|
|
Post by ImNotBenny on Nov 10, 2004 22:14:27 GMT -5
As one who was molested by her step-father, I think I can answer this (or should I have been molested by my brother too?) I would not have had the baby killed. Why? It is a life. Even at my age, I knew what was right and wrong. I am amazed that adults have trouble with this problem....  Interesting take, but I was referring to consentual, "true"** incest, and whether or not incestual relations should result in mandatory abortions to keep the mongoloid population in check. **-by "real" incest, I'm referring to true, blood-relations, whereas your horrific ordeal with a step-father wouldn't quite qualify, as your love child would not result in soiling the gene-pool... |
|
|
|
Post by ProChildren on Nov 11, 2004 10:35:03 GMT -5
Killing is not a right what do you think about that son, hucklebuck
|
|
|
|
Post by HybridConservative on Nov 11, 2004 14:45:36 GMT -5
To Anyone Who Is Anti-Abortion: Have you seen the freakin kids nowadays?? Do we really need more of these unwanted, TV-raised, half-retarded, MTV-thug-life-wannabe punks running around the streets?? If their mother is someone who would kill them, what are the odds they'll grow up in a loving home to be good citizens later in life?? I SAY ZERO-Fing-CHANCE...let 'em die... First of all, what the heck does that have to do with anything? Thats not the fault of a non abortion--thats the fault of idiot parents. There are a lot of examples of idiot parenting. Look at Dr. Phil--he wouldnt be as huge as he is if he didnt tell it like it is or got to the root of parental problems. Secondly, no, I do NOT agree with abortion. It is completely immoral and disgusting and I have not heard of one woman, not ONE, who has actually been happy with killing her child. Infact, dont most of them go through serious psychological depression...dont some kill themselves? Wow, thats a pretty drastic aftermath for killing a "zygote" Lastly, think about the theoretical case (or did it actually happen  ) in which a pregnant mother is the victim of a criminal attack and loses her baby. The aggressor is then charged twice--once for aggrivated assult and either murder2 or manslaughter. So ALL OF A SUDDEN the baby is ACTUALLY a life! But if the mother decides to go and destroy it herself, its nothing. Living in Canada, you'd think I'd be used to this revolting double standard by now. |
|
|
|
Post by Cheneysmyhero on Nov 11, 2004 17:17:16 GMT -5
First of all, what the heck does that have to do with anything? Thats not the fault of a non abortion--thats the fault of idiot parents. Exactly, those idiot parents should have had an abortion. |
|
|
|
Post by HybridConservative on Nov 11, 2004 21:04:49 GMT -5
Or they could have had some self control and kept their clothes on.
|
|
|
|
Post by ImNotBenny on Nov 11, 2004 21:24:14 GMT -5
Or they could have had some self control and kept their clothes on. I bet you're not much fun at parties, eh? |
|
|
|
Post by lisa on Nov 11, 2004 22:05:14 GMT -5
Interesting take, but I was referring to consentual, "true"** incest, and whether or not incestual relations should result in mandatory abortions to keep the mongoloid population in check. **-by "real" incest, I'm referring to true, blood-relations, whereas your horrific ordeal with a step-father wouldn't quite qualify, as your love child would not result in soiling the gene-pool... Ahh, you must have read "Flowers in the Attic" by V.C. Andrews. Look if you want to play these kind of games, you can pull all kinds of silly situations out of the woodwork and claim them as a reason for abortion. Personally ImNotBenny, I think you like to start trouble...or at least take the antagonistic side of things when you don't really even believe that way....I haven't read many of your posts, but I think you are going to be fun to watch....as long as you don't get too sleazy...I am a Christian and I do have standards. Even if I do smoke a cigar and drink Jack Daniels or Jim Bean every once in a while....   |
|
|
|
Post by Cheneysmyhero on Nov 11, 2004 22:11:33 GMT -5
Ahh, you must have read "Flowers in the Attic" by V.C. Andrews. Look if you want to play these kind of games, you can pull all kinds of silly situations out of the woodwork and claim them as a reason for abortion. Personally ImNotBenny, I think you like to start trouble...or at least take the antagonistic side of things when you don't really even believe that way....I haven't read many of your posts, but I think you are going to be fun to watch....as long as you don't get too sleazy...I am a Christian and I do have standards. Even if I do smoke a cigar and drink Jack Daniels or Jim Bean every once in a while.... I think she has a crush on you INB! WOOT! |
|
|
|
Post by cupolaa5 on Nov 14, 2004 14:22:01 GMT -5
I believe abortion should be legal!Rather then starting with the young tho! Maybe we should make it retro-active? I can't see why the left would disapprove ?If their true to there word? Or are the rules different for them?maybe the left should be considered as big of a inconvenience as raising children? when you strip away all of the BS about the right to choose, The bottom line is some people don't want to be inconvenienced or have any interuption with their life style! what does that make them? Peterson was convicted and will spend the majority of his life in prison! All he did was exercise his right to choose! Now he is a convicted murder!
