|
|
Post by Maineh on Sept 11, 2002 8:50:09 GMT -5
What's all this crap about a woman's so called "right" to choose?
Where do they get off with this?
Where in the constitution does it say "A woman shall have the right to a clean, safe abortion." Or whatever that heap of feces that they spew forth out of their mouths is.
The fact is, it DOESN'T say that, and a woman has no legal RIGHT to an abortion. This "right to choose" nonsense is nothing but a load of BS. The "right" was invented by the USSC in Roe v. Wade. The judges that voted 4 it should've been impeached, they CREATED A LAW/RIGHT, the job of the legislative body, NOT THE Supreme Court. The Supreme Court's job is only to DEFINE the laws.
Now if I was at a liberal site, they'd attempt to prove to me that there is nothing morally wrong with abortion, and I do believe I've heard just about everything, yet how can one say that it is not morally wrong to kill an innocent child. Liberals!!! It's time you wake up and pull your heads out of your asses, that way, you don't see crap you see the light.
|
|
|
|
Post by barral69 on Sept 19, 2002 3:07:17 GMT -5
One quick comment on abortion. And please don't call me a scumbag or anything. I am NOT PROMOTING ABORTION AS A RIGHT BUT AS A MEDICIAL TREATMENT IN VERY SEVERE CASES.
I think it should be allowed in cases where the mother AND child WILL die if birth is allowed, and not always, but in few cases if the mother has aids and does not want that child living a cheated(shortend) life. Granted, by not letting a child whose mother has aids or hiv, be born you are still cheating the child from life. But are you saving it from the pain of always being sick, or weak for all of the child's short life? And either way, if GOD thinks it's wrong period, the when that mother dies GOD will be the judge. Not us.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maineh on Sept 19, 2002 9:37:45 GMT -5
barral69,
In such a rare case, an abortion may be necessary to save the mothers life, and in such a case, I pity the mother that has to choose between her life and her baby's life.
With regards to HIV, this is very touchy ground, here.
Even if the baby is going to live a shitty life, is it the right of the mother to end it before this life begins? After all, she could be killing the next ronald reagan.
Myself, in both cases, I think that the time to go for both the mother and the child should be left up to God. Yet, not everybody shares that same viepoint.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mo on Oct 1, 2002 3:12:53 GMT -5
Maineh- Could not agree with you more. barral69- I'm sure you are an up-standing citizen, and thinking of what you think is in the best interest of some women, but I respectfuly disagree with you. There was once a woman who was told the child she was carrying had no hope. She had a few disabled children, and she was told this one would be the worst. Who was he? Ludwig van Beethoven! I suggest www.reclaimamerica.org Scroll down and click on the real player stuff. The right to choose is b.s. for men. You have no say if it is a "baby" or a "product of conception." And these days, if you start to support a child and turns out years later to not be yours, you may still get stuck with the bill! The courts are saying, "if you are the only father that child has ever known, it is still your bill!"I know someone in that boat. What a kick in the face to men! You guys just have to stop sleeping with s***s. I had a medical crisis pregnancy. My last one almost killed me. My family had a major death early on in the pregnancy. My asthma was to the point of constant hospital stays with oxogen tents, major drugs like prednisone , albuterol, sedatives, I was sure she would have two heads. She is yet another blessing! My pro-life leaning doctor had even talked to me about the "choice." I had promised my husband and my Lord that I would make womb for what they gave me! So I pushed on! The bottom line is, is it a human life? If so, it is wrong to kill it under any circustances, except the imediate life of the mother (self defense). When you deny human status to the fetus at conception, you dig yourself into a philosophical hole because you then have to decide where to grant it later on. If the unborn have no rights, then is it O.K. to kill a child 2 minutes before a normal delivery? Why not kill newborns if they are un-wanted? What is so magical about a brief journey down the birth canal? I would never take a chance on killing someone the creater may have already ordained as human. Life is precious! Blessings |
|
|
|
Post by Mo on Nov 7, 2002 22:00:09 GMT -5
In the state of Florida, if you get caught disturbing/ destroying sea turtle eggs you face big fines and up to 7 years in jail. We're talkin' eggs here, not turtles! Hhmmm?
|
|
|
|
Post by Peanut on Nov 28, 2002 15:42:59 GMT -5
I dont know where to begin, but i'll say that i am against abortion, in all cases, however that does not mean i'm heartless. Abortion is a decision, reagrdless of what anyone says, it is an option that women know they have - is it right? My personal beliefs say no, its not. That doesn't mean it's not needed. Ectopic pregnancies where the mother MUST terminate or else she and her baby may die, unfortunately, requires an abortion. A molestation/rape that ends in pregnancy, may not be a good enough reason to have an abortion, however, for that woman, it may be necessary (although, to me, i would still think it wrong). Now that leaves that idea of choice? Is pregnancy a choice? Most woman (and thier partners) choose to have children, sometimes children are a surprise, but the idea of a woman having the right to choose over the life of my child makes me shudder. Now before everyone starts calling me a sexist, i dont mean that in a sexist way, i would freak out if my life was in anyone elses hands but my own ESPECIALLY if i cant defend myself. The popular term "it's my body, i'll do whatever i want" is a popular one when deciding an abortion, but i ask you, is that baby inside of you, YOUR body? NO, it is not. It has 23 pairs of chromosones, different DNA, completely seperate from the mother, so why can she decide what to do with it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Foamy Dog on Nov 28, 2002 22:02:49 GMT -5
Great points on a complicated issue! This sums it up well: The popular term "it's my body, i'll do whatever i want" is a popular one when deciding an abortion, but i ask you, is that baby inside of you, YOUR body? NO, it is not. It has 23 pairs of chromosones, different DNA, completely seperate from the mother, so why can she decide what to do with it? As I have said before, it really burnes me up that some people think that a human life can just be removed as if it were a wart. FD |
|
|
|
Post by nospace on Dec 7, 2002 19:09:33 GMT -5
In this day and age it is okay to kill a defenceless baby - just DO NOT think about killing a murderer!
