it
happens. Who do you think has more interest in the best for the child?
The parent, or the person who got her pregnant while breaking laws?
You keep saying that a couple of right wing fanatics "might" do the
wrong thing for the child and this law is to protect them from that,
but I think anyone with a brain knows there is much more chance of a
statutory rapist doing the wrong thing for the child than the parent.
You still want to give the parent only two hours notice, this is still
obviously so the child can not have access to even fair and unbiased
information before the proceedure. It is still about parental concent,
we are still talking about children here, not "young women" as you
keep refering to these little girls as. And you can keep throwning
insults about my fantasys and such, it is always to avoid the real
issue.
I have to go now, this has gone on way to far... Good luck side
stepping this issue as you all seem to do. Nothing will get
accomplished until you all admit it is one of the biggest underlying
issues in politics today... As I said before, I don't beleive in
abortion, I do beleive in an adult womans' right to choose, that is
the last I will say to it.
Scott Ingersoll

Backyard Renegade wrote:

Harry Krause wrote in message ...
Backyard Renegade wrote:
Harry Krause wrote in message news:bspgiu$f8b1v$1@ID-
The unanswered question? How many were the result of daddy messing with
his little gal. Incest is a big problem among you righties.

Yeah, maybe not. Why is it then that it is the leftys that want
abortion on demand with every opportunity for the father of the child,
and pro abortion folks to convince the 13 yo girl to do something and
at the same time, make every effort to keep that girl from even
hearing an opposing viewpoint? I still say it is so adult men can
inpregnate little children and cover it up with guilt trips laid on
the little girl and keep her from telling on them. That's what this is
all about, again, the left trying to aviod accountability.


You go right ahead and fulfill your fantasies with and about little
girls. Me, I'd prefer their mommies. You are some piece of work.


It is no fantacy of mine or anyone elses, it is fact, it happens.
Adults get little girls pregnant, and this law will enable that
further and allow those criminals to get away with it.

Bullship.



You still want to give the parent only two hours notice, this is still
obviously so the child can not have access to even fair and unbiased
information before the proceedure.

What fair and unbiased information does a pregnant 13-year-old girl
need, other than where to get a safe abortion from a licensed doctor?

You're not thinking of some effort to persuade the girl to go full term
with the pregnancy, are yoU?

--
Email sent to is never read.

Harry Krause wrote in message ...
Backyard Renegade wrote:

Harry Krause wrote in message ...
Backyard Renegade wrote:
Harry Krause wrote in message news:bspgiu$f8b1v$1@ID-
The unanswered question? How many were the result of daddy messing with
his little gal. Incest is a big problem among you righties.

Yeah, maybe not. Why is it then that it is the leftys that want
abortion on demand with every opportunity for the father of the child,
and pro abortion folks to convince the 13 yo girl to do something and
at the same time, make every effort to keep that girl from even
hearing an opposing viewpoint? I still say it is so adult men can
inpregnate little children and cover it up with guilt trips laid on
the little girl and keep her from telling on them. That's what this is
all about, again, the left trying to aviod accountability.


You go right ahead and fulfill your fantasies with and about little
girls. Me, I'd prefer their mommies. You are some piece of work.


It is no fantacy of mine or anyone elses, it is fact, it happens.
Adults get little girls pregnant, and this law will enable that
further and allow those criminals to get away with it.

Bullship.



You still want to give the parent only two hours notice, this is still
obviously so the child can not have access to even fair and unbiased
information before the proceedure.

What fair and unbiased information does a pregnant 13-year-old girl
need, other than where to get a safe abortion from a licensed doctor?

You're not thinking of some effort to persuade the girl to go full term
with the pregnancy, are yoU?

Not at all. In many cases she would indeed have the final say, however
I think there should be time for her to hear other than from a guy who
does not want to be burdened with a child, or have it found out that
he is a father. The parents need to be at least as involved as he, is
there a problem with that?

Backyard Renegade wrote:
Harry Krause wrote in message ...
Backyard Renegade wrote:

Harry Krause wrote in message ...
Backyard Renegade wrote:
Harry Krause wrote in message news:bspgiu$f8b1v$1@ID-
The unanswered question? How many were the result of daddy messing with
his little gal. Incest is a big problem among you righties.

Yeah, maybe not. Why is it then that it is the leftys that want
abortion on demand with every opportunity for the father of the child,
and pro abortion folks to convince the 13 yo girl to do something and
at the same time, make every effort to keep that girl from even
hearing an opposing viewpoint? I still say it is so adult men can
inpregnate little children and cover it up with guilt trips laid on
the little girl and keep her from telling on them. That's what this is
all about, again, the left trying to aviod accountability.


You go right ahead and fulfill your fantasies with and about little
girls. Me, I'd prefer their mommies. You are some piece of work.


It is no fantacy of mine or anyone elses, it is fact, it happens.
Adults get little girls pregnant, and this law will enable that
further and allow those criminals to get away with it.

Bullship.



You still want to give the parent only two hours notice, this is still
obviously so the child can not have access to even fair and unbiased
information before the proceedure.

What fair and unbiased information does a pregnant 13-year-old girl
need, other than where to get a safe abortion from a licensed doctor?

You're not thinking of some effort to persuade the girl to go full term
with the pregnancy, are yoU?

Not at all. In many cases she would indeed have the final say, however
I think there should be time for her to hear other than from a guy who
does not want to be burdened with a child, or have it found out that
he is a father. The parents need to be at least as involved as he, is
there a problem with that?


The only thing that matters when a young girl seeks an abortion is the
mental and physical health of that girl.

Nothing is preventing her parents from "involvement" in the girl's
mental and physical restoration after the abortion.

The problem with your line of thinking is that some parents would oppose
the abortion and force their kid to go to term.

Screw that.

Let them live their own ridgid little lives and let the girl get on with
hers.



--
Email sent to is never read.