|
|
|
|
Post by cupolaa5 on Nov 14, 2004 14:29:30 GMT -5
I believe abortion should be legal!Rather then starting with the young tho! Maybe we should make it retro-active? I can't see why the left would disapprove ?If their true to there word? Or are the rules different for them?maybe the left should be considered as big of a inconvenience as raising children? when you strip away all of the BS about the right to choose, The bottom line is some people don't want to be inconvenienced or have any interuption with their life style! what does that make them? Peterson was convicted and will spend the majority of his life in prison! All he did was exercise his right to choose! Now he is a convicted murder! I voted for Bush so I know that makes me ignorant! BuT from my perspective I't sounds like hypocrisy at it's finest!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Ian on Nov 16, 2004 11:07:25 GMT -5
Actually she's a mod you dumbass. Why is this jerk off still allowed to post? He hasn't added anything to any thread except his pathetic inbred humor. We hear from liberals this idea that even if you believe a fetus to be a child you must agree with abortion in the case of rape. This coming from the same people who argue against capital punishment on the "two wrongs don't make a right" principle. The rape is not the fault of the child, and thus the child should not be punished. Please, if you're going to argue in favor of abortion, at least come up with some arguments that attempt to make sense. And before I get labeled a "fundamentalist" as I was in the homosexual thread before it was locked, there are plenty of people who aren't Christians or even conservatives who are Pro-Life, e.g. Christopher Hitchens, so stop the bashing and at least try to have an intelligent debate. I know it's hard for most "open-minded" liberals. |
|
|
|
Post by Ouka Ranman on Nov 17, 2004 18:51:22 GMT -5
Mm..
I don't agree with abortion, but I don't think it's right that the only people who decide whether or not it should be banned are some old guys. If you don't have a uterus, you shouldn't get a say anyway.
Whether or not you're gonna squeeze out the kid should be pretty obvious from the get-go. You've got about four weeks, and the only thing forming is blood and little bits and pieces- no real life form. And that's when an abortion should be had. Afterwards, well, that's your problem. And while I think abortion should only be used in certain unfortunate cases such as rape, I think a law would only cause too many naive young girls to cry wolf if they get knocked up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Franklin on Nov 22, 2004 22:47:51 GMT -5
Dear Friends,  This post is to finalize the fact that just because the Lord killed babies in the Old Testament, does not mean that moderns have the same, innate privilege. The only references to abortion in the Bible are to coerced abortion as a punishment for nonbelievers, sinners and those who fail to recognize God’s chosen people. In Second Kings, we learn that Menahem, leader of the Israelites, smote all the people who refused to follow him “and all the women therein that were with child he ripped up” (2 Kings 15:16). Later, in Hosea, we learn that because the land of Samaria rejected God, “Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up” (Hosea 13:16). Hosea was appointed to carry out God’s vengeance on the people by killing the unborn babies carried by the heathen women. He promised to “slay even the beloved fruit of their womb” (Hosea 9:16). Left to their own devices, humans have no business performing abortions because that is in the zenith of God's etherial regions of judgment. After all, it was God who killed all the unborn children on the planet (other than those of Noah’s immediate family) when He drowned everyone with the Great Flood (Genesis 7:23). And it was God who inflicted abortion on all the pregnant women when he rained fire and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah, killing everyone who lived therein (Genesis 19:24-25). And it was God who killed the unborn babies during the countless plagues and pestilence he inflicted on the planet throughout history. Abortion is obviously an act God reserves for punishing those groups of people who rub him the wrong way. It is not an act to be performed at human whim. Might I even suggest that because Demoncrats have rubbed our Righteous God the wrong way, He has handed them over to Lucifer? That their abortions may, in fact, be divinely inspired judgment on those within this holy nation who have abandoned the way of the Lord? Be that as it may, there is absolutely no reason to opt for abortion when God allows his chosen people, and in some instances, orders them, to rid themselves of troublesome children after they’re born. Wasn’t it God who said, “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones” (Psalms 137:9)? Why insist on prenatal killing when the post-natal killing options are so widespread? The Bible authorizes the Chosen to kill just about any child who becomes burdensome. According to Deuteronomy, if a child is unruly and disobedient, there exists not only the option of killing him, but it is mandatory that he be stoned to death (Deuteronomy 21:18-21). The same is true for a child who speaks with foul language (Exodus 21:17). Or a child who hits his elders (Exodus 21:15). The bottom line is that only coerced abortion is allowed in the Bible, not abortion on demand. And God, in his infinite compassion, provided his Chosen people with the means of eliminating troublesome children once they are born. So tell your skeptical acquaintances to put away the coat hangers, once and for all, and let the child be born, but have stones and the Proverbial rod handy, just in case. Bishop Franklin |
|
|
|
Post by Edge on Nov 24, 2004 12:44:45 GMT -5
Bishop Franklin,
You make me laugh. Unfortunately however, you do not yet qualify to join my minions. Keep working at it and submit your application next Fall.
|
|
|
|
Post by MO on Nov 24, 2004 15:03:47 GMT -5
What a freak! Answering your own posts! Why don't you take it to DU?
|
|
) in which a pregnant mother is the victim of a criminal attack and loses her baby. The aggressor is then charged twice--once for aggrivated assult and either murder2 or manslaughter. So ALL OF A SUDDEN the baby is ACTUALLY a life! But if the mother decides to go and destroy it herself, its nothing..jpg)