Blasted Backward Liberal MORONS!
|
|
|
|
Post by Peanut on Dec 23, 2002 1:57:59 GMT -5
Nospace, no one has the right to kill anyone. Using your beloved bible to reinforce your ridiculous ideals, is sad. Using one quote to show you're right, is NOT what the bible is used for (i should know, i was millimetres away from becoming a priest). Your quote is a nice one, but remember, words need to be wise, in order for fools to get confused. Yours are not,
|
|
|
|
Post by nospace on Dec 26, 2002 20:12:11 GMT -5
Is being almost a Priest like being ALMOST a living baby?
FYI: I too had considered going into a Seminary in the mid-70's - OH BOY!
Just for a bit more info - It is NOT my Bible!
RE: Peanuts comment saying:
Your quote is a nice one, but remember, words need to be wise, in order for fools to get confused. Yours are not,
[glow=blue,1,900]Who says you words are? ... besides you?[/glow]
If you can NOT see the logic in my comment (with the use of an oxymoron) - perhaps you are JUST a bit short of being able to understand what I was saying!
Henceforth; CONFUSED!
DO NOT insult my comments - I do NOT back down!
If you are able to say something constructive - SPEAK!
...other wise - go chase parked cars!
|
|
|
|
Post by Foamy Dog on Dec 26, 2002 22:10:55 GMT -5
Peanut: Though I subscribe to no religion I have made no rules here against using a quote from the Bible, sure it's not considered a scientific journal or anything but a member using a favorite quote as a tagline is certainly a common practice.  I don't understand your attack on nospace since you both seem to agree that no one has the right to kill. So why call this member's ideals ridculous? --FD |
|
|
|
Post by Peanut on Dec 26, 2002 23:11:07 GMT -5
NoSpace, your quote was " In this day and age it is okay to kill a defenceless baby - just DO NOT think about killing a murderer!" so you're either implying that it's not fair we are not allowed to do away with abortionists or the baby's mother. So what right do you have to claim that it would be okay to do away with these murderers, if they can be considered that. I may be pro-life but i understand that nothing is black and white and that many choices plague a woman going thru that horrible act. If you wanna debate whether or not an abortionist or the baby's mother is a murderer, i'm up for that. But you quote made it seem that it would be OKAY to kill those people, something that goes against the bible. I may no longer be catholic, but i'm one of those few that understand the religion, lol, WE ARE A RARE BREED! Putting one quote here or one quote there, is not how that book was supposed to be used, it's supposed to be studied and not used to find a quote that puts down others or reinforces YOUR belief.
FD - I say i'm pro-life, and i stand by that, but you have to admit, you cant simply say, IT'S ALL WRONG, and stay adamant to that! You gotta nit-pick everything with such a grave decision and even more severe consequences.
|
|
|
|
Post by Foamy Dog on Dec 26, 2002 23:32:36 GMT -5
I see your points. I agree that everything isn't black and white, thus the board about abortion and the one on the death penalty.
It still looks like you two agree? I think maybe you misunderstood nospace's comment . . . but I could be wrong, I may have misunderstood the comment myself.
I thought the comment was reffering to the fact that liberals say it's okay to kill an unborn child but oppose the death penalty for convicted murderers.
Clairification nospace?
--FD
|
|
|
|
Post by Mo on Dec 26, 2002 23:36:23 GMT -5
Peanut- I am not sure, but I think you have just misunderstood Nospace's post. I don't think he meant to suggest it was O.K. to kill women or abortionists. I think he meant convicted murderers. I think he was trying to make a statement about capital punishment, on the abortion thread, although I very well could be wrong. That's the way I understood it.
I think it's great to use the Bible to give yourself or others comfort, or to use it as a guide to live by. In this case I agree that it's meant to do neither. It is being used to hit people over the head with.
|
|
|
|
Post by Peanut on Dec 27, 2002 1:40:57 GMT -5
AHHHHHHHHHH NOW I'M CONFUSED! Do most of you feel that, for simplicity sake, its okay to murder a convicted murderer, via death penaulty, but not okay to kill an unborn child. Like i said, i'm pro-life, which spans into the catergory of the death penaulty and abortion, and euthanasia and in to more as well (respect for the poor, the handicapped, gay people (hehe, had to include that one  ) etc...). But i just dont see how some people can be COMPLETELY against abortion, and then those same people are for the death penaulty. Prison for life, AND I MEAN THE REST OF THE INMATES LIFE, to me, seems a better punishment then a quick death. Make the inmate suffer, like his or her victim did. To use the excuse "but a grown man or woman can make a choice, an infant cannot" is weak, because NONE OF US, can EVER take life and say we were in the right to do it. War, self-defense, abortion, death penaulty, euthanisa - all these forms of taking life ARE WRONG, but unfortunately cannot be stopped in some cases. |
|
I don't understand your attack on nospace since you both seem to agree that no one has the right to kill. So why call this member's ideals ridculous?
) etc...). But i just dont see how some people can be COMPLETELY against abortion, and then those same people are for the death penaulty. Prison for life, AND I MEAN THE REST OF THE INMATES LIFE, to me, seems a better punishment then a quick death. Make the inmate suffer, like his or her victim did. To use the excuse "but a grown man or woman can make a choice, an infant cannot" is weak, because NONE OF US, can EVER take life and say we were in the right to do it. War, self-defense, abortion, death penaulty, euthanisa - all these forms of taking life ARE WRONG, but unfortunately cannot be stopped in some cases.